Search results

1 – 10 of 107
To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 4 July 2020

Ouidade Sabri, Amina Djedidi and Mouhoub Hani

This study aims to examine the critical role of types of coopetition (upstream/downstream), market structure (concentrated/competitive) and innovation (low vs high degree…

Abstract

Purpose

This study aims to examine the critical role of types of coopetition (upstream/downstream), market structure (concentrated/competitive) and innovation (low vs high degree of innovation) that can affect the way consumers perceive the resulting price (un)fairness of new offerings.

Design/methodology/approach

Three between-subjects experiments involving different participant populations and product categories were conducted to test the research hypotheses.

Findings

The valence of the effect of types of coopetition (upstream/downstream) on price fairness is conditional on the market structure and the degree of innovation associated with the new product offering. Downstream (as opposed to upstream) coopetition is much more detrimental to perceptions of price fairness in a concentrated market than in a competitive and fragmented market. However, within a competitive market, downstream coopetition may lead to greater price fairness perception than upstream coopetition when the new product offering is highly innovative.

Research limitations/implications

The current study uses lab experiments with fictitious scenarios and focuses on two moderating variables: market structure and innovation perceptions. Future research may use field experiments and explore additional moderating variables that may annihilate the negative effect of downstream coopetition on price fairness perception, especially in a concentrated market.

Practical implications

In concentrated markets, firms should opt for upstream rather than downstream coopetition to limit the negative effect the announcement of coopetition has on price fairness evaluation. However, within a competitive market, when the new product offering resulting from coopetition is associated with a high perceived degree of innovation, firms should opt for downstream rather than upstream coopetition because of its positive impact on price fairness evaluation.

Originality/value

To the best of authors’ knowledge, this study is the first to demonstrate that new product development from coopetition has important implications for the perception of price fairness, leading to positive or negative effects depending on market structure and the degree of innovation of the new product offering. It then explores the conditions under which types of coopetition (upstream/downstream) might backfire.

Details

Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, vol. 36 no. 2
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0885-8624

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Book part
Publication date: 29 November 2018

Rauno Rusko

This chapter focuses on the coopetition features of tourism and specifically of tourism destinations. Because of the typical features of tourism destinations, coopetition

Abstract

This chapter focuses on the coopetition features of tourism and specifically of tourism destinations. Because of the typical features of tourism destinations, coopetition might be a particularly important theme in the literature on tourism. However, the number of tourism studies that have focused on, or at least mentioned, coopetition is surprisingly small. Regarding tourism destinations, co-location causes different forms of coopetition situations, which are not very common in geographically diffused industries. Furthermore, the basic idea of one joint tourism product, such as the experiences of a tourist in a tourism destination, forces the (competing) suppliers of services in the resort to cooperate. Co-location causes a situation in which the competing firms in the area have joint branding and marketing activities. Destination marketing organisations are an important form of coopetition activities in tourism. In addition to co-location, seasonality is one of the specific features of coopetition in tourism destinations. This study combines the outcomes of several publications and other empirical materials about coopetition in tourism.

Details

Tourism Planning and Destination Marketing
Type: Book
ISBN: 978-1-78756-292-9

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 6 April 2020

Siqi Xu and Youmin Xi

This paper aims to explore the complete process and underlying mechanism that social enterprises obtain legitimacy during interactions with stakeholders from theoretical…

Abstract

Purpose

This paper aims to explore the complete process and underlying mechanism that social enterprises obtain legitimacy during interactions with stakeholders from theoretical integration of institutional theory and organization ecology perspective.

Design/methodology/approach

Based on theoretical classification, this paper selects six typical Chinese social enterprises and conducts a multi-case analysis.

Findings

The study finds that social enterprises aim at legitimizing single entity or industry and shaping stakeholders’ cognitive boundary simultaneously. Therefore, by adopting constrained cooperation and competition activities, social enterprises use normative isomorphism to achieve personal legitimation and combining ecological niche construction, social enterprises achieve organizational legitimation. By adopting fragmented cooperation-dominant or competition-dominant activities, social enterprises use mimic isomorphism supplemented by competitive isomorphism or population structure creation to obtain industry legitimation. By adopting dynamically integrated coopetition activities, social enterprises use mimic isomorphism and reflexive isomorphism to reach field legitimation.

Originality/value

This paper proposes a mechanism model that the coopetition with stakeholders influences the legitimation process, identifies four stages of social enterprise’s legitimation process and the types of legitimacy obtained in each stage and fills the gap of Chinese indigenous social enterprise research.

Details

Nankai Business Review International, vol. 11 no. 2
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 2040-8749

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 5 April 2013

Stephen Kim, Namwoon Kim, Jae H. Pae and Leslie Yip

This study aims to examine the strategic implications and managerial outcomes of the concurrent use of cooperation and competition in vertical channel relationships.

Abstract

Purpose

This study aims to examine the strategic implications and managerial outcomes of the concurrent use of cooperation and competition in vertical channel relationships.

Design/methodology/approach

This study employs a structured questionnaire to gather data regarding vertical channel relationships in China.

Findings

Whereas the academic literature has emphasized cooperation between channel members because of the interdependence between them, in reality, retailers may accept competition as just another part of doing business with suppliers.

Research limitations/implications

The outcome variables used may not be comprehensive. In particular, the authors choose the flexibility of channel resources to stand for private benefits and joint benefits to represent common benefits, and though these variables certainly represent the intended benefits of the ambidextrous strategy, it remains to be seen whether other benefits may emerge for the exchange parties in vertical relationships.

Practical implications

Using an ambidextrous strategy does not damage relationship quality, though it certainly does not enhance it. This view is based on the notion that an ambidextrous strategy at least does not harm either common or private benefits. Therefore, exchange parties using the ambidextrous strategy should not experience a relationship that is worse than that which results when they use cooperation or competition alone. The results of the current study indicate that this view reflects reality more accurately.

Originality/value

The value of the current study centers on the application of a conceptual framework regarding ambidextrous strategy to vertical channel relationships in a developing economy.

Details

Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, vol. 28 no. 4
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0885-8624

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 13 May 2019

Zach Zacharia, Michael Plasch, Usha Mohan and Markus Gerschberger

Increasing environmental uncertainty, more demanding customers, rapid technological growth and rising capital costs have all forced firms to evolve from collaborating with…

Abstract

Purpose

Increasing environmental uncertainty, more demanding customers, rapid technological growth and rising capital costs have all forced firms to evolve from collaborating with buyers and suppliers to collaborating with their competitors and that is called coopetition. The purpose of this paper is to better understand the antecedents and outcomes associated with coopetition.

Design/methodology/approach

Building from the existing literature and three theoretical foundations, resource-based theory, resource dependence theory and game theory, the authors develop a model showing the antecedents and outcomes of coopetition and associated propositions of coopetition. Using a semi-structured interview process of 21 industry executives, the authors offer empirical support for the proposed coopetition model and propositions.

Findings

Firms are increasingly dependent on the knowledge and expertise in external organizations to innovate, solve problems and improve supply chain performance. This research suggests that there is a value for firms to consider coopetition as a part of their inter-firm strategies.

Research limitations/implications

The semi-structured interview process used in this research provided a wealth of information and executive experiences in coopetition. The interviews, however, only provide a single perspective of collaborative engagements with competitors. Multiple perspectives of each project would add value to this research.

Originality/value

Collaboration among buyers and suppliers have been well researched; however, there has not been as much research on coopetition. This research provides a new area for future research for academics and offers suggestions for managers to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of their coopetition projects.

Details

The International Journal of Logistics Management, vol. 30 no. 2
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0957-4093

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 24 April 2020

Yousef Bin Makhashen, Piyya Muhammad Rafi-ul-Shan, Mahdi Bashiri, Ruaa Hasan, Hassan Amar and Muhammad Naveed Khan

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the knowledge gaps in the extant literature on the role of ambidexterity and coopetition in designing resilient fashion supply…

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the knowledge gaps in the extant literature on the role of ambidexterity and coopetition in designing resilient fashion supply chains (RFSCs), and to develop a contextual framework for effective decision-making to enable practitioners to enhance their supply chain resilience.

Design/methodology/approach

The study adopts a novel multi-evidence-based approach comprising Denyer and Tranfield's (2009) systematic literature review (SLR) with context, intervention, mechanism and outcome (CIMO) logic, text mining and network analysis. The approach constitutes a rigorous methodology that cross-validates results and ensures the reliability and validity of findings.

Findings

The authors identified key knowledge gaps in the literature and explored the main contribution categories (e.g. conceptual understandings, operational impacts, use of theories and frameworks). Subsequently, we developed a contextual framework of ambidextrous coopetition to design RFSCs. Finally, an empirical research agenda is proposed with the five research directions to address the gap and take forward the notion of ambidextrous coopetition and RFSCs.

Research limitations/implications

The multi-evidence-based approach is a structured and triangulated SLR approach and thus lacks empirical study.

Practical implications

This research proposes a contextual framework of ambidextrous coopetition that can be used by fashion companies to embed resilience into their structures and operations. This research also presents an agenda for the future empirical research.

Originality/value

This paper contributes by providing a combinatory synthesis on the role of ambidexterity and coopetition in designing RFSCs. This paper introduces a novel methodological triangulation for improving the quality and validity of SLRs. It identifies significant knowledge gaps and defines directions for future research.

Details

Journal of Enterprise Information Management, vol. 33 no. 6
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1741-0398

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 10 May 2019

Steffen Roth, Loet Leydesdorff, Jari Kaivo-Oja and Augusto Sales

This paper aims to extend the existing views of coopetition into the broader context of open coopetition.

Abstract

Purpose

This paper aims to extend the existing views of coopetition into the broader context of open coopetition.

Design/methodology/approach

The authors build on the literature about open innovation cooperation between competitors in the open-source software industry, which we generalize to show that open coopetition between competitors and third parties can be observed in other industries and institutional settings.

Findings

The authors outline a research program on the management challenges of open coopetition-related and argue that open coopetition can not only be observed between business rivals but also between partners from university, industry, government and further institutional backgrounds.

Originality/value

The authors introduce to so-far neglected roots of the emerging research program on open coopetition and extend the prevailing business focus of open coopetition research to also systematically include open coopetition between partners from business and other spheres of society.

Details

Journal of Business Strategy, vol. 41 no. 6
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0275-6668

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 1 October 2008

Mahito Okura

The purpose of this paper is to investigate both cooperative and competitive strategies of firms that may cause accidents. The firms may exchange information about the…

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to investigate both cooperative and competitive strategies of firms that may cause accidents. The firms may exchange information about the previous accidents associated with their products in order to reduce accident probabilities and the amount of damage. Thus, these firms may cooperate on this point. On the other hand, they compete on quantities after deciding whether accident information is to be disclosed. This situation is termed coopetition. In order to address the issue of disclosure of accident information, an economic model is developed and it derives two main conclusions. First, there is a unique equilibrium where firms choose to not disclose their accident information. Second, the equilibrium strategies of firms are Pareto inferior for them when the condition relating to marginal effort costs and potential demands is satisfied. Thus, whether the coopetitive situation that firms exchange their accident information cooperatively and choose their quantity levels competitively is desirable for firms depends on the magnitude of the cost reduction and demand reduction effects.

Details

Management Research: Journal of the Iberoamerican Academy of Management, vol. 6 no. 3
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1536-5433

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 3 June 2019

Linlin Chai, Jin Li, Thomas Clauss and Chanchai Tangpong

The purpose of this study is to investigate the antecedents and the conditions of coopetition at the inter-organizational level.

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this study is to investigate the antecedents and the conditions of coopetition at the inter-organizational level.

Design/methodology/approach

This study is based on survey research methodology and analyzes the data from 138 companies regarding the antecedents and the conditions of their coopetition.

Findings

The results indicate that the interdependence between partners (i.e. the antecedent) positively affects interfirm coopetition, and that this relationship is contingent on the joint occurrence of opportunism (a behavioral condition) and technology uncertainty (a contextual condition). Specifically, highly interdependent firms are more likely to be involved in a coopetitive relationship when both opportunism and technology uncertainty are high. Interestingly, the authors’ data also show that opportunism or technology uncertainty alone may not be adequate in moderating the interdependence–coopetition relationship.

Research limitations/implications

This study contributes to the current literature in two meaningful ways. First, it empirically examines interdependence as a potential antecedent of interfirm coopetition. Second, it improves our understanding of the behavioral and contextual conditions that facilitate the formation of coopetitive relationships by examining the moderating roles of opportunisms and technology uncertainty in the relationship between interdependence and interfirm coopetition. The limitations of this study lie in its confined method of cross-sectional survey from the focal firm’s perspective. Future research may advance beyond this study through experimental and/or longitudinal research designs.

Practical implications

This study provides managers with two important practical insights in coopetition management. First, the findings suggest a two-step approach to help a firm assess and manage the level of coopetition in its relationship with a business partner. In addition, the findings provide a counterintuitive suggestion to managers that the joint conditions of high opportunism and high technology uncertainty indeed prime the relationship for the rise of coopetition, provided that managerial efforts are made to somewhat increase the level of interdependence in the relationship.

Originality/value

Despite the growing number of studies on coopetition, research still lacks knowledge about the antecedents and the conditions of inter-organizational coopetition, and this study aims to fill this gap.

Details

Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, vol. 34 no. 5
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0885-8624

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 17 August 2020

Christian F. Durach, Frank Wiengarten and Thomas Y. Choi

The present study considers disruption in the buyer–supplier–supplier triad. This triad has a common second-tier supplier as the disruption source, which gives us the…

Abstract

Purpose

The present study considers disruption in the buyer–supplier–supplier triad. This triad has a common second-tier supplier as the disruption source, which gives us the tetradic context. The goal is to advance the knowledge on how a first-tier supplier's resilience against lower-tier disruptive events can be developed through horizontally connecting with the other first-tier supplier and how the buyer can benefit from its first-tier suppliers' resilience capability.

Design/methodology/approach

Data from 33 triads was collected and analyzed.

Findings

As predicted, coopetition between two first-tier suppliers increases the first-tier supplier's capability to be resilient to disruptive events emanating from a lower tier source. However, contrary to initial theorization, the first-tier supplier's resilience capability affects the buyer's performance during disruptive events negatively. With increasing buyer–supplier social bonds, this negative relationship can partly be alleviated.

Research limitations/implications

Analyzing resilience within a triad to a disruption in the tetradic context reveals unexpected dynamics. Individual supplier's resilience may have a negative impact on the buyer's resilience in certain disruption events.

Practical implications

The buyer can increase collective suppliers' resilience through establishing horizontal links. To prevent becoming a victim of the supplier's resilience in the event of a second-tier disruption, a buyer needs to become a member of the supplier's relational network.

Originality/value

We propose that resilience can rest with the suppliers. This observation has implications for the buyer when selecting and coordinating suppliers. Further, it considers a context beyond a triad by venturing into the tetradic context. We anticipate more studies in tetrads in future and this study can serve as a bridge.

Details

International Journal of Operations & Production Management, vol. 40 no. 7/8
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0144-3577

Keywords

1 – 10 of 107