Coopetition

Last updated

Coopetition or co-opetition (sometimes spelled "coopertition" or "co-opertition") is a neologism coined to describe cooperative competition. Coopetition is a portmanteau of cooperation and competition. Basic principles of co-opetitive structures have been described in game theory, a scientific field that received more attention with the book Theory of Games and Economic Behavior in 1944 and the works of John Forbes Nash on non-cooperative games. Coopetition occurs both at inter-organizational or intra-organizational levels.

Contents

Overview

The concept and term coopetition and its variants have been re-coined several times in history.

The concept appeared as early as 1913, being used to describe the relationships among proximate independent dealers of the Sealshipt Oyster System, who were instructed to cooperate for the benefit of the system while competing with each other for customers in the same city. [1]

Inter-organizational

The term and the ideas around co-opetition gained wide attention within the business community after the publication in 1996 of the book by Brandenberger and Nalebuff bearing the same title. Until today this remains the reference work for both researchers and practitioners alike.

Giovanni Battista Dagnino and Giovanna Padula's conceptualized in their conference paper (2002) [2] that, at inter-organisational level, coopetition occurs when companies interact with partial congruence of interests. They cooperate with each other to reach a higher value creation if compared to the value created without interaction and struggle to achieve competitive advantage.

Often coopetition takes place when companies that are in the same market work together in the exploration of knowledge and research of new products, at the same time that they compete for market-share of their products and in the exploitation of the knowledge created. In this case, the interactions occur simultaneously and in different levels in the value chain. This is the case in the arrangement between PSA Peugeot Citroën and Toyota to share components for a new city car—simultaneously sold as the Peugeot 107, the Toyota Aygo, and the Citroën C1, where companies save money on shared costs while remaining fiercely competitive in other areas.

Several advantages can be foreseen, as cost reductions, resources complementarity and technological transfer. Some difficulties also exist, as distribution of control, equity in risk, complementary needs and trust.

It is possible for more than two companies to be involved in coopetition with one another. Another possible case for coopetition is joint resource management in construction. Sadegh Asgari and his colleagues [3] (2013) present a short-term partnering case in which construction contractors form an alliance, agreeing to put all or some of their resources in a joint pool for a fixed duration of time and to allocate the group resources using a more cost-effective plan.

Marcello Mariani (2007) [4] examined that in practice policy makers and regulators can trigger, promote, and affect coopetitive interactions among economic actors that did not intentionally plan to coopete before the external institutional stakeholders (i.e., a policy maker or regulator) created the conditions for the emergence of coopetititon.

Sadegh Asgari, Abbas Afshar and Kaveh Madani [3] (2013) suggested cooperative game theory as the basis for fair and efficient allocation of the incremental benefits of cooperation among the cooperating contractors. Their study introduced a new paradigm in construction resource planning and allocation. Contractors no longer see each other as just competitors; they look for cooperation beyond their competition in order to reduce their costs.

Intra-organizational

At the intra-organizational level, coopetition occurs between individuals or functional units within the same organization. Based on game theory [5] and social interdependence theories, some studies investigate the presence of simultaneous cooperation and competition among functional units, the antecedents of coopetition, and its impact on knowledge sharing behaviors. For example, the concept of coopetitive knowledge sharing is developed to explain mechanisms through which coopetition influences effective knowledge sharing practices in cross-functional teams. [6] The underlying argument is that while organizational teams need to cooperate, they are likely to experience tension caused by diverse professional philosophies and competing goals from different cross-functional representatives. [7]

Examples

See also

Related Research Articles

Mergers and acquisitions Type of corporate transaction

Mergers and acquisitions (M&A) are transactions in which the ownership of companies, other business organizations, or their operating units are transferred or consolidated with other entities. As an aspect of strategic management, M&A can allow enterprises to grow or downsize, and change the nature of their business or competitive position.

In business, a competitive advantage is the attribute that allows an organization to outperform its competitors. A competitive advantage may include access to natural resources, such as high-grade ores or a low-cost power source, highly skilled labor, geographic location, high entry barriers, and access to new technology.

Porters five forces analysis framework to analyse level of competition within an industry

Porter's Five Forces Framework is a method for analyzing competition of a business. It draws from industrial organization (IO) economics to derive five forces that determine the competitive intensity and, therefore, the attractiveness of an industry in terms of its profitability. An "unattractive" industry is one in which the effect of these five forces reduces overall profitability. The most unattractive industry would be one approaching "pure competition", in which available profits for all firms are driven to normal profit levels. The five-forces perspective is associated with its originator, Michael E. Porter of Harvard University. This framework was first published in Harvard Business Review in 1979.

Consortium association of legal entities, usually businesses

A consortium is an association of two or more individuals, companies, organizations or governments with the objective of participating in a common activity or pooling their resources for achieving a common goal.

A cross-functional team is a group of people with different functional expertise working toward a common goal. It may include people from finance, marketing, operations, and human resources departments. Typically, it includes employees from all levels of an organization. Members may also come from outside an organization.

Marketing strategy is a long-term, forward-looking approach and an overall game plan of any organization or any business with the fundamental goal of achieving a sustainable competitive advantage by understanding the needs and want of customers.

A strategic alliance is an agreement between two or more parties to pursue a set of agreed upon objectives needed while remaining independent organizations. A strategic alliance will usually fall short of a legal partnership entity, agency, or corporate affiliate relationship. Typically, two companies form a strategic alliance when each possesses one or more business assets or have expertise that will help the other by enhancing their businesses. Strategic alliances can develop in outsourcing relationships where the parties desire to achieve long-term win-win benefits and innovation based on mutually desired outcomes.

Open innovation is a term used to promote an information age mindset toward innovation that runs counter to the secrecy and silo mentality of traditional corporate research labs. The benefits and driving forces behind increased openness have been noted and discussed as far back as the 1960s, especially as it pertains to interfirm cooperation in R&D. Use of the term 'open innovation' in reference to the increasing embrace of external cooperation in a complex world has been promoted in particular by Henry Chesbrough, adjunct professor and faculty director of the Center for Open Innovation of the Haas School of Business at the University of California, and Maire Tecnimont Chair of Open Innovation at Luiss.

Barry J. Nalebuff is a Milton Steinbach Professor of Management at Yale School of Management and author who specializes in business strategy and game theory. His published books include Thinking Strategically and The Art of Strategy. Nalebuff's class on negotiation has over 67,000 active learners through Coursera and has the second-highest net promoter score on the platform. He has a semi-regular column in Forbes with Ian Ayres called "Why Not?"

A collective action problem or social dilemma is a situation in which all individuals would be better off cooperating but fail to do so because of conflicting interests between individuals that discourage joint action. The collective action problem has been addressed in political philosophy for centuries, but was most clearly established in 1965 in Mancur Olson's The Logic of Collective Action.

Innovation management is a combination of the management of innovation processes, and change management. It refers to product, business process, marketing and organizational innovation. Innovation management is the subject of ISO 56000 series standards being developed by ISO TC 279.

Website governance is an organization's structure of staff and the technical systems, policies and procedures to maintain and manage a website. Website governance applies to both Internet and Intranet sites.

Communities that support innovation have been referred to as communities of innovation (CoI), communities for innovation, innovation communities, open innovation communities, and communities of creation.

Vincent Mangematin is a French researcher and professor in management, specialized in Strategy, Strategic management of Innovation and Technology Management. He is currently professor and scientific director at Grenoble Ecole de Management.

Open coopetition

In R&D management and systems development, open coopetition or open-coopetition is a neologism to describe cooperation among competitors in the open-source arena. The term was first coined by the scholars Jose Teixeira and Tingting Lin to describe how rival firms that, while competing with similar products in the same markets, collaborate which each other in the development of open-source projects.

<i>Co-opetition</i> (book)

Co-opetition: A Revolution Mindset that Combines Competition and Cooperation is a non-fiction book on coopetition, business strategy, and game theory by Adam M. Brandenburger and Barry J. Nalebuff. The book was initially published by Crown Business on May 1, 1996. As of 2015, the book is still available in its 9th printing.

<i>Thinking Strategically</i> book by Avinash Dixit

Thinking Strategically: The Competitive Edge in Business, Politics, and Everyday Life is a non-fiction book by Indian-American economist Avinash Dixit and Barry Nalebuff, a professor of economics and management at Yale School of Management. The text was initially published by W. W. Norton & Company on February 1, 1991.

Co-opetition or coopetition – simultaneous competition and cooperation – is an important philosophy or strategy that goes beyond the conventional rules of competition and cooperation to achieve advantages of both. Global co-opetition, an application of co-opetition in a global context, is first systematically addressed in Luo’s (2004) book “Coopetition in international business”. According to this book, global co-opetition refers to the simultaneous competition and cooperation between multinational enterprises (MNEs) and their geographically dispersed business stakeholders such as global rivals, global suppliers, global distributors, global alliance partners, and foreign governments as well as among foreign subsidiaries within an MNE.

Cooperative strategy refers to a planning strategy in which two or more firms work together in order to achieve a common objective. Several companies apply cooperative strategies to increase their profits through cooperation with other companies that stop being competitors.

Science Fund of the Republic of Serbia is a public organization that supports science and research. It was established in January 2019 by the Government of Serbia, with the aim of providing funding and creating an enabling environment for the continuous development of scientific and research activities in the Republic of Serbia, which are, in turn, the conditions necessary for the progress of a knowledge-based society. The work of the Science Fund of the Republic of Serbia is monitored by the Ministry of Education, Science and Technological Development (Serbia). The Science Fund supports projects with sustainable goals, clear concepts, and systematic and well-designed working methodologies. High-level scientific excellence, quality, and innovative ideas represent the fundamental values of all projects supported by the Science Fund of the Republic of Serbia. The Science Fund's activities are represented through research, as well as through technological and developmental programs. Their goal is to achieve the strategic objectives of scientific and technological development of the Republic of Serbia. The operation of the Science Fund of the Republic of Serbia will also support scientists to cooperate with industry as well as with the scientific diaspora.

References

  1. 1 2 Paul Terry Cherington, Advertising as a Business Force: A Compilation of Experience Records, Doubleday, for the Associated advertising clubs of America, 1913, p. 144.
  2. Dagnino, Giovanni Battista; Padula, Giovanna (8 May 2002). "Coopetition Strategy: Towards a New Kind of Interfirm Dynamics for Value Creation" (PDF). EURAM 2nd Annual Conference, Stockholm School of Entrepreneurship, Sweden.
  3. 1 2 Asgari, Sadegh; Afshar, Abbas; Madani, Kaveh (2014). "Cooperative Game Theoretic Framework for Joint Resource Management in Construction". Journal of Construction Engineering and Management. 140 (3): 04013066. doi:10.1061/(asce)co.1943-7862.0000818. 04013066.
  4. Mariani, Marcello (2007). "Coopetition as an Emergent Strategy: Empirical Evidence from an Italian Consortium of Opera Houses". International Studies of Management & Organization. 37 (2): 97–126. doi:10.2753/IMO0020-8825370205.
  5. Loebecke, C.; Van Fenema, P.; Powell, P. (1999). "Coopetition and Knowledge Transfer". ACM SIGMIS Database. 30 (2): 14–25. doi:10.1145/383371.383373.
  6. Ghobadi, Shahla (2012). "Knowledge sharing in cross‐functional teams: a coopetitive model". Journal of Knowledge Management. 16 (2): 285–301. doi:10.1108/13673271211218889.
  7. Ghobadi, Shahla; D'Ambra, John. "Coopetitive knowledge sharing: An analytical review of literature". The Electronic Journal of Knowledge Management. 9 (4): 307–317.
  8. "Co-opetition", Los Angeles Times, 1937-11-20, p. a4
  9. "Superpublius".
  10. Fisher, Lawrence M. (1992-03-29). "Preaching Love Thy Competitor". New York Times . Archived from the original on 2018-06-27. Retrieved 2018-08-04.
  11. Williamson, Marcus (2006-10-09). "Obituary - Ray Noorda - Pioneer of 'co-opetition'". The Independent (UK) . Archived from the original on 2018-08-04. Retrieved 2018-08-04.
  12. "Phoenix Fire Inc".
  13. Kamen, Dean (March 24, 2009). "US Patent 7,507,169". US Patent Office.
  14. "FIRST values" Archived 2010-01-29 at the Wayback Machine
  15. Waltrip, Darrell. "For Gordon and Johnson, "coopetition" is a winning strategy".
  16. Gnyawali, Devi R.; Park, Byung-Jin (Robert) (2011-06-01). "Co-opetition between giants: Collaboration with competitors for technological innovation - Drivers and Consequences of Collaboration between Large Competitors". Research Policy. 40 (5): 650–663. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2011.01.009.
  17. Gnyawali, Devi R.; Park, Byung-Jin (Robert) (2009-07-01). "Co-opetition and Technological Innovation in Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises: A Multi-Level Conceptual Model". Journal of Small Business Management. 47 (3): 308–330. doi:10.1111/j.1540-627X.2009.00273.x. ISSN   1540-627X.
  18. Ghobadi, Shahla (2012). "Coopetitive relationships in cross-functional software development teams: How to model and measure?". Journal of Systems and Software. 85 (5): 1096–1104. doi:10.1016/j.jss.2011.12.027.
  19. Ghobadi, Shahla (2012). "Modeling High-Quality Knowledge Sharing in cross-functional development teams". Information Processing & Management. 49 (1): 138–157. doi:10.1016/j.ipm.2012.07.001.
  20. "Compassion Games International". Archived from the original on 2013-12-02. Retrieved 2014-01-15.
  21. "Love This Place, Serve the Earth: Collaboration is Necessary for the Earth April 18, 2016".
  22. Caring Citizens' Congress
  23. http://empathysurplus.com/compassion_primaries_invite_coopetition/?recruiter_id=2

Further reading