The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Toward a structural view of co‐opetition in supply networks
Abstract
Co‐opetition, or simultaneous competition and cooperation, in the supply chain management literature has been treated as a dyadic relational phenomenon where the buyer's strategy is considered to be the primary driver. In this paper, we move beyond the dyadic view and propose a theory of co‐opetition in supply networks. We argue that as firms within a supply network interact over time to access, share, and transform resources, new ties between firms are formed and existing ties dissolve, giving rise to co‐opetition dynamics at the network level. Taking a configurational approach, we employ the inter‐related dimensions of ties between firm, firm‐level task, network‐level objective, and governance to specify four practical supply network archetypes that cover a wide range of economic activities. We then explain how coopetitive relationships may evolve in these supply network archetypes. Specifically, we discuss how relationships form or dissolve in these archetypes and how local structural changes lead to co‐opetition dynamics at the network level. We also discuss the implications of such dynamics from a managerial perspective.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications
Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511815478 · Cited by 17,557 · cited 4×
“2.3 Understanding co-opetition as a dynamic phenomenon Triads are the smallest unit of a network (Choi and Wu, 2009; Wasserman and Faust, 1994; Simmel, 1950).”
BackgroundInfluentialBurt, R. S. (1992) · doi:10.4159/9780674029095 · Cited by 9,093
A General Framework for Analyzing Sustainability of Social-Ecological Systems
Ostrom, E. (2009) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1172133 · Cited by 8,656
Modes of Network Governance: Structure, Management, and Effectiveness
Provan, K. G., & Kenis, P. (2007) · Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory · doi:10.1093/jopart/mum015 · Cited by 4,006
Moving beyond Dyadic Ties: A Network Theory of Stakeholder Influences
Rowley, T. J. (1997) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1997.9711022107 · Cited by 2,522
Social Networks and Organizations
Kilduff, M., & Tsai, W. (2003) · doi:10.4135/9781849209915 · Cited by 1,581 · cited 1×
“Different forms of governance are deployed to manage different tasks and network level objectives (Kilduff and Tsai, 2003).”
BackgroundInter-firm Networks: Antecedents, Mechanisms and Forms
Grandori, A., & Soda, G. (1995) · Organization Studies · doi:10.1177/017084069501600201 · Cited by 1,337
Cited by
Berti, G., & Mulligan, C. (2016) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su8070616 · Cited by 403
Metadata
- Authors
- Pathak, S. D., Wu, Z., & Johnston, D.
- Venue
- Journal of Operations Management
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2014-04-16
- Volume
- 32
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 254-267
- ISSN
- 0272-6963 (ISSN-L)
- 1873-1317
- OpenAlex
- W2045496750
- Cited by
- 223
- References
- 7
- FWCI
- 42.26
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Toward a structural view of co‐opetition in supply networks. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.jom.2014.04.001
- The paper
- Pathak, S. D., Wu, Z., & Johnston, D. (2014). Toward a structural view of co‐opetition in supply networks. Journal of Operations Management. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2014.04.001
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
