Partner selection in co-opetition: a three step model

Abstract

Purpose – This paper aims to contribute towards a better understanding of the partner selection process, which anticipates a successful co-opetition partnership. Co-opetition partnerships refer to developing cooperation efforts between competitors. The scarcity of studies conducted in this field to date provides limited contribution for the understanding of the partner selection process in this, particularly, paradoxical concept. Design/methodology/approach – This study follows a methodology based on systematic combining for the qualitative analysis of four cases of domestic co-opetition in Portugal. A sample range of eight companies was selected for a series of semi-structured interviews. Testimonials were transcribed and data coded for content analysis. Findings – Results indicate that prior personal relationships between decision-makers are facilitators for the implementation of cooperation partnerships with competitors. Based on these findings, this paper proposes a three-step model to explain the process of partner selection for co-opetition partnerships. According to this model, after opting to commence a new coopetitive business alliance, the manager undergoes a first unconscious selection based on his/her own prior personal relationships, followed by a conscious and judicious selection based on specific criteria related to partner’s operational skills, resources, effectiveness and trust. Research limitations/implications – Given that the sample is entirely formed by companies from one single country, further research would benefit from the inclusion of other countries expressing different business contexts and cultural environments. Originality/value – The value of paper derives from the comprehensive realization of partner selection for domestic co-opetition as fundamentally a network-related process.

Incorporating coopetition into the entrepreneurial marketing literature

“…If owner-managers have access to limited resources and capabilities, coopetition (or similar collaborative business strategies) could be highly-effective activities to help them to: achieve their objectives, maximise their performance (e.g., sales), and compete within the competitive business environment (Chetty and Wilson, 2003;Andersson et al, 2018). Alves and Meneses (2015) examined the informal and formal processes for how entrepreneurs select partners for their coopetition strategies. These authors found that entrepreneurs may need to cooperate with their competitors for personal and professional reasons and manage assets with strategic alliances, through utilising the skills of the coopetition partners (namely, rival firms).…”

“…These authors found that entrepreneurs may need to cooperate with their competitors for personal and professional reasons and manage assets with strategic alliances, through utilising the skills of the coopetition partners (namely, rival firms). Alves and Meneses (2015) highlighted the importance of cooperating with competitors, so that entrepreneurs can be provided with new: resources, capabilities, and opportunities. Network members are critical stakeholders for entrepreneurs, as they might help them to operate successfully in their market(s) (Hill, McGowan and Drummond, 1999;Rocks, Gilmore and Carson, 2005;Andersson et al, 2018;Foster and Brindley, 2018).…”

“…While Crick (2018a) highlighted that it would have been interesting to apply all seven dimensions of entrepreneurial marketing to coopetition activities (Morris et al, 2002;Whalen et al, 2016), the three that were selected explained: how coopetition can be managed (the facets of coopetition), the factors that motivate entrepreneurs to cooperate with their competitors (the antecedents of coopetition), and the performance outcomes that such strategies might yield (the consequences of coopetition). Crick (2018a) selected these three dimensions of entrepreneurial marketing, as they were conceptually-related to the coopetition literature (Bjerke and Hultman, 2002;Hills et al, 2008; (Alves and Meneses, 2015;Crick and Crick, 2016;Crick, 2018a;Daidj and Egert, 2018), but more research is needed to integrate these two strands of literature. Crick's (2018a) study examined the link between coopetition, under an entrepreneurial marketing perspective, using qualitative insights from the New Zealand wine industry.…”

“…Despite coopetition being a well-studied issue in the broader management literature, there are some important areas that need to be investigated. As coopetition activities have scarcely been incorporated into the entrepreneurial marketing literature (Alves and Meneses, 2015;Crick and Crick, 2016;Crick, 2018a;Daidj and Egert, 2018), it is proposed that scholars, exploring this field, can use their expertise to fill such research gaps. Further, the marketing/entrepreneurship interface is far from being a saturated research domain (i.e., there are plenty of issues that need to be addressed) (O'Donnell Gilmore, 2011;Mort et al, 2012;Gross et al, 2014;Miles et al, 2015; O'Cass and Morrish, 2016;Whalen et al, 2016).…”

Effectuation and Morphogenesis in the New Zealand Fairtrade Marketing System

“…Focused on the central, agentic role of the entrepreneur (Webb et al 2011; Whalen et al 2016), EM explores marketing operationalised in an environment of uncertainty with a reliance on networks, and partners; ((Addison et al 2017; Alves and Meneses 2015; Hills, Hultman, and Miles 2008; Vasilchenko and Morrish 2011; Zontanos and Anderson 2004). EM is adaptive to contingencies and utilizes a marketing orientation to satisfy customer need while dynamically creating opportunities for entrepreneurial organisations (Webb et al 2011; Whalen et al 2016).…”