Managing coopetition in diversified firms: Insights from a qualitative case study

Cooperation among divisions is usually thought to explain the performance of diversification strategies. However, such divisions are also in competition. Through the in-depth analysis of an intraindustry diversified firm operating in the global semiconductor industry, this paper identifies the sources of coopetition and the treatment of coopetitive tensions among divisions in the production allocation process. We find a multipoint origin of cooperation within a competitive setting. Then, we extend a previous study that considers uniquely two substitute views: (a) corporate-centric; and (b) division-centric. Additionally, by employing formal organizational mechanisms, we show that corporate headquarters guides divisional interaction to form a circular coopetition process. Thus, it is feasible to consider that intrafirm competition and cooperation phases form in a dynamic loop.     

Do trust and distrust in coopetition matter to performance?

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.     

Coopetition,value co-creation,and knowledge-enhancement in the UK alpaca industry: A multi-level mechanism

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.     

Cooperative innovation through a talent management pool: A qualitative study on coopetition in healthcare

In recent years, the Dutch healthcare sector has been confronted with increased competition. Not only are financial resources scarce, Dutch hospitals also need to compete with other hospitals in the same geographic area to attract and retain talented employees due to considerable labour shortages. However, four hospitals operating in the same region are cooperating to cope with these shortages by developing a joint Talent Management Pool. ‘Coopetiton’ is a concept used for simultaneous cooperation and competition. In this paper, a case study is performed in order to enhance our understanding of coopetition. Among other things, the findings suggest that perceptions of organizational actors on competition differ and might hinder cooperative innovation with competitors, while perceived shared problems and resource constraints stimulate coopetition. We reflect on the current coopetition literature in light of the research findings, which have implications for future research on this topic.     

How rival partners compete based on cooperation?

Prior studies of coopetition have explained the what, how and why of firms cooperating with competitors. Among these, examining the how question as to the stream of coopetition dynamics is the most challenging theme. Previous research has focused much more on the cooperation side. Less attention has been paid to the competition side to reveal what happens to competition after the competitors have collaborated. This study sheds light on the issue of cooperation-based competition by answering the question: while cooperating with competitors, how do rival partners compete based on cooperation? Linking the competitive dynamics perspective to coopetition, we conducted a single-case study to analyse the competition between two leading competitors in the Taiwanese bicycle industry. We collected the reported issues pertaining to the competition in the European market and supported by in-depth interviews. The analysis leads us to develop three propositions and a conceptual framework for illustrating the cooperation-based competition and addressing how cooperation may influence competition in a coopetition relationship. This study provides new insights into a theoretical issue of cooperation-based competition. The case also provides management implications while taking a coopetition strategy.     

Revisiting the cooperation–competition paradox: A configurational approach to short- and long-term coopetition performance in business networks

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.     

Neither complements nor substitutes: Examining the case for coalignment of contract-based and relation-based alliance governance mechanisms in coopetition contexts

Although the extant literature recognizes that the contract-based and relation-based alliance governance mechanisms (AGMs) play a significant role in the success of alliances, the nature of their interplay still remains ambiguous. In this study, we move away from the traditional debate between contract- and relation-based AGMs as substitutes versus complements. Instead, we offer the notion of “fit” or the “coalignment” as a more appropriate frame to explain the interplay between contract- and relation-based AGMs in the coopetition context. We conceptualize ‘Coalignment of Alliance Governance Mechanisms’ (CAGM) as a distinct higher-order construct and outline a methodological orientation to estimate the coalignment of the two forms of AGMs. We conduct a longitudinal study using primary data from 320 matched coopetition alliances in high-technology research-intensive sectors in India and find that the CAGM explains better the impact of governance mechanisms on value creation in coopetition alliances.     

Implementing the right project structure to achieve coopetitive innovation projects

This research focuses on the project structure used by coopetitors to achieve common innovation projects. Scholars have recently identified an original but complex project structure that they call the Coopetitive Project Team (CPT). However, other project structures can also be implemented by coopetitors to achieve innovation. Therefore, we address the following question: for which types of innovation projects is CPT appropriate? We argue that coopetitors need to use CPT for high-risk and high-cost projects when the aim is to develop radical innovation. CPT allows coopetitors not only to develop innovation capabilities through close resource and knowledge sharing but also to manage the risk of opportunism. Conversely, coopetitors should use another project structure, Separated Project Teams (SPTs), for low-cost and low-risk projects when the aim is to develop incremental innovation. The SPT design allows coopetitors both to achieve the goal of the project and to minimize the risk of opportunism. To confirm our assumptions, we studied the project portfolios of Airbus and Thales, two firms in the space satellite industry. Our findings confirm that coopetitors should implement CPTs to handle innovation projects that are costly, risky and highly innovative. CPTs permit the sharing of knowledge and the management of high opportunism risk, both of which are necessary to achieve radical innovation. Conversely, coopetitors rely on SPTs for low-cost projects that require a low degree of knowledge sharing, thus avoiding the risk of opportunism in achieving their incremental innovation objectives.     

Ambiguity in the Small and in the Large

This paper considers local and global multiple‐prior representations of ambiguity for preferences that are (i) monotonic, (ii) Bernoullian, that is, admit an affine utility representation when restricted to constant acts, and (iii) locally Lipschitz continuous. We do not require either certainty independence or uncertainty aversion. We show that the set of priors identified by Ghirardato, Maccheroni, and Marinacci's (2004) “unambiguous preference” relation can be characterized as a union of Clarke differentials. We then introduce a behavioral notion of “locally better deviation” at an act and show that it characterizes the Clarke differential of the preference representation at that act. These results suggest that the priors identified by these preference statements are directly related to (local) optimizing behavior.     

Exploring the generation gap in the workplace in South Korea

This study reviewed current literature on generational issues in Korea, specifically in relation to the workplace. Based on the results, this study concluded that distinct generations of workers exist in Korea. While there are similar generational characteristics between Korea and the United States because of the unique societal, historical, and cultural factors in each country, there are noticeable differences such as the existence of Generation 386 in Korea. Due to rapid industrialization and social transformation during the past few decades, Korean society seems to exhibit wider gaps between older and younger generations than the United States. The roles of Generation 386 and Generation Y in organizations should be considered for the future.     

以党内和谐促进社会和谐

党的十六届六中全会通过的《中共中央关于构建社会主义和谐社会若干重大问题的决定》明确指出:构建社会主义和谐社会,关键在党。要提高各级领导班子和领导干部领导社会主义和谐社会建设的本领,以党内和谐促进社会和谐。近年     

在三个文明协调发展中加快和谐内蒙古建设进程

构建社会主义和谐社会,是我们党从全面建设小康社会、开创中国特色社会主义事业新局面的全局出发提出的一项重大战略任务。内蒙古是民族区域自治地方,是祖国北部边疆。落实中央提出的战略任务,建设和谐内蒙古,对于实现全面建设小康社会的奋斗目标,促进各民族共同团结奋斗、共同繁荣发展,维护祖国北疆安宁稳定,具有特殊重要的意义。     

构建和谐社会组织工作要解决好六个问题

构建社会主义和谐社会,对党的组织工作提出了一系列新课题、新要求。笔者认为,围绕构建和谐社会,组织工作重点需要研究思考和探索解决六个方面的问题。一、如何更好地以民主开放理念指导推进组织工作。我们所要建设的和谐社会,是建立在开放基础上的民主法治社会。因此,党的组织工作必须建立一套与之相适应的民主开放的工作运行机制。这些年,随着干部人事制度改革的逐步深化以及基层党建工作创新步伐的不断加快,组织工作的民主化、公开化、规范化程度都有了明显提高,但是,对照和谐社会的发展要求,民主开放的广度和深度都还显得不够,今后,重点…     

Savage in the Market

We develop a behavioral axiomatic characterization of subjective expected utility (SEU) under risk aversion. Given is an individual agent's behavior in the market: assume a finite collection of asset purchases with corresponding prices. We show that such behavior satisfies a “revealed preference axiom” if and only if there exists a SEU model (a subjective probability over states and a concave utility function over money) that accounts for the given asset purchases.     

The market power is in the services: Because the value is in the results

Sandra Vandermerwe is already a pioneer of the notion that including or extending services in a product portfolio adds value. Now she breaks new ground again with a convincing argument that the way to achieve customer satisfaction is through the ability to deliver full solution systems throughout the customer's activity cycle.Customers want results. The power to deliver results lies in value-added services. Companies which offer customers solution systems to meet their demands consisting of product-service components and who base these systems on results, will be the winners in the 1990s. We are in the competitive era of the results-driven systems solution in marketing.Vandermerwe explores this marketing strategy in detail, with examples of successful solution systems from Scandinavian Airline Systems, SKF, Du Pont and DEC. She then offers a customer activity-based diagnostic tool for managers wishing to improve their market strategy.     

Governing the Circular Economy in the City: Local Planning Practice in London

ABSTRACT

There is interest in the circular economy as a framework for transition from a linear take-make-dispose model of production and consumption, to a circular model which decouples economic growth from resource consumption. However, there is limited understanding of how that applies to the city through governance lens. This paper examines evidence from 28 municipalities in London to unpack the ‘government’ and ‘governance’ of circular economy in the city. It examines the ‘governmentality’ of circular economy in planning practice and reflects on what austerity localism and scalar politics might mean for the planning and governance of circular economy in cities.     

Home ownership in the U.K. in the 1980s

1980 saw the highest mortgage rate ever, and yet the demand for owner-occupation and hence for mortgage finance continues. Although the costs of mortgage finance are considerable, particularly for people who have just bought their first homes, there are substantial benefits as well which are more than sufficient to compensate for the cost. This article looks at both the costs and the benefits of a mortgage and considers whether people's enthusiasm for buying their own homes with the help of a mortgage will continue in the changing circumstances of the 1980s.     

Living in the question

We live in a fast moving-world. Business has accelerated to breathtaking speeds in the 1990s--and in the last few years the afterburner has really kicked in. The speed of change is overwhelming. Especially in health care, who has time to "live in the question?" We need to decide things quickly, get the decision out of the way, and move on, right? Maybe. Biology shows us that you can't plan ahead very far. New things come along that you don't even have a category for, and therefore you don't even see them. Things are going to happen that you literally have no notion are even possible. The key to succeeding in this environment? Don't plan ahead. Stay curious. Make small bets. Build organizational hothouses. Feed the seedlings that grow. The challenge is to remain curious, to live in the question, both personally and organizationally.