The architecture of coopetition: Strategic intent, ambidextrous managers, and knowledge sharing

Seepana, Chandrasekararao; Paulraj, Antony; Huq, Fahian Anisul

doi:10.1016/j.indmarman.2020.08.012

Cited by 59 publications

(75 citation statements)

References 144 publications

(214 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Within coopetition context, our results explicitly indicate that SI, as an important capability of a coopetitor, can lead to both innovation and operational performance. The SI of attaining strategic goals and competitive dominance necessitate a firm to emphasize on exploring opportunities for improvement and exploiting the available IJOPM 41,3 skills and capabilities (Koza and Lewin, 2000;Seepana et al, 2020). When it comes to coopetition, as reckoned by the relational and dynamic capabilities views (Dyer et al, 2018) as well as the extant literature (Gnyawali and Charleton, 2018;Seepana et al, 2020), it offers greater access to coopetitors so that they learn from each other's experiences (Bouncken and Fredrich, 2016).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The SI of attaining strategic goals and competitive dominance necessitate a firm to emphasize on exploring opportunities for improvement and exploiting the available IJOPM 41,3 skills and capabilities (Koza and Lewin, 2000;Seepana et al, 2020). When it comes to coopetition, as reckoned by the relational and dynamic capabilities views (Dyer et al, 2018) as well as the extant literature (Gnyawali and Charleton, 2018;Seepana et al, 2020), it offers greater access to coopetitors so that they learn from each other's experiences (Bouncken and Fredrich, 2016). This learning could benefit coopetitors in exploring opportunities for innovations and performance improvements.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Coopetitors tend to possess various traditional resources and capabilities such as knowledge (Ritala and Hurmelinna-Laukkanen, 2009; Gnyawali and Charleton, 2018), technological capabilities (Gnyawali and Park, 2011; Bouncken et al , 2016), relational investments (Gnyawali and Park, 2011) and ambidextrous managers (Bengtsson et al , 2016; Seepana et al , 2020). The significance of such resources and capabilities and how they could contribute to coopetitors competitive advantage is debated in the extant literature by often referring to the real-world example of the Sony-Samsung horizontal coopetition relationship (Gnyawali and Park, 2011; Bouncken and Fredrich, 2016); Sony-Samsung coopetition resulted in the development of new generation television display panels (Gnyawali and Park, 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…High-levels of EO could be reflected in a firm's strong emphasis on research and development (R&D), innovation and pursuing high-risk ventures (Lumpkin and Dess, 1996; Ireland et al , 2001); this is quite evident in the cases of Sony and Samsung. Apart from EO, coopetitors could also possess an aggressive strategic intent (SI) (Luo, 2007; Seepana et al , 2020). Strategic intent can guide firms to channel their resources in the right direction to attain strategic goals (Hamel and Prahalad, 1989).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, the strategic intent of Samsung is said to have assisted its resources, capabilities and learning from competitors that eventually enabled it to improve production efficiencies (Hitt et al , 1995). SI has been viewed as a strategic capability that coopetitors could possess (Seepana et al , 2020). Furthermore, coopetitors also tend to possess high-levels of potential absorptive capacity (PAC), which can be utilized to capture external knowledge and use such knowledge for their own benefits (Ritala and Hurmelinna-Laukkanen, 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Performance effects of entrepreneurial orientation, strategic intent and absorptive capacity within coopetitive relationships

Seepana

Huq

Paulraj³

2021

IJOPM

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeWhile the significance of organizational resources and capabilities is widely discussed, little is known about their interrelationships as well as benefits for firms that are involved in coopetitive relationships. Against this backdrop, the purpose of this paper is to investigate the performance effects of entrepreneurial orientation, strategic intent and potential absorptive capacity as well as their complementarity effects on operational and innovation performance for firms involved in horizontal coopetitive relationships.Design/methodology/approachDrawing upon the resource-based-view, dynamic capabilities and the relational view theories, this study forwards numerous hypotheses between the constructs of interest. The proposed hypotheses are tested utilizing survey data collected from 313 horizontal coopetitive relationships.FindingsThe results clearly suggest that entrepreneurial orientation, strategic intent and potential absorptive capacity could positively impact innovation and operational performance outcomes independently. In addition, the authors also find strategic intent and potential absorptive capacity to have differential moderating effects on the relationships between entrepreneurial orientation and the performance outcomes.Originality/valueThe findings suggest that although strategic intent and potential absorptive capacity could lead to performance benefits independently, when it comes to coopetitive relationships, the use of both these capabilities may not substantially increase the positive impact of entrepreneurial orientation on performance outcomes. Specifically, given that these capabilities could intensify competitiveness as well as hostility between partners, they seem to affect the firm's performance differently.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Performance effects of entrepreneurial orientation, strategic intent and absorptive capacity within coopetitive relationships

Seepana

Huq

Paulraj³

2021

IJOPM

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

R&D alliances and SMEs post‐entry internationalization speed: The impact of alliance management capability and co‐innovation ambidexterity

Zahoor

Al‐Tabbaa

Khan

2023

Global Strategy Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research Summary This study delves into the relationship between alliance management capability (AMC) and the post‐entry internationalization speed of small‐sized and medium‐sized enterprises (SMEs). We develop a novel theoretical framework that illuminates the effect of co‐innovation ambidexterity as a mechanism that unlocks AMC value in speeding up SME internationalization following entry into foreign markets. To validate our framework, we conduct an empirical investigation using a sample of 278 UK‐based manufacturing SMEs. Our findings support the proposition that co‐innovation ambidexterity is a crucial mediating mechanism through which AMC boosts the post‐entry internationalization speed of SMEs. Therefore, this research sheds new light on the critical roles of AMC and co‐innovation ambidexterity during the post‐entry stage, which has far‐reaching implications for the fields of international entrepreneurship and international strategic alliances. Managerial Summary Internationalizing SMEs are increasingly forming alliances with the aim of accessing and leveraging external knowledge to tackle the challenges they typically encounter during post‐entry phase. However, these alliances are difficult to establish and manage, which results in high failure rates. To address this lacuna, we argue that AMC and co‐innovation ambidexterity facilitate the post‐entry internationalization speed of SMEs. Using data from 278 UK‐based manufacturing SMEs, we show that AMC is an important capability that allows SMEs to leverage and harness the knowledge of their alliances for co‐innovation ambidexterity, which, in turn, increases their post‐entry internationalization speed. Together, these findings provide important insights for those SMEs' managers who aim to develop effective strategies for rapid internationalization via strategic alliances.

show abstract

Strategic Intent Undermines Creative Outcomes: Evidence from a Randomised Control Trial

Walia

2021

Creativity and Strategy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The architecture of coopetition: Strategic intent, ambidextrous managers, and knowledge sharing

Cited by 59 publications

References 144 publications

Performance effects of entrepreneurial orientation, strategic intent and absorptive capacity within coopetitive relationships

Performance effects of entrepreneurial orientation, strategic intent and absorptive capacity within coopetitive relationships

R&D alliances and SMEs post‐entry internationalization speed: The impact of alliance management capability and co‐innovation ambidexterity

Strategic Intent Undermines Creative Outcomes: Evidence from a Randomised Control Trial

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About