Suchergebnisse

PurposeMany firms engage in co-opetitive projects during which they have simultaneously competitive and collaborative relationships with many rivals in a complex network. A co-opetitive network offers them access to a large volume of resources and knowledge, for example, to support new markets and/or territories. So, does the network grow with the scope of the co-opetition project? The paper aims to discuss this issue.Design/methodology/approachAn empirical study of 106 French boating intermediate-sized enterprises (ETIs) and small and medium enterprises provides a descriptive and explanatory analysis of co-opetitive networks.FindingsThe results support this definition of a complex co-opetitive network only when the objectives of a firm are part of the geographical expansion of its activities. In contrast, these relations remain simple (dyadic) when a firm favours a strategy of diversifying its activities while maintaining its unique local geographical market.Research limitations/implicationsFirst, the work is based on a quantitative methodology, so is static. It would be interesting to analyze the process of the building of co-opetitive relationships and opportunism between rival firms, for example, through a qualitative study. Second, this work focusses on boating companies in France. It may be appropriate to consider the sanctions placed on the opportunism of foreign firms in co-opetition. Third, future work could increase understanding, not only of the nature of reprisals inflicted on individualistic co-opetitors, but also on the structure, objectives and results of these reprisals.Originality/valueThe study deepens our knowledge of the definition, composition and determinants of co-opetitive networks.

Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to promote decision-making structures between the customer and the supplier in a highly uncertain environment. This phenomenon of demand-supply chain synchronisation includes sharing of high-quality and timely demand and supply information in order to improve the quality and speed of decision-making.


Design/methodology/approach
The study was carried out as an abductive case study, which started from empirical observations that did not match the prior theoretical framework. Through abductive reasoning and empirical experiments, the prior framework was extended to a new synchronisation model and tools that better accommodate the observed need.


Findings
A new co-innovation toolbox was developed to create common understanding of demand-supply chain synchronisation between the customer and the supplier. The toolbox includes Demand Visibility Point-Demand Penetration Point, Supply Visibility Point–Supply Penetration Point and Integrative Synchronisation tools.


Research limitations/implications
The study extends the current models and tools of demand-supply chain synchronisation. With the new toolbox, the development needs of decision-making structures can be identified more comprehensively than with the current tools.


Practical implications
The developed visual toolbox helps partners create a common understanding of problems and development possibilities in demand-supply chain synchronisation in a highly uncertain environment. Common understanding is a starting point for changing decision-making structures to improve the overall performance of a demand-supply chain.


Originality/value
The new toolbox is both more comprehensive and more detailed than the previous tools.

In response to the global fight against environmental deterioration and resource shortage, many governments call on firms to implement green innovation strategies. However, for most small and medium-sized firms, the high cost of green innovation makes it difficult to achieve green goals, causing the need for a growing number of firms to cooperate with their supply chain partners on green innovations. Thus, this study explores, from a value co-creation perspective, how supply chain partners share the investment in, and benefits of, green innovation, assuring their long-term cooperation. Based on a three-level manufacturing supply chain, this paper proposes three different types of green co-creation strategies (i.e., the manufacturer and its supplier, the manufacturer and its competitor, the manufacturer and its retailer). We set the mechanism of co-creation to share the cost of green investment and consider the impact of co-creation on the sales of supply chain partners. Then, by constructing the value functions of three co-creation strategies and proving the concavity of these functions, the findings indicate that different co-creation strategies can indeed improve the firm&rsquo ; s profit in a certain range and achieve a different maximum value in a certain green investment sharing point. This study enriches the literature on green co-creation in supply chains by combing green investment sharing strategies among supply chain partners with value co-creation. In addition, this study provides manufacturers with guidelines on how to share green costs and choose a green co-creation strategy in different operational environments.

PurposeThe paper seeks to understand and analyse how integration changes in one supply chain are influenced by the overlap between chainsDesign/methodology/approachThe paper discusses the concepts of supply chain, firm network, overlap and integration. It takes a dynamic perspective focusing on continuing processes of change in the degree of integration within and between networks. The three examples are based on more than 70 interviews over a long period of time of firms involved in the transportation, automotive and construction industries.FindingsThe paper finds that the overlap between supply chains in terms of actors, resources and activities could seriously delay, hinder and increase costs to the process when changing the degree of integration in one chain. Therefore, supply chain myopia might lead to an increase in the total costs of a firm. Further, there is a trade‐off between the costs of integration in the focal chain and increasing costs arising from decreased integration in overlapping supply chains. Failure to consider the negative effects and the resistance caused by delays and dissolving relationships within overlapping supply chains can be detrimental. The overlap between chains can be both positive and negative, and can be reversed over time.Research limitations/implicationsThe research is limited to three examples and the interaction between two supply chains in each case. Since interdependencies might exist between several supply chains, the effects of change could have implications for more than one other supply chain.Practical implicationsWhen changing existing or developing supply chains for new businesses, firms need to take into consideration the effects and reactions of other chains. Integration between two chains might facilitate the development of business but may also actually hinder its future development.Originality/valueThe interdependencies between supply chains imply that strong pressure towards supply chain integration focusing on one chain, in literature and practice, has to be questioned for the single firm. Another specific value is the importance of existing chains for the development of new businesses.