umu.sePublications
Change search
Link to record
Permanent link

Direct link
BETA
Raza-Ullah, Tatbeeq
Publications (10 of 16) Show all publications
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
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
Raza-Ullah, T. (2018). Experiencing the paradox of coopetition: A moderated mediation framework explaining the paradoxical tension–performance relationship. Long range planning
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Experiencing the paradox of coopetition: A moderated mediation framework explaining the paradoxical tension–performance relationship
2018 (English)In: Long range planning, ISSN 0024-6301, E-ISSN 1873-1872Article in journal (Refereed) Epub ahead of print
Abstract [en]

In this paper, I investigate how and why experienced paradoxical tension deteriorates coopetitive performance and when such debilitating effects can be managed. More specifically, by drawing on the paradox theory and emotion literature, I suggest that paradoxical tension (i.e., the cognitive difficulty faced by senior managers as they pursue multiple, simultaneous competing demands of coopetition) creates a state of emotional ambivalence, which in turn, contributes negatively to coopetitive performance. I further propose that the negative consequences can be managed through organizational-level mechanisms, namely, emotional capability and balancing capability. The results show a full mediation of emotional ambivalence and a positive influence of balancing capability. Surprisingly, the moderating effect of emotional capability turns out to be negative. However, interestingly, the moderated-mediation result shows that a blend of higher balancing capability and lower emotional capability produces a positive indirect effect of tension on performance. The paper contributes to the research on strategy and organizational paradoxes.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Elsevier, 2018
Keywords
coopetition, paradox, emotion, ambivalence, capability, balancing, tension
National Category
Business Administration
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-155697 (URN)10.1016/j.lrp.2018.12.003 (DOI)
Funder
Forte, Swedish Research Council for Health, Working Life and Welfare, 2013–00741
Available from: 2019-01-26 Created: 2019-01-26 Last updated: 2019-04-05
Raza-Ullah, T. & Eriksson, J. (2018). Knowledge sharing and knowledge leakage in dyadic coopetitive alliances involving SMEs. In: Stavros Sindakis, Panagiotis Theodorou (Ed.), Global opportunities for entrepreneurial growth: coopetition and knowledge dynamics within and across firms (pp. 229-252). Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Knowledge sharing and knowledge leakage in dyadic coopetitive alliances involving SMEs
2018 (English)In: Global opportunities for entrepreneurial growth: coopetition and knowledge dynamics within and across firms / [ed] Stavros Sindakis, Panagiotis Theodorou, Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited, 2018, p. 229-252Chapter in book (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

In this chapter, we empirically investigate an important question of "how does knowledge sharing and knowledge leakage impact the alliance performance in dyadic coopetitive alliance settings that involve small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs)." Taking the perspective of the focal SME to address this question, we posit that while knowledge sharing positively associates with alliance performance, inadvertent knowledge leakage is negatively related to performance. We further postulate that under the conditions of high knowledge leakage, the positive impacts of knowledge sharing on performance would be reduced. Our structural model results based on a survey of 186 SMEs in the high-tech and knowledge-intensive industries in Sweden show support for two of the hypothesized relation- ships. More specically, the results show that knowledge sharing has a positive effect on alliance performance but knowledge leakage has an insignificant direct effect on performance. However, knowledge leakage plays a negative moderating role on the relationship between knowledge sharing and performance. We contribute by demonstrating the effects of knowledge sharing and leakage in under-researched but important dyadic one-to-one coopetitive alliances involving SMEs.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited, 2018
Keywords
Knowledge sharing, knowledge leakage, alliance performance, coopetition, SMEs
National Category
Business Administration
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-143110 (URN)9781787145023 (ISBN)9781787145016 (ISBN)
Available from: 2017-12-17 Created: 2017-12-17 Last updated: 2018-11-23Bibliographically approved
Bengtsson, M., Raza-Ullah, T. & Srivastava, M. (2018). Looking different vs thinking differently: Impact of TMT diversity on coopetition capability. Long range planning
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Looking different vs thinking differently: Impact of TMT diversity on coopetition capability
2018 (English)In: Long range planning, ISSN 0024-6301, E-ISSN 1873-1872Article in journal (Refereed) Epub ahead of print
Abstract [en]

In this study, we focus on the micro-foundations of coopetition capability and ask: "where does coopetition capability come from?" Drawing upon social psychology and cognitive theories, we seek to offer insights into the micro-foundations of coopetition capability by focusing on the role of top management team (TMT) diversity. We suggest that TMT diversity emerges from two distinct attributes of the team members: surface-level (e.g., age, gender, nationality) and deep-level (e.g., knowledge and experience). We argue that TMT diversity based on surface-level attributes contributes negatively while TMT diversity based on deep-level attributes contributes positively to coopetition capability. We test our hypotheses using a novel dataset that combines primary data and employee level secondary data of a sample of 315 Swedish firms. Results provide broad support for our hypotheses. We discuss the implications of our findings and key limitations of our study.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Elsevier, 2018
Keywords
coopetition, TMT diversity, capability, management, inter-firm, alliance, paradox, tension
National Category
Business Administration
Research subject
Business Studies
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-155692 (URN)10.1016/j.lrp.2018.11.001 (DOI)2-s2.0-85057135306 (Scopus ID)
Funder
Forte, Swedish Research Council for Health, Working Life and Welfare, 2013-00741
Available from: 2019-01-26 Created: 2019-01-26 Last updated: 2019-04-05
Raza-Ullah, T. (2017). A theory of experienced paradoxical tension in co-opetitive alliances. (Doctoral dissertation). Umeå: Umeå University
Open this publication in new window or tab >>A theory of experienced paradoxical tension in co-opetitive alliances
2017 (English)Doctoral thesis, comprehensive summary (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

Empirical research shows that co-opetition is a double-edged sword such that it can both help and hurt the achievement of desired performance outcomes. Despite the proliferation of co-opetitive alliances (i.e., simultaneous pursuit of competition and cooperation between firms), the field still lacks a theoretical framework that could help explain the dynamic mechanisms and conditions leading to these contradictory results. This thesis attempts to distill and integrate arguments from different literature streams of paradox, ambidexterity, and emotion to develop a framework in which experienced paradoxical tension (i.e., individual level cognitive difficulty and emotional ambivalence that pulls managers in opposite directions) serves as the main underlying mechanism through which co-opetition (i.e., an inter-firm level paradox) differentially affects performance in co-opetitive alliances. I further propose that firms' failure or success to achieve performance objectives in co- opetitive alliances is also contingent upon having a strong co-opetition capability (i.e., a multidimensional capability comprising analytical, emotional, and balancing dimensions). This thesis includes four appended papers that have used various methodologies such as anecdotes, exemplar cases, and particularly survey questionnaires to test some parts of the developed theory. The results from different papers show support for most of the tested relationships. Overall, the thesis contributes by proposing a much- need theory of experienced paradoxical tension that address the core issues related to the nature, source, consequence, and management of such tension in co-opetitive alliances. My theory has implications for research on organizational paradox and emotion, as well as for senior managers who are responsible for the success of co-opetitive alliances.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Umeå: Umeå University, 2017. p. 92
Series
Studier i företagsekonomi. Serie B, ISSN 0346-8291 ; 97
Keywords
co-opetition, paradox, tension, cognitive difficulty, emotional ambivalence, management, balance, capability, performance
National Category
Business Administration
Research subject
Business Studies
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-138385 (URN)978-91-7601-743-2 (ISBN)
Public defence
2017-09-14, Hörsal s205, Samhällsvetarhuset, Umeå, 13:15 (English)
Opponent
Supervisors
Available from: 2017-08-24 Created: 2017-08-21 Last updated: 2018-06-09Bibliographically 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
Raza-Ullah, T. (2017). Paradoxical tension and performance in co-opetitive alliances: a moderated mediation model including emotional ambivalence, ambivalence response, and balancing capability. In: 33rd EGOS Colloquium, Copenhagen, July 6-8, 2017: . Paper presented at 33rd EGOS Colloquium, Copenhagen, July 6-8, 2017.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Paradoxical tension and performance in co-opetitive alliances: a moderated mediation model including emotional ambivalence, ambivalence response, and balancing capability
2017 (English)In: 33rd EGOS Colloquium, Copenhagen, July 6-8, 2017, 2017Conference paper, Oral presentation only (Refereed)
National Category
Business Administration
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-138384 (URN)
Conference
33rd EGOS Colloquium, Copenhagen, July 6-8, 2017
Available from: 2017-08-21 Created: 2017-08-21 Last updated: 2018-06-09Bibliographically approved
Raza-Ullah, T. (2017). The role of emotional ambivalence in coopetition alliances. In: 77th Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management, Atlanta, Aug 4-8, 2017: . Paper presented at 77th Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management, Atlanta, Aug 4-8, 2017.
Open this publication in new window or tab >>The role of emotional ambivalence in coopetition alliances
2017 (English)In: 77th Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management, Atlanta, Aug 4-8, 2017, 2017Conference paper, Oral presentation only (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

I develop and test a theoretical model of moderated mediation in which emotional ambivalence functions as an intervening mechanism that explains association between co-opetitive tension and performance in co-opetition alliances. I also consider how managerial response of acceptance and organizational balancing capability influence the mediating role of emotional ambivalence in the tension– performance relationship through the effect they have on how ambivalence relates to performance. The structural model results, based on a sample of 220 firms involved in dyadic co-opetition alliances, show full mediation of emotional ambivalence and positive moderation of balancing capability. Counter to my expectation, however, acceptance response negatively moderates the link between emotional ambivalence and performance. Interestingly, the moderated mediation results show that when balancing capability is high and ambivalence response is low, the conditional indirect effects of tension on performance turn from negative to positive. I discuss how the recent theory on ambivalent responses of wise actors versus wise systems can explain this intriguing pattern of moderated mediation.

Keywords
paradox, tension, emotional ambivalence, co-opetition, management, balance, performance
National Category
Business Administration
Research subject
Business Studies
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-138383 (URN)10.5465/AMBPP.2017.17710abstract (DOI)
Conference
77th Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management, Atlanta, Aug 4-8, 2017
Available from: 2017-08-21 Created: 2017-08-21 Last updated: 2018-06-09
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
Organisations

Search in DiVA

Show all publications