Search results

Earlier work has suggested that assumptions, values and beliefs about the importance of cooperating with competitors (a coopetition-oriented mindset) should manifest into behavioural forms of coopetition, such as resource and capability-sharing activities. Yet, limited research surrounds the complexities of this link. The purpose of this study is to unpack the relationship between a coopetition-oriented mindset and coopetition-oriented behaviours under the moderating roles of industry experience and degree of internationalization, guided by resource-based theory and the relational view.

The chosen empirical context was the Canadian wine industry because wine producers are often involved in coopetition strategies and have varying degrees of internationalisation. Preliminary interview data were collected from 18 managers to shape the operationalisations. Then survey data were collected from 195 Canadian wine producers. After checking the statistical data for all major assessments of reliability and validity (together with common method variance), the hypothesised and control paths were tested through hierarchical regression.

A coopetition-oriented mindset had a positive and significant association with coopetition-oriented behaviours. Surprisingly, this link was negatively moderated by industry experience. Additionally, degree of internationalisation yielded a positive moderation effect. These moderators highlight situations where a coopetition-oriented mindset is (and is not) likely to manifest into coopetition activities.

If firms aim to engage in behavioural forms of coopetition, they should manage assumptions, values and beliefs associated with the advantages of collaborating with their competitors. Industry experience can limit the extent to which business’ coopetition-oriented mindsets manifest into coopetition-oriented behaviours. This could be explained by decision makers possessing information that discourages them from working with certain (untrustworthy) rivals because of the potential harmful effects on their performance. Companies should use their industry experience to avoid working with rival entities that will create negative outcomes, such as tensions (e.g., conflict, power imbalances and opportunistic behaviours), lost intellectual property and diluted competitive advantages. Nonetheless, industry experience might signify that there are more risks than rewards linked with these business-to-business marketing strategies. Higher levels of internationalisation can help firms to recognise that coopetition-oriented behaviours may lead to performance-enhancing opportunities in their overseas markets.

This investigation contributes to the business-to-business marketing literature with new evidence on how organisations can foster a coopetition-oriented mindset to engage in coopetition strategies. The negative moderation effect from industry experience highlights that knowledge of competitors’ activities can limit the extent to which coopetition-oriented behaviours are implemented. Moreover, the positive interaction effect from degree of internationalisation extends the growing body of knowledge pertaining to coopetition in an international arena. Collectively, these results show that while a coopetition-oriented mindset is a critical driver of coopetition-oriented behaviours, there are certain contingencies that can strengthen or weaken this association. Finally, by integrating resource-based theory and the relational view, this paper could explore the different forms of coopetition, in terms of organisation-wide mindsets and firm-level behaviours. This paper concludes with some managerial recommendations, alongside a series of limitations and avenues for future research.

This paper aims to review the latest management developments across the globe and pinpoint practical implications from cutting-edge research and case studies.

This briefing is prepared by an independent writer who adds their own impartial comments and places the articles in context.

This research paper clarifies that a coopetition-oriented mindset does drive coopetition-oriented behaviors. The results reveal that industry experience has a negative impact on the manifestation of coopetition-oriented behaviors, due a risk-related reticence in choosing suitable coopetition partners. Engaging in internationalization – for example, by partnering with a competitor to enter a foreign export market – with a coopetition-oriented mindset, has the positive effect of yielding further coopetition-oriented behaviors. Organizations involved in international business models are therefore more likely to partake in coopetition strategies.

The briefing saves busy executives, strategists and researchers hours of reading time by selecting only the very best, most pertinent information and presenting it in a condensed and easy-to-digest format.

The purpose of this paper is to extend the entrepreneurial marketing literature to account for coopetition (the interplay between cooperation and competition). This paper is also designed to highlight the research gaps surrounding coopetition, so that academics, working at the marketing/entrepreneurship interface, can undertake more investigations linked with this topic.

The entrepreneurial marketing literature was reviewed to develop a conceptual framework, guided by three research propositions, examining the antecedents and consequences of coopetition, as well as the boundaries of the coopetition–organisational performance relationship.

Coopetition activities are driven by an organisation-wide coopetition-oriented mindset – the degree to which managers and employees believe in the importance of cooperating with competitors. Also, coopetition can help entrepreneurs access new resources and capabilities from their competitors; however, “too much” coopetition can lead to tensions between such rival firms. Additionally, it is proposed that the relationship between coopetition activities and organisational performance is moderated by competitive intensity (a facet of the competitive business environment). That is, with higher levels of competitive intensity, entrepreneurs are less likely to improve their performance from coopetition activities. That is, the competitive business environment can affect the delicate balance between the forces of cooperativeness and competitiveness.

Entrepreneurial marketing research has concentrated on individualistic perspectives concerning how entrepreneurs operate their businesses. In this viewpoint, the competitive assumptions of the marketing/entrepreneurship interface are extended to account for coopetition. This paper also outlines the areas within the coopetition literature that entrepreneurial marketing scholars should appreciate. Specifically, entrepreneurial marketing scholars are recommended to examine the antecedents and consequences of coopetition, coupled with the moderating role of competitive intensity (a facet of the competitive business environment) in the coopetition–organisational performance relationship. This paper ends with a recommended methodology for academics to test the conceptual framework in future empirical research.

Coopetition, namely, the interplay between cooperation and competition, has received a good deal of interest in the business-to-business marketing literature. Academics have operationalised the coopetition construct and have used these measures to test the antecedents and consequences of firms collaborating with their competitors. However, business-to-business marketing scholars have not developed and validated an agreed operationalisation that reflects the dimensionality of the coopetition construct. Thus, the purpose of this study is to develop and validate a multi-dimensional measure of coopetition for marketing scholars to use in future research.

To use a highly cooperative and highly competitive empirical context, sporting organisations in New Zealand were sampled, as the key informants within these entities engaged in different forms of coopetition. Checks were made to ensure that the sampled entities produced generalisable results. That is, it is anticipated that the results apply to other industries with firms engaging in similar business-to-business behaviours. Various sources of qualitative and quantitative data were acquired to develop and validate a multi-dimensional measure of coopetition (the COOP scale), which passed all major assessments of reliability and validity (including common method variance).

The results indicated that coopetition is a multi-dimensional construct, comprising three distinct dimensions. First, local-level coopetition is collaboration among competing entities within a close geographic proximity. Second, national-level coopetition is cooperation with rivals within the same country but across different geographic regions. Third, organisation-level coopetition is cooperation with competitors across different firms (including with indirect rivals), regardless of their geographic location and product markets served. Indeed, organisation-level coopetition extends to how companies engage in coopetition in domestic and international capacities, depending on the extent to which they compete in similar product markets in comparison to industry rivals. Also, multiple indicators were used to measure each facet of the coopetition construct after the scale purification stage.

Prior coopetition-based investigations have predominately been conceptual or qualitative in nature. The scarce number of existing scales have significant problems, such as not appreciating that coopetition is a multi-dimensional variable, as well as using single indicators. In spite of a recent call for research on the multiple levels of coopetition, there has not been an agreed measure of the construct that accounts for its multi-dimensionality. Hence, this investigation responds to such a call for research by developing and validating the COOP scale. Local-, national- and organisation-level coopetition are anticipated to be the main facets of the coopetition construct, which offer several avenues for future research.

The purpose of this paper is to highlight the theoretical and methodological value of studying coopetition (the interplay between cooperation and competition) in a wine industry context.

Key publications surrounding wine industries across multiple countries were reviewed to understand how the wine industry is a highly appropriate empirical context to investigate coopetition.

The findings revealed that the wine industry is a highly suitable empirical context for researchers to explore coopetition. Specifically, being a highly cooperative and competitive market, the wine industry provides a unique outlook into how coopetition is managed.

This paper helps scholars to appreciate the theoretical and methodological benefits of using a wine industry context to evaluate coopetition. Hence, scholars should use the wine industry to obtain rich empirical data surrounding coopetition. The paper ends with a set of recommendations for future research.

Underpinned by a stakeholder-oriented resource-based theoretical lens, this inter-disciplinary study investigates the association between an entrepreneurial orientation and firm performance under different degrees of coopetition (cooperation among rival firms).

Alongside undertaking 20 semi-structured interviews, survey responses were obtained from 302 smaller-sized producers in the American wine industry. The elements of the conceptual model were evaluated via hierarchical regression. Moreover, all major robustness checks were assessed.

Positive and significant relationships respectively existed between an entrepreneurial orientation and coopetition with firm performance. However, a somewhat counter-intuitive finding involved the interaction between these two constructs negatively and significantly influencing firm performance.

Even though employing an entrepreneurial orientation has been long-since linked to facilitating improved firm performance, under-resourced owner-managers of certain smaller-sized enterprises may struggle to implement these activities. In principle, cooperating with competitors can enhance resources/capabilities and lead to mutually beneficial outcomes. Nevertheless, unique insights suggest that the potential exists for coopetition-based networking activities to have detrimental outcomes with respect to entrepreneurially orientated strategies. Consequently, decision-makers are advised to consider the merits of collaborating with their industry rivals, but also be aware of the potential “dark sides” surrounding these behaviours. Furthermore, improved knowledge emerges regarding the stakeholder themes of resource-based theory.

Small sports clubs are the life-blood of particular communities, even though many are under-resourced and have difficulties in operating under an individualistic business model. Although coopetition (simultaneous cooperation and competition) has been recognised as a positive driver of performance, the complexities of this association remain under-researched. Consequently, grounded in resource-based theory and the relational view, the purpose of this current study is to examine the moderating roles of inter-firm conflict and competitive intensity in the coopetition–sales performance relationship.

After undertaking 25 field interviews, survey data were collected from 151 non-mainstream sporting clubs in New Zealand. This setting was ideal, since it hosts high-degrees of cooperativeness and competitiveness. After assessing the statistical data for all major robustness checks (including common method variance and endogeneity bias), the hypothesised and control paths were tested through a hierarchical regression analysis.

Coopetition had a positive relationship with sales performance, but inter-firm conflict yielded a negative interaction effect. Surprisingly, this link was positively moderated by competitive intensity.

Under-resourced entrepreneurs (like those in many small sports clubs) should consider cooperating with their competitors, as these strategies can assist them to improve their sales performance. However, they should be careful when engaging in such activities due to the considerable risk that rival firms could behave opportunistically, which might harm their performance. That being said, owner-managers are advantaged if they operate in sectors where there are lots of competitors because there is increased scope to collaborate with “complementary” and trustworthy rivals that can help them to achieve mutually-beneficial outcomes. Indeed, sporting governing bodies (including those that operate on a non-profit basis) should encourage their members to engage in coopetition due to these positive financial consequences.

This investigation contributes to the extant literature by evaluating the competitive forces affecting the link between coopetition and sales performance. Specifically, new evidence emerges on the circumstances where coopetition is (and is not) a performance-enhancing entrepreneurial strategy. Further, this investigation provides unique insights regarding coopetition among non-mainstream sporting clubs, adding new knowledge to the sports entrepreneurship literature. Moreover, by infusing resource-based theory with the relational view, stronger arguments feature how owner-managers can navigate the paradoxical forces that drive coopetition activities. This study ends with several practitioner implications, alongside a series of limitations and avenues for future research.

The purpose of this study is to increase understanding about vertical coopetition from the perspective of interrelated conflict episodes on multiple levels.

The empirical part is based on a qualitative single case study of a coopetitive buyer-supplier relationship in the manufacturing sector.

Conflicts in vertical coopetition evolve from being merely functional and task-related to becoming dysfunctional and relationship-related, as the level of competition increases. The nature of conflict episodes influences the development of vertical coopetition, and therefore, the interrelatedness of conflict episodes is important to acknowledge.

Although a conflict is considered functional within a company, it may still be dysfunctional as far as the coopetitive relationship with the buyer or seller is concerned. Competition may trigger conflicts related to protecting own technology and knowledge, which may lead to termination of the cooperation, therefore coopetition should be managed in a way that balance sharing and protecting important knowledge to get advantages of coopetition.

The findings enhance prior research on vertical coopetition by offering new perspectives on causes of conflicts, their management, outcomes and types. The value of taking a multilevel approach lies in the ability to show how conflicts occur and influence other conflicts through the interrelatedness of conflict elements on different levels.

This paper aims to study the role of absorptive capacities in coopetitive alliances that involve leakages of sensitive private knowledge regarding firms’ production processes.

This paper uses a game theoretic approach to model a differentiated product market in which two firms asymmetrically informed about the economic value of a business opportunity must cooperate to exploit this opportunity. Under coopetition, firms gain access to their partners’ core knowledge as the result of inevitable leakages of information. Firms differ in their absorptive capacities, which affects their abilities to leverage this new knowledge outside the collaborative activity.

Firms with superior absorptive capacities are more likely to devise alliances whose purpose is to gain access to their partners’ core knowledge. This opportunistic behaviour does not disappear even if firms compensate their partners for the damages caused by this deceptive business practice. This paper also finds that a highly specialised product safeguards firms with limited absorptive capacities against these opportunistic behaviours.

This paper provides a theoretical analysis of the role that absorptive capacities and product specialisation play in influencing the emergence of opportunistic behaviours in coopetitive alliances. The theoretical analysis underscores the extent to which the risk of opportunism associated with the exploitation of a partner’s specific core knowledge outside the scope of the cooperative activity affects not only the nature and intensity of market competition but also the incentives to pursue coopetitive alliances.