The process of ending inter‐organizational cooperation

Abstract

Purpose -The purpose of this study is to increase the understanding of the process of ending inter-organizational cooperation by identifying the underlying reasons and stages of the ending. Design/methodology/approach -The empirical context of this study is a joint company amongst a group of competitors. The findings of this paper are based on a longitudinal case study within the construction industry in the region of Ostrobothnia in Finland. Interviews with managing directors were carried out in 1998, 2000 and 2004. Findings -The reasons for ending a co-operational relationship can be found on three levels: external, relational, and organizational. When taking into consideration the underlying reasons as well as time, the process consists of the following stages: pre-start, harmony, consideration, disengagement, communication and post-ending.Research limitations/implications -There are rare opportunities for generalizations, resulting in a risk of a fairly case specific study. Further research on this subject should focus on whether and under which circumstances do similar reasons and stages of the process exist. Practical implications -The process of ending inter-organizational cooperation may start at the very beginning of the cooperation. Although a stage of harmony exists the ending process may already have begun. There is a need to invest more resources in order to preserve cooperation. Originality/value -The empirical context of cooperation between competitors is both unique and important within the research of business relationship ending. A longitudinal perspective was used and the stages of the ending process are based on identified reasons for the ending. Thereby a holistic view of the ending of business relationships is presented.

The coopetition paradox and tension in coopetition at multiple levels

“…The coopetition literature usually explains tension in terms of role conflicts; 'tension' between cooperation and competition; or between the contradictions inherent in the nature of the coopetitive phenomenon; for instance, value creation versus value appropriation (cf. Wilhelm, 2011;Lacoste, 2012;Das & Teng, 2000;Tidström & Åhman, 2006). Similarly, in the paradox literature, tension is often interchanged with a paradox and described as a 'tension' between opposing dualities (cf.…”

An investigation of the cross-border supplier development process: Problems and implications in an emerging economy

“…Many models tend to contain a small number of stages, typically 4 or 5 and often posit a final decline stage. A deterioration/decline stage has been the subject of further distinct episodal study in the industrial marketing literature (Tidstrom and Ãhman, 2006;Tahtinen, 1998Tahtinen, , 2002.…”

“…Life-cycle models have received significant attention within business-to-business research (Dwyer, Schurr, & Oh, 1987;Eggert, Ulaga, & Schultz, 2006;Ford, 1980;Jap & Anderson, 2007;Tidstrom & Ãhman, 2006). In lifecycle models, the "trajectory to the end state is prefigured, and requires a specific historical sequence of events" ( Van de Ven, 1992, p.177).…”

Involving the process dimensions of time in case-based research

“…The creation of long-term relationships (Mason et al, 2006), networks (Persson & Steinby, 2006) and the integration of market processes (Windahl & Lakemond, 2006, Wagner & Hoegl, 2006 are examples of the latter. Thirdly, time and its process dimensions are particularly used to fully grasp the case contexts (e.g., Beverland, 2005a;Tidström & Åhman, 2006) and to a much lesser extent as a variable in the construction of causal models (e.g., Gupta, Cadeaux, & Woodside, 2005).…”

“…These can be characterized as upward with learning elements (Cheng et al, 2005) or forward with feedback loops (Lindberg-Repo & Grön-roos, 2004). Studies that take a more causal point of view tend to be more constant (e.g., Andersen, 2005) while studies that include time as a measurable construct, tend to be more linear (e.g., Tidström & Åhman, 2006).…”