Interorganizational Trust: Origins,Dysfunctions and Regulation of Rigidities

This conceptual paper extends research on the downsides of developing trust to partners in interorganizational relationships. The idea developed captures that, although interorganizational trust generates benefits, a parallel process also produces undesired rigidities. Firms' flexibility in meeting a changing environment may thus be hampered rather than enabled by the created interorganizational relationship. First, we theorize on the micro‐processes of how and why such rigidities develop already at low levels of trust and accumulate in parallel to the positive trust effects as trust builds stronger over time. Second, we propose that the trust dysfunctions can be distinguished and moderated separately from trust benefits. In doing so, we identify and discuss the moderating potential of a set of handling tactics when trust develops rigidities in the relationship: competing, accommodating, avoiding, collaborating and compromising tactics. We discuss implications in relation to research on trust, inertia and interorganizational governance.     

The double-edge sword effect of interorganizational trust on involvement in interorganizational networks: The mediator role of affective commitment

Some organizations collaborate with other partner organizations to reach common goals, establishing interorganizational networks. The governance of the network is often enacted by an interorganizational governing team composed of the directors or top managers of the partner firms. This team plans, manages, and supervises the advancement of the network’s common goals. The success of the network depends, to a large extent, on the involvement of the members of the governing team. In this study, we tested a multilevel model of the antecedents of the involvement of governing team members in the management activities of interorganizational networks. We examined whether the relationship between team interorganizational trust, as a team level construct, and individual involvement in management activities is partially mediated by individual affective commitment. Using a sample of 101 respondents belonging to 28 interorganizational governing teams, we tested a multilevel mediation model. Results showed, as expected, a positive indirect effect of team interorganizational trust on individual involvement through individual affective commitment. However, unexpectedly, team interorganizational trust also showed a negative direct relationship with individual involvement. Based on our findings, we highlight the need to also consider the “dark side” of interorganizational trust, and we propose potential mediators to explain the unexpected negative relationship.     

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.     

动态环境下联盟竞合、治理机制与创新绩效的关系研究

本文从竞合视角审视联盟组合,结合动态关系观探讨有效的联盟治理机制,揭示了联盟组合中竞合关系(横向竞合、纵向竞合)、治理机制(契约治理、关系治理)和创新绩效之间的关系,并考察了动态环境特征(技术波动、竞争强度)的二次调节作用。在不同的竞合关系中,由于合作和竞争的强度不同,契约治理与关系治理机制的作用也存在差异,同时,治理机制与创新绩效之间的关系也受到两种不同环境动态性特征的影响。研究结果显示,在纵向竞合中,运用关系治理比运用契约治理能更好地提升创新绩效,技术波动正向调节契约治理、关系治理与创新绩效间的关系。在横向竞合中,运用契约治理比运用关系治理有效,竞争强度加强了契约治理对创新绩效的影响,即关系治理在波动的环境中更有效,契约治理在竞争的环境中更有效。本文为企业开展研发联盟组合管理提供了新的视角和管理对策。     

Is a powerful rival a right partner?

This paper explores why powerless firms are faced with the dilemma of whether or not to collaborate with other powerful firms. Two natures of power, competitive and cooperative natures, are compared to study such an imbalance between firms in market power and social power. Testing the syndicated underwritings in the U.S. from 1998 to 2009, we find that egos of low market power are less likely to partner with alters of high market power. In contrast, egos of low social power are more likely to collaborate with alters of high social power. Moreover, the results show that collaborations with powerful partners are not necessarily beneficial or detrimental for the performance of powerless focal firms; only when the high power partners possess a high network constraint which constrains opportunism and facilitates trust, do collaborations with such partners help the performance of powerless focal firms.     

A coopetition perspective of MNC–host government relations

Building on convergent insights of resource dependence and business political behavior, this article attempts to develop a conceptual and typological framework of coopetition in which cooperation and competition simultaneously coexist in the relationship between multinational corporations (MNCs) and host governments. The coopetition view does not see the MNC–government relationship (MGR) as dichotomous or as a continuum between cooperation and competition but as a simultaneous, inclusive partnership containing cooperation and competition as two separate yet interrelated continua. This article addresses why coopetition arises, what coopetition constitutes, and how coopetition configures with environmental and organizational dynamics. It offers a typology of coopetition that identifies MNCs involving varying cooperation and competition (estranger, contender, partner, and integrator) and elucidates each identity's political responses.     

Is Cooperation with Competitors a Good Idea? An Example in Practice

Coopetition has become a heated issue in the last decade. In this study, a scrutinized review of previous research on coopetition is presented to clarify the research stream on coopetition, from which the implications are derived and a framework to analyse the phenomenon is proposed. Given the complex nature of coopetition, an in‐depth case study was undertaken to investigate the competition–cooperation relationship and coopetition performance over a 15‐year period in a Taiwanese supermarket network, which was formed by a focal company and its competitors. Performance was analysed before and after launching the coopetition strategy, in which 31 indicators were examined. The findings imply that competition (Yang) and cooperation (Yin) are reciprocally rooted in and mutually promoted by each other. The findings also confirmed that cooperation with competitors did lead to better performance, at least over a period, in two ways. The first was that the adoption of coopetition permitted the attainment of performance levels beyond what would otherwise have been possible; the second was that the adoption of coopetition changed the timeframe, permitting earlier achievement of higher performance levels. This study contributes to and extends knowledge of the dynamics and consequences of cooperation with competitors and demonstrates that coopetition has a significant temporary advantage.     

竞合视角下高技术企业创新联盟稳定性研究

从竞合的理论视角出发,运用演化博弈理论,通过构建高技术企业创新联盟成员企业竞合关系的演化博弈模型,分析信任度、互补度、风险系数以及合作创新贴现因子等因素对创新联盟稳定性的影响,并运用Matlab对上述因素的影响进行了数值仿真。结果表明,较高的信任度和互补度可以提高联盟成员间的合作意愿,保障联盟的稳定运行;较高的合作创新贴现因子通过降低联盟成员未来收益的不确定性,增强了合作伙伴间进行长期合作的信心,维持了联盟的稳定运行;由于较高的风险系数增加了合作创新的风险成本,导致联盟成员间合作关系可能演变为竞争关系,从而阻碍了联盟的稳定发展。最后,根据演化博弈分析结果提出了相关建议。     

人际沟通与企业间关系:心理契约的中介作用

如何分析并揭示企业间关系质量的影响机制是管理学关心焦点。本文通过引入传统文献所忽视变量,形成以人际技能、心理契约和关系质量为核心的新企业间关系分析框架,并通过199个中国企业间采购关系数据进行了验证。结果表明:人际技能对心理契约的交易建构和关系建构具有显著正向影响,特别是移情和反馈;心理契约交易建构和关系建构对持续采购和采购比例具有显著正影响;心理契约对人际技能和关系质量具有一定的中介作用。研究结果对于相关的理论发展和管理实践具有一定的启示作用。     

Untangling the trust–control nexus in international buyer–supplier exchange relationships: An investigation of the changing world regarding relationship length

Control and trust are the primary governance mechanisms buying organizations rely upon to organize and maintain their collaborative exchange relationships with foreign suppliers. But the question of how control and trust interrelate and should be pursued seems entangled and practical advice remains largely elusive. Based on empirical data on 212 recently- and long-established buyer-supplier exchange relationships in the textile industry, we test the relationship between three practices of interorganizational control (output, process, and normative controls), two dimensions of interorganizational trust (competence and goodwill trust), and relationship performance. Using structural equation modelling, we demonstrate the value of controls for building and validating trust to depend as much on the specific control practice deployed and dimension of trust observed, as on the temporal stage of the exchange relationship. Moreover, we reveal distinct performance effects of the different control practices and dimensions of trust. Herewith, this study allows for a comprehensive understanding of the trust-control nexus in collaborative exchange relationships between buyers and their foreign suppliers. Addressing managers, we reveal how normative controls can be used to build trust and promote performance at the start of the relationship, whereas output controls need time to reach their full potential. Process controls, in turn, are found to have adverse effects.     

Coopetition Strategy – When is it Successful? Empirical Evidence on Innovation and Market Performance

Coopetition (collaboration between competing firms) has been viewed as a potentially beneficial but also a risky relationship for a firm. Earlier literature provides inconclusive evidence in terms of the effects of a firm's coopetition strategy on innovation and market performance, suggesting both positive and negative implications. Some of this variation could be attributed to the fact that coopetition is successful only in certain types of business environment. In order to take the research further, this study examines the effect of a coopetition strategy on the firm's innovation and market performance, focusing on the moderating effects of market uncertainty, network externalities and competitive intensity. The results from a cross‐industry survey of 209 Finnish firms provide novel evidence on the conditions under which coopetition is successful and when it is not.     

Culture and cross-functional coopetition: The interplay of organizational and national culture

Scholars now recognize coopetition—the joint occurrence of cooperation and competition—between functional units as an important factor for a firm's learning and performance. We know little, however, about the drivers of cross-functional coopetition and in particular the roles of organizational culture and national culture. This study introduces cross-functional coopetition to the international management literature by illuminating the cultural antecedents of cross-functional coopetition. Specifically, we develop a cross-cultural model to analyze the influence of organizational and national culture on cross-functional coopetition. Drawing on a dataset of 646 companies from seven countries, we theoretically advance and empirically validate the influence of organizational culture and the moderating role of individualism and uncertainty avoidance on cross-functional coopetition. Organizational cultural dimensions directly enhance cross-functional coopetition. Furthermore, strong social values of individualism and uncertainty avoidance weaken the relationship between organizational culture and cross-functional coopetition. This study provides a novel perspective on how organizational culture can represent a strategic resource by illuminating the cultural mechanisms that influence coopetition within the firm.     

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.     

Roles of Transparency and Trust in the Relationship between Privatization and Customers’ Satisfaction in Ethiopia: Results of Structural Equation Modelling

As a part of public sector reform, privatization has been actively experienced since three decades across the globe. This study examines the relationship between privatization of public organizations and customers’ satisfaction in Ethiopia with the mediating role of transparency and trust. The structural equation modelling was applied to 315 samples taken from privatized services and manufacturing sectors. The results established that transparency alone fails to be a mediator, but trust plays the role of a partial mediator into the relationship between privatization and customers satisfaction. Combined together, the model results into a partial mediation of both transparency and trust.

     

On the Same Page? How Asymmetric Buyer–Supplier Relationships Affect Opportunism and Performance

Research on buyer–supplier relationships (BSRs) has often focused on only one side of the relationship and, thus, has tended to overlook asymmetries. Yet, a buyer (supplier) may often deal with a bigger supplier (buyer) or one that has higher levels of trust, respect, and reciprocity. Therefore, we examined how two types of asymmetries—size and relational capital—affect perceived opportunism and performance. We used dyadic data from 106 buyers and their matched suppliers gathered from a survey and an archival database. The results demonstrate that the degree and direction of both asymmetries affect the BSR. Our results also reveal that an imbalance of relational capital in a firm's favor may have the opposite effect from that intended. In other words, the firm's counterpart perceives more, rather than less, firm opportunism. The results also suggest that a buyer observes lower benefits in the presence of size asymmetry, whereas the supplier's perception of benefits is unaffected. Thus, our research represents a significant step forward in understanding BSRs and asymmetries by (i) bringing attention to two key asymmetries inherent in BSRs and (ii) showing that these asymmetries are not unidirectional in their influence on perceived opportunism and performance.     

Organizational innovativeness and coopetition: a study of video game developers

Collaboration with rivals is viewed as a way to achieve superior performance of firms in terms of innovation output. Yet empirical results show that coopetition may either foster, hamper or be neutral to innovation. The motivation of our study resides in firms’ heterogeneity in terms of their innovative capacity, that is innovativeness, in order to better understand the complex relationship between coopetition and innovation. We explore the interdependency between organizational innovativeness and coopetition. Our study has been conducted in the Polish video game industry. The data has been collected through a survey administered to all 506 identified Polish video game developers, with an effective sample of 84 coopetitors. We run correlation and regression analyses in a multidimensional approach to organizational innovativeness and coopetition. Our findings show that coopetition is a popular strategy for video game developers, and is adopted by 68% of firms. Organizational innovativeness and its particular dimensions are positively and significantly related to both direct and indirect coopetition. Based on factor analysis we find its three components to be reliable: openness and encouragement to innovate; strategic innovative focus; and extrinsic monetary motivation. While extrinsic monetary motivation does not play a role in coopetition of video game developers, openness and encouragement to innovate stimulates especially indirect coopetition, while strategic innovative focus affects especially direct coopetition.     

Effect of Formal Contracts,Relational Norms and Trust on Performance of Joint Research and Development Projects

This paper examines the effect of governance mechanisms – formal contracts, relational norms and trust – on the performance of exploration and exploitation joint research and development (R&D) projects. While the authors acknowledge the need for a twofold approach, transactional and relational, to understand the interfirm exchange governance, the joint action of formal contracts and relational governance has been caught between the complementary or substitutive forces involved in interorganizational relationships. Using survey data on joint exploration and exploitation R&D projects developed by the European biotechnology companies, the synergies of both mechanisms and their effects in improving project performance are investigated. The analysis suggests that contracts and relational norms and trust act as complementary mechanisms, but while contracts are more effective in exploitation projects, relational norms and trust are more powerful in improving the performance of exploration projects.     

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.     

Weighing the Risks of Nuclear Energy and Climate Change: Trust in Different Information Sources,Perceived Risks,and Willingness to Pay for Alternatives to Nuclear Power

We examined how individuals perceive nuclear energy in the context of climate change mitigation and how their perceptions are associated with trust in different risk information sources. We analyzed the interrelationships between trust, perceived risk of nuclear power, climate change concern, perception of nuclear energy as an acceptable way to mitigate climate change, and willingness to pay (WTP) for alternatives to nuclear power. A nationwide survey (N = 967) collected in Finland was analyzed with structural equation modeling. The associations between trust and perceived risk of nuclear power, climate change concern, and perception of nuclear power as a way to mitigate climate change varied by the type of information source. Political party support and other background variables were associated with trust in different information sources. The effect of trust in information sources on WTP was mediated by perceived risks and benefits. The results will increase our understanding of how individuals perceive nuclear energy as a way to cut CO₂ emissions and the role of trust in different information sources in shaping nuclear risk perceptions and energy choices.     

Trust,confidence, familiarity,and support for land-based recirculating aquaculture facilities

Surveys in three U.S. localities (n = 523) with proposed or existing land-based aquaculture facilities probed trust's relationship with perceived net benefits and public intentions to cooperate with siting of this novel technology. The trust, confidence, and cooperation (TCC) model posits that shared values shape willingness to be vulnerable to others (trust), while past performance shapes certainty that others will behave as expected (confidence). Trust affects confidence given moral outweighs performance information, possibly varying by familiarity. Other research suggests that trust shapes benefit and risk perceptions, which drive cooperation (defined here by potentially observable behavior: voting on siting, trying to influence government decisions directly or through citizen groups, and buying or eating facility fish). Confirmatory factor analyses suggested that a two-factor model fit the trust/confidence measures better than a one-factor model or a two-factor model without inter-factor correlation, indicating (despite a strong association of trust and confidence) that they are empirically distinct. Path analyses suggested that trust had stronger direct effects on cooperation than did confidence, reflecting the TCC notion that moral information underlying trust judgments is more influential, and stronger indirect effects through benefit-risk judgments. Model fit was better than if the benefit-risk mediator was omitted. Trust in government had a small direct effect on cooperation and confidence, but a large effect on trust in the corporation, and model fit was much worse if any of these paths was omitted. Low familiarity with the project lowered both model fit and trust–confidence association. We discuss implications for risk analysis theory and practice.