Processes Underlying Interfirm Cooperation

Abstract

This special issue intended to bring together scholarly insights on the processes that underlie the formation, growth, management and termination of interfirm cooperation (IFC). In this introductory paper, we highlight what we know about IFC and why fresh perspectives are warranted on this phenomenon from a conceptual and practical standpoint. We also highlight the contribution of each paper published in this special issue. The seven selected papers differ in their theoretical perspective, context, research methodology and findings, but collectively they enhance our understanding of various IFC processes. We end this paper by highlighting fertile avenues of future research.

Network ambidexterity and environmental performance: Code‐sharing in the airline industry

“…Conversely, failure to address challenges during code-sharing collaboration could lead to stifled innovation, opportunistic behaviour, distrust and competition, undermining further collaboration and the positive environmental impacts of code-sharing. Challenges to collaboration include issues related to trust, complacency and groupthink, information sharing and commitment (Majava et al, 2013), as well as issues with lack of compatibility, contractual complications, unmanageable uncertainties, and failure to anticipate and manage changes in the collaborative relationship (Lahiri et al, 2021). Old allies in code-sharing may become complacent and use code-sharing to delay the retirement of less-fuel efficient and more polluting aircraft; more generally, complacency could help avoid environmental innovation (Uphan et al, 2003).…”

“…A distinctive feature of the airline industry is multi‐ and bilateral horizontal (i.e., with potential competitors) collaboration agreements (Min & Joo, 2016), consisting of ‘short‐ or long‐term arrangements between independent business entities designed to generate mutually beneficial outcomes’ (Lahiri et al, 2021, p. 8). Concretely, code‐sharing partnerships, consisting of bilateral agreements in which a firm sells tickets for a flight that will be operated by another airline, are currently the most common type of collaboration in the airline sector (Alderighi et al, 2015; Castiglioni et al, 2018; Zou & Chen, 2017).…”

“…Conceptually, previous research has largely overlooked the extent to which the collaborative relationship between competitors required for code‐sharing may also have positive or negative consequences for environmental performance. Lahiri et al (2021) note that when companies gain access to additional value through collaboration, they are encouraged to test the waters of further collaborative alliances—formal or informal—particularly when industries are under pressure to change because collaboration helps to address uncertainties and legitimise the industry (Adobor, 2005). Then, it is possible that successful collaboration through code‐sharing could lead to collaboration to address common environmental challenges, with increased trust enabling partners to develop environmental capabilities through the pooling of resources (Pérez‐Valls et al, 2019) and innovate in aspects such as the use of non‐fossil fuels and the development of lighter aircraft material, which would lead to less polluting planes and flights.…”

Digitalization, inter-organizational collaboration, and technology transfer

“…Therefore, in this study, we argue that collaboration between different organizations plays a key role in how the digitalization of business processes affects the intensity of technology transfer. The main argument is that inter-organizational collaboration facilitates knowledge sharing, collaboration, and joint innovation between organizations (Ahmad & Daghfous, 2010;Eriksson et al, 2022;Lahiri et al, 2021) and can serve as a mechanism between business process digitalization and technology transfer intensity. First, in the context of business process digitalization, inter-organizational collaboration can help to identify new opportunities for innovation and promote the adoption of new technologies (Picazo-Vela et al, 2018).…”

Managing global value chain triversity and innovation performance using social mechanisms

“…Extant literature further suggests that innovation is a learning process and innovation success is influenced by flexibility, solidarity, control, and knowledge transfer in the GVC network. Such facets of the learning process are facilitated through social mechanisms that are embedded within GVC networks (Cano‐Kollmann, Hannigan, & Mudambi, 2018; Kano et al, 2020; Lahiri, Kundu, & Munjal, 2021). That sustenance and growth of innovation is a function of knowledge connectivity and ties at local, regional, and global levels (Cano‐Kollmann, Cantwell, Hannigan, Mudambi, & Song, 2016) is demonstrated by survival of innovation at Goodyear and in the auto tire cluster in North East Ohio (Mudambi, Mudambi, Mukherjee, & Scalera, 2017).…”