Explore the vast range of titles available.

Research Summary: This paper extends the relational view to offer a dynamic perspective on the factors that drive value creation and value capture over the alliance life cycle. We argue that access to complementary resources provides an initial rationale for forming alliances, but benefits from complementarity can attenuate over time. Indeed, viewed dynamically, factors that often lead to higher value creation—informal trust, repeated ties, customized assets—may also lead to diminished alliance performance. We highlight interdependence between the complementary resources of partners as the critical factor determining the pattern of alliance value creation, notably how quickly alliances generate value and how quickly they are likely to dissolve. We identify factors, both internal and external to the alliance, that trigger diminished value creation and increased competition for value capture among partners. Managerial Summary: The “relational view” perspective has shown that firms create value in alliances when they identify partners with complementary resources, when they build high levels of informal trust and they share knowledge and make investments that are customized to the partner. The level of resource interdependence in alliances determines how quickly alliances can reach their potential in value creation and how quickly they are likely to dissolve. Viewed dynamically, factors that often lead to higher value creation—like informal trust, repeated ties, customized assets—may also lead to diminished alliance performance. Finally, a number of factors both internal to and external to an alliance may trigger competition between the partners within an alliance to capture the value created by the alliance and also diminish the value created within the alliance.

Although coopetition (simultaneous cooperation and competition) is likely to enhance financial performance if effectively managed, earlier investigations have overlooked the complexities of this relationship. Most notably, understanding the impact of moderating factors can help unpack the complexity of the association between coopetition and performance. Therefore, grounded in resource-based theory and the relational view, this study focuses on the quadratic relationship between coopetition and financial performance under different degrees of export intensity and export geographical scope. Using survey responses from 101 wine producers in New Zealand, the empirical results show that coopetition has a nonlinear (inverted U-shaped) relationship with financial performance. Furthermore, export intensity and export geographical scope positively moderate this quadratic association. As such, for underresourced firms with overseas market potential, decision makers should consider the merits of combining the benefits of coopetition with those from an internationalized business model. This arrangement can help them navigate these potentially paradoxical forces, assuming they engage with trustworthy and complementary rivals in coopetition partnerships.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to use a theoretical framework to investigate the relationships between different innovation-oriented dynamic capabilities, dynamic resilience and firm performance among logistics service providers (LSPs) and in-house logistics departments of industrial companies during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.Design/methodology/approachThe conceptual theoretical framework relies on the dynamic capabilities framework (DCF) and the relational view (RV), which are rooted in the resource-based view (RBV). It is hypothesized that the dynamic capability to innovate reinforces the dynamic capability to adapt and to recover in highly dynamic and vulnerable environments during the pandemic. This allows LSPs to successfully create new services and respond to the changing market circumstances in terms of logistics service quality (LSQ) and firm performance. Data were collected from 83 LSPs and 30 in-house logistics departments via an online survey. The study determined the general strength and direction of the relationships between latent variables. A correlation analysis was utilized to establish statistical significance of the results.FindingsIn this study, a range of innovation-oriented capabilities for achieving more dynamic resilience were bundled in a conceptual framework and were found to be statistically significant for LSQ and firm performance. They are the capability to distribute new knowledge, to train employees effectively, to develop cross-functional collaboration within the firm, to develop inter-firm relationships with business partners on a long-term basis as well as to learn from rivals, and to pursue a win-win relationship with them.Research limitations/implicationsThe results of the study do not imply that the identified capabilities are the only ones relevant to increasing dynamic resilience during the pandemic. In October 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic was at different stages in different countries, so that the level to which firms were affected varied, and although the data were collected during one month only, due to the high dynamics of the pandemic, data were collected during different stages of disruptions, even among respondents in the same country. This study was set in the context of COVID-19, and it could not be proved whether the conceptual framework is generalizable to other crises or particular industries, but it would be worthwhile to examine this in the future. Finally, it was not tested whether LSQ mediates the relationship between innovative capabilities and firm performance during the pandemic.Practical implicationsThe results help managers with regard to their strategic and operational decisions in relation with COVID-19. These findings are useful for executives and logistics managers to improve these capabilities to gain a competitive advantage during pandemic and to find their strengths and weaknesses to develop critical capabilities for situations with a high turbulence and dynamic in their environment, and therefore provide a path for improvement.Originality/valueThis paper operationalizes a multi-theoretical conceptual framework in the context of logistics management (LM) and supply chain management (SCM). This conceptual framework was empirically tested.

Purpose Suppliers are essential partners in innovation projects, as they own resources, knowledge assets and capabilities that complement those of buying firms. In today’s competitive environment, firms may choose to collaborate with suppliers beyond dyads, forming triadic or three-party relationships. Using the theoretical lens of the relational view (RV), this study aims to explore what type of triad configurations firms use to govern supplier relationships in collaborative innovation projects, how they choose to share resources and implications for project performance. Design/methodology/approach The authors use interview data from buyers and suppliers in six case studies of firms involved in ten collaborative innovation projects. The four constructs of the RV are used to observe how firms govern triadic relationships, combine complementary resources, invest in relationship-specific assets and manage information and knowledge exchange with and between suppliers in innovation projects. Findings Four archetypes of triadic relationships in innovation projects – labeled Triangle, A-frame, D-Frame and Line – are presented and characterized in terms of their structural and relational features. The authors discuss how each triad archetype is applicable to different innovation projects according to specific project characteristics. Originality/value This study is pioneering in its empirical examination of triadic relationships in collaborative innovation projects. It provides a novel typology of four archetypes of triad from the perspective of collaborative relationships with suppliers. Through applying the RV, it advances understanding of how triadic relationships are governed, how they invest in relationship-specific assets, how they combine complementary resources and how they exchange knowledge and information in each type of triad appropriate to different innovation project settings. To date, much of the extant literature has focused on dyads.

Humanitarian organizations are increasingly facing challenges in terms of improving the efficiency and the effectiveness of their disaster relief efforts. These challenges often arise due to a lack of trust, poor collaboration and an inability to respond to disaster affected areas in a timely manner. Our study attempts to understand how these challenges are overcome by seeking answers to questions related to the topics of swift-trust, collaboration and agility in humanitarian supply chains. For instance, in our study we have attempted to examine how information sharing and supply chain visibility in humanitarian supply chains improve the swift-trust among the humanitarian actors engaged in disaster relief operations. Further, we attempt to understand how-swift trust, commitment and collaboration among the humanitarian actors improve the agility in humanitarian supply chains. In our study we provide both theoretical and data-driven answers to our stated research gaps. Our theoretical model is firmly grounded in organizational information process theory and relational view. We tested our research hypotheses using variance based structural equation modelling with survey data collected using a web based pre-tested instrument from 147 NGOs respondents drawn from the National Disaster Management Authority database. Our results help to advance the theoretical debates surrounding “swift-trust”, “collaboration” and “agility” in humanitarian settings. We further provide direction to managers engaged in disaster relief operations. The humanitarian actors engaged in disaster relief often fail to understand how to build swift-trust. Moreover, how swift-trust further affects commitment and collaboration which in turn further affect agility in humanitarian supply chains. Thus humanitarian organizations must understand how information sharing and supply chain visibility is key to swift-trust among humanitarian actors and agility in humanitarian supply chains. Finally, we outline the limitations of our study and offer some future research directions for investigation.

Purpose Coopetition is the interplay between cooperation and competition, involving organisations sharing resources and capabilities with rival entities. Earlier work has suggested that coopetition has a linear (positive) relationship with company performance, with scarce considerations towards whether this link could have a diminishing-returns effect. Thus, this paper aims to examine the non-linear (quadratic) relationships between coopetition and three performance outcomes. Using resource-based theory and the relational view, this study is designed to evaluate the dark side of coopetition, in terms of identifying situations when such activities can be harmful for company performance. Design/methodology/approach Survey data were collected from a sample of 101 vineyards and wineries in New Zealand. After purifying the measures through a series of multivariate statistical techniques, the research hypotheses and control paths were tested through hierarchical regression. Furthermore, the statistical data passed all major assessments of reliability and validity (including common method variance). Findings Coopetition was found to have non-linear (quadratic) relationships with customer satisfaction performance, market performance, and financial performance. These results indicate that while coopetition provides organisations with new resources, capabilities and opportunities, there are some dark sides of coopetition activities. With “too little” coopetition, firms might struggle to survive within their markets, with an insufficient volume of resources and capabilities. With “too much” coopetition, companies could experience increased tensions, potentially lose intellectual property and dilute their competitive advantages. Such negative outcomes could harm their performance in several capacities. Practical implications Firms should appreciate that coopetition is a competitive strategy. In other words, regardless of how much collaboration occurs, coopetition partners are still competing entities. It is recommended that organisations should strive to engage in an “optimal-level” of coopetition, as “too little” or “too much” of such strategies can be harmful for various types of company performance. To mitigate some of the dark sides of coopetition, businesses should attempt to use all the benefits of collaborating with competitors (i.e. accessing new resources, capabilities and opportunities), but at the same time, not become dependent on rivals’ assets. Originality/value This paper develops and tests a framework examining the non-linear (quadratic) linkages between coopetition and multiple assessments of company performance. It highlights the benefits and drawbacks of businesses sharing resources and capabilities with their competitors. Contrary to prior studies in the business-to-business marketing literature, the results signify that firms need to engage in an “optimal-level” of coopetition to minimise certain dark sides, such as reduced company performance. After providing some practitioner implications, this paper ends with a series of limitations and avenues for future research.

PurposeThis paper draws upon the Yin and Yang concept of Chinese philosophy within a Western context to examine coopetition, namely, the interplay between cooperation and competition. Although coopetition activities should positively affect company performance, earlier research involving this relationship has typically been linear in nature and without moderating factors. Consequently, underpinned by resource-based theory and the relational view, the purpose of this investigation is to examine the non-linear (inverted U-shaped) link between coopetition and company performance under the moderating role of competitive intensity.Design/methodology/approachCollection of survey data involved a sample of 101 internationalising wine producers in New Zealand. Following a check of the statistical data for all major assessments of reliability and validity (together with common method variance), testing the research hypotheses and control paths took place through hierarchical regression. Furthermore, 20 semi-structured interviews helped explain the underlying mechanisms behind the quantitative results.FindingsCoopetition had a non-linear (inverted U-shaped) relationship with market performance. Surprisingly, competitive intensity yielded a negative moderation effect. The mixed methods results highlighted that firms must strike an effective balance between the paradoxical forces of cooperativeness and competitiveness across their product-market strategies.Originality/valueThis investigation contributes to the existing literature by developing and testing a conceptual framework examining the nature of the relationship between coopetition activities and market performance – using non-linear (inverted U-shaped) and moderating effects. It addresses a debate between two schools-of-thought concerning the impact of competitive intensity on the coopetition paradox. Additionally, this study helps to explain the coopetition construct through the Yin and Yang concept to highlight how the paradoxical forces of cooperativeness and competitiveness can create harmful outcomes for organisations if they do not manage them effectively (across domestic and international markets).

A growing body of supply chain management (SCM) literature has relied on the premises of the resource‐based view (RBV) and its extensions like the relational view (RV) to investigate resources and their relationship to performance. Recently, the practice‐based view (PBV) has been proposed as a complementary theoretical foundation for strategic management research. While the PBV primarily focuses on the firm, we note that SCM practices often span firm boundaries and extend to supply chain partners. In addition, there is an opportunity to explicitly consider firm performance as both individual performance and relational performance. We do this by proposing the supply chain practice view (SCPV), in which we extend the PBV to the interorganizational level of analysis—both in terms of practices and performance. We also build upon and extend the PBV's discussion of the interaction of practices and resources by advocating that there are no discrete boundaries between practices and resources and between firm and relational performance; we conceptualize these dimensions as continua as opposed to sets of dichotomies. The SCPV complements the PBV, as well as the RBV and RV, and provides an alternative theoretical lens for the SCM discipline.

Purpose Earlier work has suggested that assumptions, values and beliefs about the importance of cooperating with competitors (a coopetition-oriented mindset) should manifest into behavioural forms of coopetition, such as resource and capability-sharing activities. Yet, limited research surrounds the complexities of this link. The purpose of this study is to unpack the relationship between a coopetition-oriented mindset and coopetition-oriented behaviours under the moderating roles of industry experience and degree of internationalization, guided by resource-based theory and the relational view. Design/methodology/approach The chosen empirical context was the Canadian wine industry because wine producers are often involved in coopetition strategies and have varying degrees of internationalisation. Preliminary interview data were collected from 18 managers to shape the operationalisations. Then survey data were collected from 195 Canadian wine producers. After checking the statistical data for all major assessments of reliability and validity (together with common method variance), the hypothesised and control paths were tested through hierarchical regression. Findings A coopetition-oriented mindset had a positive and significant association with coopetition-oriented behaviours. Surprisingly, this link was negatively moderated by industry experience. Additionally, degree of internationalisation yielded a positive moderation effect. These moderators highlight situations where a coopetition-oriented mindset is (and is not) likely to manifest into coopetition activities. Practical implications If firms aim to engage in behavioural forms of coopetition, they should manage assumptions, values and beliefs associated with the advantages of collaborating with their competitors. Industry experience can limit the extent to which business’ coopetition-oriented mindsets manifest into coopetition-oriented behaviours. This could be explained by decision makers possessing information that discourages them from working with certain (untrustworthy) rivals because of the potential harmful effects on their performance. Companies should use their industry experience to avoid working with rival entities that will create negative outcomes, such as tensions (e.g., conflict, power imbalances and opportunistic behaviours), lost intellectual property and diluted competitive advantages. Nonetheless, industry experience might signify that there are more risks than rewards linked with these business-to-business marketing strategies. Higher levels of internationalisation can help firms to recognise that coopetition-oriented behaviours may lead to performance-enhancing opportunities in their overseas markets. Originality/value This investigation contributes to the business-to-business marketing literature with new evidence on how organisations can foster a coopetition-oriented mindset to engage in coopetition strategies. The negative moderation effect from industry experience highlights that knowledge of competitors’ activities can limit the extent to which coopetition-oriented behaviours are implemented. Moreover, the positive interaction effect from degree of internationalisation extends the growing body of knowledge pertaining to coopetition in an international arena. Collectively, these results show that while a coopetition-oriented mindset is a critical driver of coopetition-oriented behaviours, there are certain contingencies that can strengthen or weaken this association. Finally, by integrating resource-based theory and the relational view, this paper could explore the different forms of coopetition, in terms of organisation-wide mindsets and firm-level behaviours. This paper concludes with some managerial recommendations, alongside a series of limitations and avenues for future research.

Purpose The purpose of this study is to advance the understanding of resource orchestration in inter-firm partnerships that appropriately configure and align strategic cross-firm supply chain resources and capabilities generating synergies to deliver superior performance. Design/methodology/approach Applying the resource orchestration logic, supported by the relational view of competitive advantage, the study draws from an empirical analysis of survey data from 152 top-level executives of US manufacturing firms to investigate the effect of leveraging and coherently combining cross-firm supply chain resources with capabilities on operational performance. Findings The study underscores the view that appropriately orchestrated combinations of key partnership resources and capabilities as mechanisms for marketing strategy implementation, enhance performance. Specifically, research results suggest that complementary inter-firm resources and lean align, and similarly idiosyncratic resources and agility align synergistically to deliver superior operational performance outcomes. The results also accent partnership responses to intense competition, enabling enhanced operational performance. The findings thus enrich the understanding of the resource orchestration logic and strategy, making important theoretical contributions. Research limitations/implications As is typical in marketing and strategy research, the study research design has a cross-sectional framework, thus limiting insights on the resource orchestration dynamics that can otherwise be generated using a longitudinal design. Also, the resource orchestration stream is still nascent. Further research is needed to delineate the orchestration mechanisms that deliver on performance outcomes, especially in supply chains. Practical implications A key insight for supply chain and marketing managers is that close-knit inter-firm partnerships are critical for accessing idiosyncratic and complementary resources that can be configured and symbiotically aligned with market-facing agility and lean capabilities, respectively, to deliver market value. Proactive partnerships, especially in highly competitive and disruptive environments, enable mobilizing cross-firm resources and building appropriate matching combinations with capabilities to deliver on operational performance. Originality/value The study, guided by theory, advances the understanding of how key cross-firm resources and capabilities deliver performance gains. The key to competitive advantage and enhanced performance outcomes may lie in acquiring, leveraging and deploying appropriately matched resource-capability combinations. The present study investigates this proposition within the context of supply chain partnerships, focusing on cross-firm resources and capabilities.