Coopetition For The Greater Good. Exploratory study of coopetition management mechanisms in the pharmaceutical industry

The pharmaceutical industry has experienced a remarkable surge in "coopetition," wherein rival companies join forces to pursue shared objectives, leading to a dynamic business environment fraught with tensions resulting from the coexistence of strong, contradictory forces of competition and cooperation. Despite its growing importance, research examining coopetition implementation and management, especially considering contextual influences shaping its dynamics, remains limited. This study aims to fill this gap by exploring the mechanisms of coopetition implementation and management in the pharmaceutical industry, focusing on the interrelation of different elements of coopetition execution and the contextual environment. Adopting an interpretivist philosophy and a qualitative, exploratory approach, this research engaged with industry insiders to explore how large, global pharmaceutical companies effectively manage dyadic coopetition. Key findings highlight the significance of the formation stage in mitigating tensions throughout the coopetition lifecycle. The operationalization stage emphasizes emotional and analytical capabilities across organizational levels, in addition to the balancing capability manifested through various coopetition management principles identified in the literature: separation, integration, arbitration, and a novel variant of co-management principles, alongside a unique approach - unilateral control, all complemented by supportive organizational adaptations. Moreover, diplomacy and learning capabilities were identified as crucial components of coopetition capabilities. The termination stage brings persisting tensions due to legal pressures and competitive vigilance. The research also brings to light the complex interplay between legal and regulatory institutional pressures and coopetition dualities. The research complements and contributes to coopetition management literature by proposing a multi-level, multi-stage view of tensions. It offers a nuanced understanding of how these tensions are navigated throughout the drug development cycle and highlights the importance of addressing the often-overlooked termination stage of coopetition. Furthermore, it highlights the complex relationship between institutional pressures and dualities. Overall, the study provides valuable insights into the nuanced mechanisms employed by large pharmaceutical companies to holistically manage and maintain balanced coopetition.