umu.sePublications
Change search
Link to record
Permanent link

Direct link
BETA
Bengtsson, Maria
Publications (10 of 56) Show all publications
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
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 1099-0836Article in journal (Refereed) Epub ahead of print
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)2-s2.0-85047497261 (Scopus ID)
Available from: 2018-10-10 Created: 2018-10-10 Last updated: 2018-10-10
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)
Available from: 2018-09-14 Created: 2018-09-14 Last updated: 2018-09-19Bibliographically 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
Rezvani, Z., Jansson, J. & Bengtsson, M. (2017). Cause I'll Feel Good!: An Investigation into the Effects of Anticipated Emotions and Personal Moral Norms on Consumer Pro-environmental Behavior. Journal of Promotion Management, 23(1), 163-183
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Cause I'll Feel Good!: An Investigation into the Effects of Anticipated Emotions and Personal Moral Norms on Consumer Pro-environmental Behavior
2017 (English)In: Journal of Promotion Management, ISSN 1049-6491, E-ISSN 1540-7594, Vol. 23, no 1, p. 163-183Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Anticipated emotions and moral norms have previously been found to influence consumer adoption of pro-environmental products in different ways. However norms and emotions have seldom been combined in order to understand their relations in motivating consumers to adopt sustainable products. Despite the environmental benefits of sustainable products, consumer adoption is slow to take off. Utilizing data from an online survey (N=576), this study finds that anticipated emotions directly influence consumer adoption and the effect of moral norms is mediated by the anticipated emotions. This study extends the norm activation model and implies communicating positive emotions for promoting sustainable products.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Taylor & Francis, 2017
Keywords
anticipated emotion, ascription of responsibility, attitude, consumer pro-environmental behavior, personal moral norm
National Category
Business Administration
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-117949 (URN)10.1080/10496491.2016.1267681 (DOI)
Note

USBESDA

Available from: 2016-03-08 Created: 2016-03-08 Last updated: 2018-06-07Bibliographically approved
Bengtsson, M. & Raza-Ullah, T. (2017). Paradox at an inter-firm level: a coopetition lens. In: Wendy K. Smith, Marianne W. Lewis, Paula Jarzabkowski and Ann Langley (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of organizational paradox: (pp. 296-314). Oxford: Oxford University Press
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Paradox at an inter-firm level: a coopetition lens
2017 (English)In: The Oxford handbook of organizational paradox / [ed] Wendy K. Smith, Marianne W. Lewis, Paula Jarzabkowski and Ann Langley, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017, p. 296-314Chapter in book (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

This chapter focuses on coopetition (i.e., simultaneous pursuit of cooperation and competition between firms) as a manifestation of paradox at an inter-firm level, and develops a nuanced understanding of the resulting paradoxical tension by bringing its micro-foundations into focus. The authors suggest that unlike the paradox that manifests at the inter-firm level (or organizational level), tension is experienced by individual actors, and comprises ambivalent cognitions, emotions, and their interplay. The authors further suggest that paradoxical tension is most productive when maintained at a moderate level, and for that firms need to develop a multilevel operating capability. The suggested theory provides novel and useful insights to advance the research on paradoxes at inter-firm and organizational levels.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017
Keywords
paradox, coopetition, tension, emotional ambivalence, managing capability
National Category
Business Administration
Research subject
Business Studies
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-138781 (URN)10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198754428.013.16 (DOI)978-0-19-875442-8 (ISBN)978-0-19-181596-6 (ISBN)
Available from: 2017-08-31 Created: 2017-08-31 Last updated: 2018-06-09Bibliographically approved
Bengtsson, M. & Raza-Ullah, T. (2016). A systematic review of research on coopetition: Toward a multilevel understanding. Industrial Marketing Management, 57, 23-39
Open this publication in new window or tab >>A systematic review of research on coopetition: Toward a multilevel understanding
2016 (English)In: Industrial Marketing Management, ISSN 0019-8501, E-ISSN 1873-2062, Vol. 57, p. 23-39Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

While research on the phenomenon of coopetition has dramatically increased during the last years, this line of inquiry often embodies a loosely connected body of work with fragmented themes, underdeveloped concepts, and little work explaining coopetition at multiple levels. In this paper, we conduct a systematic literature review of the field, and based on a final set of 142 contributions, synthesize the disparate research into a coherent whole by developing an overarching and dynamic multilevel model. We first systematize diverse conceptualizations of coopetition with respect to different levels into The Actor and The Activity Schools of Thought. Then we integrate major critical themes into a Driver, Process, Outcomes (DPO) framework, and offer a Blended School of Thought to show how different levels are intertwined and affect each other. Next, we develop a multilevel conceptual model of coopetition by integrating the Blended School into the DPO framework. This model helps future re- search better understand how the phenomena of coopetition at one level of analysis are distinct, yet interlinked, from coopetition at other levels, and in so doing, provides a richer and more complete perspective of the phe- nomenon of coopetition. Finally, we identify promising research avenues and suggest how future research can strengthen this line of inquiry.

Keywords
coopetition, systematic literature review, multilevel
National Category
Business Administration
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-124278 (URN)10.1016/j.indmarman.2016.05.003 (DOI)000381591000004 ()
Available from: 2016-07-29 Created: 2016-07-29 Last updated: 2018-06-07Bibliographically approved
Bengtsson, M., Kock, S., Lundgren-Henriksson, E.-L. & Harryson Näsholm, M. (2016). Coopetition research in theory and practice: growing new theoretical, empirical, and methodological domains. Industrial Marketing Management, 57, 4-11
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Coopetition research in theory and practice: growing new theoretical, empirical, and methodological domains
2016 (English)In: Industrial Marketing Management, ISSN 0019-8501, E-ISSN 1873-2062, Vol. 57, p. 4-11Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

In this paper we discuss the theoretical rooting of present research on coopetition and point to the need for an integration of theories on competition dynamics, and cooperative interactions in social networks. We argue that the future growth of the coopetitive research field hinges on creatively combining existing theoretical approaches with novel research methods and contexts. In particular, we suggest that incorporating theories on the micro foundations of strategic action can substantially enhance the field. The aim of this paper is both to raise questions regarding the theory and practice of coopetition research and to give examples of new approaches and trends that may contribute to the advancement of the field in the future. We consider our research practice and explore avenues for further research starting from what, where and how we study coopetition, to when and who we study. In general, we call for a stronger focus on the centrality of multiple stakeholders in forming, executing, and developing coopetition, and on research methods that can investigate in depth the multitude of actors, interests, and interactions using a multi-level analysis, including the micro foundations of coopetition.

Keywords
Coopetition, Coopetition strategy, Theoretical rooting, Emerging trends, Micro foundations
National Category
Business Administration
Research subject
Business Studies
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-121706 (URN)10.1016/j.indmarman.2016.05.002 (DOI)000381591000002 ()
Available from: 2016-06-07 Created: 2016-06-07 Last updated: 2018-06-07Bibliographically approved
Gnyawali, D. R., Machavan, R., He, J. & Bengtsson, M. (2016). The competition-cooperation paradox in inter-firm relationships: a conceptual framework. Industrial Marketing Management, 53, 7-18
Open this publication in new window or tab >>The competition-cooperation paradox in inter-firm relationships: a conceptual framework
2016 (English)In: Industrial Marketing Management, ISSN 0019-8501, E-ISSN 1873-2062, Vol. 53, p. 7-18Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

With a focus on inter-firm relationships involving the simultaneous pursuit of competition and cooperation, we develop a conceptual framework that explicates key paradoxical conditions, paradoxical tension, and performance implications of tension in such relationships. We propose felt tension as the actual manifestation of the paradox and offer insights on critical capabilities necessary to understand and manage the paradox. Our paper extends the paradox literature in the inter-organizational context and provides a set of concepts and propositions designed to stimulate systematic empirical research on the competition–cooperation paradox.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Elsevier, 2016
National Category
Business Administration
Research subject
Business Studies
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-114800 (URN)10.1016/j.indmarman.2015.11.014 (DOI)000370885300003 ()
Note

Available online 11 December 2015

Available from: 2016-01-28 Created: 2016-01-28 Last updated: 2018-06-07Bibliographically approved
Bengtsson, M., Raza-Ullah, T. & Vanyushyn, V. (2016). The coopetition paradox and tension: the moderating role of coopetition capability. Industrial Marketing Management, 53, 19-30
Open this publication in new window or tab >>The coopetition paradox and tension: the moderating role of coopetition capability
2016 (English)In: Industrial Marketing Management, ISSN 0019-8501, E-ISSN 1873-2062, Vol. 53, p. 19-30Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

In this study, we apply a paradox perspective on coopetition to investigate the effects of coopetition paradox on managers' experience and perception of coopetitive tensions, and the role of coopetition capability in managing such tensions. We propose a theoretical model to posit that the intensity of coopetition paradox positively associates with managers' experience of external tension, which in turn lead them to perceive internal tension. Further, coopetition capability plays a dual role—moderates the relation between coopetition paradox and external tension, and reduces internal tension. We tested hypotheses on a representative multi-industry sample of 1532 firms in Sweden and the results confirm them. Our study contributes to understanding the critical role of coopetition capability that enables firms to maintain a moderate level of tension regardless of the intensity of coopetition paradox. 

Keywords
coopetition, paradox, tension, management, capability
National Category
Business Administration
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-116721 (URN)10.1016/j.indmarman.2015.11.008 (DOI)000370885300004 ()
Available from: 2016-02-10 Created: 2016-02-10 Last updated: 2018-06-07Bibliographically approved
Organisations

Search in DiVA

Show all publications