Ohne Titel

Implementing the right project structure to achieve coopetitive innovation projects

Coopetition and innovation

interplay situated in a “value net” between a focal firm, its customers, its suppliers and its complementors

The first perspective, based on the TCT, argues that coopetition cannot be a fruitful strategy for innovation because of the risk of opportunism

Collaborating with a competitor to achieve innovation involves the sharing of knowledge, resources and competencies.

In contrast, the second perspective, based on the DCT, concludes that coopetition is a fruitful strategy for innovation

The DCT considers organizational capabilities and, more specifically, dynamic capabilities as a major source of firm performance

The absence of a theoretical consensus is in accordance with the mixed empirical results. While many contributions have tried to assess the impact of R&D collaborations with competitors on innovation, no clear relationship has been found.

Other contributions find that cooperation between competitors has a positive impact on product innovation

These contrasting results have pushed some authors to draw a distinction between incremental and radical innovation. Considering that developing a radical innovation requires sharing more knowledge with the partner than developing an incremental innovation

concluded that working with a competitor is not compatible with radical innovation. Following this approach, the lower the innovativeness of the project, the higher the positive impact of coopetition.

key role of coopetition management

Among the various coopetitive capabilities, managerial capabilities are essential both to achieve product innovation and to create a win-win relationship

Without appropriate management, the innovation could fail and coopetition could yield a win-lose relationship. Thus, managing coopetition is considered the missing link between coopetition strategy and performance

Managing coopetition is a pervasive research question, and recent research has identified several principles for managing coopetition successfully

The first principle, separation, advocates a functional, temporal or spatial separation of the management of competition and the management of collaboration

The second principle, integration, encourages individuals to transcend paradoxes

Finally, the co-management principle states that firms can implement specific project structures in which they replicate managerial positions to manage potential tensions between the partners

Radical innovation

Incremental

innovation

metods

CP

Radical innovation

High development of innovation capabilities

Management of relational risks

High levels of perfomance risk

High level of risks and costs

High level of relational risks

Pooling of human resources from both parent firms

Daily collaboration among individuals from competing firms

Knowledge sharing encouraged throughout the project

SPT

Incremental innovation

moderate resorce sharing requirement

Low development of innovation capabilities

Each parent firm builds its own team with its own resource

Limited relational risks

Knowledge protected in each parent firm