The yin and yang nature of coopetition activities: non-linear effects and the moderating role of competitive intensity for internationalised firms
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose This paper draws upon the Yin and Yang concept of Chinese philosophy within a Western context to examine coopetition, namely, the interplay between cooperation and competition. Although coopetition activities should positively affect company performance, earlier research involving this relationship has typically been linear in nature and without moderating factors. Consequently, underpinned by resource-based theory and the relational view, the purpose of this investigation is to examine the non-linear (inverted U-shaped) link between coopetition and company performance under the moderating role of competitive intensity. Design/methodology/approach Collection of survey data involved a sample of 101 internationalising wine producers in New Zealand. Following a check of the statistical data for all major assessments of reliability and validity (together with common method variance), testing the research hypotheses and control paths took place through hierarchical regression. Furthermore, 20 semi-structured interviews helped explain the underlying mechanisms behind the quantitative results. Findings Coopetition had a non-linear (inverted U-shaped) relationship with market performance. Surprisingly, competitive intensity yielded a negative moderation effect. The mixed methods results highlighted that firms must strike an effective balance between the paradoxical forces of cooperativeness and competitiveness across their product-market strategies. Originality/value This investigation contributes to the existing literature by developing and testing a conceptual framework examining the nature of the relationship between coopetition activities and market performance – using non-linear (inverted U-shaped) and moderating effects. It addresses a debate between two schools-of-thought concerning the impact of competitive intensity on the coopetition paradox. Additionally, this study helps to explain the coopetition construct through the Yin and Yang concept to highlight how the paradoxical forces of cooperativeness and competitiveness can create harmful outcomes for organisations if they do not manage them effectively (across domestic and international markets).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it