IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-02051335.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Implementing the right project structure to achieve coopetitive innovation projects

Author

Listed:
  • 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)

  • Paul Chiambaretto

    (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, Groupe Sup de Co Montpellier (GSCM) - Montpellier Business School, Université Paris-Saclay)

Abstract

This research focuses on the project structure used by coopetitors to achieve common innovation projects. Scholars have recently identified an original but complex project structure that they call the Coopetitive Project Team (CPT). However, other project structures can also be implemented by coopetitors to achieve innovation. Therefore, we address the following question: for which types of innovation projects is CPT appropriate? We argue that coopetitors need to use CPT for high-risk and high-cost projects when the aim is to develop radical innovation. CPT allows coopetitors not only to develop innovation capabilities through close resource and knowledge sharing but also to manage the risk of opportunism. Conversely, coopetitors should use another project structure, Separated Project Teams (SPTs), for low-cost and low-risk projects when the aim is to develop incremental innovation. The SPT design allows coopetitors both to achieve the goal of the project and to minimize the risk of opportunism. To confirm our assumptions, we studied the project portfolios of Airbus and Thales, two firms in the space satellite industry. Our findings confirm that coopetitors should implement CPTs to handle innovation projects that are costly, risky and highly innovative. CPTs permit the sharing of knowledge and the management of high opportunism risk, both of which are necessary to achieve radical innovation. Conversely, coopetitors rely on SPTs for low-cost projects that require a low degree of knowledge sharing, thus avoiding the risk of opportunism in achieving their incremental innovation objectives.

Suggested Citation

  • Anne Sophie Fernandez & Frédéric Le Roy & Paul Chiambaretto, 2018. "Implementing the right project structure to achieve coopetitive innovation projects," Post-Print hal-02051335, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-02051335
    DOI: 10.1016/j.lrp.2017.07.009
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. 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).
    2. Palmié, Maximilian & Miehé, Lucas & Oghazi, Pejvak & Parida, Vinit & Wincent, Joakim, 2022. "The evolution of the digital service ecosystem and digital business model innovation in retail: The emergence of meta-ecosystems and the value of physical interactions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    3. Fernandez, Anne-Sophie & Chiambaretto, Paul & Chauvet, Mathieu & Engsig, Juliane, 2021. "Why do MNEs both make and coopete for innovation?," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    4. sari, Ade Indah, 2021. "Social EntrepreneursandInnovation for the Unemployment," OSF Preprints eynqs, Center for Open Science.
    5. Le Roy, Frédéric & Robert, Frank & Hamouti, Rizlane, 2022. "Vertical vs horizontal coopetition and the market performance of product innovation: An empirical study of the video game industry," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    6. Xie, Qiuhao & Gao, Ying & Xia, Nini & Zhang, Shuibo & Tao, Guowu, 2023. "Coopetition and organizational performance outcomes: A meta-analysis of the main and moderator effects," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    7. Paul Chiambaretto & David Massé & Nicola Mirc, 2019. "“All for One and One for All?” - Knowledge broker roles in managing tensions of internal coopetition: The Ubisoft case," Post-Print hal-02104540, HAL.
    8. Frédéric Le Roy & Sea Matilda Bez & Johanna Gast, 2021. "Unpacking the management of Oligo-coopetition strategies in the absence of a moderating third party," Post-Print hal-03349671, HAL.
    9. Ming-Chao Wang & Ja-Shen Chen, 2022. "Driving coopetition strategy to service innovation: the moderating role of coopetition recognition," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 16(5), pages 1471-1501, July.
    10. Farazi, Mohammad Saleh & Chiambaretto, Paul & Fernandez, Anne-Sophie & Gopalakrishnan, Shanthi, 2024. "Unbundling the impact of current and future competition on cooperation in coopetition projects for innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(6).
    11. Lafuente, Esteban & Vaillant, Yancy & Rabetino, Rodrigo, 2023. "Digital disruption of optimal co-innovation configurations," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    12. Danilo Magno Marchiori & Silvio Popadiuk & Emerson Wagner Mainardes & Ricardo Gouveia Rodrigues, 2021. "Innovativeness: a bibliometric vision of the conceptual and intellectual structures and the past and future research directions," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(1), pages 55-92, January.
    13. Czakon, Wojciech & Niemand, Thomas & Gast, Johanna & Kraus, Sascha & Frühstück, Lisa, 2020. "Designing coopetition for radical innovation: An experimental study of managers' preferences for developing self-driving electric cars," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).

    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-02051335. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.