How Coopetition Influences the Development of a Dominant Design: Evidence from the Pinball Industry

Fanny  Simon; Albéric   Tellier

doi:10.37725/mgmt.v23i2.4624

Fanny Simon University of Rouen Normandy, NIMEC UPRES EA 969, Rouen, France
Albéric Tellier Paris-Dauphine University, PSL University, CNRS 7088, DRM (M-LAB), Paris, France

DOI: https://doi.org/10.37725/mgmt.v23i2.4624

Keywords: Coopetition, Dominant Design, Historical Analysis, Innovation, Pinball

Abstract

Most studies concerning dominant designs focus on ‘collective’ or ‘competitive’ strategies that companies deploy to impose their choices on the market. The objective of this research is to assess the extent to which ‘coopetitive’ strategies may lead to a dominant design. We analyzed the development of a dominant design over an 84-year period through a historical study in the field of pinball machines. Our study focuses on the five main manufacturers of pinball machines and analyzes data from 1930 to 2014. We demonstrate that companies undergo three phases that involve the progressive development of coopetitive relationships with different impacts on the generation of innovation. Because manufacturers differentiated their offerings, innovated and simultaneously imitated others, increased competition resulted. Simultaneously, external threats and the need to collectively respond to clients and partners prompted the manufacturers to cooperate with one another. Thus, our research provides a better understanding of how specific horizontal coopetitive relationships among manufacturers of the same type of products impact the development of a dominant design at the industry level. This case study suggests that as a theoretical framework, coopetition introduces new insights into the comprehension of relational dynamics during the development of dominant designs. Our observations also confirm or invalidate conclusions drawn in previous works related to coopetition strategies. In particular, this case is interesting as although the appropriability regime was weak, companies still developed coopetitive relationships, contradicting previous studies.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Fanny Simon, University of Rouen Normandy, NIMEC UPRES EA 969, Rouen, France

Fanny Simon is a Full Professor of management at the University of Rouen Normandy. She is a researcher at the NIMEC laboratory. Her research deals with innovation management and social network analysis. She has published several works on creativity and innovation management in European Management Journal, Advances in Strategic Management, International Management and International Journal of Project Management.

Albéric Tellier, Paris-Dauphine University, PSL University, CNRS 7088, DRM (M-LAB), Paris, France

Albéric Tellier is a Full Professor at Paris-Dauphine University, PSL University. His field of research is the management of innovation. His works have focused most notably on the configuration and workings of innovation networks, situations of technological competition and collective strategies for innovation.

References

Abernathy, W. J. & Utterback, J. M. (1978). Patterns of industrial innovation. Technology Review, 80(7), 40–47.

Akrich, M., Callon, M., Latour, B. & Monaghan, A. (2002a). The key to success in innovation Part I: The art of interessement. International Journal of Innovation Management, 6(2), 187–206. doi: 10.1142/S1363919602000550

Akrich, M., Callon, M., Latour, B. & Monaghan, A. (2002b). The key to success in innovation part II: The art of choosing good spokespersons. International Journal of Innovation Management, 6(2), 207–225. doi: 10.1142/s1363919602000562

Anderson, P. & Tushman, M. L. (1990). Technological discontinuities and dominant designs: A cyclical model of technological change. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, 604–633. doi: 10.2307/2393511

Arranz, N. & Arroyabe, J. C. (2008). The choice of partners in R&D cooperation: An empirical analysis of Spanish firms. Technovation, 28, 88–100. doi: 10.1016/j.technovation.2007.07.006

Arthur, W. B. (1989). Competing technologies, increasing returns, and lock-in by historical events. The Economic Journal, 99(394), 116–131. doi: 10.2307/2234208

Astley, G. & Fombrun, C. J. (1983). Collective strategy: Social ecology of organizational environments. Academy of Management Review, 8(4), 576–587. doi: 10.5465/amr.1983.4284657

Batson, B. J. & Bellgraph, B. B. (2008). Pinball passion. Playfield Productions.

Bengtsson, M. & Kock, S. (2000). ‘Coopetition’ in business networks – To cooperate and compete simultaneously. Industrial Marketing Management, 29(5), 411–426. doi: 10.1016/s0019-8501(99)00067-x

Bengtsson, M. & Kock, S. (2014). Coopetition – Quo vadis? Past accomplishments and future challenges. Industrial Marketing Management, 43(2), 180–188. doi: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2014.02.015

Bengtsson, M., Kock, S. & Lundgren-Henriksson, E.-L. (2019). Coopetition research. Rooting and future agendas. In A.-S. Fernandez, P. Chiambaretto, F. Le Roy & W. Czakon (Eds.), The Routledge companion to coopetition strategies (pp. 13–22). Abingdon: Routledge. doi: 10.4324/9781315185644-2

Bengtsson, M. & Raza-Ullah, T. (2016). A systematic review of research on coopetition: Toward a multilevel understanding. Industrial Marketing Management, 57, 23–39. doi: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2016.05.003

Bijker, W. E., Hughes, T. P. & Pinch, T. (Eds.). (1989). The social construction of technological systems, new directions in the sociology and history of technology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. doi: 10.1017/s0025727300049516

Bouncken, R. B. & Fredrich, V. (2012). Coopetition: Performance implications and management antecedents. International Journal of Innovation Management, 16(5), 1250028, 1–28. doi: 10.1142/s1363919612500284

Bouncken, R. B., Fredrich, V., Ritala, P. & Kraus, S. (2017). Coopetition in new product development alliances: Advantages and tensions for incremental and radical innovation. British Journal of Management, 29(3), 391–410. doi: 10.1111/1467-8551.12213

Bouncken, R. B., Gast, J., Kraus, S. & Bogers, M. (2015). Coopetition: A systematic review, synthesis, and future research directions. Review of Managerial Science, 9(3), 577–601. doi: 10.1007/s11846-015-0168-6

Brandenburger, A. M. & Nalebuff, B. J. (1995, July–August). The right game: Use game theory to shape strategy. Harvard Business Review, pp. 57–71. doi: 10.1016/0024-6301(95)90326-7

Castaldo, S., Möellering, G., Grosso, M. & Zerbini, F. (2010). Exploring how third-party organizations facilitate coopetition management in buyer-seller relationships. In S. Yami, S. Castaldo, B. Dagnino & F. Le Roy (Eds.), Coopetition: Winning strategies for the 21st century (pp. 141–165). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing. doi: 10.4337/9781849807241.00016

Cecere, G., Corrocher, N. & Battaglia, R. D. (2015). Innovation and competition in the smartphone industry: Is there a dominant design? Telecommunications Policy, 39(3–4), 162–175. doi: 10.1016/j.telpol.2014.07.002

Chabaud, D. & Germain, O. (2006). Re-using qualitative data in management science: A second choice? M@n@gement, 9(3), 191–213. doi: 10.3917/mana.093.0199

Chiambaretto, P. & Dumez, H. (2012). The role of bundling in firms’ marketing strategies: A synthesis. Recherche et Applications en Marketing, 27(2), 91–105. doi: 10.1177/205157071202700205

Chiambaretto, P. & Rigaud, E. (2013). Coopétition, hétérogénéité des consommateurs et stratégies de ciblage. Journal of Social Management/Revue Européenne des Sciences Sociales et du Mangement, 11, 98–131.

Choi, P., Garcia, R. & Friedrich, C. (2009). The drivers for collective horizontal coopetition: A case study of screwcap initiatives in the international wine industry. International Journal of Strategic Business Alliances, 1(3), 271–290. doi: 10.1504/ijsba.2010.030427

Christensen, C. M., Suárez, F. F. & Utterback, J. M. (1998). Strategies for survival in fast-changing industries. Management Science, 44(12-part 2), S207–S220. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.44.12.s207

Cohen, W. M. & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 128–152. doi: 10.2307/2393553

Colmer, M. (1976). Pinball an illustrated history. New York, NY: New American Library.

Cusumano, M. A., Mylonadis, Y. & Rosenbloom, R. S. (1992). Strategic maneuvering and mass-market dynamics: The triumph of VHS over beta. Business History Review, 66(1), 51–94. doi: 10.2307/3117053

Czakon, W. & Czernek-Marszatek, K. (2019). Trust in tourism dyadic and network coopetion. In A.-S. Fernandez, P. Chiambaretto, F. Le Roy & W. Czakon (Eds.), The Routledge companion to coopetition strategies (pp. 83–92). Abingdon: Routledge. doi: 10.4324/9781315185644-8

Czakon, W. & Dana, L. P. (2013). Coopetition at work: How firms shaped the airline industry. Journal of Social Management, 11(2), 32–61.

Depeyre, C. & Dumez, H. (2010). The role of architectural players in coopetition: The case of the US defense industry. In S. Yami, S. Castaldo, B. Dagnino & F. Le Roy (Eds.), Coopetition: Winning strategies for the 21st century (pp. 124–141). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing. doi: 10.4337/9781849807241.00015

Dorn, S., Schweiger, B. & Albers, S. (2016). Levels, phases and themes of coopetition: A systematic literature review and research agenda. European Management Journal, 34(5), 484–500. doi: 10.1016/j.emj.2016.02.009

Dussauge, P. & Garrette, B (1999). Cooperative Strategy. Competing Successfully through Strategic Alliances. Chichester: Wiley.

Dyer, J. H. & Singh, H. (1998). The relational view: Cooperative strategy and sources of inter-organizational competitive advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23(4), 660–679. doi: 10.5465/amr.1998.1255632

Ehrhardt, M. (2004). Network effects, standardization and competitive strategy: How companies influence the emergence of dominant designs. International Journal of Technology Management, 27(2–3), 272–294. doi: 10.1504/ijtm.2004.003956

Fernandez, A.-S., Le Roy, F. & Chiambaretto, P. (2018). Implementing the right project structure to achieve coopetitive innovation projects. Long Range Planning, 51(2), 384–405. doi: 10.1016/j.lrp.2017.07.009

Fernandez, A.-S., Le Roy, F. & Gnyawali, D. R. (2014). Sources and management of tension in co-opetition case evidence from telecommunications satellites manufacturing in Europe. Industrial Marketing Management, 43(2), 222–235. doi: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2013.11.004

Fernández, E. & Valle, S. (2019). Battle for dominant design: A decision-making model. European Research on Management and Business Economics, 25(2), 72–78. doi: 10.1016/j.iedeen.2019.01.002

Funk, J. L. (2003). Standards, dominant designs and preferential acquisition of complementary assets through slight information advantages. Research Policy, 32(8), 1325–1341. doi: 10.1016/s0048-7333(02)00121-x

Garud, R. & Karnøe, P. (2003). Bricolage versus breakthrough: Distributed and embedded agency in technology entrepreneurship. Research Policy, 32(2), 277–300. doi: 10.1016/s0048-7333(02)00100-2

Garud, R., Jain, S. & Kumaraswamy, A. (2002). Institutional entrepreneurship in the sponsorship of common technological standards: The case of Sun Microsystems and Java, Academy of Management Journal, 45(1), 196–214. doi: 10.2307/3069292

Geroski, P. A. (1995). What do we know about entry? International Journal of Industrial Organization, 13, 421–440. doi: 10.1016/0167-7187(95)00498-x

Glaser, B. & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago, IL: Aldine Publishing Company. doi: 10.1007/978-3-658-13213-2_59

Gnyawali, D. R. & Park, B. J. R. (2009). Co-opetition and technological innovation in small and medium-sized enterprises: A multilevel conceptual model. Journal of Small Business Management, 47(3), 308–330. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-627x.2009.00273

Gnyawali, D. R. & Park, B. J. R. (2011). Co-opetition between giants: Collaboration with competitors for technological innovation. Research Policy, 40(5), 650–663. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2011.01.009

Gnyawali, D. R. & Ryan Charleton, T. (2018). Nuances in the interplay of competition and cooperation: Towards a theory of coopetition. Journal of Management, 44(7), 2511–2534. doi: 10.1177/0149206318788945

Gnyawali, D. R. & Song, Y. (2016). Pursuit of rigor in research: Illustration from coopetition literature. Industrial Marketing Management, 57, 12–22. doi: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2016.05.004

Hamouti, R., Robert, F. & Le Roy, F. (2014). Individual strategy, vertical cooperation or coopetition strategy: What is the best strategy for product innovation? Innovations, 1(43), 135–161. doi: 10.3917/inno.043.0135

Heaton, J. (2004). Reworking qualitative data. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Hekkert, M. & van den Hoed, R. (2004). Competing technologies and the struggle towards a new dominant design. Greener Management International, 47, 29–43. doi: 10.9774/gleaf.3062.2004.au.00005

Helms, M., Cook, H. & Fisher, D. (1997). Pleasure machine, the history of pinball. New Video Images.

Henderson, R. M. & Clark, K. B. (1990). Architectural innovation: The reconfiguration of existing product technologies and failure of established firms. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 9–30. doi: 10.2307/2393549

Huberman, A. M. & Miles, M. B. (2002). The qualitative researcher’s companion. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. doi: 10.4135/9781412986274

Huhtamo, E. (2005). Slots of fun, slots of trouble. An archaeology of arcade gaming. In J. Raessens & J. Goldstein (Eds.), Handbook of computer games studies (pp. 3–21). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. doi: 10.1162/leon.2007.40.2.207

Hurmelinna-Laukkanen, P. & Puumalainen, K. (2007). Nature and dynamics of appropriability: Strategies for appropriating returns on innovation. R&D Management, 37(2), 95–112. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9310.2007.00460.x

Jakobsen, S. & Steinmo, M. (2016). The role of proximity dimensions in the development of innovations in coopetition: A longitudinal case study. International Journal of Technology Management, 71(1/2), 100–122. doi: 10.1504/ijtm.2016.077976

Jensen, R. (1979). What is Pinball? Amusement Review, 2, 3–4.

Joosten, J. (Ed.). (2012). Pinball Magazine, 1. Utrecht: Unigroove Publishing.

Joosten, J. (Ed.). (2013). Pinball Magazine, 2. Utrecht: Unigroove Publishing.

Joosten, J. (Ed.). (2014). Pinball Magazine, Special Issue. Utrecht: Unigroove Publishing.

Joosten, J. (Ed.). (2015). Pinball Magazine, 3. Utrecht: Unigroove Publishing.

Joosten, J. (Ed.). (2016). Pinball Magazine, 4. Utrecht: Unigroove Publishing.

Joosten, J. (Ed.). (2018). Pinball Magazine, 5. Utrecht: Unigroove Publishing.

Katz, M. L. & Shapiro, C. (1985). Network externalities, competition, and compatibility. The American Economic Review, 75(3), 424–440. https://www.jstor.org/stable/181480

King, J. L., Gurbaxani, V., Kraemer, K. L., McFarlan, F. W., Raman, K. S. & Yap, C. S. (1994). Institutional factors in information technology innovation. Information Systems Research, 5(2), 139–169. doi: 10.1287/isre.5.2.139

Klepper, S. (1996). Entry, exit, growth, and innovation over the product life cycle. The American Economic Review, 86(3), 562–583.

Klymas, P. (2019). Organizational culture models of coopetitors. In A.-S. Fernandez, P. Chiambaretto, F. Le Roy & W. Czakon (Eds.), The Routledge companion to coopetition strategies (pp. 117–127). Abingdon: Routledge. doi: 10.4324/9781315185644-11

Kœnig, G. (2004). Management stratégique. Projets, interactions & contextes. Paris: Dunod.

Lee, G. K. (2007). The significance of network resources in the race to enter emerging product markets: The convergence of telephony communications and computer networking, 1989–2001. Strategic Management Journal, 28(1), 17–37. doi: 10.1002/smj.566

Liebowitz, S. J. & Margolis, S. E. (1995). Path dependence, lock-in, and history. Journal of Law, Economics, & Organization, 11(1), 205–226. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.1706450

Le Roy, F., Fernandez, A.-S. & Chiambaretto, P. (2019). From strategizing coopetition to managing coopetition. In A.-S. Fernandez, P. Chiambaretto, F. Le Roy & W. Czakon (Eds.), The Routledge companion to coopetition strategies (pp. 36–46). Abingdon: Routledge. doi: 10.4324/9781315185644-4

Maletic, G. (2010). Tilt, the battle to save pinball, the future of pinball. LLC.

March, J. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2(1), 71–87. doi: 10.1287/orsc.2.1.71

Mariani, M. (2019). The role of policy makers and regulators in coopetition. In A.-S. Fernandez, P. Chiambaretto, F. Le Roy & W. Czakon (Eds.), The Routledge companion to coopetition strategies (pp. 105–116). Abingdon: Routledge. doi: 10.4324/9781315185644-10

Mione, A. (2009). When entrepreneurship requires coopetition: The need for standards in the creation of a market. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business, 8(1), 92–109. doi: 10.1504/ijesb.2009.024107

Murmann, J. P. & Frenken, K. (2006). Toward a systematic framework for research on dominant designs, technological innovations, and industrial change. Research Policy, 35, 925–952. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2006.04.011

Nalebuff, B. J., Brandenburger, A. & Maulana, A. (1996). Co-opetition. London: Harper Collins Business.

Nieto, M. J. & Santamaría, L. (2007). The importance of diverse collaborative networks for the novelty of product innovation. Technovation, 27(6), 367–377. doi: 10.1016/j.technovation.2006.10.001

Peng, T. J. A., Yen, M. H. & Bourne, M. (2018). How rival partners compete based on cooperation? Long Range Planning, 51(2), 351–383. doi: 10.1016/j.lrp.2017.10.003

Ritala, P. (2012). Coopetition strategy – When is it successful? Empirical evidence on innovation and market performance. British Journal of Management, 23, 307–324. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8551.2011.00741.x

Ritala, P. & Hurmelinna-Laukkanen, P. (2009). What’s in it for me? Creating and appropriating value in innovation-related coopetition. Technovation, 29(12), 819–828. doi: 10.1016/j.technovation.2009.07.002

Ritala, P. & Hurmelinna-Laukhanen, P. (2013). Incremental and radical innovation in coopetition – The role of absorptive capacity and appropriability. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 30(1), 154–169. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-5885.2012.00956.x

Ritala, P., Kraus, S. & Bouncken, R. B. (2016). Introduction to coopetition and innovation: Contemporary topics and future research opportunities. International Journal of Technology Management, 71(1–2), 1–9. doi: 10.1504/IJTM.2016.077985

Ritala, P. & Sainio, L. M. (2014). Coopetition for radical innovation: Technology, market and business-model perspectives. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 26(2), 155–169. doi: 10.1080/09537325.2013.850476

Ritala, P. & Tidström, A. (2014). Untangling the value-creation and value-appropriation elements of coopetition strategy: A longitudinal analysis on the firm and relational levels. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 30(4), 498–515. doi: 10.1016/j.scaman.2014.05.002

Rosenbloom, R. & Cusumano, M. (1987). Technological pioneering and competitive advantage: The birth of the VCR Industry. California Management Review, 29(4), 51–76. doi: 10.2307/41162131

Rossignoli, M. (2011). The complete pinball book (3rd ed.). Atglen: Schiffer.

Ruben, A. (2018). Pinball wizards, jackpots, drains and the cult of the Silber ball. Chicago, IL: Chicago Review Press.

Sanou, F. H., Le Roy, F. & Gnyawali, D. R. (2016). How does centrality in coopetition networks matter? An empirical investigation in the mobile telephone industry. British Journal of Management, 27(1), 143–160. doi: 10.1111/1467-8551.12132

Santamaria, L. & Surroca, J. (2011). Matching the goals and impacts of R&D collaboration. European Management Review, 8(2), 95–109. doi: 10.1111/j.1740-4762.2011.01012.x

Schubert, C., Sydow, J. & Windeler, A. (2013). The means of managing momentum: Bridging technological paths and organisational fields. Research Policy, 42(8), 1389–1405. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2013.04.004

Shalhoub, M. (2002). The pinball compendium, 1, 1930–1960s. Atglen: Schiffer.

Shalhoub, M. (2004). The pinball compendium, 2, 1970–1981. Atglen: Schiffer.

Shalhoub, M. (2005). The pinball compendium, 3, 1982 to present. Atglen: Schiffer.

Shapiro, C. & Varian, H. R. (1998). Information rules: A strategic guide to the network economy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business Review Press.

Shibata, T. (1993). Sony’s successful strategy for compact discs. Long Range Planning, 26(4), 16–21. doi: 10.1016/0024-6301(93)90053-i

Silverman, D. (2000). Doing qualitative research: A practical handbook. London: Sage.

Simon, H. A. (1962). The architecture of complexity: Hierarchic systems. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 106, 467–482.

Smith, W. K. & Tushman, M. L. (2005). Managing strategic contradictions. Organization Science, 16(5), 522–536. doi: 10.1287/orsc.1050.0134

Soh, P. H. (2010). Network patterns and competitive advantage before the emergence of a dominant design. Strategic Management Journal, 31(4), 438–461. doi: 10.1002/smj.819

Srinivasan, R., Lilien, G. L. & Rangaswamt, A. (2006). The emergence of dominant designs. Journal of Marketing, 70(2), 1–17. doi: 10.1509/jmkg.70.2.1

Stake, R. E. (1994). Case studies. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 236–247). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Stewart, D. (1984). Secondary research: Information sources and methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Suárez, F. F. & Utterback, J. M. (1995). Dominant designs and the survival of firms. Strategic Management Journal, 16(6), 415–430. doi: 10.1002/smj.4250160602

Sullivan, B., Jacobsen, C. & Rickard, E. (2010). Special when lit. Steam.

Sydow, J., Windeler, A., Schubert, C. & Möllering, G. (2012). Organizing R&D consortia for path creation and extension: The case of semiconductor manufacturing technologies. Organization Studies, 33(7), 907–936. doi: 10.1177/0170840612448029

Teece, D. J. (1986). Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy. Research Policy, 15(6), 285–305. doi: 10.1016/0048-7333(86)90027-2

Tellier, A. (2015). Le déclin des écosystèmes d’affaires: quelles leçons tirer de la chute des «trois géants de Chicago»? Revue Française de Gestion, 41(248), 23–39. doi: 10.3166/rfg.248.23-39

Tellier, A. (2017). Whatever happened to the ‘great escape’? Lessons from the rise and decline of the pinball ecosystem. International Journal of Technology Management, 75(1–4), 121–141. doi: 10.1504/ijtm.2017.10006143

Tushman, M. L. & Rosenkopf, L. (1992). On the organizational determinants of technological change. In B. Staw & L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in Organizational Behavior, Greenwhich, CT: JAI Press.

Tomlinson, P. R. (2010). Co-operative ties and innovation: Some new evidence for UK manufacturing. Research Policy, 39(6), 762–775. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2010.02.010

Tushman, M. L. & Anderson, P. (1986). Technological discontinuities and organizational environments. Administrative Science Quarterly, 31(3), 439–465. doi: 10.2307/2392832

Tushman, M. L. & Murmann, P. (1998). Dominant designs, technology cycles and organizational outcomes. Research in Organizational Behavior, 20, 231–266. doi: 10.5465/apbpp.1998.27643428

Utterback, J. M. (1994). Mastering the dynamics of innovation. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

Von Burg, U. & Kenney, M. (2003). Sponsors, communities, and standards: Ethernet vs. token ring in the local area networking business. Industry and Innovation, 10(4), 351–375. doi: 10.1080/1366271032000163621

Weber, R. P. (1990). Basic content analysis. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. doi: 10.4135/9781412983488

Yami, S., Chappert, H. & Mione, A. (2015). Séquences stratégiques relationnelles: le jeu coopetitif de Microsoft dans le processus de normalisation OOXML. M@n@gement, 18(5), 330–356. doi: 10.3917/mana.185.0330

Yami, S. & Nemeh, A. (2014). Organizing coopetition for innovation: The case of wireless telecommunication sector in Europe. Industrial Marketing Management, 43(2), 250–260. doi: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2013.11.006

Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research. Design and methods (4th ed.). Applied Social Research Methods Series, Vol. 5. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Footnotes

¹. The skill game sector includes firms specializing in the production, distribution, and operation of gaming devices that offer no winnings to players. It is basically foosball, pinball, billiards, arcade games and darts.

². In the early 1970s, health problems forced David Gottlieb to stop working. He died in 1974. Obviously, his successors at the head of the company resumed the filing of patents as shown in Table 6.