umu.sePublications
Change search
Refine search result
1 - 11 of 11
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent 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
Rows per page
  • 5
  • 10
  • 20
  • 50
  • 100
  • 250
Sort
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
Select
The maximal number of hits you can export is 250. When you want to export more records please use the Create feeds function.
  • 1. Akpinar, Murat
    et al.
    Vincze, Zsuzsanna
    Umeå University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Umeå School of Business and Economics (USBE), Business Administration.
    The dynamics of coopetition: A stakeholder view of the German automotive industry2016In: Industrial Marketing Management, ISSN 0019-8501, E-ISSN 1873-2062, Vol. 57, p. 53-63Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    In response to calls for better understanding the dynamics of coopetition, this study aims to develop a framework that explains why the levels of competition and cooperation change over time. The framework adopts the two-continua approach to coopetition and the theoretical concepts of power and stake from the stakeholder literature. Integrating concepts from the coopetition and stakeholder literatures is a promising attempt, which is justified by the fact that stakeholders are in coopetition with the firm. According to our framework the power difference affects the level of competition, and vice versa, whereas common stakes affect the level of cooperation, and vice versa. This was subject to a test with insights from the in-depth analysis of the changing coopetition between the Volkswagen Group and Porsche AG during the period 2001–2012. Our findings explain why an environmental threat on one of the firms shifted the power difference and changed the coopetition first from cooperation-dominant to balanced-strong and then ended it through a full acquisition.

  • 2.
    Bengtsson, Maria
    et al.
    Umeå University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Umeå School of Business and Economics (USBE).
    Kock, Sören
    Department of Management and Organization, Hanken School of Economics, Finland & Erling-Persson Center for Entrepreneurship, Hanken School of Economics, Finland.
    Coopetition - Quo vadis?: Past accomplishments and future challenges2014In: Industrial Marketing Management, ISSN 0019-8501, E-ISSN 1873-2062, Vol. 43, no 2, p. 180-188Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Research on coopetition has been conducted for more than two decades. However, several concepts remain that require elaboration. A study on the literature shows that there is a lack of unified definitions, as various definitions have been employed in previous accomplished research. In this article we suggest that the early definition of coopetition, as a dual relationship between firms that simultaneously cooperate and compete needs to be refined. Our new definition suggests that coopetition is a paradoxical relationship between two or more actors, regardless of whether they are in horizontal or vertical relationships, simultaneously involved in cooperative and competitive interactions. We also highlight important contributions to the field, and some shortcomings that point to future challenges for coopetition research. Finally, we put forward five directions for future research: (1) understand the balancing of cooperation and competition, (2) understand the coopetition paradox and engendered tension, (3) apply a multilevel perspective on coopetition (4) understand the dynamics of coopetitive interaction, and (5) understand how coopetition impacts business models and strategy.

  • 3.
    Bengtsson, Maria
    et al.
    Umeå University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Umeå School of Business and Economics (USBE), Business Administration.
    Kock, Sören
    Hanken School of Economics, Department of Management and Organization, Finland.
    Lundgren-Henriksson, Eva-Lena
    Hanken School of Economics, Department of Management and Organization, Finland.
    Harryson Näsholm, Malin
    Umeå University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Umeå School of Business and Economics (USBE), Business Administration.
    Coopetition research in theory and practice: growing new theoretical, empirical, and methodological domains2016In: Industrial Marketing Management, ISSN 0019-8501, E-ISSN 1873-2062, Vol. 57, p. 4-11Article in journal (Refereed)
    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.

  • 4.
    Bengtsson, Maria
    et al.
    Umeå University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Umeå School of Business and Economics (USBE), Business Administration.
    Raza-Ullah, Tatbeeq
    Umeå University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Umeå School of Business and Economics (USBE), Business Administration.
    A systematic review of research on coopetition: Toward a multilevel understanding2016In: Industrial Marketing Management, ISSN 0019-8501, E-ISSN 1873-2062, Vol. 57, p. 23-39Article in journal (Refereed)
    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.

  • 5.
    Bengtsson, Maria
    et al.
    Umeå University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Umeå School of Business and Economics (USBE), Business Administration.
    Raza-Ullah, Tatbeeq
    Umeå University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Umeå School of Business and Economics (USBE), Business Administration.
    Vanyushyn, Vladimir
    Umeå University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Umeå School of Business and Economics (USBE), Business Administration.
    The coopetition paradox and tension: the moderating role of coopetition capability2016In: Industrial Marketing Management, ISSN 0019-8501, E-ISSN 1873-2062, Vol. 53, p. 19-30Article in journal (Refereed)
    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. 

  • 6.
    Biedenbach, Galina
    et al.
    Umeå University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Umeå School of Business and Economics (USBE), Business Administration.
    Bengtsson, Maria
    Umeå University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Umeå School of Business and Economics (USBE), Business Administration.
    Wincent, Joakim
    Institutionen för ekonomi, teknik och samhälle, Innovation och Design, Luleå Tekniska Universitet.
    Brand equity in the professional service context: Analyzing the impact of employee role behavior and customer–employee rapport2011In: Industrial Marketing Management, ISSN 0019-8501, E-ISSN 1873-2062, Vol. 40, no 7, p. 1093-1102Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    The study examines whether factors related to customers' perception of employees' behavior in terms of customer perceived role ambiguity, role overload and customer–employee rapport influence the development of brand equity in the professional service context. 632 customers of one of the Big Four auditing companies participated in the study. The results of structural equation modeling show negative effects of role ambiguity and role overload on brand associations, perceived quality and brand loyalty, which constitute brand equity. The findings indicate a positive effect of customer–employee rapport on the enhancement of B2B brand equity. However, the negative influences of role ambiguity and role overload on customer–employee rapport transfer detrimental indirect effects on brand equity. The study contributes to an understanding of how the real interaction between service providers and customers can influence brand equity in the professional service setting.

  • 7.
    Boström, Gert-Olof
    Umeå University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Umeå School of Business and Economics (USBE).
    Successful Cooperation in Professional Services: What Characteristics Should the Customer Have?1995In: Industrial Marketing Management, ISSN 0019-8501, E-ISSN 1873-2062, Vol. 24, no 3, p. 151-165Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    The service sector is a growing part of the economy in many countries. To be able to survive in this sector, it is necessary to offer the market services that are perceived as having quality. Interviews with both providers and customer stated the importance of cooperation between the two parties. The perspective on cooperation in this article was from the providers' side. The question was, “What characteristics should a customer have?” An aggregation of the different answers to this question by Swedish architects suggested a customer that has good knowledge and relates well with the professional service provider was the best.

  • 8.
    Gnyawali, Devi R
    et al.
    Pamplin College of Business, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University (Virginia Tech), Blacksburg, VA 24060, USA.
    Machavan, Ravi
    Katz Graduate School of Business, University of Pittsburgh, 208 Mervis Hall, Pittsburgh, PA 15260, USA.
    He, Jinyu
    Department of Management, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Clear Water Bay, Kowloon, Hong Kong.
    Bengtsson, Maria
    Umeå University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Umeå School of Business and Economics (USBE), Business Administration.
    The competition-cooperation paradox in inter-firm relationships: a conceptual framework2016In: Industrial Marketing Management, ISSN 0019-8501, E-ISSN 1873-2062, Vol. 53, p. 7-18Article in journal (Refereed)
    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.

  • 9.
    Huemer, Lars
    et al.
    BI-Norwegian School of Management Nydalsveien 37, 0484, Oslo, Norway.
    Boström, Gert-Olof
    Umeå University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Umeå School of Business and Economics (USBE).
    Felzensztein, Christian
    chool of Business, Universidad Adolfo Ibáñez, Diagonal Las Torres 2640, Peñalolén, Santiago, Chile.
    Control-trust interplays and the influence paradox: A comparative study of MNC-subsiciary relationships2009In: Industrial Marketing Management, ISSN 0019-8501, E-ISSN 1873-2062, Vol. 38, no 5, p. 520-528Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This study focuses on the interplay and possible coexistence of control and trust when influencing others and when being influenced. The paper presents an analysis of change processes whereby an actor becomes ‘a trusted influenced other’. This occurs due to the controls that take place, rather than despite of these. It is suggested that intended purpose and perceived legitimacy need to be considered, as well as the type and level of control. Moreover, imbalanced interactions whereby the other actor is prevented from becoming a source of influence may negatively impact the overall development and exploitation of knowledge. A second dimension in the studied relationships is when the other becomes ‘a trusted source of influence’, not only a ‘trusted influenced other’.

  • 10.
    Hultén, Peter
    et al.
    ESC-Rennes School of Business, Rennes, France.
    Viström, Magnus
    STFI-Packforsk AB/Lund University (division of packaging logistics), STFI-Packforsk c/o Mittuniversitetet, SE-891 18 Örnsköldsvik, Sweden.
    Mejtoft, Thomas
    STFI-Packforsk AB/Royal Institute of Technology (KTH), STFI-Packforsk c/o Mittuniversitetet, SE-891 18 Örnsköldsvik, Sweden.
    New printing technology and pricing2009In: Industrial Marketing Management, ISSN 0019-8501, E-ISSN 1873-2062, Vol. 38, no 3, p. 253-262Article in journal (Refereed)
  • 11.
    Raza-Ullah, Tatbeeq
    et al.
    Umeå University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Umeå School of Business and Economics (USBE), Business Administration.
    Bengtsson, Maria
    Umeå University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Umeå School of Business and Economics (USBE), Business Administration.
    Kock, Sören
    Department of Management and Organization, Hanken School of Economics, Vaasa, Finland.
    The coopetition paradox and tension in coopetition at multiple levels2014In: Industrial Marketing Management, ISSN 0019-8501, E-ISSN 1873-2062, Vol. 43, no 2, p. 189-198Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This article explores the nature of the paradox inherent in coopetition; that is, the simultaneous pursuit of cooperation and competition between firms, and emanating tensions that develop at individual, organizational, and inter-organizational levels. We dissect the anatomy of the coopetition paradox to discover how it materializes by creating an external boundary (i.e., via unifying forces) and internal boundaries (i.e., via divergent forces). After explaining the coopetition paradox, we distinguish tension from paradox and submit that tension comprises both positive and negative emotions simultaneously, also known as emotional ambivalence. Finally, we recognize that emotional ambivalence in coopetition prevails at different levels, and vary in its level of intensity and persistency in relation to different contexts. We employ illustrative cases to ground our propositions empirically. This article provides understanding on concepts, expects to incite fruitful dialogue, and fuels further studies on inter-firm paradoxes.

1 - 11 of 11
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent 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