Search results

Although earlier research suggests a positive relationship exists between engaging in entrepreneurial marketing activities and firm performance, there may be contingent issues that impact the association. This investigation unpacks the relationship between entrepreneurial marketing behaviour and firm performance under the moderating role of coopetition, in an immediate post-COVID-19 period.

A resource-based theoretical lens, alongside an outside-in perspective, underpins this study. Following 20 field interviews, survey responses via an online survey were obtained from 306 small, passive exporting wine producers with a domestic market focus in the United States. The data passed all major robustness checks.

The statistical findings indicated that entrepreneurial marketing activities positively and significantly influenced firm performance, while coopetition provided a non-significant moderation effect. Field interviews suggested that entrepreneurs’ attemps to scale up from passive to more active export activities in an immediate post-pandemic period helped explain the findings. Owner-managers rejoined trustworthy and complementary pre-pandemic coopetition partners in the immediate aftermath of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) for domestic market activities. In contrast, they had to minimise risks from dark-side/opportunistic behaviour when joining coopetition networks with partners while attempting to scale up export market activities.

Unique insights emerge to unpack the entrepreneurial marketing–performance relationship via the moderation effect of coopetition, namely, with the temporal setting of an immediate post-COVID-19 period. Firstly, new support arises regarding the likely performance-enhancing impact of owner-managers’ engagement in entrepreneurial marketing practices. Secondly, novel findings emerge in respect of the contrasting role of coopetition in both domestic and export market activities. Thirdly, new evidence arises in relation to a resource-based theoretical lens alongside an outside-in perspective, whereby, strategic flexibility in pivoting facets of a firm’s business model needs effective management following a crisis.

This study aimed to understand coopetition in the context of Brazilian specialty coffee grower Small and medium enterprises (SMEs), based on the need to differentiate the beans in and outside the farm level, taking into account the stakeholders’ influence.

In this study twenty semistructured interviews were carried out with coffee growers and managers of cooperatives, associations and supporting institutions involving two Brazilian coffee geographical indications. Data were analyzed using a mixed grid composed of qualitative, semantic and categorical factors.

Strategic moves undertaken by coffee growers and stakeholders have shaped the pathway of coopetition among coffee growers, as determinants to frame it as a deliberate or emergent pattern (intentional or unplanned, respectively). Our findings provide evidence that coopetition development among firms is deliberate when influenced by firms’ or stakeholders’ cooperative moves and emergent when influenced by firms’ or stakeholders’ competitive moves.

Although the firm/stakeholder relationship is often approached as a joint wealth creation effort, stakes are not always fairly distributed, so one of the parties may be negatively affected, with consequences for the development of coopetition. Underpinned by a stakeholder-oriented resource-based theoretical lens, this investigation of the development patterns of coopetition linked to the strategic actions undertaken by firms and stakeholders has resonance on competitive advantages.

The purpose of this study is to explore the coopetition relationships between platform owners and complementors in complementary product markets. Drawing on the coopetition theory, the authors examined the evolutionary trends of the coopetition relationships between platform owners and complementors and explore the main influence factors.

The authors used Lotka–Volterra model to analyze the coopetition relationship between platform owners and complementors, including the evolutionary trends as well as the results. Considering the feasibility of sample data collection, simulation is used to verify the effects of different factors on the evolution of coopetition relationships.

The results show that there are four possible results of the competition in the complementary products market. That comprises “winner-take-all for platform owners,” “winner-take-all for complementors,” “stable competitive coexistence” and “unstable competitive coexistence,” where “stable competitive coexistence” is the optimal evolutionary state. Moreover, the results of competitive evolution are determined by innovation subjects’ interaction parameters. However, the natural growth rate, the initial market benefits of the two innovators and the overall benefits of the complementary product markets influence the time to reach a steady state.

The study provides new insights into the entry of platform owners into complementary markets, and the findings highlight the fact that in complementary product markets, platform owners and complementors should seek “competitive coexistence” rather than “winner-takes-all.” Moreover, the authors also enrich the coopetition theory by revealing the core factors that influence the evolution of coopetition relationships, which further enhance the analysis of the evolutionary process of coopetition relationships.

Innovativeness is crucial for industrial cluster firms to gain sustained competitive advantage. This study aims to investigate the effects of inter-firm coopetition on firm innovativeness within a cluster and examines the moderating role of institutional support.

This research adopts an empirical survey method using multi-source data from 181 industrial cluster firms. Regression is used to test the hypotheses of this study.

The results show that cooperation and constructive conflict promote firm innovativeness, while destructive conflict is detrimental to firm innovativeness. Moreover, the study also finds that cooperation interacts with both types of conflict to affect firm innovativeness, where cooperation and constructive conflict interact negatively on firm innovativeness, while cooperation and destructive conflict interact positively on firm innovativeness. In addition, institutional support weakens the effects of cooperation and destructive conflict on innovativeness, respectively, but has no significant moderating effect on the relationship between constructive conflict and innovativeness.

These findings enrich the current research on coopetition. The interaction effects of cooperation and both types of conflict on innovativeness deepen the concept of coopetition and responds to the call to further explore the interaction effects within coopetition. The moderating role of institutional support fills a gap in the empirical research on the role of institutional factors affecting coopetition on innovation and also provides valuable suggestions for firm managers and governments in industrial clusters.

The purpose of this paper is to contribute to the discussion on how multinational company (MNC) headquarters (HQs) can manage the existing coopetition paradox to ensure innovation within the MNC. In contrast to the rather scarce previous research, the authors argue that HQ needs to solve the coopetition paradox under the sway of a parenting paradox. Hence, HQ faces a dual paradox.

Drawing on the literature on HQ’s role during MNCs’ innovation processes, this conceptual paper revisits the previously suggested HQ measures to enable coopetition among subsidiaries. By applying a sheer ignorance perspective, the authors contribute with a more nuanced understanding of the HQ’s role in innovation activities.

The article identifies four challenges as the HQ faces a parenting paradox that hinders its ability to solve the coopetition paradox: context specificity of subsidiaries’ innovation work, normative expectations of subsidiary managers, potential opportunistic behavior of HQ manager and HQ underestimation of needed resources. The article suggests that HQ needs to become more informed and preferably even embedded in the local innovation networks of its most important subsidiaries and that coopetition should not be managed solely on an HQ level.

Advocating a sheer ignorance perspective, the article pioneers in discussing the role that HQ plays in managing coopetition among subsidiaries in innovation activities.

Members in the international joint ventures (IJVs) for high-speed rail (HSR) projects usually engage in coopetition interactions to create common benefits (CB) and simultaneously safeguard private benefits (PB). Previous studies of coopetition and performance using variance-based methods usually ignore the combinational influence of diverse coopetition constructs on performance, which can be effectively compensated by adopting a configuration perspective. Therefore, this research aims to ascertain various combinations of three coopetition constructs (coopetition relationship, coopetition capability and coopetition strategy) that lead to high IJVs’ performance through a configuration approach.

First, the research framework of coopetition configuration was established, and the key constructs were operationalized, which were validated by expert interviews. Then the information on 12 HSR IJVs was collected and quantified through nine rounds of interviews and a questionnaire survey. Later, the fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) was applied to explore what coopetition configurations benefit the CB or PB achievement.

Configuration results indicate that six coopetition configurations lead to CB outcome and seven configurations lead to PB outcome. Based on the results, coopetition contexts are divided into four categories: firm-based coopetition, project-based coopetition, firm-project-based coopetition and none-based coopetition. Then, a selection scheme for coopetition strategies in various contexts has been developed. The results also show that the core conditions mostly appear in the coopetition relationships and coopetition strategies dimensions, and the optimal coopetition strategies vary in different contexts.

This study enhances the theoretical understanding of coopetition in HSR IJVs and assists relative HSR industrialists, as well as the mega infrastructure project managers, in IJVs’ implementation. The configuration perspective of this paper also contributes to a systemic and holistic view of coopetition in HSR IJVs.

Guided by resource-based theory, this study unpacks the relationship between an export entrepreneurial marketing orientation (EMO) and export performance. This is undertaken by investigating quadratic effects and the moderating role of export coopetition (cooperation amongst competitors in an international arena).

Survey responses were collected from a sample of 282 smaller-sized wine producers in Italy. This empirical context was ideal, as it hosted varying degrees of the constructs within the conceptual model. Put another way, it was suitable to test the underlying issues for theorising purposes. The hypotheses and control paths were tested through a three-step hierarchical regression analysis.

An export EMO had a non-linear (inverted U-shaped) association with export performance. Furthermore, this link was positively moderated by export coopetition. With too little of an export EMO, small enterprises might struggle to create value for their overseas customers. With too much of an export EMO, owner-managers could experience harmful performance outcomes. By cooperating with appropriate industry rivals, small companies can acquire new resources, capabilities and opportunities to help them to boost their export performance. That is, export coopetition can stabilise some of the potential dangers of employing an export EMO.

The empirical findings signified that an export EMO has potential dark-sides if these firm-wide behaviours are not implemented effectively. Nevertheless, cooperating with competitors in export markets can alleviate some of these concerns. Collectively, unique insights have emerged, whereby entrepreneurs are advantaged by being strategically flexible and collaborating with appropriate key stakeholders to enhance their export performance.

Studies concentrating on digitalization and interconnected capabilities have increased over the past several decades. Digitalization capability and open innovation are perceived as sources of sustained competitiveness across disciplines. This study investigated how digitalization capability and coopetition strategy affect the sustainable performance of firms by exploring the role of internal and external factors in influencing the adoption and success of open innovation in emerging markets.

To test the hypothesis, the authors conducted a structural equation model analysis on 509 firm datasets from the hub cities in China, an innovative battlefield where multilateral cooperation and competition are interwoven for globalization, clean development and the enhancement of economic growth.

The authors found that a firm's digitalization capability positively impacts outbound/inbound open innovation, coopetition strategy and sustainable performance. This study’s results support a series of mediating effects through outbound/inbound open innovation and coopetition strategy. Also, it provides a nuanced understanding of how digitalization capability and open innovation can affect sustainable performance in emerging markets.

The present study provides a nuanced understanding of how digitalization capability and in/out-bound open innovation can affect sustainable performance in emerging markets. The authors believe this model contributes to current knowledge by filling several research gaps, and this study’s findings offer valuable and practical implications for achieving open innovation and creating sustainable performance.

Open innovation (OI), by now one of the major concepts for the analysis of innovation, is seen as a methodology for collaboratively designing and implementing solutions by engaging stakeholders in an iterative and inclusive service design process. This paper aims to empirically investigate OI capacities, defined as a cooperative, knowledge-sharing innovation ecosystem, and to explore how it can lead to improved performance of firms in Central and Eastern European (CEE) and Southeastern European (SEE) countries.

The study builds on the World Bank/European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD’s) Business Environment Enterprise Performance Survey (BEEPS) dataset for 2009, 2013 and 2019. Primarily, the research model was estimated using log-transformed ordinary least squares (OLS). Taking into consideration that this method might produce substantial bias, yielding misleading inferences, this study is fitting Poisson pseudo maximum likelihood estimators with robust standard errors and instrumental variable/generalized method of moments estimation (IV/GMM) approach for comparative results. Secondarily, the research model was tested using structural equation modelling (SEM) to investigate the relationship between five OI capacities and firm performance.

The findings indicate that there is a significant positive relationship between most OI capacities and firm performance, except for innovation, which did not show a statistically significant relationship with firm performance. Specifically, research and development (R&D), knowledge and coopetition are statistically significant and positively associated with firm performance, whereas transformation is statistically significant but negatively associated with firm performance. The IV/GMM estimations’ findings support the view that the firm performance is significantly affected by OI capacities, together with some control variables such as size, age, foreign ownership and year dummy to have a significant impact on firm performance.

This paper fills an identified gap in the literature by investigating the impact of OI on firm performance executed in the specific CEE and SEE country context.

The purpose of the study is to investigate how small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) can effectively collaborate for eco-innovation using the business modes of innovation framework to emphasise three types of collaboration: “science, technology, and innovation” (STI), “learning by doing, using, and interacting” (DUI)-Vertical and DUI-Horizontal.

This analysis uses data from 838 SMEs in the Basque Country (2018–2020) to evaluate the effects of the three types of collaboration on eco-innovation. The authors employ a propensity score-based method to address potential bias associated with endogeneity in innovation studies.

The findings suggest that DUI-Vertical collaboration has a positive relationship with the development of product, process and marketing eco-innovation. Furthermore, DUI-horizontal collaboration is the most effective collaboration mode for SMEs, positively impacting their overall eco-innovation portfolio. Finally, STI collaboration is positively associated with product eco-innovation.

Policymakers should support SMEs by designing programmes that facilitate collaboration between competing firms to stimulate eco-innovation, but potential challenges of coopetition must be addressed. Rather than a generic, one-size-fit-all approach, SMEs' managers should identify the most appropriate partners corresponding to their specific eco-innovation goal, ensuring a more effective and targeted. Collaboration between science partners and SMEs should be reinforced by approximating the SMEs' needs more effectively.

This study contributes twofold. Firstly, the authors investigate whether the STI and DUI modes of innovation are determinant factors in the introduction of various types of eco-innovation. Secondly, the authors contribute to the literature on business modes of innovation by differentiating between DUI-Vertical (i.e. suppliers, customers and consultancy) and DUI-Horizontal (i.e. competitors) collaboration, thus highlighting the complexity of DUI collaboration forms.