IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i10p8370-d1152384.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Critical Review of Studies on Coopetition in Educational Settings

Author

Listed:
  • Minwei Chen

    (Institute of Education, Xiamen University, Xiamen 361005, China)

  • Cixian Lv

    (Normal College, Qingdao University, Qingdao 266071, China)

  • Xinghua Wang

    (Normal College, Qingdao University, Qingdao 266071, China
    College of Business Management, Xiamen Huaxia University, Xiamen 361024, China)

  • Linlin Li

    (Normal College, Qingdao University, Qingdao 266071, China)

  • Peijin Yang

    (Normal College, Qingdao University, Qingdao 266071, China)

Abstract

The benefits and limitations of utilizing collaborative and competitive activities within and between groups to facilitate learning are well known. Typically, these two concepts are viewed as mutually exclusive approaches, where one is favored over the other in the classroom. However, utilizing an approach that takes advantage of the strengths of both while minimizing each one’s weaknesses, could greatly enhance students’ learning. This approach is called coopetition. Because of the dominance of collaboration and competition, the number of studies investigating coopetition in learning environments is rather limited. Therefore, this article reviews the extant studies using a coopetitive approach to provide a fuller understanding of this concept. Altogether, 33 articles were retrieved and analyzed using a grounded constant-comparative approach. As a result of the analysis, three categories of research topics emerged: (a) organization of coopetition, including zero-sum coopetition and social comparison coopetition, (b) medium and coopetition, including coopetition conducted in conventional face-to-face settings and computer-mediated settings, and (c) application of coopetition in education, which covers multiple areas such as cognitive, affective, and social domains, as well as educational management. The review discusses each category in detail, highlighting implications for future educational research and practice.

Suggested Citation

  • Minwei Chen & Cixian Lv & Xinghua Wang & Linlin Li & Peijin Yang, 2023. "A Critical Review of Studies on Coopetition in Educational Settings," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-18, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:10:p:8370-:d:1152384
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/10/8370/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/10/8370/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Reuben, Ernesto & Tyran, Jean-Robert, 2010. "Everyone is a winner: Promoting cooperation through all-can-win intergroup competition," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 25-35, March.
    2. Riechmann, Thomas & Weimann, Joachim, 2008. "Competition as a coordination device: Experimental evidence from a minimum effort coordination game," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 437-454, June.
    3. Saïd Yami & André Nemeh, 2014. "Organizing coopetition for innovation: The case of wireless telecommunication sector in Europe," Post-Print hal-02049456, HAL.
    4. Giovanni Battista Dagnino, 2007. "Preface: Coopetition Strategy—Toward a New Kind of Inter-Firm Dynamics?," International Studies of Management & Organization, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(2), pages 3-10, January.
    5. X. Henry Wang & Bill Yang, 2003. "Why Competition may Discourage Students from Learning? A Behavioral Economic Analysis," Education Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(2), pages 117-128.
    6. Heidi S. Fisher & Hopi E. Hoekstra, 2010. "Competition drives cooperation among closely related sperm of deer mice," Nature, Nature, vol. 463(7282), pages 801-803, February.
    7. Bouncken, Ricarda B. & Kraus, Sascha, 2013. "Innovation in knowledge-intensive industries: The double-edged sword of coopetition," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(10), pages 2060-2070.
    8. Devi R. Gnyawali & Byung‐jin (robert) Park, 2009. "Co‐opetition and Technological Innovation in Small and Medium‐Sized Enterprises: A Multilevel Conceptual Model," Journal of Small Business Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(3), pages 308-330, July.
    9. Kuo-Feng Huang & Chwo-Ming Yu, 2011. "The effect of competitive and non-competitive R&D collaboration on firm innovation," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 36(4), pages 383-403, August.
    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. Jesús González & Liliana Martínez & Roberto Aguas & Jhon De La Hoz & Henry Sánchez, 2023. "Redesign and Implementation of the Electromagnetism Course for Engineering Students Using the Backward Design Methodology," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(16), pages 1-14, August.

    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. Heinrich Ursprung, 2012. "The evolution of sharing rules in rent seeking contests: Incentives crowd out cooperation," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 153(1), pages 149-161, October.
    2. 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).
    3. Corbo, Leonardo & Kraus, Sascha & Vlačić, Božidar & Dabić, Marina & Caputo, Andrea & Pellegrini, Massimiliano M., 2023. "Coopetition and innovation: A review and research agenda," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    4. Anne-Sophie Fernandez & Frédéric Le Roy, 2016. "Why firms implement Coopetitive-Project Teams?," Post-Print hal-02101071, HAL.
    5. 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).
    6. Livieratos, Antonios D. & Tsekouras, George & Vanhaverbeke, Wim & Angelakis, Antonios, 2022. "Open Innovation moves in SMEs: How European SMEs place their bets?," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    7. Bacon, Emily & Williams, Michael D. & Davies, Gareth, 2020. "Coopetition in innovation ecosystems: A comparative analysis of knowledge transfer configurations," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 307-316.
    8. Raza-Ullah, Tatbeeq & Kostis, Angelos, 2020. "Do trust and distrust in coopetition matter to performance?," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 367-376.
    9. Vladimir Vanyushyn & Maria Bengtsson & Malin H. Näsholm & Håkan Boter, 2018. "International coopetition for innovation: Are the benefits worth the challenges?," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 12(2), pages 535-557, March.
    10. Dorn, Stefanie & Schweiger, Bastian & Albers, Sascha, 2016. "Levels, phases and themes of coopetition: A systematic literature review and research agenda," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 484-500.
    11. Gil S Epstein & Yosef Mealem, 2012. "Cooperation and Effort in Group Contests," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 32(1), pages 624-638.
    12. Eduard Gabriel Ceptureanu & Sebastian Ion Ceptureanu & Violeta Radulescu & Stefan Alexandru Ionescu, 2018. "What Makes Coopetition Successful? An Inter-Organizational Side Analysis on Coopetition Critical Success Factors in Oil and Gas Distribution Networks," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-20, December.
    13. Fonseca Cristina & Meneses Raquel, 2020. "Motivations for Coopetition Strategies between Banks and Fintechs," Proceedings of the International Conference on Business Excellence, Sciendo, vol. 14(1), pages 282-293, July.
    14. Kris De Jaegher, 2021. "Common‐Enemy Effects: Multidisciplinary Antecedents And Economic Perspectives," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(1), pages 3-33, February.
    15. Carlos Devece & D. Enrique Ribeiro-Soriano & Daniel Palacios-Marqués, 2019. "Coopetition as the new trend in inter-firm alliances: literature review and research patterns," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 13(2), pages 207-226, April.
    16. Carlos Devece & Daniel Palacios-Marqués & D. Enrique Ribeiro-Soriano, 2021. "IT-based strategy, capabilities, and practices: crowdsourcing implementation in market-oriented firms," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 15(1), pages 15-32, January.
    17. Wang, Yonggui & Hong, Aoran & Li, Xia & Gao, Jia, 2020. "Marketing innovations during a global crisis: A study of China firms’ response to COVID-19," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 214-220.
    18. Mathieu Lefebvre & Lucie Martin-Bonnel de Longchamp, 2022. "Knowledge acquisition or incentive to foster coordination? A real-effort weak-link experiment with craftsmen," Journal of Behavioral Economics for Policy, Society for the Advancement of Behavioral Economics (SABE), vol. 6(S1), pages 93-107, July.
    19. Carboni, Oliviero A. & Medda, Giuseppe, 2021. "External R&D and product innovation: Is over-outsourcing an issue?," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    20. Bouncken, Ricarda B. & Fredrich, Viktor, 2016. "Good fences make good neighbors? Directions and safeguards in alliances on business model innovation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 5196-5202.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:10:p:8370-:d:1152384. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.