Search

When firms collaborate with their competitors (i.e., engage in coopetition), individual managers play a pivotal role in protecting their firm's sensitive knowledge from potential misuse by partners. But which managers are more successful in performing this role? To better understand the senior-level human resources who help secure a firm's competitive advantage, we build on the Upper Echelons Theory and explore how managers' cognitions and values, as expressed in their demographic characteristics, influence knowledge protection in coopetitive relationships. To test our hypotheses, we use multi-source, time-lagged data on a sample of 176 small and medium-sized firms involved in coopetition. Our results suggest that managers' tenure and female gender relate positively to knowledge protection, which in turn contributes to subsequent firm performance, whereas managers' age and higher education impact knowledge protection negatively. On this basis, our study helps develop micro-macro linkages between the Upper Echelons Theory and the Resource-Based View, and reveals how different managerial characteristics influence knowledge protection, thereby threatening or securing sustainable firm performance. We discuss the implications for knowledge protection processes and human resource management.

International audience; Although coopetition literature developed a lot for years, several dimensions remain under-studied. This paper addresses three of these gaps. First, the dilemma between value creation and value appropriation for coopetitors; second, the lack of empirical studies regarding the mechanisms of coopetition among micro-firms in traditional activities; third, the recent interest for geographic levels in coopetition, with a focus on the local level. Our research question is therefore: What are the mechanisms of value creation and value appropriation in local-level coopetition among micro-firms in traditional industries?We use an in-depth case study about a small French wine appellation, which is characterised by a modestly sized cultivated area occupied by small micro-firms, the existence of a cooperative cellar, but also a weak brand image.Our research contributes to the ongoing coopetition discussion in three ways: we enrich the literature on coopetition by documenting value creation and appropriation mechanisms, identifying nine different mechanisms that are collective or individual; we provide some empirical insights to coopetition literature regarding micro-firms and local-level coopetition; we produce some managerial recommendations.

Cooperation and competition are often viewed as incompatible, antagonistic forces, thus are operationalized as two extremes on a continuum. However, they can coexist and even enable each other, thus may be operationalized as orthogonal constructs. We address this contradictory phenomenon by developing a more granular view of the cooperation–competition paradox. Building on interdisciplinary research, we develop a three-dimensional model of relational space (fairness–opportunism, sharing–control, and engagement–rivalry), providing a novel tool with which to investigate the paradoxical interplay between cooperation and competition through eight operationalizable configurations. Using fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA), we test our model by assessing how different configurations of interfirm relationships influence the short- and long-term success of a sample of 217 firms. Our findings show that only two of the eight possible relational configurations are associated with firm success, one in both the long and short term, and the other in the short term only.

Companies rely widely on coopetition, that is, cooperation with competitors, to foster their innovation. However, despite its increasing popularity, the impact of coopetition on innovation remains unclear. Different theories predict different results, and empirical evidence suggests that coopetition can either improve or reduce innovation performance, or even make no impact. The lack of consensus makes further exploration of this important relationship essential. Our study attempts to shed new light on the impact of sourcing from competitors on innovation, using a data-driven exploratory model that needs no prior specification of the direction and form of this relationship. We use a recently developed analytical method based on the preference disaggregation approach to analyze data from a sample of 112 firms operating in the petroleum, chemical, and pharmaceutical industries. We find that sourcing from competitors fosters the innovation performance of firms with financial constraints (small firms receiving no financial support from the government for innovation). In contrast, our results show that sourcing from competitors has a non-linear negative impact on large and small firms receiving such financial support, and that sourcing from competitors is much riskier for small firms in this category. Our findings contribute to the coopetition for innovation literature by highlighting that the relationship between sourcing from competitors and innovation performance depends on firm characteristics, i.e., size and financial capability. Our use of a preference disaggregation method confirms its value when studying relationships between variables where the conceptual and empirical evidence leaves this relationship unclear.

Coopetition is a business phenomenon that dominates many supply chains. We aim to understand why and how coopetition occurs in supply chains with the presence of process improvement in upstream component production. An original equipment manufacturer (OEM) can purchase the component from either a non-competing supplier (NS) or a competing supplier (CS) that also sells substitutable products in the end consumer market. We demonstrate that without process improvement, coopetition does not exist, because the OEM prefers sourcing from the NS, even though the CS is willing to sell the component to the OEM. Two cases are considered in which process improvement is present: supplier-initiated investment, where the suppliers conduct self-investment, and OEM-initiated investment, where the OEM invests in the supplier's process. We find that with supplier-initiated investment, the CS always prefers coopetition, but the OEM may not. When the investment is efficient, coopetition occurs as an equilibrium outcome; otherwise, competition occurs. The cause of coopetition equilibrium comes from variable process improvement incentives of the CS that derive from two driving forces: the vertical wholesale price effect and the horizontal quantity competition effect. When the degree of product substitution is low, the CS increases its investment and lowers its wholesale price, benefiting the OEM. When the degree of product substitution is high, the CS reduces its investment as well as production quantity, which also benefits the OEM. Interestingly, with OEM-initiated investment, the CS might not always choose to sell the component to the OEM, and as a result, coopetition never occurs.

Although the advantages of a market orientation (the organisation-wide implementation of the marketing concept) are well-known, many smaller-sized (and under-resourced) companies struggle to satisfy their customers' wants and needs. Therefore, grounded in resource-based theory and the relational view (as well as drawing upon an outside-in marketing perspective), this current study examines whether collaborating with competitors (coopetition) enhances the market orientation – customer satisfaction performance relationship. Based on a mixed methods research approach involving the New Zealand tourism and hospitality sector, the findings showed that while a market orientation positively impacts customer satisfaction performance, surprisingly, this association was negatively moderated by coopetition. A post-hoc test (via a three-way interaction effect) revealed that industry experience can stabilise the potentially harmful consequences of coopetition by allowing decision-makers to cooperate with suitable rivals (those that are trustworthy and target complementary product-markets) to help them achieve mutually-beneficial outcomes. In short, it is sometimes not enough to be market-oriented. Instead, owner-managers are typically best-served if they can coordinate a combination of activities featuring a market orientation, coopetition, and “appropriate” industry experience to create “synergistic” results.

Funding Information: We thank Paul Wiegmann, Geerten van de Kaa, Filippo Grillo, Tuomo Uotila, Elina Berghäll, Joakim Wikström and a number of anonymous reviewers for helpful comments. Earlier versions of the paper have been presented at EURAS2022 conference at Adam Smith Business School of the University of Glasgow, 38th Summer Seminar of Finnish Economist at University of Jyväskylä and Lappeenranta-Lahti University of Technology LUT. Heikkilä gratefully acknowledges financial support from the Foundation for Economic Education (Liikesivistysrahasto, Reino Rossi Memorial Fund), PHP Säätiö and the Jyväskylä University School of Business and Economics. We argue that coopetition and standardization are important dimensions in the analysis of general-purpose technologies (GPT). We synthesize ideas from GPT, standardization, and coopetition literatures and introduce a framework for empirical analysis of GPTs that are enabled by standards development and related coopetition. We apply this framework and analyze the role of coopetition in standardization of wireless cellular technology, which has been recently discussed as a GPT. We document that coopetition and standardization have been associated with increasing improvement, innovation spawning, and pervasiveness—the characteristics of GPTs—in the context of wireless cellular technology. The perspective of standardization and coopetition could shed further light on the technological progress and evolution related to emerging GPT candidates, such as artificial intelligence and blockchain.

This paper investigates whether and how interfirm coopetition—the combination of cooperation and competition—affects collaborative innovation performance in competitive environments. We address this issue by introducing interfirm knowledge creation as a mediating mechanism based on knowledge creation theory and by examining the moderating effects of environmental competitiveness and dysfunctional competition. The hypotheses are tested using survey data from a sample of 170 Chinese high-tech firms. The results show that interfirm knowledge creation mediates the impact of interfirm coopetition on collaborative innovation performance. Furthermore, the findings indicate that the positive relationship between interfirm coopetition and interfirm knowledge creation is stronger under higher levels of environmental competitiveness but weaker under higher levels of dysfunctional competition. The positive relationship between interfirm knowledge creation and collaborative innovation performance is more evident under higher levels of environmental competitiveness. These findings enrich the interfirm coopetition literature, contribute to knowledge creation theory by extending it to the interfirm context, and provide a better understanding and useful advice for enterprise managers and government officials.

The deployment of 5G urban networks is often described as a disruptive phenomenon since it enables new emerging Internet of Things (IoT) applications such as connected vehicles. Such applications demand new spectrum regulations to decrease network investment requirements by incentivizing operator cooperation. However, currently, no clear consensus exists on the appropriate regulatory regime for such an urban deployment. This work explores two main alternative regulatory scenarios for a connected vehicle use case. Both alternatives lower implementation costs while promoting competition. The first alternative is to maintain the current scheme of spectrum assignment while facilitating additional flexibility for infrastructure sharing (ex-post competition). The second alternative is to define local areas for monopoly 5G provisioning and define the conditions for competition ex-ante. Through agent-based simulations, this work shows that a local licensing of spectrum scenario may achieve better performance than alternative scenarios with traditional spectrum assignment. Additional sensitivity checks also help detail the practical trade-offs.

Developing solutions to sustainability challenges requires cooperation among various firms and actors in different industries and sectors (e.g., regulatory authorities, nonprofit organizations). Prior studies investigate sustainability-related coopetition tensions in bilateral relationships; this article instead considers tensions at a broader, value net level and highlights the dark side of business relationships for firms engaged in coopetition. Qualitative analyses, based on interviews with 31 experts from the automotive industry, highlight how innovative efforts to achieve environmental sustainability can generate detrimental environmental and societal impacts. Specifically, the authors identify four sustainable innovation tensions, at the firm level and the value net level. They outline the aggregate economic, social, and ecological sustainability impacts, as well as the critical need for an exhaustive definition of the value net and which factors influence coopetition in sustainability efforts.

The purpose of this investigation, underpinned by resource-based theory, involves unpacking the complexity of coopetition activities (interplay between cooperation and competition) among family-owned firms. The methods involve 20 field interviews and statistical analysis of 302 family-owned wine producers in the United States. Principal findings establish the non-linear (inverted U-shaped) nature of the coopetition-performance relationship within family-owned firms. Furthermore, competitive intensity negatively moderated the non-linear relationship between coopetition and company performance and a positive moderation effect existed from a competitor orientation. Additionally, unique insights illustrate the importance of utilising social capital in building relationships with trustworthy and complementary partners within and across clusters to enhance the performance consequences of firms’ product-market strategies; that is, both in their domestic market and internationally. The non-linear coopetition-performance relationship suggests decision-makers should not engage in too little or too much coopetition and have an exit strategy if things do not work out as planned.

Notwithstanding the increasing interest in coopetition, relevant research is still composed of loosely connected themes with little contextual focus. Little attention has been paid to explain coopetition at multiple stages and levels, in various industries, and between micro-firms. This paper addresses these gaps by proposing a multi-level mechanism, unravelling the relationship between coopetition management, value co-creation, knowledge-enhancement, and superior performance achievement in micro-businesses. Using qualitative methods, we look at the non-high tech alpaca industry. Results reveal that the successful coopetition management in various coopetition stages, at an individual, organizational, and industry level, leads to value co-creation, knowledge-enhancement, and to the VRIO resources development, and thus drive positive outcomes for the individuals and organizations engaged and for the industry as a whole. This mechanism is influenced by industrial, market, and institutional factors.

Despite substantive evidence showing mixed results on the association between a coopetitive relationship and performance, surprisingly little theory explains the contingencies under which a coopetitive relationship does (or does not) matter to performance. By combining insights from the trust-distrust literature and 18 in-depth managerial conversations, this study unpacks the multidimensional nature of trust (i.e., goodwill and competence) and distrust (i.e., malevolence and discredibility) and suggests that the effect of a coopetitive relationship matters to performance, when both trust and distrust are present (at moderate to high levels), but fails to do so when one of them is low and the other is high. The results based on a sample of Swedish firms provide full support for the hypotheses. In terms of theoretical contributions, this study challenges the old wisdom suggesting trust as good and distrust as bad, extends the current understanding of trust and distrust beyond their one-dimensionality, and provides a novel approach to understanding when a coopetitive relationship performs well and when it does not. In terms of practical relevance, it suggests that firms adopt a paradox mindset (with a focus on both trust and distrust) to unlock the positive potential of a coopetitive relationship.

Digital platforms help develop the open value co-creation strategic alliances, reshape traditional B2B relationships, and promote inclusive social innovation. This research explores the nature of coopetition between the digital platform and its participants. The focus is on how the platform-based alliance balances the contradiction between value creation and appropriation. The support evidence derives from a Stackelberg game in the context of cooperative advertising. Either the platform or the participant supporting advertising in the alliance prompts a Pareto improvement for all players. But the increased profit would be mainly occupied by the dominant platform. The incentive mechanism of profit sharing can promote the alliance to co-create value in a sustainable manner. The game illustrates the significance of cooperative relationships to co-create a larger total value and the existence of an unequal win-win relationship in the strategic alliance. The contradictory logic of cooperation and competition can be accommodated in the platform-based alliance. The dynamic coopetition is involved in a partially convergent interest structure and impacted by power asymmetry. The results highlight the balance between the tensions and harmonies through value creation and appropriation.

Although a body of work surrounds the notion of coopetition (simultaneous cooperation and competition), the complexities of these inter-firm networks remain relatively under-researched. Consequently, this current study infuses resource-based theory and the relational view (alongside drawing upon the outside-in marketing perspective) to evaluate the drivers and outcomes of coopetition activities. The core method involved collecting survey data from a national-level sample of 323 American wine producers. After assessing this information for all major robustness checks, ordinary least squares regression analysis was used in the model-testing stage. The results showed that while a coopetition-oriented mindset, a competitor orientation, inter-firm trust, and competitive intensity positively impact coopetition activities (in a linear manner), there are certain moderating effects that influence these paths. Additionally, coopetition activities yielded a quadratic association with company performance. Business experience negatively affected this link, whereas, there was a positive interaction effect from industry experience. These findings, offer new evidence regarding the risks and potential rewards of coopetition, including mechanisms that decision-makers can utilize to manage these inter-firm relationships.

Research in the field of coopetition, which describes firms simultaneously competing and collaborating to create value, has recently gained enormous momentum. Over the period of 2015 to 2020, scholars published more high-quality studies on this subject than in the entire 25-year history of coopetition research. Despite the relevance of these contributions, their fragmented nature and disjuncture from prior studies limit a connected understanding of the current standing of the field. Our analysis addresses this gap by systematically reviewing, comparing, and connecting a selected sample of 161 recent articles with the body of research established prior to 2015. Our study makes three main contributions. We (1) structure and connect past and present coopetition research across five identified research dimensions: Antecedents, execution, interaction, outcomes, and levels of coopetition. We (2) supplement this review with a qualitative trend analysis, identifying emerging themes for the future of the field. By combining past and present perspectives with the future outlook, we (3) provide a comprehensive, unique, and updated perspective on coopetition research, unifying it into a cohesive, overarching framework. Lastly, we explain crucial interdependencies and suggest areas for future research before we conclude the study.

Firms in an international B2B relationship often simultaneously pursue two types of benefits: Common benefit (cooperation) and private benefit competition). Past literature only examined performance implications of such behavioral tensions. Drawing on Hofstede’s cultural dimensions, this study attempts to build a theoretical model to better understand firms’ behavioral intentions from a cultural perspective in international B2B relationships. Propositions were developed on five dimensions of the cultural framework: individualism/collectivism, uncertainty avoidance, masculinity/femininity, long-term orientation/short-term orientation, and power distance. This model should help firms to select partners with the most compatible objectives and to establish appropriate safeguarding mechanisms based on their behavioral intentions.

In this paper, we contribute to the literature on uncertainty and the drivers of social exchange. We explore the 2008 financial crisis and hand-collect unique data on more than 2,700 vessel chartering deals closed in the container shipping industry from 2000 to 2011. Our contribution is twofold. We challenge the literature by finding that low and high status players use different collaborative strategies under uncertainty: the high status players are more prone to coopetition and the low status ones reach out to external buyers. We also extend the literature on social exchange and uncertainty and introduce other constructs: strategic versatility and country-level long-term orientation of the suppliers that we study in our model. Our findings are relevant for policy and managerial decision-makers in the industry.

High-technology firms often partake in coopetitive alliances toward improving their innovation performance. As relational governance contributes significantly to explaining the coopetitive alliance success, this research examines the facilitation of relational governance in coopetitive alliances. Drawing from social contract theory, we propose that alliance’s market orientation (AMO) is a means to establish social and cooperative norms, which in turn, increases the viability of relational governance. The analysis of 246 coopetitive innovation alliances among firms in high-technology industries reveals that alliance competence is an important antecedent to AMO, and AMO plays a key role in facilitating relational governance toward improving alliance performance. Furthermore, environmental turbulence enhances the positive influence of relational governance.

Technological advancements have made it easier for firms to bypass traditional distribution networks and establish subscription-based direct-to-consumer (SBDTC) channels. Despite their growing popularity, little is known about the effectiveness of these channels. However, pursuing these new channels may not be the best decision for firms even though technology allows it and, in some instances, consumers demand it. Results from an event study of SBDTC channel additions in the cable television industry show that they complicate channel relationships and can lead to conflict, which reduce firm value. Further analysis reveals that firm-specific characteristics and strategic execution factors operate to mitigate the loss in firm value. Specifically, the study results show that channel power diminishes the negative impact of channel conflict, suggesting that firms with greater channel power benefit from adding SBDTC channels. The study also finds that firms marketing high-quality, differentiated offerings are rewarded with more favorable firm valuations.

Although it has been widely established that coopetition (simultaneous cooperation and competition) has a positive association with firms’ performance, researchers have largely overlooked the environmental and firm-level forces potentially affecting that relationship. Under resource-based theory and the relational view, this current study evaluates whether competitive intensity and competitive aggressiveness negatively moderate the coopetition-financial performance relationship. Through a mixed methods approach featuring New Zealand wine producers, a positive relationship existed between coopetition and financial performance supporting earlier research. However, competitive aggressiveness provided a negative moderation effect and competitive intensity had a positive moderation effect. Unique insights emerge regarding underlying issues (potential dark-sides) behind the coopetition-financial performance relationship. Competitive intensity provides an opportunity for owner-managers to select trustworthy rivals targeting complementary product-markets. However, if decision-makers cannot effectively manage competitive aggressiveness across product-market strategies, they are likely to experience certain harmful outcomes, like tensions and diluted competitive advantages.

The aim of this paper is to explore the link between joint value creation and the varying nature of simultaneity. Joint value creation is a central concept in cooperative strategies and more broadly in the strategic management field. When cooperating with competitors firms have value creation intent, but face conflicting logics arising from the simultaneous pursuit of cooperation and competition. This study adopts a two continua approach to analyze coopetition at both the department level and the organizational level. We explore the conjunctural causality based on two multipartner alliances in the pharmaceutical industry. The fsQCA allows detecting multiple causal paths between different intensities of cooperation and competition at both the department and the firm levels (conditions) to joint value creation (outcome). A key contribution of this paper is the conceptualization and empirical demonstration of the relation between the joint value creation and the coopetition intensity. Different types of coopetition engagements generate different outcomes in terms of joint value creation. The results show that high intensity of cooperation combined with high intensity of competition is significant for joint value creation. Unbalanced intensities of both elements, as well as low coopetition intensity, do not lead to joint value creation.

The study investigates the significance of strategic intent, manager's ambidexterity, and knowledge sharing routines for firms in their quest to pursue coopetition. We utilize the resource-based view and the dynamic capabilities theory to ground our hypotheses. We test the hypotheses using the data collected from 313 firms that engage in coopetition relationships through an online survey. The findings forward knowledge sharing and ambidextrous managers as intervening variables, in that when complemented with knowledge sharing, a firm's strategic intent could better guide the firm's managers to pursue coopetition successfully. Findings further advocate that knowledge sharing complements to enable the relationship between a firm's strategic intent and its ambidextrous managers, as well as the relationship between strategic intent and coopetition. Furthermore, results also indicate that ambidextrous managers, with a skillset of a combination of exploration and exploitation, are positively associated to coopetition. Overall, the findings make important theoretical as well as empirical contributions to the coopetition and strategic alliance literature.

Alliances are often thought to be longer lasting and lead to better results when they are perceived as equal and fair in terms of how efforts and rewards are distributed. This study conceptualizes the value-creation-capture-equilibrium (VCCE) as the relative inputs and efforts made by alliance partners to create and capture innovation-related value. We seek to better understand the determinants of the VCCE in dyadic new product development (NPD) alliances. We focus on three factors from a focal firm's perspective: (1) the coopetition intensity with the alliance partner (i.e. simultaneous competition and collaboration), (2) the expert power of the alliance partner, and (3) the relative importance of the particular NPD alliance. We hypothesize that coopetition intensity stabilizes the VCCE. Furthermore, we assume that the partner's expert power and the focal firm's relative alliance importance negatively moderate the relationship between coopetition intensity and the VCCE. Based on a dataset of N = 471 NPD alliances of high-tech firms, we find partial support for our hypotheses and contribute towards a better understanding of the factors influencing the VCCE in NPD alliances.

This article explores intermediaries as a missing link in initiating coopetition between established industry firms and start-ups. Research establishes that partner search and compatibility are critical success factors from the very beginning of coopetition. As many relationships fail owing to the absence of partner fit, knowledge on facing the challenge at this early stage is highly relevant. By applying a network perspective, we propose that intermediaries can bridge partners and hence overcome this initial hurdle. Based on a case study of an intermediary high-tech incubator, we examine the triad of start-ups, incubator, and established industry firms. Findings show how the involvement of an intermediary can facilitate the initiation of coopetition. The key contribution is an inductive model illustrating the interaction of the dimensions of incubator-initiated start-up–industry coopetition. We highlight an incubator's quality filter function evolving from bridging matchmaker and initial broker and demonstrate the added value to the initial partner search and compatibility. We enrich coopetition with network theory and provide implications on how incubators can provide an important foundation for establishing coopetition between start-ups and industry firms.

Current research lacks a deeper explanation of inter-team coopetition as a potential source of improved organizational performance on a micro-level. To fill this gap, our paper explores how inter-team coopetition influences individual team productivity. Building on social identity theory, we hypothesize that inter-team competition and inter-team coopetition both have a positive influence on individual team productivity with inter-team competition having a stronger influence. We further argue that organizational identification has a positive moderating effect on the link between inter-team coopetition and individual team productivity. To test our hypotheses, we conducted a laboratory experiment with 240 university students in which we simulated team scenarios using the puzzle board game Ubongo. Our findings confirm a positive effect of inter-team competition and coopetition on individual team productivity. In case of a high organizational identification, inter-team coopetition will boost individual team productivity further. Our paper improves the understanding of coopetition within the boundaries of the firm and the circumstances under which inter-team coopetition enhances individual team productivity and ultimately organizational performance. We also advance the literature on social identity theory by applying it to the organization’s micro-levels in the context of inter-team coopetition.

Collaboration with direct competitors is a valuable, yet risky, strategy that might pave the way for competitive advantages. Thus far, we have lacked a detailed understanding of how competitive relations between firms shape collaborative relations between their managers, and consequently the structural interdependencies at both levels. The primary objective of this study is to understand the multi-level structure underlying the ambiguous relationship of coopetition, a state of simultaneous collaboration and competition. Hence, we investigate the influence of perceived inter-firm competition on interpersonal knowledge flows among managers within three high-tech clusters by applying multi-level exponential random graph models to network data. Our results reveal that the interpersonal exchange of advice and information depends strongly on the inter-firm competitive structure and that competitive structures shape these interpersonal exchanges in different ways. Thereby, our research demonstrates that managers utilize asymmetries by means of perceived competitive relations to seek work-related advice and information from their competitors and that stronger forms of competition are significant, but not insuperable, obstacles to the exchange of knowledge.

It is widely acknowledged that firms intensely engage in coopetition (i.e., simultaneous cooperation and competition) and obtain unique benefits from such relationships. However, limited knowledge exists about how and when coopetition intensity leads to superior performance. Building on the theoretical work documenting that both trust and distrust are critical for enhancing performance in interfirm relationships, we address the aforementioned gap by looking into the distinct yet beneficial roles of trust and distrust in coopetition. More specifically, we argue that whereas trust likely serves as an intervening mechanism through which coopetition intensity enhances relationship performance, distrust positively influences the association between coopetition intensity and relationship performance. We test our hypotheses on a sample of 225 Swedish firms engaged in coopetition, and provide empirical evidence that trust and distrust play distinct yet important roles in achieving superior performance from coopetition.

This paper addresses the bipartite synchronization problem of coupled inertia memristor-based neural networks with both cooperative and competitive interactions. Generally, coopetition interaction networks are modeled by a signed graph, and the corresponding Laplacian matrix is different from the nonnegative graph. The coopetition networks with structural balance can reach a final state with identical magnitude but opposite sign, which is called bipartite synchronization. Additionally, an inertia system is a second-order differential system. In this paper, firstly, by using suitable variable substitutions, the inertia memristor-based neural networks (IMNNs) are transformed into the first-order differential equations. Secondly, by designing suitable discontinuous controllers, the bipartite synchronization criteria for IMNNs with or without a leader node on coopetition networks are obtained. Finally, two illustrative examples with simulations are provided to validate the effectiveness of the proposed discontinuous control strategies for achieving bipartite synchronization.

This paper discusses the effects of the cooperation among terminal operators in a single port as a part of their coopetition strategy in order to increase overall port competitiveness by minimizing vessel traffic congestion and berthing delays at terminals. A mixed-integer programming model is formulated incorporating game-theoretical decision-making, and then tested with the Port of Colombo, Sri Lanka. The results show that depending on the terminals' objectives, namely “minimizing total penalty cost” and “maximizing total profit,” cooperation among terminals in the operation stage reduces berthing delays and increases terminal utilization than in the status quo, where terminals do not cooperate in the operation stages. This paper discusses policy recommendations to increase the effectiveness of vessel transfers, while also considering the port authority's policies toward enforcing penalty charges for berthing delays and collecting terminal fees from concession terminals.

This paper offers a systematic review of the main findings concerning the role of trust in coopetitive interactions. It adheres to a multilevel conceptualization of trusting relationships in coopetition, analyzing the manifestations of trust on the interpersonal, intergroup, interorganizational and inter-network level. It also applies a dynamic perspective on trust, investigating its antecedents, development processes and outcomes in coopetitive collaboration. Finally, it suggests some directions for future research of trusting relationships forged among coopetitors.

Strategic alliances between competitors (coopetition) is perceived to be full of tensions that needs to be managed. This study explore the evolution of a Norwegian coopetition alliance, through how firms handle tensions over time. The study finds that the firms experience a mutual dependence towards one another and that this dependence evolves over time. In the early phases of a coopetition alliance firms handle tension by relying on a structural dependence with their partners whereas firms move towards a more harmonious relationship with their partners by building a psychological dependence through trust and generosity. Further, the results indicate these dependencies might reduce the possible tensions related to asymmetries in size and knowledge between firms. Unit Licence Agreement

Network effects encourage original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) to expand their market size by changing their relationships with third-party manufacturers who provide compatible products from competition to coopetition. Moreover, network effects render consumer valuation inherently dynamic. Consumer perceptions of the sales quantity are continuously updated, causing the impact of the network effect to change dynamically over time. To this end, we examine technology licensing and price competition in a dynamic duopoly including an OEM and a third-party manufacturer, considering that consumer utility increases with the dynamic and evolving impact of network effects. However, because of limited product technology, the lower compatibility of third-party products reduces network effects. Thus, the third-party manufacturer licenses technology from the OEM. Because the OEM can strategically choose a static or dynamic royalty under technology licensing in a dynamic pricing game, we derive the firms’ subgame-perfect Nash equilibrium decisions and profits and analyze the effects of licensing mechanisms and market factors on firms’ instantaneous and steady-state equilibrium decisions and profits. Technology licensing enhances firms’ profits when firms’ and consumers’ dynamic behaviors are more significant by exerting stronger network effects. A dynamic royalty is more effective for mitigating price competition intensity and for helping firms maintain higher sales margins. A static royalty induces a lower royalty chosen by the OEM and firms lower prices, which increases the impact of network effects and thus is generally more advantageous for the firms and for social welfare.

The aim of this article is to provide an in-depth examination of the relationship between coopetition and innovation in the European context. After examining the main findings in the literature on the subject, this article analyzes the data from the Eurostat Community Innovation Survey in Germany, and conducts a quantitative study associating coopetition and innovation with a view to observing how coopetitive companies perform in the field of innovation and what characteristics they have. Among other findings, the results show that international coopetition relates to cooperation with international clients in the public sector, governments and international universities. Less interest in collaborating with private partners is observed when coopeting on a domestic level. The size of the firm, the location of the partners, and the percentage of employees with a university degree are just some of the factors that are incorporated in the analysis.

As part of their embrace of open innovation, many organizations have established innovation contests to gather creative ideas from online users. Some of these contests are deployed on platforms that use hybrid coopetitive models to promote a combination of competition and cooperation. In this paper, we use a theoretical framework, namely social interdependence theory, to understand and explain the behaviors of users of idea crowdsourcing platforms to support organizational innovation. In our empirical study using both behavioral and social network data of 19,516 registered users of a crowdsourcing platform, we first analyze different user profiles that display varying levels of competitive and cooperative behaviors. Second, through a qualitative analysis, we explore the users' perceptions of the structured coopetition model. Our results reveal that the mixture of cooperative and competitive design features positively impacts the creative process and nudges the nature of competition along constructive lines.

Multi-sourcing arrangements are a major trend in the contemporary outsourcing landscape, but our understanding of what makes these complex ventures effective remains relatively fragmented. Our study focuses on the multi-sourcing and opportunistic behavior of service providers, and in particular a relatively neglected but major driver of opportunistic behavior, namely the uncertainty surrounding the transaction. Developing an extended transaction cost economics perspective, our investigation focuses on the roles of internal and behavioral uncertainty and the occurrence of opportunistic behavior. We research a rich multi-sourcing case study within the financial services sector and compare and re-analyze a detailed case in the literature. According to our findings, internal uncertainty creates an ‘alignment of actions’ problem between outsourcing partners, while behavioral uncertainty can shape an ‘alignment of objectives’ problem, leading to the occurrence of opportunistic behavior. Our findings further contribute to a more thorough understanding of ways to reduce these uncertainties and facilitate coopetition between multiple vendors.

The need to reduce time-to-market and reduce cost-of-non-quality drives organizations operating within the advanced manufacturing industry to explore, and source technology externally. This paper reports on a case study of enabling technology and strategies for technology acquisition. The data is collected through in-depth structured interviews with five global technology experts. The interview guide is developed based on data collected in the Norwegian maritime industry, which deliver vessels to global markets and a high-level adopter of advanced manufacturing technology. The analyzis was done in Nvivo. Results relates to three modes of technology acquisition, namely alliances & licensing, monitor, acquire&merger, and coopetition.

The framework of implementing oilfield project is viewed as an engineering service chain consisting of serial different links supplied by multiple service providers in their specialized technical fields. It is the challenge for an oilfield project proprietor to ensure the consistency of accountability for quality performance of engineering services and acceptance of time limit for the project. This paper, from the view of general contractor as a group company, focuses on the tradeoff analysis of two different business strategies that are independent integration strategy and customized integration strategy, in which the factors affecting their comparative advantages are studied. The mechanism of how to distribute project profits between members of the engineering service chain is investigated. Our findings show that the optimal solution presents win-win profit distribution through the negotiation of outsourcing prices between the general contractor and multiple service providers (subcontractors) under coopetition strategy which characterizes the development trend of petroleum industry.

An intra-port coopetition model is proposed, which simultaneously characterizes both competition and cooperation among terminal operators in a port when competing with operators from external ports. Terminal operators make cooperative efforts to increase port competitiveness, while simultaneously making competitive efforts for price adjustment, cost and/or time reduction at individual terminals. Numerical analysis is performed considering private and public terminals characterized by different profit and social surplus maximization objectives. The results show that operator incentives change depending on the combinations of terminal ownership, and the private terminal tends to behave as a free rider in a public-private combination.

Geographical and industry proximity are positively correlated with the likelihood of relationship formation. However, studies of this interrelationship are scarce, have yielded mixed results, and have failed to unveil the mechanisms behind the effects of different types of proximity and their links with tie formation. This paper investigates the roles of geographical proximity and industry proximity with a focus on competitors. It examines the interplay of these two types of proximity in the context of relationships in the shipping industry. Based on a quantitative case study, I find that geographical proximity is not a prerequisite for relationship formation. On average, shipbrokers are more likely to enter into new deals with counterparties external to the industry than with shipping parties or competitors. However, geographical proximity positively moderates the likelihood of dealing with competitors. I explain this on the basis of coopetition, simultaneous competition, and cooperation among firms within local clusters.

Coopetition alliances offer great learning opportunities as well as tensions related to the sharing and protection of knowledge. Interfirm learning advances the complementarities in coopetition while sourcing efficiency advantages and innovation. Sharing and protection tensions in coopetition require firm- and relationship-oriented factors to enable interfirm learning. The present study reveals configurations of strong and weak interfirm learning in coopetition alliances. Absorptive learning capacity is a necessary condition of interfirm learning, while organizational slack resources and interdependence between firms are important additional conditions.

Coopetition, i.e., cooperation between competing actors, has become a pervasive strategy for innovative firms. The primary focus of studies investigating coopetition centers on inter-firm relationships, highlighting the benefits, limits and configurational patterns of cooperative relationships between competing firms. Only a small, emerging group of studies seeks to extend the concept to the intra-firm level, stressing the existence and effects of competition and cooperation between units that are part of the same organization. This paper contributes to this latter group by investigating the effects of internal coopetition on knowledge and innovation sharing and highlighting the fundamental role of knowledge brokers in managing the resulting tensions. Based on a qualitative case study of the video game publisher Ubisoft, we stress how the tensions raised by internal coopetitive settings limit knowledge sharing between units, and we analyze the mechanisms through which the knowledge broker helps to overcome these limits. We identify three main functions of this knowledge broker that allow the promotion of knowledge and innovation transfer to occur between coopeting units: (1) protecting the unit’s competitive advantage by introducing a lagging principle in the transfer process, (2) reducing sharing costs by standardizing innovative solutions, and (3) enhancing awareness of and trust in innovative solutions by centralizing knowledge diffusion.

In light of the transition towards a low-carbon economy and growing social demands for sustainable energy consumption, alternative powertrain systems, such as battery electric vehicles (BEVs), hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs) and fuel cell electric vehicles (FCEVs), have gained significance as a viable solution to revolutionize the dominant design logic of internal combustion engines (ICE) in automotive applications. By assuming that technological innovations emerge from the ability to recombine existing technologies, tracking and forecasting the technological knowledge interaction trajectory could assist experts and decision-makers in guiding their future R&D activities. To this end, a patent-based analysis framework is introduced to study the technological knowledge ecosystem of BEVs, HEVs and FCEVs in terms of technological knowledge flow (TKF). In this study, the principles of social network analysis are firstly used to quantify and visualize the connections among interacting technological knowledge areas. Secondly, link prediction technique is applied to predict the newly emerging and decaying links from a forward-looking perspective as well as the changing interrelationships among different technological knowledge areas. The findings show that the alternative powertrain systems form a cohesive technological knowledge ecosystem, pushing the underlying technological knowledge ecosystem to adopt a coopetition-based growth strategy. This study can provide valuable information for stakeholders interested in evaluating the evolving characteristics of alternative powertrain system technologies and offer an enhanced understanding on the technological competition in the automotive industry with regard to developing cleaner and more efficient mobility solutions.

In performing outsourcing tasks for original equipment manufacturers (OEMs), some competitive contract manufacturers (CCMs) develop enhanced production capabilities and begin to launch their own products. This gives rise to novel questions with respect to the moving sequence preferences of OEMs and CCMs and, particularly, whether they can reach consensus or will experience conflict. To capture these issues, we develop a model in which an OEM and its CCM compete through three game sequences: the simultaneous game, the CCM-as-leader game and the OEM-as-leader game. By comparing these games, we demonstrate that as the wholesale price increases, the OEM's preference shifts from moving first to moving simultaneously and then to moving last, while the CCM's preference shifts from moving first to moving last and then back to moving first in the case of a high outsourcing rate; these findings differ from most prior research results. Combining their preferences, we also obtain another distinctive insight that in both the CCM-as-leader game and the OEM-as-leader game, they can achieve consensus without concessions by either party under a high degree of cooperative manufacturing, moderate competition between channels and low market variation; however, in the simultaneous game, they always conflict with one another. Further, we find that the CCM, when moving first, may determine a lower production quantity than those in other games under the effect of coopetition, which contrasts with the conventional wisdom that the first mover gains the largest market share.

While coopetition behavior has been explored in various studies from different points of view, tourism coopetition and models to measure coopetition capacity have not received similar attention. In this study, we aim to develop an explanatory model of coopetition in tourism destinations. A theoretical review provided a list of factors and environmental conditions to favor coopetition behavior. Later, a Delphi technique was used to better define the model of Tourism Coopetition. An expert panel analyzed a list of 47 indicators derived from coopetition literature grouped in seven factors and narrowed them down to the 30 most important indicators of coopetition related to tourism destinations. The findings show that a coopetition model in a tourism destination is determined by seven factors: co-location, associationism, competition, cooperation, strategic management, co-entrepreneurship, and co-production. This research has a twofold implication: it provides a means of monitoring the strengths and weaknesses of a tourism destination toward coopetition behavior and therefore, it can be used to optimize stakeholder relationships to increase the competitiveness in the hospitality and tourism industry, as well as inspiring other researchers in this field.

There are well-documented examples of successful, mutually beneficial collaborations in supply chains; however, the failure rate of collaborations that are initiated is surprisingly high. This research focuses on one cornerstone of a successful collaboration, information sharing. The idea is to help companies who are considering a collaborative opportunity to evaluate the value of the information that would be shared so efforts are only expended on potential collaborations that have an acceptable reward for the risk. This proposed methodology is an optimality-based approach that uses game theory and considers information sharing in both the competition-cooperation and coopetition environments. Value is first assigned to information along several dimensions that allows payoff matrices to be constructed. Using these, Nash equilibrium and Pareto optimality are used to provide insights for decision makers.

Large companies were concerned about their supply chains with environmental and social sustainability and disruption from natural disasters, conflict, and trade disagreements even before the advent of Covid-19. The additional challenges presented by Covid-19 in 2020 are “extreme” in being distinct from supply chain risk in that not just particular companies, but also entire societies are affected. Therefore, it is appropriate to rethink supply chain management (SCM) for research and practice to cope with extreme conditions, now and in the future, whether due to pandemics, war, climate change, or biodiversity collapse. In this essay, we first present the widespread challenges, along with some of the responses. We then list research opportunities for supply chain management in extreme conditions. These opportunities pertain to retailers’ survival in the face of highly successful e-commerce giants and the mixed use of robots and human workers. There are also opportunities to share supply-chain capacity in distribution and coopetition regarding medically necessary items such as anti-virals or vaccines. The growing role of government in supporting business, including the creation of industry commons, also presents avenues for further research.

Business accelerators are a phenomenon of increasing popularity in practice, but their specific value-added for the participating startups has been understudied thus far. Our study addresses this research gap by investigating how participating in a business accelerator program supports startups to forge relationships with other startups, helping them to overcome their early-stage needs. We use an in-depth exploratory qualitative research approach based on a multiple embedded case study design by studying 23 startups within six accelerators in Germany. We find evidence that startups in accelerators forge specific types of relationships, including both cooperative and competitive elements, characterizing their early-stage needs. They cooperate through joint projects and exchange and compete on the firm level for internal and external resources and on the individual level for reputation, which makes these relationships overall coopetitive. Our findings indicate the importance of accelerators in driving the startups’ relationships, as accelerators trigger “coopetitive” behavior among startups through their available tools, including events, communication and the coworking space. This study contributes to literature on business accelerators and coopetition. Additionally, this study offers implications for startups, accelerators and policy makers.

In this article, we investigate the role of keystone players and consider their impact in terms of innovation rate in an industry. To do so, we build a theoretical framework that considers the innovation rate in the context of an industry with one keystone player and then with multiple keystone players. The results are threefold. First, the presence of a keystone player is incredibly important for innovation on a market. Second, however, our results also show that a biased market power in favor of the keystone player may hinder innovation in this industry, although the negative impact on the industry’s innovation rate may not be seen at first. Finally, we demonstrate that an industry obtains a higher innovation rate with multiple keystone players. This framework could inform decisions for the antitrust enforcers.