Know Thy Enemy: A Review and Agenda for Research on Competitor Identification

Abstract

Competitor identification, a core element of competitive dynamics, has been of long-standing interest to researchers in management and related disciplines. This broad interest has resulted in various definitions and conceptualizations of competitor identification as well as various approaches to studying it, which impairs the integration of existing knowledge aimed at answering vital questions regarding its nature, processes, and implications. To help researchers confront the complexities underlying this phenomenon, we identify, review, and organize theory and research on competitor identification across the management, marketing, and industrial organization economics disciplines. Based on our review, we organize the identified literature into four perspectives on competitor identification labeled as industry-oriented, strategic groups–oriented, manager-oriented, and customer-oriented. For each of these perspectives, we also identify major research streams and these streams’ foci and contributions. Building on our review, we propose an agenda for future management research that addresses both unresolved debates in the reviewed literature and identifies new promising connections between competitor identification and specific areas of management theory and research. We organize this future research agenda into six main themes focusing on exploring the dynamics of competitor identification, building connections to research on interorganizational relations, building a practice and process perspective, expanding micro-oriented approaches, and exploring international and entrepreneurial dimensions of competitor identification.

Competitor Perceptions in Tourism Coopetition

“…This study focuses on the individual perceptions of collaborating competitors in order to identify how coopeting tourism managers perceive their competitors. In line with the managerial-oriented perspective on competitor identification methodology, we rely on qualitative research and its methods in order to explore how managers’ cognitive maps are linked to competitor identification (Gur and Grekhamer 2018). Qualitative research is needed here for two main reasons.…”

“…J. Chen and Hambrick 1995). Differently from the industry-oriented perspective, which departs from the assumption that all industry players are by default competitors, and from the strategic groups–oriented perspective, which restricts the scope of competition in industries to smaller sets of firms according to their similarities and differences (Gur and Greckhamer 2018), the manager-oriented perspective adopts a fine-grained approach to understanding what a firm does when competing with specific rivals, or by extension how a firm manages competition–cooperation interdependence (M. J. Chen and Miller 2015).…”

Factor market rivalry and interindustry competitive dynamics

“…Our findings broaden the definition of competitor identification and rivalry, which extends traditional classifications and schemas employed in the strategic management and interfirm rivalry literatures (cf. Gur & Greckhamer, forthcoming; Withers, Ireland, Miller, Harrison, & Boss, for recent theoretical and empirical work on competitor identification). Hoping to reduce the misclassification of rivals, scholars generally select samples from a narrow set of rivals within well‐defined industry precincts or strategic groups (Ketchen et al, 2004).…”

Competitive dynamics of strategic groups in the Portuguese banking industry

“…As a result of such competitive interactions, companies actively fight for a competitive advantage, seeking profitability or market shares (Chen and Hambrick 1995;Ferrier 2001;Cattani et al 2017). Understanding these mechanisms is a key factor to understand the market and competitors (Smith et al 2001;Ketchen et al 2004;Gur and Greckhamer 2018;Rebière and Mavoori 2019), since companies foster competitive advantages that can be translated into long-term sustainability of the adopted corporate strategy. Hunt (1972) defends that an industry can be grouped in several SGs, arguing that they could be composed of companies following similar strategies.…”

“…It involves the study of how a small group of rival companies engage in rivalry against other groups of rival companies, shaping the structure of rivalry within an industry (Porter 1980;Cattani et al 2017). As such, one can argue that SGs follow similar strategies despite their different motivations and results (Chen and Miller 2012;Gur and Greckhamer 2018).…”