Published
2024-11-29
Section
Research Articles
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Jimmy Gabriel Díaz-Cueva, Alexander Sánchez-Rodríguez, Mariana Malvina Iozzeli-Valarezo, Yandi Fernández-Ochoa

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
The journal adopts the Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0), which means that anyone can reuse and redistribute the materials for non-commercial purposes as long as you follow the license terms and the original source is properly cited.
Author(s) shall retain the copyright of their work and grant the Journal/Publisher rights for the first publication with the work concurrently licensed since 2023 Vol.8 No.2.
Under this license, author(s) will allow third parties to download, reuse, reprint, modify, distribute and/or copy the content under the condition that the authors are given credit. No permission is required from the authors or the publisher.
This broad license intends to facilitate free access, as well as the unrestricted use of original works of all types. This ensures that the published work is freely and openly available in perpetuity.
By providing open access, the following benefits are brought about:
- Higher Visibility, Availability and Citations-free and unlimited accessibility of the publication over the internet without any restrictions increases citation of the article.
- Ease of search-publications are easily searchable in search engines and indexing databases.
- Rapid Publication – accepted papers are immediately published online.
- Available for free download immediately after publication at https://esp.as-pub.com/index.php/ESP
Copyright Statement
1.The authors certify that the submitted manuscripts are original works, do not infringe the rights of others, are free from academic misconduct and confidentiality issues, and that there are no disputes over the authorship scheme of the collaborative articles. In case of infringement, academic misconduct and confidentiality issues, as well as disputes over the authorship scheme, all responsibilities will be borne by the authors.
2. The author agrees to grant the Editorial Office of Environment and Social Psychology a licence to use the reproduction right, distribution right, information network dissemination right, performance right, translation right, and compilation right of the submitted manuscript, including the work as a whole, as well as the diagrams, tables, abstracts, and any other parts that can be extracted from the work and used in accordance with the characteristics of the journal. The Editorial Board of Environment and Social Psychology has the right to use and sub-licence the above mentioned works for wide dissemination in print, electronic and online versions, and, in accordance with the characteristics of the periodical, for the period of legal protection of the property right of the copyright in the work, and for the territorial scope of the work throughout the world.
3. The authors are entitled to the copyright of their works under the relevant laws of Singapore, provided that they do not exercise their rights in a manner prejudicial to the interests of the Journal.
About Licence
Environment and Social Psychology is an open access journal and all published work is available under the Creative Commons Licence, Authors shall retain copyright of their work and grant the journal/publisher the right of first publication, and their work shall be licensed under the Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0).
Under this licence, the author grants permission to third parties to download, reuse, reprint, modify, distribute and/or copy the content with attribution to the author. No permission from the author or publisher is required.
This broad licence is intended to facilitate free access to and unrestricted use of original works of all kinds. This ensures that published works remain free and accessible in perpetuity. Submitted manuscripts, once accepted, are immediately available to the public and permanently accessible free of charge on the journal’s official website (https://esp.as-pub.com/index.php/ESP). Allowing users to read, download, copy, print, search for or link to the full text of the article, or use it for other legal purposes. However, the use of the work must retain the author's signature, be limited to non-commercial purposes, and not be interpretative.
Click to download <Agreement on the Licence for the Use of Copyright on Environmental and Social Psychology>.
How to Cite
Coopetition in business relationships: Validation and improvement of the coopetitive paradox model
Jimmy Gabriel Díaz-Cueva
Universidad Técnica de Machala, Faculty of Business Sciences. Machala, 070220, Ecuador
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0276-6865
Alexander Sánchez-Rodríguez
Universidad UTE, Faculty of Engineering Sciences and Industries. Quito, 170527, Ecuador
http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8259-2131
Mariana Malvina Iozzeli-Valarezo
Universidad Técnica de Machala, Faculty of Business Sciences. Machala, 070220, Ecuador
http://orcid.org/0009-0004-5233-3365
Yandi Fernández-Ochoa
Universidad UTE, Faculty of Engineering Sciences and Industries. Santo Domingo, 230202, Ecuador
http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0579-5052
DOI: https://doi.org/10.59429/esp.v9i10.2986
Keywords: Coopetition, Collaboration, Competition, Business Relationships, Coopetitive Paradox Model
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to validate the conceptual model of the coopetitive paradox proposed by Gnyawali et al.[1] This qualitative study, using grounded theory, involved 54 executives from 25 companies from Ecuador’s agriculture sector. The results validated and complemented the conceptual model of the coopetition paradox, filling up important knowledge gaps related to the sources of the dualities and contradictions that drive the paradoxical coopetitive situations in an inter-company network. New findings indicate that the willingness of firms for collaborate with competitors is influenced by the competitive position, the emphasis on the strategic development of the sector, and the interest in long-term sustainability, inferring that an individualistic business culture that emphasizes competitiveness significantly limits the drive for coopetitive strategies. It was also found that the ability to identify and manage sources of tension in coopetitive relationships is determined by the structure of managerial thinking in top managers. As a result of this study, 13 new tentative propositions were incorporated into the theoretical model. This represents an important contribution on strategic management by highlighting the meaning of coopetition to increase the perceived value of customers and the network, even in the presence of conflicts, rivalries and divergent interests.
Author Biographies
Jimmy Gabriel Díaz-Cueva, Universidad Técnica de Machala, Faculty of Business Sciences. Machala, 070220, Ecuador
Faculty of Business Sciences. Machala, Ecuador.Alexander Sánchez-Rodríguez, Universidad UTE, Faculty of Engineering Sciences and Industries. Quito, 170527, Ecuador
Faculty of Engineering Sciences and Industries. Quito, EcuadorMariana Malvina Iozzeli-Valarezo, Universidad Técnica de Machala, Faculty of Business Sciences. Machala, 070220, Ecuador
Faculty of Business Sciences. Machala, Ecuador.Yandi Fernández-Ochoa, Universidad UTE, Faculty of Engineering Sciences and Industries. Santo Domingo, 230202, Ecuador
Faculty of Engineering Sciences and Industries. Santo Domingo, Ecuador.
References
[1]. Gnyawali DR, Madhavan R, He J, Bengtsson M. The competition–cooperation paradox in inter-firm relationships: A conceptual framework. Industrial Marketing Management. 2016, 53: 7–18. doi:10.1016/j.indmarman.2015.11.014
[2]. Winberg J, Öster H. Organization and management of coopetition: Trust the¨ 805 competition, not the competitor. [Master’s Thesis, Uppsala University]. 2015. https://bit.ly/3K7Ente
[3]. Dagnino GB, Le Roy F, Yami S. La dynamique des stratégies de coopetition. Revue Française de Gestion. 2007, 33(176): 87-98. doi:10.3166/rfg.176.87-98
[4]. Karno CG, Purwanto E. The effect of cooperation and innovation on business performance. Calitatea. 2017, 18(158): 123-126.
[5]. Nalebuff BJ, Brandenburger AM. Co-opetition. Harper Collins Business. 1997.
[6]. Bengtsson M, Eriksson J, Wincent J. Co-opetition dynamics–an outline for further inquiry. Competitiveness Review: An International Business Journal. 2010, 20: 194–214. doi:10.1108/10595421011029893
[7]. Bengtsson M, Raza-Ullah T, Vanyushyn V. The coopetition paradox and tension: The moderating role of coopetition capability. Industrial Marketing Management. 2016, 53: 19–30. doi:10.1016/j.indmarman.2015.11.008
[8]. Bouncken RB, Fredrich V, Ritala P, Kraus S. Coopetition in new product development alliances: Advantages and tensions for incremental and radical innovation. British Journal of Management. 2018, 29: 391–410. doi:10.1111/1467-8551.12213
[9]. Gast J, Filser M, Gundolf K, Kraus S. Coopetition research: towards a better understanding of past trends and future directions. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business. 2015, 24: 492–521.
[10]. Seran T, Pellegrin-Boucher E, Gurau C. The management of coopetitive tensions within multi-unit organizations. Industrial Marketing Management. 2016, 53: 31–41. doi: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2015.11.009
[11]. Li D, Yang Z, Ma P, Chen H. Cooperation and competition among subsidiaries in a business group: their impacts on innovation. Management Decision. 2022, 60(6): 1662-1682. doi:10.1108/MD-12-2020-1692
[12]. Fuentes-Fernández R, Gilinsky Jr. A. Coopetition as improvisation: an exploratory comparative case study investigation into Spain’s natural wine industry. International Journal of Wine Business Research. 2022, 34(2): 308-328. doi:10.1108/IJWBR-12-2020-0062
[13]. Li W, Zhao X. Competition or coopetition? Equilibrium analysis in the presence of process improvement. European Journal of Operational Research. 2022, 297(1): 180-202. doi: 10.1016/j.ejor.2021.04.031
[14]. Crick JM, Crick D, Chaudhry S. The dark-side of coopetition: it’s not what you say, but the way that you do it. Journal of Strategic Marketing. 2022, 30(1): 22-44. doi:10.1080/0965254X.2019.1642936
[15]. Gernsheimer O, Kanbach DK, Gast J. Coopetition research - a systematic literature review on recent accomplishments and trajectories. Industrial Marketing Management. 2021, 96: 113–134. doi:10.1016/j.indmarman.2021.05.001.
[16]. Hannah DP, Eisenhardt KM. How firms navigate cooperation and competition in nascent ecosystems. Strategic Management Journal. 2018, 39: 3163–3192. doi:10.1002/smj.2750
[17]. Lascaux A. Coopetition and trust: What we know, where to go next. Industrial Marketing Management. 2020, 84: 2–18. doi:10.1016/j.indmarman.2019.05.015
[18]. Akpinar M, Vincze Z. The dynamics of coopetition: A stakeholder view of the German automotive industry. Industrial Marketing Management. 2016, 57: 53–63. doi:10.1016/j.indmarman.2016.05.006
[19]. Ricciardi F, Zardini A, Czakon W, Rossignoli C, Kraus S. Revisiting the cooperation–competition paradox: A configurational approach to short- and long-term coopetition performance in business networks. European Management Journal. 2022, 40(3): 320-331. doi: 10.1016/j.emj.2021.07.002
[20]. Moritz A, Naulin T, Lutz E. Accelerators as drivers of coopetition among early-stage startups. Technovation. 2022, 111: 102378. doi: 10.1016/j.technovation.2021.102378
[21]. Meena A, Dhir S, Sushil S. A review of coopetition and future research agenda. Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing. 2022. doi:10.1108/JBIM-09-2021-0414
[22]. Bengtsson M, Kock S. Coopetition—quo vadis? past accomplishments and future challenges. Industrial Marketing Management. 2014, 43: 180–188. doi:10.1016/j.indmarman.2014.02.015
[23]. Chou HH, Zolkiewski J. Coopetition and value creation and appropriation: The role of interdependencies, tensions and harmony. Industrial Marketing Management. 2018, 70: 25–33. doi:10.1016/j.indmarman.2017.08.014
[24]. Gnyawali DR, Charleton TR. Nuances in the interplay of competition and cooperation: Towards a theory of coopetition. Journal of Management. 2018, 44(7): 2511–2534. doi:10.1177/0149206318788945
[25]. Dziurski P. Interplay between coopetition and innovation: Systematic literature review. Organization and Management. 2020, 188(1): 9–20.
[26]. Czakon W, Klimas P, Mariani M. Behavioral antecedents of coopetition: A synthesis and measurement scale. Long Range Planning. 2020, 53: 101875. doi:10.1016/j.lrp.2019.03.001
[27]. Darbi WPK, Knott P. Coopetition strategy as naturalised practice in a cluster of informal businesses. International Small Business Journal: Researching Entrepreneurship. 2022. doi:10.1177/02662426221079728
[28]. Riquelme-Medina M, Stevenson M, Barrales-Molina V, Llorens-Montes FJ. Coopetition in business Ecosystems: The key role of absorptive capacity and supply chain agility. Journal of Business Research. 2022, 146: 464-476. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.03.071
[29]. Pan´kowska M, Soltysik-Piorunkiewicz A. Ict supported urban sustainability by example of silesian metropolis. Sustainability. 2022, 14. doi:10.3390/su14031586
[30]. Cygler J, Sroka W, Solesvik M, Debkowska K. Benefits and drawbacks of coopetition: The roles of scope and durability in coopetitive relationships. Sustainability. 2018,10. doi:10.3390/su10082688.
[31]. Vătămănescu E-M, Mitan A, Andrei AG, Ghigiu AM. Linking coopetition benefits and innovative performance within small and medium-sized enterprises networks: a strategic approach on knowledge sharing and direct collaboration. Kybernetes. 2022, 51(7): 2193-2214. doi:10.1108/K-11-2020-0731
[32]. Crick JM, Crick D. Coopetition and international entrepreneurship: the influence of a competitor orientation. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Research. 2022, 28(3): 801-828. doi:10.1108/IJEBR-06-2021-0519
[33]. Yami S, Nemeh A. Organizing coopetition for innovation: The case of wireless telecommunication sector in Europe. Industrial Marketing Management. 2014, 43: 250–260. doi: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2013.11.
[34]. Niu Y, Li H, Ye K, Mahmoudi A, Deng X. Determinants of coopetition relationships in international joint ventures for high-speed rail projects. KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering. 2022, 26(5): 2036-2057. doi:10.1007/s12205-022-1649-1
[35]. Klimas P, Czakon W, Fredrich V. Strategy frames in coopetition: An examination of coopetition entry factors in high-tech firms. European Management Journal. 2022, 40(2): 258-272. doi: 10.1016/j.emj.2021.04.005
[36]. Le Roy F, Czakon W. Managing coopetition: the missing link between strategy and performance. Industrial Marketing Management. 2016, 53: 3–6.
[37]. Ritala P, Tidström A. Untangling the value-creation and value-appropriation elements of coopetition strategy: A longitudinal analysis on the firm and relational levels. Scandinavian Journal of Management. 2014, 30: 498–515. doi: 10.1016/j.scaman.2014.05.002
[38]. Glaser BG, Strauss AL. The discovery of grounded theory. Strategies for qualitative research. Routledge. 2017. doi:10.4324/9780203793206
[39]. Eisenhardt KM, Graebner ME. Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges. Academy of Management Journal. 2007, 50: 25–32.
[40]. Crick JM, Crick D. Rising up to the challenge of our rivals: Unpacking the drivers and outcomes of coopetition activities. Industrial Marketing Management. 2021, 96: 71-85. doi: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2021.04.011
[41]. Roman DJ, Osinski M, Erdmann RH. The construction process of grounded theory in administration. Contaduría y Administración. 2017, 62: 985–1000. doi:10.1016/j.cya.2016.06.012.006
[42]. Creswell JW, Miller DL. Determining Validity in Qualitative Inquiry. Theory into Practice. 2000, 39: 124-130. doi: 10.1207/s15430421tip3903_2
[43]. Lincoln YS, Guba EG. Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE. 1985.
[44]. Zhang YA, Shaw JD. Publishing in amj-part 5: Crafting the methods and results. Academy of Management Journal. 2012, 55: 8–12. doi:10.5465/amj.2012.4001
[45]. Meng L, Lv W, Xianzhi Yuan G, Wang H. The dynamic risk profiles and management strategies in supply chain coopetition under altruistic preference. International Review of Financial Analysis. 2023, 90: 102895. doi: 10.1016/j.irfa.2023.102895
[46]. Wang H, Yuan W, Yuan G. The mechanism for SMEs growth by applying stochastic dynamical approach. Finance Research Letters. 2022, 48: 102850. doi: 10.1016/j.frl.2022.102850
[47]. Li X, Chen K, Xianzhi Yuan G, Wang H. The decision-making of optimal equity and capital structure based on dynamical risk profiles: A Langevin system framework for SME growth. International Journal of Intelligent Systems. 2021, 36(7): 3500-3523. doi: 10.1002/int.22424
[48]. Xianzhi Yuan G, Wang H. The general dynamic risk assessment for the enterprise by the hologram approach in financial technology. International Journal of Financial Engineering. 2019, 6(1): 1950001. https://doi.org/10.1142/S2424786319500014
[49]. Elgazzar AS. Risk-dominant Equilibrium in Chicken and Stag-hunt Games with Different Dilemma Strengths. Modern Economy and Management. 2024, 3: 8. doi: 10.53964/mem.2024008
[50]. Gao S, Wang H, Yuan X, Lin L. Cooperative Mechanism of SME Growth in the Mesoscopic Structure with Strategic and Nonstrategic Partners. IEEE Intelligent Systems. 2020, 35(3): 7-18. doi: 10.1109/MIS.2019.2935965
[51]. Yu L, Wang H, Lin L, Zhong S. The incentive effect of venture capital in bilateral partnership systems with the bias mono-stable Cobb–Douglas utility. Nonlinear Dyn. 2019, 95: 3127–3147. doi: 10.1007/s11071-018-04745-1
[52]. Lin L, Xianzhi Yuan G, Wang H, Xie J. The stochastic incentive effect of venture capital in partnership systems with the asymmetric bistable Cobb–Douglas utility. Communications in Nonlinear Science and Numerical Simulation. 2019, 66: 109-128. doi: 10.1016/j.cnsns.2018.06.010
[53]. Dagnino GB. Coopetition strategy: a new kind of interfirm dynamics for value creation. In Dagnino GB, Rocco E (eds). Coopetition strategy: Theory, experiments and cases (pp. 45–63). London: Routledge. 2009.
[54]. Bouncken RB, Gast J, Kraus S, Bogers M. Coopetition: a systematic review, synthesis, and future research directions. Review of Managerial Science. 2015, 9: 577–601. doi:10.1007/s11846-015-0168-6
[55]. Chim-Miki AF, Batista-Canino RM, Sosa-Cabrera S. Analizando el tipo de coopetición en redes interorganizativas turísticas de Curitiba, Brasil. PASOS Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural. 2018, 16: 769–784.
[56]. Liu A, Tan J. Unpacking coopetition and innovation: Contingency roles of pluralistic network embeddedness. Academy of Management Proceedings. 2017: 11085. doi:10.5465/AMBPP.2017.11085abstract
[57]. Elgazzar AS. Coopetition in quantum prisoner’s dilemma and COVID-19. Quantum Information Processing. 2021, 20: 102 doi: 10.1007/s11128-021-03054-8
[58]. Elgazzar AS. Risk-Dominant Equilibrium in Quantum Prisoner´s Dilemma. Journal of the Physical Society of Japan. 2024, 93(8): 1-17. doi: 10.7566/JPSJ.93.084803