Prior work has focused on understanding coopetition tensions and response in bilateral coopetitions. Even though multilateral coopetitions are prevalent in practice they have not been fully studied in terms of coopetition tensions and their management. This omission is problematic. Multilateral coopetitions can complement what we know in prior work because they are inherently complex with multiple actors and greater coordination needs. Hence, we asked: how are tensions experienced and managed in multilateral coopetitions? We answer this question by drawing on 31 interviews and archival data from seven multilateral coopetitions. We found three types of multilateral coopetitions comprising member companies and independent central coordinating organization. We show that actors within each coopetition type experience tensions differently and have varied capabilities to manage these tensions. Our contribution is twofold. First, we complement insights from prior work by opening the black box of coopetition tensions to show that not all coopetition tensions are salient for actors within and across coopetitions. Second, unlike prior work that locates capabilities within focal firms, we show that coopetition capabilities are dispersed across actors, which has implications for value creation and capture.
DOCUMENT
Prior work has focused on understanding coopetition tensions and response in bilateral coopetitions. Even though multilateral coopetitions are prevalent in practice they have not been fully studied in terms of coopetition tensions and their management. This omission is problematic. Multilateral coopetitions can complement what we know in prior work because they are inherently complex with multiple actors and greater coordination needs. Hence, we asked: how are tensions experienced and managed in multilateral coopetitions? We answer this question by drawing on 31 interviews and archival data from seven multilateral coopetitions in the context of sustainability. We found three types of multilateral coopetitions comprising member companies and independent central coordinating organization. We show that actors within each coopetition type experience tensions differently and have varied capabilities to manage these tensions. Our contribution is twofold. First, we complement insights from prior work by opening the black box of coopetition tensions to show that not all coopetition tensions are salient for actors within and across coopetitions. Second, unlike prior work that locates capabilities within focal firms, we show that coopetition capabilities are dispersed across actors, which has implications for value creation and capture.
LINK
Coopetition (simultaneous competition and collaboration between firms) is an important driver for innovation, as competing organizations benefit from pooling resources and ideas for new products, processes and achieving benefits such as collective reputation. However, a key issue facing such relationships is the notion of value creation and capture–how does value get created and distributed amongst competing partners. This issue becomes increasingly salient when the coopetition includes multiple actors and common pool resources such as land and water. In this symposium, we bring together scholars who are investigating coopetition between different actors such as direct competitors, actors from the same industry, and organizations sharing similar collective goals such as sustainable manufacturing. In showcasing this diversity of context we shed light on the notion of value creation and capture in coopetitive relationships.
MULTIFILE
Competitive advantage is probably the most popular business concept today (Mooney, 2007). This article aims to investigate critically the discourse on competitive advantage, as expressed by business literature, by locating its meanings in the public higher education sector. This research reveals that people working within the HEIs have given broader and more diversified meanings to this concept, which are partly due to the message received from external environment, and partly because of the influence of professional settings in which they function. By studying these diversified meanings, 13 elements are identified in constructing the competitive advantages of higher education institutions. Furthermore, the importance of each element is rated and ranked which enables us to assess the quantitative significance. The clarification of this container concept “competitive advantage” leads to the conclusion that the business way of defining of competitive advantage should be critically reviewed and verified in the context of public higher education sector, because the competition in the public education market is different from the normal market competition defined by the business literature.
LINK
This study explores how non-executive directors are challenged by management while they seek to improve the effectiveness of supervisory boards in the Netherlands. A combination of semi-structured interviews and a questionnaire among non-executive directors indicates that supervisory board members mainly experience boardroom challenges in three core areas: the ability of non-executive directors to ask management critical questions, information asymmetries between the management and supervisory boards and the management of the relationship between individual executive and non-executive directors. The qualitative in-depth analysis reveals the complexity of the main contributing factors to problems in the boardroom as well as the range of process and social interventions non-executive directors use to address boardroom issues. The findings highlight the need to better understand boardroom processes and the need of non-executive directors to carefully manage relationships in and around the boardroom.
LINK
Dit document geeft een overzicht van de bevindingen over het Factory-as-a service concept. Gedurende het SMITZH project heeft het lectoraat Smart Sustainable Manufacturing gezocht naar antwoorden op een aantal vragen: Welke initiatieven bestaan er, waar ondernemers elkaar helpen via het beschikbaar stellen en delen van productiecapaciteit? Wat zijn de randvoorwaarden om zo’n initiatief te laten slagen? Wat kan bijdragen om belemmeringen voor de toekomst weg te nemen? De voordelen zijn zeker aanwezig, maar obstakels ook. Met name dat laatste kan de voortgang en innovatief denken over de inrichting van flexibele en ‘Smart Manufacturing’ in de weg zitten. Het verhogen van de flexibiliteit om de maakindustrie concurrerender en veerkrachtiger te maken is een van de doelstellingen van het Smart Industry Programma, SMITZH en het lectoraat.
MULTIFILE
Nonprofit organizations (NPOs) have deployed various strategies in motivating businesses to source sustainably, such as the co-development and promotion of sustainability certification and direct collaboration in cross-sector partnerships (CSPs). This is an important current-day priority, given the ambitions set out in the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Increasingly, NPOs have taken up a role as conveners of such CSPs. Research on CSPs has, to date, often considered conveners as a ‘resource’ to the CSP, contributing to its effectiveness. In this study, we shift the focus towards the convener by considering a case of a ‘mission-driven convener’, an NPO that initiates CSPs as a strategy to realize its own sustainability objectives. Our explorative case study—comparing the NPO’s efforts across six countries in setting up national coffee platforms—reviews the concept of a mission-driven convener vis-à-vis established notions on convening and identifies which strategies it applies to realize a CSP. These strategies comprise productively combining certification-driven efforts with CSPs, combining process and outcomes of CSPs, and drawing on cross-level dynamics derived from outsourcing of convening work to local actors. With our study, we contribute to research on CSP conveners by offering an alternative interpretation to the relation between the CSP and the convener, attributing more agency to the convener as a mission-driven organization. Strengthening our understanding of CSPs and conveners is an important means to advance the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).
DOCUMENT
DOCUMENT
The Collaborative Innovation and Entrepreneurship professorship focuses on the collaborative paradigm in economic transformation - the ways diverse organizations in globalvalue chains innovate and act in partnerships to address ecological and social grand challenges. Collaboration with multiple and diverse stakeholders is complex and challenging. Stakeholders have different interests, may compete with each other, or are just not ready to move as fast or as radically as others. Yet, we know that grand challenges are too complex and systemic for any one organization to address alone. Business leaders have an important role to play in transforming economic ecosystems and catalysing change among stakeholders and industry actors. They must move from linear thinking, where sustainability is a market for green or social products, to circular and inclusive thinking, where regeneration of natural ecosystems occurs and economic profits are equally distributed.The Collaborative Innovation and Entrepreneurship professorship aims to contribute knowledge, support organizations, and facilitate learning about collaborative organizational forms and practices - what we call collaborative organizing - for a more sustainable, regenerative and thriving 21st century economic system.
DOCUMENT
