When entrepreneurs instigate institutional change through coopetition: The case of winemakers in south of France

Abstract

Winemakers in South France combine contingently institutional logics to achieve economic performance. Entrepreneurs who decide to cooperate with their competitors must manage four phases of “coopetition”: launch, formalization, protection, and reinforcement. They engage in the coopetition process by referring to a professional logic that becomes dominant, and they complete the process by fostering a community logic that is combined with the professional logic. Identity and legitimacy are the key elements that entrepreneurs segregate and blend, which entails new combinations in the respective influential power of state logic, professional logic and community logic.

Membership in winemaking cooperatives: Motivations and barriers

“…The loss of entrepreneurial freedom, as developed by Planas (2016), Nilsson et al (2017), and Granata et al (2019), is the most substantial barrier for independent winegrowers to join a cooperative. However, cooperative participants do not feel having less freedom; only one of them spontaneously cited this issue as a drawback, and they assigned low importance to the question of entrepreneurial freedom.…”

“…These motivations may belong to other theoretical frameworks, such as institutional theories. Family links are sources of legitimacy, loyalty, identity, and reputation (Granata et al, 2019).…”

“…Winegrowers can decide to join a cooperative because they know members of this cooperative: networks influence their enrolment (Planas, 2016). Benefiting from the advantages of networks can motivate membership in winemaking cooperatives: networks provide complementary skills and resources to carry out projects (Granata et al, 2019; Touzard, 2011). Cooperatives are a way to develop skills: by applying cooperative principles, they provide education, training, and information to their members.…”

“…This section is theoretically grounded on the work of Fulton (1999) and the mutual incentives theory that Birchall and Simmons (2004) proposed for consumer cooperatives. Other theoretical frameworks could have been mobilized, such as institutional change theories, like in the study of Granata et al (2019), or the resource‐based view. The model proposed by Birchall and Simmons combines an individualistic approach, where motivations are based on individual rewards, cost reduction, learning experience, and social life; a collectivistic approach, where motivations are linked to shared goals, shared values, and a sense of community.…”

Value creation, appropriation and destruction in coopetitive relationships among micro-firms

“…We use an in-depth case study on the small French wine appellation "Côtes d'Auvergne", classified since 2010 as an AOC ("Appellation d'Origine Contrôlée", which in France is the most demanding label among the Protected Designations of Origin). Moreover, the wine sector is particularly well suited for studying coopetition (Crick, 2018) and has started to receive increasing attention from scholars (Cusin & Loubaresse, 2018;Dana & Granata, 2013;Granata, Géraudel, & D'Armagnac, 2019;Granata, Lasch, Le Roy, & Dana, 2018;Spielmann & Williams, 2016). This specific appellation is characterised by a modestly sized cultivated area occupied by micro-firms, the existence of a relatively large cooperative cellar, but also a weak brand image inherited from the (fairly recent) past, when the wine there was produced without any show or ambition, almost exclusively for local consumers.…”