umu.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
A systematic review of research on coopetition: Toward a multilevel understanding
Umeå University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Umeå School of Business and Economics (USBE), Business Administration.
Umeå University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Umeå School of Business and Economics (USBE), Business Administration.
2016 (English)In: Industrial Marketing Management, ISSN 0019-8501, E-ISSN 1873-2062, Vol. 57, 23-39 p.Article 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.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2016. Vol. 57, 23-39 p.
Keyword [en]
coopetition, systematic literature review, multilevel
National Category
Business Administration
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-124278DOI: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2016.05.003ISI: 000381591000004OAI: oai:DiVA.org:umu-124278DiVA: diva2:950443
Available from: 2016-07-29 Created: 2016-07-29 Last updated: 2017-08-23Bibliographically approved
In thesis
1. A theory of experienced paradoxical tension in co-opetitive alliances
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. 92 p.
Series
Studier i företagsekonomi. Serie B, ISSN 0346-8291 ; 97
Keyword
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: 2017-09-05Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full text

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Bengtsson, MariaRaza-Ullah, Tatbeeq
By organisation
Business Administration
In the same journal
Industrial Marketing Management
Business Administration

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

Altmetric score

Total: 261 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf