Search results

This paper aims to explore small firm perceptions of coopetition, focusing on coopetitive tension, balance and value appropriation realised in dyadic relationships, not considered holistically in previous research.

The authors use seven cases of small firms as the empirical foundation of this study and analysed data thematically.

The findings show that precursors to coopetitive tension in dyads influence friction in these relationships, as firms seek to achieve balance. Balance is dynamic as firms continuously appraise their positions to determine the benefits realised from coopetition. The extent to which firms act cooperatively or competitively is influenced by their perception of fair value appropriation for sustained coopetitive relationships.

Because of the research design findings are not generalisable but provide insight into small firm coopetitive relational dynamics. Future research should explore how industry differences influence firms’ perceived precursors to coopetitive tension and value appropriation based on boundary conditions.

Small firms can proactively address coopetitive tension by developing relationships with potential partner firms through trialling smaller projects and increasing awareness of how their competitive or cooperative behaviours might influence the actions of their counterpart.

This study advances a theoretical framework integrating coopetitive tension, balance and value appropriation, as opposed to earlier fragmented approaches. The framework reveals that precursors to coopetitive tension are continuously appraised as firms act in cooperative or competitive ways. These interactions imply that firms will take a position of balance that provides complementary benefits.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the impact of different food choice motives on attitude and, subsequently, the impact of attitude, subjective norm and perceived behavioural control on the purchase intention of Pakistani ethnic food, based on the food choice motives theory and the theory of planned behaviour.

Using an intercept survey, data were collected from 559 local tourists coming from different areas of the country, who visited Swat, Gilgit and Muree regions of Pakistan, and the data were analysed using SmartPLS software.

In terms of direct effects, mood, familiarity, natural content and price were found to be significant predictors for attitude, whereas attitude, subjective norm and perceived behavioural control were found to positively affect intention to purchase Pakistani ethnic food. In addition, attitude was found to serve as a mediator for the relationships between mood, familiarity, sensory appeal and price on purchase intention.

This study has shed some light on the food choice behaviour of domestic tourists opting for their own local cuisine in Pakistan, which is under-represented in the tourism and food research literature. We also tested an integrated model of food choice motives and the theory of planned behaviour in modelling purchase intention in the tourism perspective. The present study also adds to the existing literature on mediation by modelling attitude as a mediator between food choice motives and purchase intention in the context of a developing country.

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.

Coopetition is the interplay between cooperation and competition, involving organisations sharing resources and capabilities with rival entities. Earlier work has suggested that coopetition has a linear (positive) relationship with company performance, with scarce considerations towards whether this link could have a diminishing-returns effect. Thus, this paper aims to examine the non-linear (quadratic) relationships between coopetition and three performance outcomes. Using resource-based theory and the relational view, this study is designed to evaluate the dark side of coopetition, in terms of identifying situations when such activities can be harmful for company performance.

Survey data were collected from a sample of 101 vineyards and wineries in New Zealand. After purifying the measures through a series of multivariate statistical techniques, the research hypotheses and control paths were tested through hierarchical regression. Furthermore, the statistical data passed all major assessments of reliability and validity (including common method variance).

Coopetition was found to have non-linear (quadratic) relationships with customer satisfaction performance, market performance, and financial performance. These results indicate that while coopetition provides organisations with new resources, capabilities and opportunities, there are some dark sides of coopetition activities. With “too little” coopetition, firms might struggle to survive within their markets, with an insufficient volume of resources and capabilities. With “too much” coopetition, companies could experience increased tensions, potentially lose intellectual property and dilute their competitive advantages. Such negative outcomes could harm their performance in several capacities.

Firms should appreciate that coopetition is a competitive strategy. In other words, regardless of how much collaboration occurs, coopetition partners are still competing entities. It is recommended that organisations should strive to engage in an “optimal-level” of coopetition, as “too little” or “too much” of such strategies can be harmful for various types of company performance. To mitigate some of the dark sides of coopetition, businesses should attempt to use all the benefits of collaborating with competitors (i.e. accessing new resources, capabilities and opportunities), but at the same time, not become dependent on rivals’ assets.

This paper develops and tests a framework examining the non-linear (quadratic) linkages between coopetition and multiple assessments of company performance. It highlights the benefits and drawbacks of businesses sharing resources and capabilities with their competitors. Contrary to prior studies in the business-to-business marketing literature, the results signify that firms need to engage in an “optimal-level” of coopetition to minimise certain dark sides, such as reduced company performance. After providing some practitioner implications, this paper ends with a series of limitations and avenues for future research.

This paper aims to unpack how small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) can operationalise coopetition in talent management, addressing ongoing talent shortages in the hospitality industry which were intensified during the Covid-19 pandemic.

This conceptual paper draws from literature on coopetition and talent management in SMEs. Specifically, the authors take an interorganisational talent pool lens and develop a framework following the principles of open-systems theory.

The authors find that the traditional use of talent pools is often impractical for SMEs because of a lack of resources and capabilities. Instead, interorganisational talent pools, through coopetition in talent management, can aid these firms to address talent shortages. The authors identify potential for SME coopetition at various stages, including attraction, development and retention of talent.

Coopetition in talent management can aid industries in establishing market-thickening pipelines. Through co-attracting, co-developing and co-retaining talent, SMEs can create interorganisational talent pools. To develop talent management coopetition, a set of prerequisites, catalysts and potential inhibitors must be analysed and managed.

This paper moves the talent management debate beyond competition for talent, introducing coopetition as a viable alternative. Taking an open-systems perspective, the authors develop an integrative framework for coopetition in talent management in SMEs encompassing input, process and output components. The authors reveal the dynamic and complex nature of this coopetition process, highlighting the essential role of coopetition context and illustrating open-system principles.

This study aims to empirically investigate how knowledge paradox affects collaboration performance. Knowledge paradox, which arises from the simultaneous need for knowledge sharing and protection, is common in interorganizational collaboration. Using the ambidexterity perspective, this paper aims to reexamine the effect of the knowledge paradox on collaborative performance to explore the moderating roles of structural and contextual ambidexterity.

This study used a sample of 153 firms involved in vertical and horizontal collaboration, collected via questionnaires. Hypotheses were tested using hierarchical regression analysis.

This study demonstrates that the stronger the knowledge paradox is, the higher the potential for value creation. Thus, knowledge paradox has a positive impact on collaborative performance. The functions of structural ambidexterity and contextual ambidexterity strengthen this positive relationship.

This paper not only expands the theoretical application of the knowledge paradox and ambidexterity theory in the context of interorganizational relationships but also provides significant managerial implications. By comprehending the dynamics of the knowledge paradox and the role of ambidexterity, managers can make well-informed decisions to enhance their collaborative performance.

This chapter develops an on-going theory of coopetition management in knowledge-based industries. Coopetition is a strategy which combines simultaneously competitive and collaborative relationships. This combination permits companies to benefit from both the advantages of the competition and the advantage of collaboration. However, this strategy is also risky in case of unintended spillovers and technology plunders. Companies have to manage the coopetitive risk by implementing three principles of coopetition management: the separation principle, the integration principle, and the co-management principle.

Although the literature recognizes that coopetition plays a significant role in the success of international construction joint ventures (ICJVs), the impacts of coopetition on the performance outcomes of ICJVs remain largely unknown. This study extends this line of research by theorizing coopetition from three dimensions, i.e. coopetition intensity, coopetition balance and coopetition structure, and examining the relationships between coopetition and ICJV performance outcomes from both the contingency and configuration perspectives.

The hypotheses were tested using survey data from a sample of 188 ICJVs. Structural equation modelling was employed for the contingency approach to estimate the relationships between the three dimensions of coopetition and performance. For the configuration approach, cluster analysis was utilized to identify coopetition patterns. Subsequently, an analysis of variance was employed to analyse the relationships between these coopetition patterns and performance.

The contingency results indicate that while coopetition intensity is positively related to all types of performance, coopetition balance is only positively related to project performance and partner performance. Moreover, coopetition structure is only related to partner performance and socioenvironmental performance. The configuration approach identifies six patterns of coopetition, manifesting different levels of project, partner and socioenvironmental performance.

These findings, therefore, contribute to the ICJV literature by extending the understanding of how coopetition dimensions individually and jointly influence ICJV performance.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the moderating factors that could affect the relationship between coopetition (the interplay between cooperation and competition) and company performance.

Under the relational view and resource-based theory, key articles surrounding coopetition were reviewed. A conceptual framework (with six research propositions) was developed to understand the nature of the relationship between coopetition and company performance.

While the coopetition – company performance relationship has been well-studied, this link could be moderated by the competitive business environment, organizational resources and capabilities, and trust between rivals. Further, most authors have explored the linear relationship between coopetition and company performance; however, in this paper, the non-linear (inverted U-shaped) link is also conceptualized, whereby firms might experience “too little” and “too much” coopetition in their business strategies.

Management teams should engage in an “optimal-level” of coopetition by sharing resources and capabilities with rival firms, but not to the extent where they depend on such competitors. If firms rarely collaborate with their competitors, they risk not being able to achieve their performance objectives. Likewise, if businesses engage in excessive degrees of coopetition, there could be tensions between the rival companies involved. Also, practitioners should be aware of the factors that can improve or reduce their performance when they implement coopetition activities. By taking: the competitive business environment, organizational resources and capabilities, and trust between rivals into consideration, the themes of this paper should be used to help managers to maximize company performance (considered in multiple capacities).

This paper is used to help scholars and practitioners to understand the factors that could help or hinder the performance outcomes of coopetition activities. By appreciating the moderating roles of the competitive business environment, organizational resources and capabilities, and trust between rivals, managers are anticipated to provide themselves with scope to alter their coopetition activities to improve their performance. This article ends with a series of managerial implications, alongside some limitations and avenues for future research.