Impact of coopetition in the alliance portfolio and coopetition experience on firm innovation

Park, Byoungjin; Srivastava, Manish K.; Gnyawalị, Devi R.

doi:10.1080/09537325.2014.913016

Cited by 91 publications

(121 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

112

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…On the other hand, the literature states that co-innovations are one of the most important antecedents for coopetition strategy adoption (Gnyawali & Park, 2009), where coopetitive relationships are particular types of R&D relationship (Ritala, 2012), knowledge source (Belderbos, Carree, & Lokshin, 2004), and innovation stimulus (Park, Srivastava, & Gnyawali, 2014;Ritala & Hurmelinna-Laukkanen, 2013;Ritala & Hurmelinna-Laukkanen, 2009;Ritala & Sainio, 2014). Under these circumstances, the adhocracy culture ought to be the most appropriate model as it favors innovativeness (Tseng, 2010).…”

Section: Organizational Culture Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 96%

Organizational culture and coopetition: An exploratory study of the features, models and role in the Polish Aviation Industry

Klimas

2016

Industrial Marketing Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Organizational Culture Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 96%

Organizational culture and coopetition: An exploratory study of the features, models and role in the Polish Aviation Industry

Klimas

2016

Industrial Marketing Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Increased interdependence to buyers and suppliers handcuffed by the lack of control could make those supply chains highly vulnerable to disruptions (Hendricks, Singhal et al 2009). Likewise, the degree of interdependence and reliance on outside entities is argued to be a key vulnerability factor that could undermine firms' SCR (Pettit, Fiksel et al 2010), especially considering co-existence of both collaborative and competitive behaviors between partners (Park, Srivastava et al 2014). Specifically, increased dependence usually leads to decreased opportunities for operational flexibility, and the high connectivity in turn leads to a lack of reliable alternatives (Hearnshaw and Wilson 2007).…”

Section: The Moderating Role Of Interdependencementioning

confidence: 99%

How does firm innovativeness enable supply chain resilience? The moderating role of supply uncertainty and interdependence

Gölgeci

Ponomarov

2014

Technology Analysis & Strategic Management

114

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite its potential benefits in a wide range of circumstances, firm innovativeness received scant attention in relation to managing the various risks and uncertainties in the global business environment.Likewise, there is still a limited understanding of firms' supply chain resilience and its related antecedents in the strategic management literature. This research focuses on exploring the relationship between firm innovativeness and supply chain resilience in an attempt to facilitate bridging the gap between two important research streams and shed some light on the contingent value of firm innovativeness against disruptions and adversities. The moderating role of supply uncertainty and interdependence in the focal relationship was also hypothesized and tested. Findings suggest that firm innovativeness is positively associated with firm supply chain resilience, and supply uncertainty negatively moderates this relationship but interdependence does not. We argue that this could be due to the dual nature of interdependence in supply networks.

show abstract

“…The first has centred on operational aspects (Casanueva, Gallego, & Sancho, 2013;Park, Srivastava, & Gnyawali, 2014) and the second on more global and financial aspects (Koka & Prescott, 2008;Lavie, 2007;Wassmer & Dussauge, 2012). Therefore,…”

Section: Theory and Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Resource mobilization levels and the configuration of the alliance portfolio

Castro

Gallego²,

Casanueva³

2015

Proceedings of the 2nd International Symposium on Partial Least Squares Path Modeling: The Conference for PLS Users

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Alliance Portfolio Configuration (APC) conditions access to network resources, however, not all access to partner resources is finally mobilized by the firm. Our paper contributes to the understanding of alliance portfolio performance by examining how an acceptable configuration of the alliance portfolio will be conditioned by the level of resource mobilization that the firm really achieves. A variance-based structural equation modelling (Partial Least Squares) has been applied to a sample from the Top International Airlines database. Results from the data analysis show that the Level of Network Resource Mobilization (LNRM) (a) fully mediate the effect of alliance portfolio configuration on the operating performance; and (b) partially mediate this effect on financial performance of airlines.

show abstract

Impact of coopetition in the alliance portfolio and coopetition experience on firm innovation

Cited by 91 publications

References 40 publications

Organizational culture and coopetition: An exploratory study of the features, models and role in the Polish Aviation Industry

Organizational culture and coopetition: An exploratory study of the features, models and role in the Polish Aviation Industry

How does firm innovativeness enable supply chain resilience? The moderating role of supply uncertainty and interdependence

Resource mobilization levels and the configuration of the alliance portfolio

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About