umu.sePublications
Change search
Link to record
Permanent link

Direct link
BETA
Bengtsson, Maria
Publications (10 of 63) Show all publications
Raza-Ullah, T., Bengtsson, M. & Gnyawalli, D. (2019). Managing the dark side of coopetition. In: : . Paper presented at European Academy of Management (EURAM) 2019, Lisboa, Portugal, June 26-28, 2019.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Managing the dark side of coopetition
2019 (English)Conference paper, Oral presentation only (Refereed)
National Category
Business Administration
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-163602 (URN)
Conference
European Academy of Management (EURAM) 2019, Lisboa, Portugal, June 26-28, 2019
Available from: 2019-09-29 Created: 2019-09-29 Last updated: 2019-10-03Bibliographically approved
Raza-Ullah, T., Bengtsson, M. & Gnyawalli, D. (2019). Paradoxical tension and firm performance: The contingent role of coopetition capability. Paper presented at Academy of Management, Boston, United States, August 9-13, 2019. Academy of Management. Annual Meeting Proceedings, 1
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Paradoxical tension and firm performance: The contingent role of coopetition capability
2019 (English)In: Academy of Management. Annual Meeting Proceedings, ISSN 2151-6561, E-ISSN 2151-6561, Vol. 1Article in journal, Meeting abstract (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

While a growing body of research has recognized that coopetition is paradoxical and creates tension, limited research has examined how paradoxical tension manifests and impacts firm performance. We theorize that paradoxical tension in coopetition manifests in the cognition and emotion of senior managers and that high level of paradoxical tension creates dysfunctional behaviors that compromise performance. We further argue that the detrimental effect on performance could be mitigated when firms have capabilities to understand and deal with the paradoxical situation. We conceptualize coopetition capability as a three dimensional construct consisting of cognitive, emotional, and balancing dimensions, and empirically examine its moderating role on the tension-performance relationship. Results based on survey and secondary data from 187 high technology and knowledge intensive firms show that experienced paradoxical tension does indeed hurt firm performance. Results also show that firms that possess coopetition capability can analyze the paradoxical situation, emotionally deal with the paradox, and maintain a balance in the midst of competing demands from competition and cooperation do minimize the negative performance effect of paradoxical tension in coopetition.

National Category
Business Administration
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-163606 (URN)10.5465/AMBPP.2019.14771abstract (DOI)
Conference
Academy of Management, Boston, United States, August 9-13, 2019
Available from: 2019-09-29 Created: 2019-09-29 Last updated: 2019-10-08Bibliographically approved
Chiambaretto, P., Bengtsson, M., Fernandez, A.-S. & Harryson Näsholm, M. (2019). Small and large firms’ trade-off between benefits and risks when choosing a coopetitor for innovation. Long range planning
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Small and large firms’ trade-off between benefits and risks when choosing a coopetitor for innovation
2019 (English)In: Long range planning, ISSN 0024-6301, E-ISSN 1873-1872Article in journal (Refereed) Epub ahead of print
Abstract [en]

This research investigates the extent to which small and large firms differ when assessing the benefits and risks provided by competitors as partners in innovation. Scholars have shown that coopetition can provide both significant benefits and risks for participating firms. The risks associated with firm competition and the trade-off firms make between the risks and benefits that can be obtained through coopetition must be considered when choosing a partnering firm. In addition, we argue that the firm size could affect the evaluation of benefits and the willingness to take risks such that small and large firms differ in their decision making. Therefore, we address the following questions: First, when choosing a coopetitor with which to innovate, to what extent do small and large firms differ in their evaluation of the benefits and risks associated to coopetition? Second, how does this evaluation influence firms’ willingness to coopete? We draw on research on coopetition to hypothesize that small and large firms differ in their evaluation of the six most important benefits of coopetition. To test our hypotheses, we rely on an experimental research design based on a choice-based conjoint (CBC) analysis applied to a sample of innovative Swedish firms. Our results confirm that small and large firms value the benefits and risks associated with coopetitors differently. We show that small firms are less reluctant to coopete than large firms, especially if coopetition allows them to reduce their costs and learn from their coopetitor. In contrast, we show that large firms agree to coopete if coopetition enables them to reduce their time-to-market.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Elsevier, 2019
Keywords
Coopetition, Innovation, Benefits and risks, Conjoint analysis, Small and large firms, Trade-off
National Category
Business Administration
Research subject
Business Studies
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-157342 (URN)10.1016/j.lrp.2019.03.002 (DOI)
Available from: 2019-03-14 Created: 2019-03-14 Last updated: 2019-03-20
Kostis, A., Bengtsson, M. & Harryson Näsholm, M. (2019). The role of trust and distrust to manage interpartner uncertainty in the robotics and automation ecosystem. In: : . Paper presented at 35th EGOS Colloquium, Edinburgh, United Kingdom, July 4–6, 2019..
Open this publication in new window or tab >>The role of trust and distrust to manage interpartner uncertainty in the robotics and automation ecosystem
2019 (English)Conference paper, Oral presentation with published abstract (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

Firms holding complementary knowledge and expertise increasingly engage in ecosystems to co-create and jointly deliver tailored-made solutions to industrial customers. Interdependencies inherent in ecosystems make partner alignment a unique challenge related to divergence in partners’ expectations about structure and roles. Such divergence in expectations gives rise to uncertainty in the interactions among the interdependent actors. Yet the level of interpartner uncertainty is heightened in ecosystems characterized by frequent coopetitive interactions and temporal alignment of a set of actors in multiple projects. To acknowledge this, we introduce the concept floating ecosystem. In floating ecosystems, besides uncertainty about how to align activities and actors within one project, there is also interpartner uncertainty about how partners will behave in other projects and relationships. Thus, the question about how to manage and navigate within these dynamic and complex ecosystems to manage the multifaceted nature of interpartner uncertainty is of critical importance. In light of uncertainty and interdependence, trust has been suggested as a unique organizing principle. Drawing on the idea that trust and distrust are distinct phenomena, we also argue that distrust is a distinct organizing principle that has been neglected. We conduct a case study of the Swedish robotics and automation ecosystem and explore the nature of interpartner uncertainty in this ecosystem and the mechanisms through which trust and distrust empower firms to deal with different facets of uncertainty. Our findings establish that trust and distrust work as complementary organizing principles, which operate based on distinct orienting and enabling mechanisms empowering firms to maintain fruitful interactions despite the presence of increased interpartner uncertainty.

National Category
Business Administration
Research subject
Business Studies
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-161966 (URN)
Conference
35th EGOS Colloquium, Edinburgh, United Kingdom, July 4–6, 2019.
Available from: 2019-08-08 Created: 2019-08-08 Last updated: 2019-09-06
Rezvani, Z., Jansson, J. & Bengtsson, M. (2018). Consumer motivations for sustainable consumption: the interaction of gain, normative and hedonic motivations on electric vehicle adoption. Business Strategy and the Environment, 27(8), 1272-1283
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Consumer motivations for sustainable consumption: the interaction of gain, normative and hedonic motivations on electric vehicle adoption
2018 (English)In: Business Strategy and the Environment, ISSN 0964-4733, E-ISSN 1099-0836, Vol. 27, no 8, p. 1272-1283Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Recent conceptual studies identify gain, normative and hedonic factors as three categories of motivations of consumer proenvironmental behavior. However, empirical understanding of how these motivations interact and affect proenvironmental behavior is limited. This study is based on a survey of car owners in Sweden (N = 573) and uses structural equation modeling to analyze the data. The empirical findings point to the importance of all three motivations (gain, normative and hedonic) in consumer electric vehicle adoption intentions. Furthermore, for consumers who perceive high social norms regarding sustainable consumption, the direct effect of hedonic motivations on behavioral intention is stronger, and the direct effect of gain motivations is insignificant. The business strategy implications indicate that targeting consumers who perceive high social norms in relation to proenvironmental behavior and communicating the hedonic and normative aspects of proenvironmental behaviors to this group might be more effective than general mass communication.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Elsevier, 2018
Keywords
consumer behavior, gain, hedonic motivation, norm, sustainable consumption
National Category
Business Administration
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-152534 (URN)10.1002/bse.2074 (DOI)000453631500013 ()2-s2.0-85047497261 (Scopus ID)
Available from: 2018-10-10 Created: 2018-10-10 Last updated: 2019-01-08Bibliographically approved
Raza-Ullah, T., Bengtsson, M. & Vanyushyn, V. (2018). Coopetition capability: what is it?. In: Anne-Sophie Fernandez, Paul Chiambaretto, Frédéric Le Roy, Wojciech Czakon (Ed.), The Routledge companion to coopetition strategies: (pp. 197-204). Abingdon: Routledge
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Coopetition capability: what is it?
2018 (English)In: The Routledge companion to coopetition strategies / [ed] Anne-Sophie Fernandez, Paul Chiambaretto, Frédéric Le Roy, Wojciech Czakon, Abingdon: Routledge , 2018, p. 197-204Chapter in book (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

In this chapter, we develop a fundamental understanding of an essential yet overlooked component of alliance capability, namely coopetition capability. We suggest that coopetition capability based on three dimensions—analytical, balancing, and emotional—reflects managers' ability to handle paradoxical demands. This capability is especially helpful and needed to deal with coopetition paradox and the resultant paradoxical tension. Coopetition capability not only allows firms to balance their cooperative and competitive interactions but also helps managers to keep a moderate level of tension to boost performance outcomes.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Abingdon: Routledge, 2018
Series
Routledge companions in business, management and accounting
Keywords
coopetition capability, paradox, tension, emotion, alliance
National Category
Business Administration
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-151885 (URN)978-1-138-73689-4 (ISBN)978-1-315-18564-4 (ISBN)
Note

I publikationen felaktigt: "First published 2019".

Available from: 2018-09-14 Created: 2018-09-14 Last updated: 2019-01-11Bibliographically approved
Näsholm, M. H., Bengtsson, M. & Johansson, M. (2018). Coopetition for SMEs (1ed.). In: Anne-Sophie Fernandez, Paul Chiambaretto, Frédéric Le Roy, and Wojciech Czakon (Ed.), The Routledge companion to coopetition strategies: (pp. 390-397). Abingdon: Routledge
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Coopetition for SMEs
2018 (English)In: The Routledge companion to coopetition strategies / [ed] Anne-Sophie Fernandez, Paul Chiambaretto, Frédéric Le Roy, and Wojciech Czakon, Abingdon: Routledge, 2018, 1, p. 390-397Chapter in book (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

Coopeting with other firms can be a necessary, but risky, strategy for small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). This chapter discusses specificities of small firms that make coopetition important for their growth and success, but also make them particularly vulnerable. Relationships with larger firms are especially challenging due to power asymmetry, and SMEs need to consider their entire portfolio of alliances to manage them. We explore capabilities needed by SMEs to cope with the challenges and define dimensions of alliance management and portfolio management capabilities. We also provide directions for further research.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Abingdon: Routledge, 2018 Edition: 1
Series
Routledge companions in business, management and accounting
National Category
Business Administration
Research subject
Business Studies
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-152123 (URN)9781138736894 (ISBN)9781315185644 (ISBN)
Note

I publikationen felaktigt: "First published 2019".

Available from: 2018-09-27 Created: 2018-09-27 Last updated: 2019-01-11Bibliographically approved
Raza-Ullah, T., Bengtsson, M. & Gnyawali, D. (2018). Experienced paradoxical tension in coopetition and firm performance: The moderating role of coopetition capability. In: : . Paper presented at 34th EGOS Colloquium, Tallinn, Estonia, July 5-7, 2018.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Experienced paradoxical tension in coopetition and firm performance: The moderating role of coopetition capability
2018 (English)Conference paper, Oral presentation only (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

In this study, we investigate the conditions under which firms involved in coopetition can mitigate the detrimental effects of experienced paradoxical tension on performance. We propose that the ability of a firm to benefit from the challenging and paradoxical phenomenon of coopetition is contingent upon having a specialized multi-dimensional coopetition capability comprising analytical, emotional, and balancing dimensions. Analysis of multisource, one-year time-lagged data on 173 Swedish firms in the high-tech manufacturing and knowledge intensive services industries show strong support for the moderating role of coopetition capability. Our study contributes by theorizing and operationalizing coopetition capability as a multi-dimensional construct and foregrounding its critical role in helping firms reduce the negative consequences of paradoxical tension while at the same time tapping into its positive energy.

Keywords
paradox, coopetition, tension, capability, performance
National Category
Business Administration
Research subject
Business Studies
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-151883 (URN)
Conference
34th EGOS Colloquium, Tallinn, Estonia, July 5-7, 2018
Available from: 2018-09-14 Created: 2018-09-14 Last updated: 2019-03-19Bibliographically approved
Vanyushyn, V., Bengtsson, M., Harryson Näsholm, M. & Boter, H. (2018). International coopetition for innovation: Are the benefits worth the challenges?. Paper presented at 7th Global Innovation and Knowledge Academy (GIKA) Conference, Lisbon, Portugal, June 28–30, 2017. Review of Managerial Science, 12(2), 535-557
Open this publication in new window or tab >>International coopetition for innovation: Are the benefits worth the challenges?
2018 (English)In: Review of Managerial Science, ISSN 1863-6683, E-ISSN 1863-6691, Vol. 12, no 2, p. 535-557Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

International coopetition has rarely been studied in relation to innovation. Further exploration of effects of international coopetition, i.e. the pursuit of simultaneous cooperation and competition, on a firm’s innovation performance is especially important as such a relationship is challenging with a high propensity to fail. This observation formed the point of departure for this study, which aims to increase the understanding of the effects of international coopetition on firm innovativeness and how these effects are conditioned on the magnitude of the organizational adjustments a firm introduces. We use an unbalanced panel of 9,839 firms that participated in four waves of the Swedish Community Innovation Survey between 2008 and 2014 as our empirical base. We illustrate that firms that cooperate with competitors internationally are more likely to exhibit higher propensity to introduce radical innovations, yet this effect is conditioned upon the magnitude of organizational adjustments. Overall, our study contributes to the understanding of the implications of international coopetition and what a firm needs to benefit from it.

Keywords
innovation, coopetition, international coopetition, radical innovation, incremental innovation, organizational innovation
National Category
Business Administration
Research subject
Business Studies
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-140402 (URN)10.1007/s11846-017-0272-x (DOI)000425552800008 ()
Conference
7th Global Innovation and Knowledge Academy (GIKA) Conference, Lisbon, Portugal, June 28–30, 2017
Available from: 2017-10-10 Created: 2017-10-10 Last updated: 2018-06-09Bibliographically approved
Manzhynski, S., Bengtsson, M. & Stål, H. (2018). Knotted paradoxes in eco-innovation: a double trap or two needs with one deed?. In: : . Paper presented at 34th EGOS Colloquium, Tallinn, July 5-7, 2018.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Knotted paradoxes in eco-innovation: a double trap or two needs with one deed?
2018 (English)Conference paper, Oral presentation with published abstract (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

Paradox theory has not yet considered how paradoxes interact when they are brought together. To explore such knotting we investigate coopetition for sustainability, when competitors collaborate to address environmental concerns. We use a case study of three examples of collaborative activities between housing companies in Belarus to display how these two paradoxes are knotted together. We find that coopetition brings less tension and is used as a means to address stronger sustainability tensions, enabling firms to partially achieve ‘two needs with one deed’. Based on our findings we suggest that how knotting appears is affected by the type of paradoxes involved, the strength and dynamics of their tensions, and their relationships to each other. We conclude with a call for more research particularly in more competitive settings and with other types of paradoxes. 

Keywords
Paradox, tensions, sustainability, coopetition, coopetition for sustainability, knotted paradoxes
National Category
Business Administration
Research subject
Business Studies
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-152504 (URN)
Conference
34th EGOS Colloquium, Tallinn, July 5-7, 2018
Available from: 2018-10-08 Created: 2018-10-08 Last updated: 2018-10-08
Organisations

Search in DiVA

Show all publications