IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-01637707.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Integration of coopetition paradox by individuals. A case study within the French banking industry

Author

Listed:
  • Sea Matilda Bez

    (DRM - Dauphine Recherches en Management - Université Paris Dauphine-PSL - PSL - Université Paris Sciences et Lettres - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, MRM - Montpellier Research in Management - UPVM - Université Paul-Valéry - Montpellier 3 - UPVD - Université de Perpignan Via Domitia - Groupe Sup de Co Montpellier (GSCM) - Montpellier Business School - UM - Université de Montpellier)

  • Anne-Sophie Fernandez

    (MRM - Montpellier Research in Management - UPVM - Université Paul-Valéry - Montpellier 3 - UPVD - Université de Perpignan Via Domitia - Groupe Sup de Co Montpellier (GSCM) - Montpellier Business School - UM - Université de Montpellier)

  • Frédéric Le Roy

    (MRM - Montpellier Research in Management - UPVM - Université Paul-Valéry - Montpellier 3 - UPVD - Université de Perpignan Via Domitia - Groupe Sup de Co Montpellier (GSCM) - Montpellier Business School - UM - Université de Montpellier)

  • Stéphanie Dameron

    (DRM - Dauphine Recherches en Management - Université Paris Dauphine-PSL - PSL - Université Paris Sciences et Lettres - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

Abstract

This study seeks to provide insights into the principle of "integration of coopetition paradox" considered as a managerial necessity to manage coopetition situations. Coopetition is a relationships filled with tensions related to the coexistence of two contradictory dimensions of cooperation and competition. To manage this situation, individuals need to integrate the coopetive paradox, that means to accept cognitively the paradox and to integrate both contradictory dimensions into their daily activities. The cognitive dimension of the integration principle and its consequences on managerial practices remain under investigated in previous literature. How do individuals perceive the coopetition paradox? What are the consequences of the integration principle on managerial practices? We aim to fill this gap by identifying how individuals are capable of integrating coopetition paradox and how do they deal with it in their daily management. Based on an in-depth study of an exemplar case of intra-firm coopetition we identify for the first time in the coopetitive literature to show and discuss different capacities of integration of the coopetition paradox between managers. According to the integration principle at the individual level, individuals should cognitively accept the coopetition paradox and behave correspondingly to their cognitive perception, emphasizing on both dimensions of cooperation and competition. However, in this study, we show that managerial practices can be disconnected from a cognitive acceptance of the paradox. Moreover, depending on the level of the cognitive integration, we point out that managerial tools are insufficient to efficiently manage coopetition and that all manager are not capable of integrate the paradox and handle coopetition situations.

Suggested Citation

  • Sea Matilda Bez & Anne-Sophie Fernandez & Frédéric Le Roy & Stéphanie Dameron, 2015. "Integration of coopetition paradox by individuals. A case study within the French banking industry," Post-Print hal-01637707, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-01637707
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-01637707
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-01637707/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Luo, Yadong, 2007. "A coopetition perspective of global competition," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 129-144, June.
    2. Anne-Sophie Fernandez & Fréderic Le Roy & Devi Gnyawali, 2014. "Sources and management of tension in co-opetition case evidence from telecommunications satellites manufacturing in Europe," Post-Print hal-02042458, HAL.
    3. Gnyawali, Devi R. & Park, Byung-Jin (Robert), 2011. "Co-opetition between giants: Collaboration with competitors for technological innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(5), pages 650-663, June.
    4. Wendy K. Smith & Michael L. Tushman, 2005. "Managing Strategic Contradictions: A Top Management Model for Managing Innovation Streams," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(5), pages 522-536, October.
    5. Smith, Wendy K. & Lewis, Marianne W., 2012. "Leadership Skills for Managing Paradoxes," Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Cambridge University Press, vol. 5(2), pages 227-231, June.
    6. Michael Gibbert & Winfried Ruigrok & Barbara Wicki, 2008. "What passes as a rigorous case study?," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(13), pages 1465-1474, December.
    7. Dodgson, Mark & Mathews, John & Kastelle, Tim & Hu, Mei-Chih, 2008. "The evolving nature of Taiwan's national innovation system: The case of biotechnology innovation networks," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 430-445, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. repec:dau:papers:123456789/15186 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Xue, Jinjie & Liu, Junqi & Geng, Zizhen & Yuan, Hongping & Chao, Lei, 2023. "Why and when do paradoxical management capabilities matter to paradoxical pressure? An empirical investigation of the role of coopetition," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    3. Anna Minà & Giovanni Battista Dagnino & Gianluca Vagnani, 2020. "An interpretive framework of the interplay of competition and cooperation," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 24(1), pages 1-35, March.
    4. Thuy Séran & Anne-Sophie Fernandez & Hervé Chappert, 2024. "Managing coopetition in multi-unit organizations: a management-control perspective," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 18(10), pages 2889-2924, October.
    5. Ritala, Paavo & Huizingh, Eelko & Almpanopoulou, Argyro & Wijbenga, Paul, 2017. "Tensions in R&D networks: Implications for knowledge search and integration," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 311-322.
    6. Anne-Sophie Fernandez & Frédéric Le Roy, 2016. "Why firms implement Coopetitive-Project Teams?," Post-Print hal-02101071, HAL.
    7. Sea Matilda Bez & Frédéric Le Roy, 2022. "Open Innovation and Coopetition," Post-Print hal-03920452, HAL.
    8. Raza-Ullah, Tatbeeq & Bengtsson, Maria & Gnyawali, Devi R., 2020. "The nature, consequences, and management of emotions in interfirm paradoxical relationships—A conceptual framework," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 36(4).
    9. Joanna Cygler & Włodzimierz Sroka & Marina Solesvik & Katarzyna Dębkowska, 2018. "Benefits and Drawbacks of Coopetition: The Roles of Scope and Durability in Coopetitive Relationships," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-24, August.
    10. Fernandez, Anne-Sophie & Chiambaretto, Paul & Chauvet, Mathieu & Engsig, Juliane, 2021. "Why do MNEs both make and coopete for innovation?," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    11. Vladimir Vanyushyn & Maria Bengtsson & Malin H. Näsholm & Håkan Boter, 2018. "International coopetition for innovation: Are the benefits worth the challenges?," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 12(2), pages 535-557, March.
    12. Patrycja Klimas & Ali Ashraf Ahmadian & Morteza Soltani & Meisam Shahbazi & Ali Hamidizadeh, 2023. "Coopetition, Where Do You Come From? Identification, Categorization, and Configuration of Theoretical Roots of Coopetition," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(1), pages 21582440221, January.
    13. Dorn, Stefanie & Schweiger, Bastian & Albers, Sascha, 2016. "Levels, phases and themes of coopetition: A systematic literature review and research agenda," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 484-500.
    14. Rouyre, Audrey & Fernandez, Anne-Sophie & Bruyaka, Olga, 2024. "Big problems require large collective actions: Managing multilateral coopetition in strategic innovation networks," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    15. Chiambaretto, Paul & Massé, David & Mirc, Nicola, 2019. "“All for One and One for All?” - Knowledge broker roles in managing tensions of internal coopetition: The Ubisoft case," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 584-600.
    16. Patrycja Klimas & Wojciech Czakon, 2018. "Organizational innovativeness and coopetition: a study of video game developers," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 12(2), pages 469-497, March.
    17. Eduard Gabriel Ceptureanu & Sebastian Ion Ceptureanu & Violeta Radulescu & Stefan Alexandru Ionescu, 2018. "What Makes Coopetition Successful? An Inter-Organizational Side Analysis on Coopetition Critical Success Factors in Oil and Gas Distribution Networks," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-20, December.
    18. Sebastian Ion Ceptureanu & Eduard Gabriel Ceptureanu & Marieta Olaru & Liviu Bogdan Vlad, 2018. "An Exploratory Study on Coopetitive Behavior in Oil and Gas Distribution," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-18, May.
    19. Carlos Devece & D. Enrique Ribeiro-Soriano & Daniel Palacios-Marqués, 2019. "Coopetition as the new trend in inter-firm alliances: literature review and research patterns," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 13(2), pages 207-226, April.
    20. Arman Avadikyan & Gilles Lambert & Christophe Lerch, 2016. "A Multi-Level Perspective on Ambidexterity: The Case of a Synchrotron Research Facility," Working Papers of BETA 2016-44, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    21. Kirsti Iivonen, 2018. "Defensive Responses to Strategic Sustainability Paradoxes: Have Your Coke and Drink It Too!," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 148(2), pages 309-327, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-01637707. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.