IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/stratm/v42y2021i4p710-740.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The evolution of cooperation in the face of conflict: Evidence from the innovation ecosystem for mobile telecom standards development

Author

Listed:
  • Stephen L. Jones
  • Aija Leiponen
  • Gurneeta Vasudeva

Abstract

Research Summary How does interfirm cooperation in innovation ecosystems evolve in the face of conflict? We theorize that conflict propels firms to reconfigure cooperative relationships while maintaining and even increasing cooperation with aggressors because cooperation is the primary mechanism for value creation in such ecosystems. To empirically test our arguments, we study patent litigation and subsequent cooperation between mobile telecommunications firms within the 3GPP standards development organization. We find evidence of a dual cooperative strategy in the face of conflict: while cooperation increases between litigants, defendants also enhance cooperation with others to steer standards away from aggressors. We also highlight the contingent roles of technological complementarities and relational position underpinning cooperation after conflict. Our findings demonstrate that in innovation ecosystems, cooperation with adversaries persists despite conflict. Managerial Summary Firms in innovation‐driven industries cooperate to develop interoperability standards and compatible technologies. Yet, cooperative firms may disagree about what constitutes fair, reasonable, and non‐discriminatory terms for licensing intellectual property. Thus, conflict and patent litigation arise even as firms cooperate to build technologies and industry standards. We find that in innovation ecosystems, firms commonly increase cooperative efforts in response to conflict. Less‐connected firms or those with valuable complementary technologies will likely expand cooperation than well‐connected firms or technological competitors. Well‐connected firms may pursue alternative cooperative opportunities. We suggest that defendant firms' managers can adopt a dual cooperative strategy: (a) identify private and shared benefits from the joint development of complementary technologies with aggressors and (b) invest in alternative technological partnerships to influence the direction of future standards development.

Suggested Citation

  • Stephen L. Jones & Aija Leiponen & Gurneeta Vasudeva, 2021. "The evolution of cooperation in the face of conflict: Evidence from the innovation ecosystem for mobile telecom standards development," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(4), pages 710-740, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:stratm:v:42:y:2021:i:4:p:710-740
    DOI: 10.1002/smj.3244
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.3244
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/smj.3244?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lanjouw, Jean O & Schankerman, Mark, 2001. "Characteristics of Patent Litigation: A Window on Competition," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 32(1), pages 129-151, Spring.
    2. Gary Dushnitsky & J. Myles Shaver, 2009. "Limitations to interorganizational knowledge acquisition: the paradox of corporate venture capital," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(10), pages 1045-1064, October.
    3. Tarun Khanna, 1998. "The Scope of Alliances," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 9(3), pages 340-355, June.
    4. Hirshleifer, Jack, 1991. "The Technology of Conflict as an Economic Activity," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(2), pages 130-134, May.
    5. Jacobides, Michael G. & Knudsen, Thorbjorn & Augier, Mie, 2006. "Benefiting from innovation: Value creation, value appropriation and the role of industry architectures," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(8), pages 1200-1221, October.
    6. Marc Rysman & Timothy Simcoe, 2008. "Patents and the Performance of Voluntary Standard-Setting Organizations," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(11), pages 1920-1934, November.
    7. Rocco Macchiavello & Ameet Morjaria, 2015. "The Value of Relationships: Evidence from a Supply Shock to Kenyan Rose Exports," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(9), pages 2911-2945, September.
    8. Teece, David J., 2018. "Profiting from innovation in the digital economy: Enabling technologies, standards, and licensing models in the wireless world," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(8), pages 1367-1387.
    9. Joseph Farrell & Timothy Simcoe, 2012. "Choosing the rules for consensus standardization," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 43(2), pages 235-252, June.
    10. Shahzad (Shaz) Ansari & Raghu Garud & Arun Kumaraswamy, 2016. "The disruptor's dilemma: TiVo and the U.S. television ecosystem," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(9), pages 1829-1853, September.
    11. Fleming, Lee & Sorenson, Olav, 2001. "Technology as a complex adaptive system: evidence from patent data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(7), pages 1019-1039, August.
    12. Justus Baron & Daniel F. Spulber, 2018. "Technology Standards and Standard Setting Organizations: Introduction to the Searle Center Database," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(3), pages 462-503, September.
    13. Joseph Farrell & Garth Saloner, 1988. "Coordination through Committees and Markets," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 19(2), pages 235-252, Summer.
    14. Oxley, Joanne E, 1997. "Appropriability Hazards and Governance in Strategic Alliances: A Transaction Cost Approach," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 13(2), pages 387-409, October.
    15. Neil Gandal & Michael Kende & Rafael Rob, 2000. "The Dynamics of Technological Adoption in Hardware/Software Systems: The Case of Compact Disc Players," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 31(1), pages 43-61, Spring.
    16. Iacus, Stefano M. & King, Gary & Porro, Giuseppe, 2011. "Multivariate Matching Methods That Are Monotonic Imbalance Bounding," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 106(493), pages 345-361.
    17. Ron Adner & Rahul Kapoor, 2010. "Value creation in innovation ecosystems: how the structure of technological interdependence affects firm performance in new technology generations," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(3), pages 306-333, March.
    18. Constance E. Helfat, 1994. "Evolutionary Trajectories in Petroleum Firm R&D," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 40(12), pages 1720-1747, December.
    19. Birgul Arslan, 2018. "The interplay of competitive and cooperative behavior and differential benefits in alliances," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(12), pages 3222-3246, December.
    20. Josh Lerner & Jean Tirole, 2015. "Standard-Essential Patents," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 123(3), pages 547-586.
    21. Frank T. Rothaermel & Warren Boeker, 2008. "Old technology meets new technology: complementarities, similarities, and alliance formation," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(1), pages 47-77, January.
    22. Luis Diestre & Nandini Rajagopalan, 2012. "Are all ‘sharks’ dangerous? new biotechnology ventures and partner selection in R&D alliances," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(10), pages 1115-1134, October.
    23. Shane, Scott & Somaya, Deepak, 2007. "The effects of patent litigation on university licensing efforts," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 63(4), pages 739-755, August.
    24. Scott Shane & Deepak Somaya, 2007. "The Effects of Patent Litigation on University Licensing Efforts," NBER Chapters, in: Academic Science and Entrepreneurship: Dual Engines of Growth, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    25. Jin Li & Niko Matouschek, 2013. "Managing Conflicts in Relational Contracts," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(6), pages 2328-2351, October.
    26. Pisano, Gary P, 1989. "Using Equity Participation to Support Exchange: Evidence from the Biotechnology Industry," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 5(1), pages 109-126, Spring.
    27. Ramon Casadesus-Masanell & David B. Yoffie, 2007. "Wintel: Cooperation and Conflict," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(4), pages 584-598, April.
    28. Gurneeta Vasudeva & Hildy Teegen, 2011. "Why Do Private Firms Invest in Public Goods?," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Alfred Marcus & Paul Shrivastava & Sanjay Sharma & Stefano Pogutz (ed.), Cross-Sector Leadership for the Green Economy, chapter 0, pages 263-276, Palgrave Macmillan.
    29. Ram Ranganathan & Anindya Ghosh & Lori Rosenkopf, 2018. "Competition–cooperation interplay during multifirm technology coordination: The effect of firm heterogeneity on conflict and consensus in a technology standards organization," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(12), pages 3193-3221, December.
    30. Lee Fleming, 2001. "Recombinant Uncertainty in Technological Search," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 117-132, January.
    31. Justus Baron & Kirti Gupta, 2018. "Unpacking 3GPP standards," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(3), pages 433-461, September.
    32. Timothy Simcoe, 2012. "Standard Setting Committees: Consensus Governance for Shared Technology Platforms," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(1), pages 305-336, February.
    33. Anne Layne-Farrar & A. Jorge Padilla & Richard Schmalensee, 2007. "Pricing Patents for Licensing in Standard Setting Organizations: Making Sense of FRAND Commitments," Working Papers wp2007_0702, CEMFI.
    34. Timothy S. Simcoe & Stuart J.H. Graham & Maryann P. Feldman, 2009. "Competing on Standards? Entrepreneurship, Intellectual Property, and Platform Technologies," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(3), pages 775-816, September.
    35. Helfat, Constance E. & Raubitschek, Ruth S., 2018. "Dynamic and integrative capabilities for profiting from innovation in digital platform-based ecosystems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(8), pages 1391-1399.
    36. Elinor Ostrom, 2000. "Collective Action and the Evolution of Social Norms," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 14(3), pages 137-158, Summer.
    37. Yongwook Paik & Feng Zhu, 2016. "The Impact of Patent Wars on Firm Strategy: Evidence from the Global Smartphone Industry," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(6), pages 1397-1416, December.
    38. Talia Bar & Aija Leiponen, 2014. "Committee Composition and Networking in Standard Setting: The Case of Wireless Telecommunications," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(1), pages 1-23, March.
    39. Johnston, Jason Scott & Waldfogel, Joel, 2002. "Does Repeat Play Elicit Cooperation? Evidence from Federal Civil Litigation," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 31(1), pages 39-60, January.
    40. Pierre Dussauge & Bernard Garrette & Will Mitchell, 2000. "Learning from competing partners: outcomes and durations of scale and link alliances in Europe, North America and Asia," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(2), pages 99-126, February.
    41. Gurneeta Vasudeva & Elizabeth A. Alexander & Stephen L. Jones, 2015. "Institutional Logics and Interorganizational Learning in Technological Arenas: Evidence from Standard-Setting Organizations in the Mobile Handset Industry," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(3), pages 830-846, June.
    42. Vasudeva, Gurneeta & Leiponen, Aija & Jones, Stephen, 2020. "Dear Enemy: The Dynamics of Conflict and Cooperation in Open Innovation Ecosystems," Strategic Management Review, now publishers, vol. 1(2), pages 355-379, June.
    43. King, Gary & Nielsen, Richard, 2019. "Why Propensity Scores Should Not Be Used for Matching," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 27(4), pages 435-454, October.
    44. Deepak Somaya, 2003. "Strategic determinants of decisions not to settle patent litigation," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(1), pages 17-38, January.
    45. Fudenberg, Drew & Gilbert, Richard & Stiglitz, Joseph & Tirole, Jean, 1983. "Preemption, leapfrogging and competition in patent races," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 3-31, June.
    46. Milgrom, Paul & Roberts, John, 1990. "The Economics of Modern Manufacturing: Technology, Strategy, and Organization," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(3), pages 511-528, June.
    47. Bernard Garrette & Pierre Dussauge & Will Mitchell, 2000. "Learning from competing partners: outcomes and durations of scale and link alliances in Europe, North America and Asia," Post-Print hal-00458812, HAL.
    48. Rosemarie Ham Ziedonis, 2004. "Don't Fence Me In: Fragmented Markets for Technology and the Patent Acquisition Strategies of Firms," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(6), pages 804-820, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Jan Frederic Nerbel & Markus Kreutzer, 2023. "Digital platform ecosystems in flux: From proprietary digital platforms to wide-spanning ecosystems," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 33(1), pages 1-20, December.
    2. Schott, Lennart & Schaefer, Kerstin J., 2023. "Acceptance of Chinese latecomers' technological contributions in international ICT standardization — The role of origin, experience and collaboration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(1).
    3. Diestre, Luis & Lumineau, Fabrice & Durand, Rodolphe, 2023. "Litigate or let it go? Multi-market contact and IP infringement-litigation dynamics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(6).
    4. Schott, Lennart & Schaefer, Kerstin, 2023. "Acceptance of Chinese latecomers' technological contributions in international ICT standardization — the role of origin, experience and collaboration," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 116987, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    5. Jarryd Daymond & Eric Knight & Maria Rumyantseva & Steven Maguire, 2023. "Managing ecosystem emergence and evolution: Strategies for ecosystem architects," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(4), pages 1-27, April.
    6. Heikkilä, Jussi & Rissanen, Julius & Ali-Vehmas, Timo, 2023. "Coopetition, standardization and general purpose technologies: A framework and an application," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(4).
    7. Hao, Xinyu & Liu, Guangfu & Zhang, Xiaoling & Dong, Liang, 2022. "The coevolution mechanism of stakeholder strategies in the recycled resources industry innovation ecosystem: the view of evolutionary game theory," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    8. Kang, Byeongwoo & Bekkers, Rudi, 2022. "The determinants of parallel invention : Measuring the role of information sharing and personal interaction between inventors," IIR Working Paper 22-06, Institute of Innovation Research, Hitotsubashi University.
    9. Rikard Lindgren & Fatemeh Saadatmand & Ulrike Schultze, 2023. "Compatibility promotion for standard development within shared platforms: A rising tide does not lift all boats," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 33(1), pages 1-10, December.

    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. Cameron D. Miller & Puay Khoon Toh, 2022. "Complementary components and returns from coordination within ecosystems via standard setting," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(3), pages 627-662, March.
    2. Wen, Wen & Forman, Chris & Jarvenpaa, Sirkka L, 2022. "The effects of technology standards on complementor innovations: Evidence from the IETF," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(6).
    3. Justus Baron & Jorge Contreras & Martin Husovec & Pierre Larouche, 2019. "Making the Rules: The Governance of Standard Development Organizations and their Policies on Intellectual Property Rights," JRC Research Reports JRC115004, Joint Research Centre.
    4. Baron, Justus, 2020. "Counting standard contributions to measure the value of patent portfolios - A tale of apples and oranges," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(3).
    5. Justus Baron & Daniel F. Spulber, 2018. "Technology Standards and Standard Setting Organizations: Introduction to the Searle Center Database," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(3), pages 462-503, September.
    6. Lee, Jong-Seon & Kim, Nami & Bae, Zong-Tae, 2019. "The effects of patent litigation involving NPEs on firms’ patent strategies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).
    7. Pierre Larouche & Florian Schuett, 2019. "Repeated interaction in standard setting," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(3), pages 488-509, June.
    8. Gandal, Neil & Regibeau, Pierre, 2013. "SSOs: Current Policy Issues and Empirical Evidence," Foerder Institute for Economic Research Working Papers 275825, Tel-Aviv University > Foerder Institute for Economic Research.
    9. Cesare Righi & Timothy Simcoe, 2020. "Patenting Inventions or Inventing Patents? Continuation Practice at the USPTO," NBER Working Papers 27686, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Justus Baron & Tim Pohlmann, 2018. "Mapping standards to patents using declarations of standard‐essential patents," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(3), pages 504-534, September.
    11. Deng, Xin & Li, Qian Cher & Mateut, Simona, 2022. "Participation in setting technology standards and the implied cost of equity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(5).
    12. Fu, Xiao & Tan, Guofu & Wang, Jin, 2023. "Policy orientations and technology choices in standards wars," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    13. Wen Wen & Chris Forman & Sirkka Jarvenpaa, 2014. "How Do Open Standards Influence Inventive Activity? Evidence from the IETF," Working Papers 14-20, NET Institute.
    14. Reuer, Jeffrey & Devarakonda, S.V., 2015. "Mechanisms of hybrid governance : Administrative committees in non-equity alliances," Other publications TiSEM 063d9ccc-59c8-4e76-a77d-8, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    15. Cesare Righi & Timothy Simcoe, 2022. "Patenting inventions or inventing patents? Continuation practice at the USPTO," Economics Working Papers 1820, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    16. Cesare Righi & Timothy Simcoe, 2022. "Patenting Inventions or Inventing Patents? Continuation Practice at the USPTO," Working Papers 1320, Barcelona School of Economics.
    17. Shivaram V. Devarakonda & Jeffrey J. Reuer, 2019. "Safeguarding from the Sharks: Board Representation in Minority Equity Partnerships," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(5), pages 981-999, September.
    18. Jongkuk Lee & Glenn Hoetker & William Qualls, 2015. "Alliance Experience and Governance Flexibility," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(5), pages 1536-1551, October.
    19. Boeker, Warren & Howard, Michael D. & Basu, Sandip & Sahaym, Arvin, 2021. "Interpersonal relationships, digital technologies, and innovation in entrepreneurial ventures," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 495-507.
    20. Reuer, Jeffrey J. & Zollo, Maurizio, 2005. "Termination outcomes of research alliances," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 101-115, February.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:bla:stratm:v:42:y:2021:i:4:p:710-740. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/0143-2095 .

    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.