Competitor Collaboration Before a Crisis

Bez, Sea Matilda; Chesbrough, Henry

doi:10.1080/08956308.2020.1733889

Cited by 12 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Another significant research stream focuses on knowledge strategy in inter-organizational settings (Wang et al , 2020; Paoloni et al , 2020; Matilda Bez and Chesbrough, 2020; Yadav et al , 2020; Fallatah, 2018; Scuotto et al , 2017; Del Giudice and Maggioni, 2014; Teece, 2007). This research recognizes that knowledge creation (Mehralian et al , 2018) can be collective, involving external actors.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dispersed knowledge management in ecosystems

Gomes

Faria

Borini

et al. 2021

JKM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Accessing and sharing dispersed knowledge in ecosystems is neither easy nor automatic. In ecosystems, focal firms should purposely create the right conditions and act to deal with dispersed knowledge. This study aims to investigate how focal firms manage dispersed knowledge in ecosystems characterized by a set of autonomous, heterogeneous, yet interdependent actors involved in experimentation under uncertainty. Design/methodology/approach Following a conceptual framework based on preceding literature, this study conducted a broad qualitative case study of 6 firms and 12 projects, with 43 semi-structured interviews to identify the patterns of actions associated with dispersed knowledge management (KM) in ecosystems. This paper combines coding and multiple case comparisons to examine the processes and strategies used by the firms to strategically manage dispersed knowledge in ecosystems. Findings This paper proposes a framework that articulates a new type of orchestration (dispersed knowledge orchestration) and offers a new set of dispersed knowledge strategies (transfer, modularity and circular) for ecosystems. Practical implications Innovation and knowledge managers play the roles of dispersed knowledge orchestrators. The study offers guidance on how focal firms should carefully use a particular set of approaches (e.g. integrative theorization) including a portfolio of dispersed knowledge strategies in ecosystems. Originality/value Current literature on KM and ecosystem management offers a limited understanding of how organizations manage dispersed knowledge in ecosystems. The research provides three major original contributions. First, the framework contributes to broadening the current understanding of ecosystem orchestration by identifying the micro-foundations of dispersed knowledge orchestration: integrative theorization, nurturing distributed sensemaking and a new chapter for ecosystem governance (i.e. dispersed knowledge governance). Moreover, the framework proposes a new type of strategy, the dispersed knowledge strategy. Finally, by exploring the interplay between the micro-foundations of dispersed knowledge orchestration and dispersed knowledge strategy, the results contribute to a multi-level approach in the field.

show abstract

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dispersed knowledge management in ecosystems

Gomes

Faria

Borini

et al. 2021

JKM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In essence, we shift the focus away from firm-led efforts to change or nurture ecosystems to the potential role of CSPs in achieving this. While past research has acknowledged the impact of partnerships and alliances between multiple stakeholders on innovation ecosystems (Bez and Chesbrough, 2020), we specifically highlight the vital role of places and expand on the notion of ecosystem health and how it is tied with placial quality. We suggest four critical mechanisms for CSPs, especially multistakeholder partnerships, that affect the dynamics between innovation ecosystems and places.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The role of cross‐sector partnerships in the dynamics between places and innovation ecosystems

Dzhengiz

Patala

2023

R & D Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The dynamics between places and innovation ecosystems and the role that cross‐sector partnerships (CSPs) can play in regenerating places and in revitalizing innovation ecosystems remain poorly theorized. In this study we use two cases – Humber (UK) and Southwest Finland – to develop a conceptual model that demonstrates the vicious and virtuous dynamics between places and innovation ecosystems. We show that CSPs can act as herding spaces – arenas where actors from different organizations get together to address a common purpose and connect with the institutional context – and alter these vicious and virtuous dynamics. Specifically, our findings shed light on four mechanisms that enable CSPs to act as herding spaces and so to help break away from the vicious (vitalizing role) and reinforce the virtuous (nurturing role) dynamics between places and innovation ecosystems: recognition of place‐based challenges, improvement or utilization of place attachment, development of purpose ecosystems, and direct engagement in place regeneration activities.

show abstract

“…In exploring coopetitive open innovation, the open innovation research started by exploring R&D collaboration (Bogers, 2011;Cano-Kollmann et al, 2018). The form taken later could also be R&D consortia (Olk & West, 2020;Rouyre & Fernandez, 2019) or a pooled R&D (West & Gallagher, 2006), open standards (Dittrich & Duysters, 2007;Simcoe & Rotman, 2006) and industry's exploration of best practice in technology risk management (Bez & Chesbrough, 2020). The origin of these specificities of open innovation between competitors relative to none competitors is strongly related to the knowledge sharing and protection tension that characterized the collaboration between competitors (Bogers, 2011).…”

Section: Coopetitive Open Innovationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Open Innovation and Coopetition

Bez,

Le Roy

2024

The Oxford Handbook of Open Innovation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While the open innovation literature has acknowledged competitors as a source of innovative knowledge, competitors have been relatively neglected relative to other sources such as universities, suppliers, customers, and employees. Research in open innovation increasingly includes this counter-intuitive partner and acknowledges that the drivers and management of the open innovation practice with competitors are different from those with a non-competitive partner. In parallel and independently from the open innovation literature, research on coopetition and coopetitive innovation has grown and explored when, why, and how a competitor is a relevant partner for innovation. These frameworks develop by the coopetition literature brought into the open innovation research to generate new insights and a whole research agenda. The main insight is: coopetitive open innovation, defined as open innovation with competitors embracing a “coopetitive mindset” and specific managerial principles (i.e., cooperation and competition, should be simultaneously pursued and the competition dimension should not be reduced).

show abstract

Competitor Collaboration Before a Crisis

Cited by 12 publications

References 11 publications

Dispersed knowledge management in ecosystems

Dispersed knowledge management in ecosystems

The role of cross‐sector partnerships in the dynamics between places and innovation ecosystems

Open Innovation and Coopetition

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About