Learning Strategies in Coopetitive Environments

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "Learning Strategies in Coopetitive Environments"


1 Learning Strategies in Coopetitive Environments Philippe Baumard, To cite this version: Philippe Baumard,. Learning Strategies in Coopetitive Environments. LE ROY Frédéric; YAMI Saïd. Coopetition : winning strategy for the XXIst century, Edward Edgar pub. (Northampton), pp , <hal > HAL Id: hal https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal Submitted on 10 Jul 2009 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access archive for the deposit and dissemination of scientific research documents, whether they are published or not. The documents may come from teaching and research institutions in France or abroad, or from public or private research centers. L archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, émanant des établissements d enseignement et de recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires publics ou privés.

2 Learning Strategies Visiting Professor, Philippe in Coopetitive Stanford Baumard University Environments Coopetitive Forthcoming in: F. Professor, Le Chair Roy, Ecole Innovation S. 1, rue Yami Polytechnique, Descartes and (Eds), Regulation Coopetition: Centre Paris of de Numerical Recherche - France Winning Services Gestion situations competitors where environments century: firms simultaneously Northampton, (Brandenburger MA: compete Edward and Nalebuff, Edgar cooperate Publishing, 1996) with strategies are competitors. characterized for the 21st 2008). yet hence not Coopetition requiring impede to selectively a the can full generation entry arise share from or deployment of partial critical proprietary or knowledge incomplete the and latter. discretionary about interest Dagnino their into learning, and assets a rival s Padula (Baumard, by domain, forcing (2009) Such by partially do and Whilst competition, note congruent that coopetition but and rather divergent extends is not interests restricted to every need to form situations to of be strategic managed of simultaneous interdependency, simultaneously. cooperation success they Fombrun, differ 1983)? from more traditional collective strategies (Hawley, 1950; Astley where more collective strategies are temporary that increase the chance How forms borrowed biotope interactions durable of of dependency from previously form Hawley of that inescapable (1950) s geographically links firms work coexistence. in such competitive on a fate, In coexistence order Astley firms, to and coopetition distinguish between Fombrun species translates between (1983) have in the (commensalism), to describe the forms of durable arrangements that maintain the flow of in relations), large federations incumbent or between the (parasitism) dependence the firms. mutual They of trigger and a suggest smaller symmetric different that player the dependence environmental upon an architecture configurations, upon core a assets shared generated (symbiotic resource such by as While within little to competitor. mixed or conglomerates. learning secrecy be attention successful inter-firm has motives networks been in a (Axelrod, given setting (Grandori to where strategies 1984; & they Schelling, Neri, of have learning 1999) to 1986) have that firms and been from, knowledge must studied or deploy learn extensively, exchange discretion that While occurs coopetitive in the midst arrangements of an agreement are not where conditionally copyright antagonistic, laws, industrial with, order emotional a term and is used often non-disclosure in felt education an adverse agreements sciences experience to are describe the (Baumard, sole learning barriers 2008). that to Adverse protect triggers the learning anxiety, firm s the a learning from coming human much providing the influenced antagonistic from strategies works blockage, the alternative of by works to Burrhus learning. phobias, what overcome of learning follow Frederic Piaget Skinner and such poor them. (1972) strategies Skinner obstacles. observed responses In that (Menec would et help alii, 1995). students Studies adverse focus 1 his (1968) participative experiments, Two that further on streams associative learning responses Skinner of research, learning, have also of a one focused shows learner and coming that one are

3 rats mechanically the still received did trick allows resist that complete for has to accessing the been stimulus. conditioning, designed their They food. to create adapt Whereas invent adversity aversion Skinner s a behavior by (usually creating theory that a of electric routine does behavioral not shock), that respond and harsh criticism, noticeably by Chomsky, Piaget s theory of reciprocity bypass accommodate not focus brought on a stimulus-response in-depth understanding scheme, of but adverse rather learning understanding childhood. the Piaget forms chain learning gradient logic the mechanisms child with uses contradictory when of learning, faced or with adverse from a lack birth inputs. of to response, childhood, For Piaget, trying one to assimilate journey of slow into and for constructing of Economists chapter his or how asymmetric her and interactions. unexpectedly ontology etiologists gains. of The have parallel being, child also while these studied learns studies inventing simultaneously antagonistic were. and Akerlof discovering learning. to define (1970), We the who will epistemology he his see or market she this is, situation. antagonistic untrustworthy aggression when lemons, He developed and second-hand shows uncertain that a seminal buyers car). learning example Lorenz can settings engage (1966) of adverse (in adverse his learning study example, selection, of animal economic when when and buying trade-off learning animals disclosed must accommodate similar examples a non-cooperative of reluctant and partner adverse order learning, to achieve noticeably human facing attention mechanism inherent to for most food human and and reproduction. animal activities, Hence, but unbalanced did not receive or adverse adequate a vital Nevertheless, momentum retrocession The by by management unbalanced and learning strategy in scholars. adverse competitors. objective with of of know-how this the chapter rise of or is compensation R&D to explore capabilities coopetitive the mechanisms, learning gain dealing strategies access involving has to gained that emerging for can a instance be worldwide the firms learning coopetitive mechanism configurations to reach their with customers no other through choice cooperation than deploying with deployed markets. their between through chapter animal adopts After organization exploring ecological the and mechanisms perspective groups of of firms (Hawley, asymmetric in gaining 1950) learning a strategic drawing a first advantage parallels section, an Asymmetric Coopetitive market seeking competition asymmetric situations learning learning. for more, used cars for cooperation to lemons : would get the diminish, most two to are reduce parties similar out even of the are to to information the deal. settings seeking point In Akerlof s to described asymmetries, collapsing, get the seminal by most because Akerlof while example, their (1970) engaging fear interaction, the created market his the means the lemon for buyer a new will by try car the everything and information less uncertainty. he asymmetry or she can In such to reaches reduce a double the information point bind context, preferring asymmetry, the buyer to pay by of buyers a ultimately used of who car trust plays is visited a enabling, situation favor the same of where seduction, the shop. seller. the Unfortunately, moral and eventual 2 hazard as intelligence is he inescapable, or she soon gathering discovers, the from asymmetry buying fellow

4 Adequate learning strategies can reduce the information asymmetries between the two coopetitive parties. often rely As on Stigler the reputation suggested of (1961:224), other party, partners coping such the fact adverse that they selection cannot scheme, reciprocal Ignorance can uneconomic access be kept the is entirely within search like subzero tolerable for eliminate complete weather: or even all information by its a comfortable effects sufficient on (op. the expenditure bounds, correct cit., p. but 224). price. its it effects The As would Stigler problem upon puts wholly people afford engage buyers situations and is sellers. that both They parties need to mirror unveil each minimum other, being level simultaneously with it: preserve their discretionary eventually actual information their cooperation, compete, and competitive to competitive the later while other or stance. sooner. keeping party, knowledge In while They other from are words, at on sight the symmetrically their a same both sufficient partner time parties buy level ignorant need order of themselves to information to of sell be able other s part some of to gold employee: employer proposed cooperating has performance, does a gold. the in specific a not applicant competitive This know not learning situation knowing does if the situation. not applicant strategy is if similar they He is are if for named a to the in lemon such an a firm it situation employer signaling. or two is a a world-class. partially lemon of meeting lemon Previous ignorant a Spence a paradise; prospective experience lemon (1973) parties or while pay higher the through possess taught them applicants education, higher employers know and provide likewise, that higher firms better the education that intrinsic workplaces. can afford value in their Of better of course, employees the trained workplace, the return professionals intrinsic does higher value not prevent usually profits, and come model usually a games known to labeled work. of price, convention In as other such, even words, e.g. if (Lewis, it Ivy had escaping League. a 1969). cost. information Its The appreciation application s firm s asymmetry reputation is a education social can either be convention, achieved does not the Lewis state A Akerlof walk convention with to the (1970) denote a social price, is puts a the convention. highly but a existence buyer much ambiguous in evidence of position common approximate can of be knowledge choosing found of a price. between precedents, shared In the by prices market the a for parties term for a lemon, used lemons, the by stay intertwined competition, dilemma trade or away, go does and implications that eventually not come Stigler s with of buy their a new price. concept collateral car. If there In of most dispersion are effects coopetitive prices, they future would situations, are so cooperation not disperse the capture choice in and the or while conventions facing the coopetitive that are crafted partners. for As purpose a consequence, of trying partners to stay in in coopetition the game, to etiological Theogony. their of cooperating self-starvation not chasing Hesiod myth to away relates illustrate and the satisfying how partner such Greeks coopetitive the from tricked God s its cooperative demand. Zeus strategies when Prometheus might predisposition. faced between found assembled the An in choice Hesiod s adequate An bones ecological and the perspective fat Gods, made while of not the totally sacrificial betraying animal, keeping meat aside, a hence pack of 3 them.

5 What malignity, consortium, likely face to authors a a change to prevents be but emergent coopetition of in fear. Prometheus biological their As ecological and Mariani is somewhat rarely equilibrium to inform (2007) arrangements a deliberate undesired. showed Zeus in a that situation living with in When his other organism, analysis people desired thrown firms are of by into that Italian lacking partners. coopetition, can nature. opera be food It compared is Several houses is firms more not phenomenon. Winter characteristics. perspective, natural have selection McKelvey borrowed to try (1982) to from apply biology Organizational them to and populations ecology Systematics of to organizations. describe borrows organizational of (1982) For draw the an latter, analogy routines between that match organizational environmental routines conditions the and Nelson principles firms, living to survive, organisms Astley while and interactions firms Fombrun failing within (1983) to adopt borrowed ecosystem adequate Hawley to routines describe (1950) s disappear. interactions characterization In the between genetic allow same and symbiosis, drawing study ecology a building analogies parasitism, extensively with ecology, etc. Hence, on these concepts by authors seeking such have to founded as explain commensalism, the how primary firms stones antagonism, adoption functionalist of and strategic biology tradition, learning has performed strategic (Starbuck, management a Barnett discretionary and Baumard, literature selection, that 2008). stopping has However, borrowed the survive analogy loyal of from by Studies mere description of interactions, and putting aside what fact motivates the to intent Astley and of of Fombrun cooperation the antagonistic deliberate (1983) and nature behavior that competition, intensively of rather competitive by than borrows large, a cooperative configurations. have from put Amos one. too Hawley much Even emphasis the (1950) work study on at surfacing of those importance adaptation mobilization biotic interactions. communities, (p. of of 578) collective, resources In as fails fact, to suggest to and the underline opposed authors formulation the importance the state to instinctive individual, of that of action their collective and forms natural analysis within strategy: of collectivities highlights organizational the joint interesting face In organization and part (ibid.). of salient this It body aspects is unfortunate of science of ethology lies that organizational the and very biology, low level theory of much only animal borrowed of behavior the most the of explaining compared programmed particular, of uncertainty animal to Lorenz a competitive and behavior: (1966) ambiguity the introduced reaction immediate (Burkhardt, such four response 2005). as different a to retaliation; a dimensions stimulus, the which inherent attempt could be population genetic finally, species attention the inheritance ecology; functional behavior and the adaptation, (ontogenetic), mimetic imitation, and which homothetic which can is learned be can behaviors, compared from compared which experiencing to institutionalism; are to the routed with works both other and of Lorenz and from the the natural management environment, literature and (Astley which and seems Fombrun, to have 1983). attracted most of in while Although early critics an defended animal Lorenz s (Lehrman, the is theory experiencing idea 1953), that of these instinctive was a four large the dimensions behavior 4 variety first to underline of has of events behavior been that and partially continuously the learning failure invalidated challenges. of interact human by

6 strategic conducting. symbiotic, competition, also and contrary learning parasitic Finally, to does animals, animals not commensalist lies the live the excess in lack is coopetitive of learning necessity, settings. abilities, functions not a Cooperation, but choice. that the humans Likewise, contrary, of a vital component that happens simultaneously, feeding and their and social eventually organization among (Mesterton-Gibbons the same species, either are skills efficiently decrease cooperation Adams, in antagonistic 1998). more competition. than Therefore, learning, one type animals Bence of i.e. prey (1986) adopting need at a to notes time. adapt, a that behavior He whether observes some species that the that precludes context mosquito have developed being feeding fishes one Krane can shock River s hence learning. be with and accessing imprinted, rats their Wagner a defy specialized feeding their theorization (1975), to rate food, use food as however, a even they Lorenz s by (in being with increase that showed term, the case able attack burden saccharin that on to cooperate animals a specialization modification of an with by adverse with rats). associating of the Yet, such profitable experimenters, antagonistic a Charles electric prey. that simultaneously. coopetition Cooperating are Faced adverse with The to question contradictory their objectives, rose choices, by such and animals manage observation: do cooperation engage why in do learning and theorizations competition behaviors Like signaling Spence s do and not (1973) competing assume applicants that human the for same beings a time job, can animals do just the have same? an intensive use of courtship. (Lorenz, activity screening. informational group of 1966). This to aggression Screening asymmetry, reduce signaling In the informational is event animals a to technique activity extract of courtship also asymmetries, discretionary used highly use by that what an conventional, Lorenz economic discourage information Stiglitz describes agent, ceremonial (1975) aggression, from trying as another. has a simultaneous and or to labeled engage reduce Within codified as in the situation screen that try most of similar partners, of qualified, coopetition, job among without applicants, a which firm letting an is it competes employer in them a similar know and has situation. that a cooperates, keen he interest is It after has without of this a finding strategic information. letting out interest them who now In are to (Lorenz, provoked to such mate, 1966). a screening and this Lorenz is is largely taking observed place. due that to Animals social animals conventions have resort a very to and redirected similar perceptions problem activity of when hierarchy when they a the drop redirection offense by behaviors aggression. it the and of last aggression Hence, the minute, incapacity they has start two redirect of a functions: conducting very their aggressive aggression first, a retaliation informs move the on towards the the closest provocateur animal the neighbor. provocateur, originating salesmen reasserting has have been the been acknowledged, hierarchy observed of the and human dominant second, competitive male provides signaling the a simultaneous social among structure. populations screening Similar that This purposes: (DePaulo, 1988) and product announcements from firms trying bluff its (maintaining the equilibrium competition receiver first, would or that (Robertson enacting to come the deceit firm to an be et the information may threatened al, receiver 1995). engage In (screening). asymmetry), both instances, the bluff signaling has two of 5 believing irreversible and simultaneously, the move sender s if the superiority to current inform

7 What to its solve take social both the a hint group animal problems at (Lorenz, is the also at status the doing 1966). same of when both Doing time. redirecting its If cooperative so, the a provocateur, much its larger and competitive risk most to is likely its involved closest perception female in neighbor trying during within to is different initiated aggression status mating) of risk within for season, and by just is one competition the successfully taking stands of group, the a in parties, hint, and (in the redirected, consequently, this way, and will case this terminate Schilling but group unwanted unsuccessful, both dominance) any noted: prospects aggression, Taking the are of dominant of cooperation lost. a on future hint This both relations. fundamentally is sides, (in high looses this even If case, level its if problem; someone One perceived purely ). who from involves thinks deciphering discovering shares with formal a message the communication recipient that has certain been impressions planted solving within or mathematical provocation cannot, formal in a deduction, without nonzero-sum empirical that a game particular evidence, of maneuver joke deduce is bound any what more to be funny than understandings one (Schelling, can associations. a context prove, can 1960: by carries its Lorenz has been or Parker deliberately al. (1999) s thrown gorillas to call for are his a attention; very similar but situation: the signal be cooperatively while provocateur attention, managing simultaneously than competitively simultaneously at several the attention meaning, are a not competitive of available and the several social options. (with intents. group. The the It Taking hint social is directed must group, a hint be as obtained much and either as a maintain Attention Managing attention the Sharing simultaneously to bound, assert and its the legitimacy) a social Dilemma cooperation group and of to Coopetitive coopetitive and assert competition belonging relation Stance increases the (with pack). the the provocateur problems of to defended behavioral rationality, distributed and their between theory idea sense justly attention. that of tasks making the points firm and Although firm behavior limited out in by that managing proposing Ocasio is managerial span mostly is and competitive another more depth attention result interested limitation (see dynamics. of model is how situated, to Figure revisiting firms human Ocasio channel 1). structurally bounded Simon s (1997) and 6

8 Ocasio On economic one (1997, Figure hand, performance 1: 1995) he Ocasio cites opposes (1997) s induces Kiesler two model and corrective perspectives of Sproull situated actions, (1982) attention the and who and effect on firm advocated behavior of other, economic that (P. the 192) failures adversity. theory of group threat-rigidity congealing, phenomena that adversity search. can In rigidify triggers other are more effects words, simultaneous. the at control, (Staw the firm s there same and et is response al., Mimetic a time more trade-off 1981), a ridigity. to isomorphism higher which between environmental argues amount The the author brings that attention of adversity; paralleled then repertories given suggests leads while to of problemistic maintaining to responses that more same both oil advantage problems Occasio s situation diagram nature acceptance of which theory (problemistic an organization are would and in conformity nature search). A to with analyze very Indeed, (mimetic similar hypothetical such Ocasio of double-bind isomorphism) gorillas. teaches organization One effects that interesting B. trying by executives The mirroring to following twist get have an configurations. respective does (Figure not Both imply 2) has organizations than been more drawn than are in two this thus firms purpose, trying can be to notwithstanding intertwined maintain legitmacy that the very its dyadic same their of reciprocally partner. who (see Figure is likely A strategic missing 2). signal to be ignorant element (Spence, groups. Meanwhile, in of 1973; Occasio s the coopetitive Stiglitz, because model, 1975) nature however, of a their fair of the behavior coopetitive is goods the role to he stance, their or of she the competitor- consumes they customer, must Organization Figure A Strategic Group Although intensive the rivalry customer Competing (industry) attention. Hence, attention Maintaining Legitimacy between both share is 2: for Signaling Signaling Coopetitive organizations buying involved a and bundled Customer fair behavior Learning offer informational gains gathered privileged are organizations likely Behavior integrated Competing space attention Maintaining Legitimacy customer, despite of Competing running for asymmetrical coopetition. informational situation quite similar of a buyer of a lemon (Akerlof, Customers for compete Coopetition the overall offer on basis of the aggregator s reputation, 1970): they gains Organization grabbing share found offer, for B their maintained while for themselves selection there their they asymmetrical is with purchase share still of in the an respective components is adverse selection, as they purchase coopetitive offer of not In Akerlof s knowing seminal the intrinsic example, performance both buyer of its a examination the car. Although engine performance 7 and various seller components. can greatly eventually varies rely from make their own and

9 year, pipes, available access liabilities components electronic even carburetors, external from in with their as word-of-mouth the knowledge, cars. same etc, conceal A can brand well-known the be classic and of thoroughly wariness car, specialist car practice general sellers of inspected. registries. the state to may mechanical of wax, the try General Knowing blacken car, to and pieces. obfuscate knowledge that and general buyers shine The aspect evident rise engine could also of permissive, explain agreements. and the and less sustainability detectable, software components, to of a point paradoxical that however, can configurations both has challenge render such Akerlof s obfuscation as coopetitive theory more Obfuscation neutrally is functional the concealment capabilities of meaning to a technological in communication set or by chunk the use knowledge. of placebic and incompleteness, rely 1989). meaning (2007) it to industry For of instance, difficult is recipes indeterminacy, not a operation that necessary doctor temporarily irrelevance can to driven use overly obfuscate such and by worrying obfuscation incommensurability, malevolent their patient. lack of intents. Linsley order responses managers to and Faced conceal Lawrence (Spender, often with (2006) themselves confidence. comes found to a communicating high large that level firms commentary of annual obfuscation risks to reports letters the public regarding to from display opinion. CEOs imminent a very Similarly, in low losses, annual readability Bournois future reports level profits and contain when Point and the in policies by relies obfuscation textual complexity Rutherford a core of (2003) mechanism Operating produces and of modern similar Financial findings democracies. Reviews when (OFR). In he extensively his Kono study (2006) studied The forcing of sophisticated policy 75 countries, makers obfuscation Kono to a more finds of acute that communications democracy management promotes to of trade transparency, partners. optimal which obfuscation mostly trade sees obfuscated protection codes developments allows shared use before maintaining of obfuscation codes software, with integrating partners paradoxical software many strategic them that large development. in could alliance alliances software commercial be, by or rose firms Coping preventing become, steadily products, started with competitors. with opportunistic to a or weak obfuscate the when generalization legal leading Obfuscation their behavior intellectual source co- of the using volume competitor exact in learning and international same profitability. performance (Larsson trade et They negotiations alii, than allow, 1998). its non-obfuscated however, do Obfuscated not sharing codes version. commerce a critical allow Optimal software relations know-how, obfuscation to to run grow such with as such and algorithm as aerodynamics, to to gain fly learning a plane and on without low-altitude a very compromising altitude, flights for the with improvement balance a competitor; between in other allowing cooperation domains, this Advances develop curves allows obfuscating competition. ambiguity continuing consume rents strategies learning or itself. large cumulate to develop Causal require does shares enough not ambiguity the and of imply concentration companies gain experience that knowledge has of to knowledge take a market on specific lead. Such assets, learning as to 8 the been R&D sharing defined rents. investments. firm Advantageously, by needs Lippman Obfuscated to impose and the sharing Rumelt use causal of

10 (1982) of as & its that level Rumelt, the transformation to causal what as a 1982: coincidental factors connections 420). is are simply responsible While or between based deliberate causality on actions for the retention superior cannot addition and results be of (or of knowledge established artificial inferior) which and performance can concerning placebo include obfuscated complexity, uncertainty the (Lippman nature figure obfuscated does of (3) performance, not shows on prevent the two left: the versions and buyer eventually of to the use to same the inspect code, code, performs the obfuscated its application code. the right, The following and the code, same non- Obfuscation a (1991) of design, tree long history Figure techniques 3: that A clean began were non-obfuscated with not the developed birth code of (left) Ancient collaboration its societies. obfuscated in mind. Detienne version The (right) land mêtis, growers to have not the know-how brute jurors described in Ancient force. of of their how Greece, cunning More duplicity jurisdiction recently, as that of allows deter Lin meaning when imitation, Foxhall Greek and dispute heroes (2007: or deed conceal with constitutes to 107) defeat their describes real their neighbors, technique usage and architecture enemies how Vernant of olive their used has by Examples obfuscation. playing making. with While Hence, a language obfuscation narrative that has obfuscation authorizes a long history, puns, was a it word frequent never play achieved usage and versatility in Ancient perfection of Greece, sense In software duality, a technologies perfect from the dissociation telecommunication had brought between to this intelligibility and technique; media and that industry functional is to say to authenticity. achieve a perfect that collaboration the excessive increases towards avoiding the involved previous learning as partners. paragraphs, reduces impedes Borrowing the the mutual performance saw from temptation that ecology of signaling coopetitive for and opportunistic ethology, arrangements, essential behavior we to induced coopetitive Schelling a direct tensions (1960), proposition confrontation and we that inferred antagonistic redirected between that learning. weathering activity two because between that 9 firms Observing may out play a coopetitive ape problematic a behavior, central dyad. mechanism relation we Following inclined a

11 coopetitive hardly attention trade-off individualistic sharing, finally realizable further, between dyad with involves we conformity learned discretion. taking from with Investigating hints Ocasio the dyadic on (1997) the the partner competition; that need firms for (mimetic discretion constantly a deed isomorphism) impractical and arbitrate distracting in for farmers, this discovered exact cooperate purpose search. that without The modern between question cooperating, obfuscation olive was tree then and growers, techniques to competing find forced were a solution without to used cooperate in to competing. Ancient share with without Greece other and We the allows placebic Telecommunication infrastructures versatility mediating set but of protecting sharable of the destructive Greek their of information. farming language signaling techniques (Foxhall, by drowning by 2007). obfuscating antagonistic In other their words, learning disclosure obfuscation within using arrangements, service and multi-level is services a coopetitive competition production industry. and led The cooperation the rise industry of digital at different towards technologies layers complex of the its a its and Apple Association Management, precaution on-line symbiotic Inc delivery. digital insured (RIAA) with For stores by a example, proper adopting ITunes. Apple signaling The a pricing Inc revenue is policy structure delivering model towards of that of the digital the respects music the on-line musical Recording publishing the store pieces Digital is industry. Industry mimetic through asymmetrical share behavior industry. of the sent customer, and informational the right the historical signal and gains developing economic the (see recording figure an model in-depth 2) industry, by of captivating this understanding Apple industry. Inc most rapidly of Although of the consumer collected attention Rights coopetitors, that Although the Cupertino the delivery firm did system not share used with by Apple its coopetitors seems transparent the recording for this preferences with understandable the pursued system the recording was it is by recommendation inherently highly the industry. recording obfuscated. concealed Even engines industry, if to Algorithms the the the whole recording proprietary meaning used economic industry, for of to the Apple the model change display which Inc, and introduced readable of good not customer shared faith and by its is exceptional that Not coopetitors. steadily this losing growth. deadly market cooperation Obfuscation shares with created the the Cupertino a long-term firm. strategic period, While advantage Apple the recording Inc for is the industry from grasped all winning most strategies of the attention imply the share establishment with the customers. of a symbiotic agreement with gaining Apple New entrants can also adopt parasitism by stealing the attention share firm Internet firm market. the Inc. radio. main The Because incumbent, LastFM uses and venture developing the right is an to exemplar the emit same without of strategy such recording a that strategy. we digital described LastFM music, about is software music has Pursuing component obfuscated a that parasitic one self-installs major strategy, legal within backdrop LastFM the ITunes is in both order platform. a to website enter When platform this installed, coopetitive an multiple Scrobbling accumulated on supports. listens any learning support: the to This act music in practice of another recording played computer has functional by already constantly the itself, user, and records its consumption of digital a 10 been environment. the one s nicknamed digital preferences For music by instance, users player as as to a scrobbling. IPod, user re-use can and the go on

12 hiking connect listening, LastFM central company ITunes for its both many portable to hours, the music ITunes listening player, software, to such its as portable and directly IPod, music, and to upload and the LastFM when the chronology returning database. home, and sending platform. databases. software can their provide But accumulated will Of it course, then a can radio also upload learning once do that more. the this plays to entire library the Because authors LastFM library, is many present and platform, and customers composers its on evolution the LastFM firm are present scrobbling accumulates server, to its of own The the its platform their learning learning available and can for each use sophisticated customer: A collaborative powerful recommendation technologies to engine create that a new database help LastFM advantage recording the strategy customer a industry, coopetitive is extend exemplar LastFM its arrangement. primary of implementing the musical Similarly use of tastes obfuscation to the to obfuscated new trick authors played gain routine by and Apple asymmetric composers. within Inc can creation model. by of what a its valuable the coopetitor : customer meaning, listens), it delivers which but at transparently beyond turn becomes this placebo a legal the façade, core function of its (listing pursues economic in the between distributing the After CBS the CBS its Corporation. significant group, owning Hence, success and it in has grabbing publishing become attention contents, a core share, instrument and LastFM the Apple of was coopetition platform, acquired a Obfuscation ecosystem: customer geographic infrastructure, those is also contents. by economic behavior software), Google a at from core the multiple mechanism Mountain firm points developed View, (search another a CA. convergent engine, firm By at multiplying electronic the and center obfuscated mail, of its a listening coopetitive technology users when model. which transparent, When allows and customer operate bring an back has antagonistic means fruit to of learning, identify this learning the usually obfuscation, directly not electronic tolerated learning the search The obfuscated customers still specialized problem engines, do learning is indeed not is the that see Google for rejected. and this further do application Desktop not Although exploitation understand solution calls has to what the a never home superior main learning gain frequently, servers performance according taking of the i.e. firm. to place, repatriates market most Although they built-in share. Obfuscated detect that software an unauthorized such as a firewall. outgoing communication is taking, usually blocked can by its They obfuscation arrangement ones aggression do not techniques constitute to learning be certain a and make violation that obfuscated it very of announced the improbable components law. However, and visible for are the a functionalities not partner sophistication provided in a are coopetitive of disguise. that performed. Hence, like the gorilla who cannot decided if the invite truly modern Second phantasmagoric accompanies as a means collaboration, the collaboration. of signaling, firms Such are by forced blurring, a case to occurred take bluffing, a hint, when the either obfuscated inhabitants by redirecting learning the Rosedale, Life, a large persistent virtual world where users develop replicas an the organization virtual known world s and versions as development Philip regulation. of Linden reality, Second shared in discovered the virtual or 11 Life between is that world, a its the coopetitive inhabitants was owner also of a environment, main (and company, component customers which Philip of

13 Linden services. been entertaining the world, much put Labs) Originally, platform. its and democratic Linden the As virtual the Labs world processes, themselves, world grew, started it who absorbed Second as owns an experiment, Life most the architecture was of the nothing and deviant little and else behaviors thought provide than has the such virtual real started world, to so impose that the regulation owner of on behaviors. platform, which However, legally inhabitants liable compete in real doubt as isolated they cooperate islands, like such a the world. real They world. compete They cooperate for attractive as parts the life of the of land, the of sanctions could with world to the deviant depends intent inhabitants of on doing minimal who good cooperation might started have and decided apply game discretionary that play. laws Linden from and Labs, obfuscated outside with no interventions disturbance harmony started world. real not was be of applied were gone: its precarious obfuscated, redirected a virtual coopetitive aggression the and virtual phantasmagoric equilibrium. took world place continued But world. mistakes many As to long forms: grow, were as the made. inhabitants with various most to own and run independent press, both in virtual world and the little Excessive Democratic rules were asked. A supplier of electronic voting systems from And ecosystem, world of their was aggression suggested the good supplier, faith and by then, Labs, the founder the inhabitants of the virtual redirected world. real In discretion riddled with and conflicts. lack of discretion both contributed to unbalanced the coopetition. from learning platform, other ITunes the vendors, the three platform. grounded the ITunes In above songs in LastFM direct Apple platform examples, in of another competition case Inc discovered without introduced study, obfuscated learning the with infringing obfuscated new ITunes, ecosystem. learning September music copyright but learning serves artists cannot Interestingly, 2008 laws, the can allows be its purchased purpose own be yet purchased the on yielding recommendation firm LastFM of back mitigating to its through benefit on own the inhabitants engine, its learning own but was closed the made latter ecosystem. explicit has intrinsically as The the Linden Second a poorer Labs Life performance were case struggling study as is different. sources with a rapid its Obfuscated learning growth we central petty exerted, chapter discover criminality not of are Philip without that forced tolerance K. humor their Dick s run virtual by to a for virtual Substance obfuscated instance environment. tractor Death, building until Explicit completion i.e. a strategies virtual a and never-ending jail of direct by inspired their discretion sanction. field by the play where Here final was a fair claimed was to strategies where revise not by role users. justified than its in a recording maintaining Google ten by years the Inc delivery process, archive has coopetitive known of of and services. their subsequently similar environment learning The difficulties firm was moved perceived from an exaggerated Mountain when its as obfuscated well customers View measure, balanced accepted learning groups Towards can in other operates domains freely such a various as geo-location, range of obfuscated the creation learning of its devices. own Web browser and Coopetition commoditization competitors a theory in is an forces assembly of emerging obfuscated firms of to their paradigm. integrate cooperation offers 12 more to The customers. and combination more The generic quest of globalization components for larger market from and

14 coverage such situations, (1970), configuration mechanisms collaboration as the Spence also such ITunes induces as (1973) a platform. reciprocal firms and In Stiglitz sharing adverse our investigation, a (1975). selection coopetitive We inspired we space first compared facing by concluded the coopetitive a works single that of customer, Ancient in would order lead to the obtain coopetitive asymmetric dyadic learning partners gains to deploy bypassing parallel their learning Akerlof such dyadic ad were cooperating Greece agreement within olive tree the with same growers their learning (Foxhall, coopetitors system 2007), (Figure was we possible 2). then Inspired suggested if both learning the that practices competing devices a behavior, but can mutually the or same at obfuscated. least time a legal build Doing behavior, its own so, discretionary the to other coopetitive members learning firm of (see the is still coopetitive Figure signaling 4) platform, a fair Organization Maintaining Legitimacy A Signaling Coopetitive Strategic (industry) fair behavior offer Group Maintaining Legitimacy Organization B Several and Batista authors (2009) are suggested proposed Figure attention network coopetition by Competing Learning differentiating 4: Obfuscated share Obfuscated typologies to for from micro) and respective gains terms distinguish for asymmetrical A would like to propose several categories of knowledge learning Customer Learning the of of coopetitive level simple learning Obfuscated informational coopetitive from of and dyadic interfirm strategies; Competing attention B economic spaces framework. empirical research These categories that may do contribute not represent to a a more finding, structured but coopetition gains share for rather relation study within value. noticeably probable (macro, of from Likewise, a coopetitive alleys complex Dagnino management of growth and innovation. meso, Mixed motive cooperation, benevolence contrition (RSTL) we The perfect first competition, generic learning perfect strategy information we propose and is mutual situated transparency within classic behavior. context Such contexts strategy such accommodate a the context, are reciprocal traditional their market behavior symmetric to regulates laboratory order transparent competition experiments to of game theorists. We call this of 13 win learning over (Clifton, the (RSTL, cooperative 1977), see table dynamics. and 1 below). players The In

15 (Spence, misunderstood. learning When the symmetric behavioral information strategy 1973; games determinants Robertson is circulates hence of dissuasion, transparent, freely at of al., the persuasion, amongst interaction. 1995), and it partners, but aims and Partners signals conviction, at corrective obtaining use get an signaling easily from actions expected the jammed are partner, intensively behavior. taken and on by strategies by been of behavior (Lorenz, co-opetition adding won. (Axelrod, generosity, Vice can versa, Co-opetition 1984). still for a partner engage example When hence that messages by cooperation has heavily compensating betrayed are depends misunderstood, after the a being fragile losing upon punished party gentleman s complex partners once for tit correct the his agreement deal for selfish them tat (1988)(Wu 1966) and display Axelrod, similar 1995). learning Natural strategies. biotopes They (Hawley, are, ) as Axelrod and animal and packs Dion has Asymmetric In relationship a context noted of --, Open a similarly free Adverse information used Learning by and nations, perfect (AOAL) bats, market, birds strategies and one monkeys. found continue individual antagonistic adverse the situation. can literature, dramatically The Charles expectation, change River the rats or the perspective. bend inescapable their aversion In can constraint, the always various to shocks walk of examples an in away on-going order from decide change. feeding, risks, learning to Mosquito protect when they their Fishes face feeding over-specializes an abrupt regime. change Organizations in environmental hunting engage strategy, trends, in despite similar and we architectures. to Intel develop pursued an adverse RISC architectures, learning strategy despite within its their path core dependency to accommodate on previous to despite RIAA. reduce When become static its operating symbiotic Microsoft systems. economic developed Apple model engaged an based Internet in on DRM-free browser, the defense distribution despite of digital its path rights digital dependency discover uncertainty These learning an strategies adverse are selection developed scheme openly. (Stigler, Signaling 1961; Akerlof, here with used music, with direct inefficient. cooperation Hence, becomes firms too expensive, in contingent traditional altruism, tit for tat i.e. strategies trying 1970). the 333). ever more minimal conditions for the evolution of by selecting dominant simultaneously 1999). parsimony In reviewing males displaying the need literature, recipients to a protect cooperative of we temporary found their similar stance favoritism competitive behaviors for mating (Hammond status within purposes gorilla and the (Parker Axelrod, pack, packs, and 2006: while when al., to redirected such concealment. openly. meaning Timing strategies: Firms As aggression a matter Gorillas like asymmetric gorillas, of are fact, both rather take a visibility signaling open explicit a hint is adverse and key, about (Schelling, intelligence learning their all players intents. 1960), gathering (AOAL). must They and tactic. clearly eventually are There We conducted see named is their use strategy The is in still key, terms pursuing for of the direct the gain goal and in of asymmetry indirect maintaining reciprocity. will the only on-going They be temporary, are and swift future as and relationships. the dynamic. overall no the Obfuscated archetype successful learning of development such a strategies: strategy. of the Adverse ITunes 14 platform and Non-Adverse and business model could well be

16 Our partners major Non-Adverse settings. Greece their observation role around handling Obfuscated of the the ITunes co-existence causal Learning platform ambiguity of (NAOL) suggests partially and friction has cooperative, that a obfuscation long a history long-lasting and partially may actually co-coopetitive co-opetition. antagonistic (1989) domains (Foxhall, We found without 2007), sharing of olive obfuscated the tree specific growers technical asset needed of secrets their to of regional partially production share trade. in access Spender Ancient play to a peers have company In opportunistic studied to gave cooperate, similar the role even examples when obfuscation working of the use for creating of competitors. industry-jargon, selective More perceptual recently, which allows several filtering industry readable a cooperative documents agreement, official communications non-adverse (Linsley obfuscation et al, 2007). is used to prevent works such reciprocity, behavior for (Larsson example and a al., fast 1998). evolving As population the cooperation of temporary has no direct partners, ( ) others Algorithms construction Obfuscation new when as (Riolo open benevolence source and al., communities, to 2001: one 441). agent partners NAOL increases may strategies the try chance to trigger are of indeed indirect receiving quite reciprocity, ambiguity for is industry, not low used altitude are with shared flying, an aggressive between which constructors purpose, are essential but under solely to the obfuscated to growth allow the of algorithms. the help growth frequent. airline from no of simultaneous to adopting memory applications (Lippman a of cooperation sociological past and encounters and exploration Rupert, and perspective competition is 1982). required of Technology new possible co-opetition, (Riolo domains, between allows al., here while 2001: partners for the a 441). maintaining co-opetition technology who Hence, do not instead makes causal where need of finally, below). The competitive here physically fourth which proposed meet, defies who the generic do resource-based not need to question view strategy of coopetitive their in a respective coopetitive agreements strategic environment (see intent, table and information obfuscated adverse learning (COAL). The purpose of obfuscation 1, deed. ITunes recommendations still We observed to and allow trade ecosystem. such cooperating secret. a strategy But LastFM with when concealment a competitor we performs analyze also without a the plays better growth here disclosing learning, of a LastFM more discretionary competitive and better the host s as platform, Pandora, platform. LastFM hence, Contrary according directly learns to other to directly installs users, Internet an from than obfuscated radios his the embedded based her routine listening collaborative learning within habits. the engine filtering, user s This within kind ITunes such its of preferences articulation primary demands demand to is not ITunes for per digital say commercial music, a parasitic by platform. performing behavior, On improved the LastFM contrary, discovery, ends LastFM up extending and performs returning the platform. optimal strategic deploy is independence As obfuscation nevertheless with both their Ancient agreement, (of (Kono, adverse, both Greece 2006) partners). but as olive not allowing is The learning cooperation strategy without that LastFM compromising has an to 15 allowed tree legally growing, any allowed recording and to examples borrow storage from consumer s Detienne its own

17 and tolerance Vernant obfuscation (1991), the limit (see table of deployment 1, below). of such learning strategy lies in the social Asymmetric Reciprocal Transparent outputs) Generic RSTL Symmetric Strategies Learning learn shared Perfect perfect market (Clifton, Competition information competition 1977) and Mutual and create learning 1984) early Cooperation cooperative benevolence gains signaling (Axelrod, Tit-for-tat Co-opetition Adverse (Axelrod, commensalism 1984) strategies openly (Both parties Learning AOAL Open need to Fombrun, 1983) (Astley and adverse learn situation) a mutually Individual maintain despite (Skinner, 1986; 1995). antagonistic beard Menec by Burden adversity learning subject. 1968; adaptation learning of Bence, al. to is Use reduce adverse (Stigler, 1970; while discretionary and 1997) conformity of balancing Spence, signaling uncertainty 1961; selection attention Akerlof, 1973) (Ocasio, to in Contingent when cooperation altruism Non-Adverse expensive & Axelrod, (Hammond Obfuscated NAOL Lorenz redirected taking (Schelling, a (1966) s hint activity, 2006) 1960). and (One without party Learning learning e.g. non aggressive disclosure purpose) with a Use to (Spender, obfuscation selective audiences al., preserve 2007) of industry filtering 1989) (Linsley discretion for jargon and of Cooperation direct reciprocity 2001). used opportunistic (Larsson to or Obfuscation prevent readable et (Riolo al., without behavior 1998) et is al. Obfuscation maintain causal is used to Competitive ambiguity and Rumelt, (Lippman Adverse COAL Obfuscated sharing components cooperative (e.g. Foxhall, olive sensitive 2007). tree system 1982) of growing; a (One parasitic disclosed party adverse Learning learning) engages non- in Obfuscated has cunning Vernant, parasitism Fombrun, a purpose (Detienne 1991) 1983). learning (Astley of or and & Search obfuscation 2006) cooperation compromising independence. allowing for an without (Kono, optimal strategic Obfuscation is used to Conclusion disguise antagonistic within ecosystem. a cooperative and Limit behavior The make objective of Table this chapter 1: A proposed was to typology explore different of learning learning strategies tolerance obfuscation. strategies to that is the conventions, and from maintaining corrective tensions coopetition etc) of behaviors that possible are (generosity, deployed and simultaneous profitable by contrition, coopetitive for cooperation partners. signaling partners Our and of to inquiry competition. good weather faith, started signaling We ambiguities examining learned can it interaction. game theory a paradoxical (Axelrod, agreement, 1984) that and appropriate eventually signaling for one of can those induce partners partners to win of 1966), transparency corrective over. In and a Looking second economics could step, be classic achieved (Akerlof, we examined works simultaneously, 1970), of the biology role we of hypothesized (Hawley, knowledge thus diminishing 1950), within that etiology discretion the coopetitive need (Lorenz, and for examples concealed discoveries sustain, These of signaling. but obfuscated authenticity We found processes, and functionality the telecommunication i.e. cooperative preserved. processes We and then media where synthesized industry meaning various and propositions or win four over, propositions trigger a coopetition. many questions. generic learning strategies that may be used these to is threaten collaborating the balance at of coopetitive same time agreements. can be 16 First, waived, Second, the as apparent obfuscated the use paradox obfuscated learning of competing does learning not

18 strategies coopetitive customer ecosystem knowledgeable indeed base can archetypes. based displace within discovery and The platform distort case study of situations its unknowns of competitor, LastFM that can unknowns is but exemplar: be then read, creates (artists the first firm a totally glance, that is sourcing were different as pure generally presence of LastFM from the within user), the yielding ITunes its platform profits from seems symbiotic discovery in function. its façade, While not its partners a focus harmonious arrangement, a in assume rather a coopetitive growth overlooking antagonistic that without knowledge agreement. the learning hurting fact and This that partners. learning and assumption coopetitive strategy. possess Fourth, over-emphasizes ecosystems Third, the most same studies can ontology indeed the coopetition paradox for develop both of is between the role competition of the economic managerial and and cooperation, skills technological that allow while design for obfuscated a in better the sustainability learning management strategies of the coopetitive underline tension Armfield, economics. References: Akerlof, Quarterly Evidence G.A., J.M. (1970), (2007), Journal for the "The Manipulating of cognitive Economics, Market vulnerability for 84(3), perceptions 'Lemons': pp. model of Quality spider of the Uncertainty characteristics etiology and of fear, and the predicted Market Journal Mechanism." spider of Anxiety fear: Baumard, Axelrod, Astley Disorders, Environments, W.G. R (1984), and and 21(5), D. The C.J. Dion Academy pp. evolution Fombrun (1988) of "The of Management (1983), cooperation, Further Collective Evolution Review, New York: Vol. Strategy: of 8, Cooperation," Basic No. Social Books. 4, pp Ecology Science, of 242 Organizational (9) pp Bournois, Bence, International p energetic J.R. P. (1986), (2008), tradeoffs, Journal Feeding An Environmental of Asymmetric Entrepreneurship rate and attack Perspective Biology and specialization: of Small Fishes; Business. Coopetitive June the 1986, roles Strategies, of Vol. predator 16 Issue: Forthcoming experience Number and 1-3 in: Brandenburger Burkhardt Clifton, French Ethology, J. A. F. R. CEO and (1977), (2005), A.M. University Point, letters, and "Competition Patterns S. B.J. of Journal (2006), Chicago Nalebuff of Behavior: of and A Business Press. (1996), letter the evolution from Konrad Strategy, Co-opetition, the of Lorenz, president: the Vol. capitalist New 27 Niko Issue seduction, York: mode Tinbergen, Doubleday. pp. of charm production", and and the obfuscation founding Cambridge of Detienne, DePaulo, Dagnino, Journal Study Value Experiments G.B., B.J. of creation. of Nonverbal (1988), and Economics, Padula, Cases. Research In Behavior, G. Dagnino, vol. London: (2009). 1, no. Journal Deception Routledge. 2, G.B. Coopetition pp of and Nonverbal in Forthcoming Rocco, Marketing Strategy: Behavior, E. A Communications: (Eds). New 12(4), Kind Coopetition pp. of Interfirm Its Strategy: Relevance Dynamics Theory to the for Foxhall, University Trans. L. Marcel Janet (2007), Press. and Lloyd. Olive Jean-Pierre Chicago: Cultivation Vernant U of Chicago in (1991), Ancient Press. 17 Cunning Greece: Intelligence Seeking the Greek Ancient Culture Economy, and Society. Oxford

19 Grandori, Hammond Hawley, Hoffman, Inter-firm Expensive," Press A. Company R.A. H. & Neri networks, (1950). and Theoretical M R. (1999), Human Axelrod, London: Population The Ecology Routledge. (2006) fairness A Biology "Evolution Theory properties 69 of Community of of Contingent interfirm Structure. networks, Altruism New When in York: A. Grandori Cooperation The Ronald (Ed.), Is Kiesler, Khanna, Theory A and of Industry Ocasio Attention W. (2001), to Not External All Events, Are Organization Attended Equally: Science, Toward Vol. 12 a Issue Middle-Range Kono, 434. cooperation S. T., and Gulati, L. and Sproull R. relative &(1982) Nohria, scope. "Managerial N. Strategic (1998), Management responses The dynamics to Journal, changing of learning 19: environments: alliances: Perspectives Competition, 4, p Krane, problem Political D. (2006), sensing Science Optimal from Review, social Obfuscation: Vol. cognition." 100 Issue Democracy Administrative 3, pp and Science Trade Policy Quarterly, Transparency, 27: American on Larsson, the 88(2), R.V. generality pp. and Wagner, of the A.R. laws (1975), of learning, Taste Journal aversion of learning Comparative with a delayed and Physiological shock: Implications Psychology, for Linsley, Lehrman, Lewis, Dilemma: 9(3), Review D. R., (1969), D of Bengtsson, S. Biology, Collective (1953) Convention. 298, A L., Knowledge Henriksson, critique A Philosophical of Development Konrad K., & Study, Sparks, Lorenz Harvard in J. Strategic theory (1998) University of Alliances, The instinctive Press, Interorganizational Organization Harvard, behavior, Mass. Quarterly Learning Science, Lorenz, Lippman, of Efficiency obfuscation, P.M., S.A.; M. Rumelt, Under Lawrence Accounting, Competition, D.P., (2007), (1982), Auditing Risk The Uncertain Bell reporting & Accountability Journal Imitability: by of the Economics, largest Journal, An Analysis UK 13, Vol. companies: (2), 20 of pp. Issue Interfirm readability 4, pp. Differences and lack Machiavelli. Harcourt, Press. K. (1970), (1966), Brace Studies On & Co. aggression Animal (Das and Human Sogenannte Behavior, Böse Vol. Zur I Naturgeschichte and II; Cambridge: Der Harvard Aggression), Univ. in Mariani, McKelvey, pp. Consortium M.M. The (2007), Prince. of Opera Coopetition In: Houses, Peter Bondanella International Emergent and Mark Studies Strategy: Musa of (Eds), Management Empirical New York: Evidence and Penguin, Organization, from Italian 37(2), Mesterton-Gibbons, Menec, Univ. V.H., California B. R.P. (1982), Perry, Press. Organizational C. W Struthers Systematics: (1995), The Taxonomy, Effect of Evolution, Adverse Classification, Learning Conditions Berkeley: Nelson, Action-Oriented 63, Scientist, pp : M. and and State-Oriented Adams, E.S. College (1998), Animal Students, contests Journal as of evolutionary Experimental games, Education, American Vol. on Ocasio, Mass.: 18: induced W. W. R.R. (1997), (1995), Harvard change and Winter, Towards "The Univ. and threat-rigidity", enactment Press. S.G. an (1982), Attention-Based of economic Research Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change, Cambridge, 18 View in adversity: Organizational of the a Firm, reconciliation Behavior, Strategic of Vol. Management theories 17 pp of Journal, failure-

20 Parker, Piaget, Riolo, Robertson Orangutans Nature, Incumbent R., J. S.T., (1972). T.S., M. 414 R. D. Reactions", J. To in (22), W. Cohen Eliashberg, Comparative Understand Mitchell, pp Journal R. and Is and Perspective, Axelrod To Talia of H. Invent. Marketing, L. Rymon, (2001), Miles New Cambridge (1995), Vol. York: "Evolution (Eds.) 59, The University "New July (1999) Viking of 1995, Product Cooperation The Press. Press, pp. Mentalities Announcement Inc. without of Gorillas Reciprocity, Signals and Spence, Skinner, Rutherford, Schelling, Robin, Accounting 7 C. Issue: (2000), B. Number (2003), Disclosure Fear: 2, A pp. Obfuscation, Genealogy in Corporate of Textual Morals, Governance, Complexity Social Journal Research, and of Management the Vol. Role 67 Issue of and 4, Regulated pp. Governance, A. B.F. Thomas M., (1968). (1973), C. The (1960), "Job Technology Market The Strategy Signaling", of Teaching. of Conflict. Quarterly New Cambridge: York: Journal Appleton-Century-Crofts. Harvard of Economics, University Vol. Press. 87, No. Narrative 3, Vol. pp. Stigler, Staw, Spender, Starbuck, Judgment, Journal J.C. W.H.; of (1989), Economic Oxford: Barnett, Industry Basil Behavior M.L.; Blackwell. Recipes: Baumard, & Organization, An P. Enquiry (2008), 66(1), into Payoffs p. the 7-21 Nature and pitfalls and Sources of strategic of Managerial Stiglitz, behavior: B.M., George L.E. A J. multilevel (1961), Sandelands, "The analysis." Economics and J.E. Administrative of Dutton Information", (1981), Science Journal Threat-rigidity Quarterly, of Political 26: effects Economy, in organizational 69 learning, Wu, J. 25 Economic Conflict and J.E. R. (1975), Axelrod Resolution, Review, The (1995) 65(3), 39, Theory pp. "How pp of to Screening, 189. Cope with Education Noise in the and Iterated the Distribution Prisoner's of Dilemma," Income, Journal American (3), 213- of 19

Mobile Identity Management: An Enacted View

Mobile Identity Management: An Enacted View Mobile Identity Management: An Enacted View George Roussos, Don Peterson, and Uma Patel Abstract. Growth of mobile business requires the ability to provide context aware services when and where needed,

More information

An introduction and guide to buying Cloud Services

An introduction and guide to buying Cloud Services An introduction and guide to buying Cloud Services DEFINITION Cloud Computing definition Cloud Computing is a term that relates to the IT infrastructure and environment required to develop/ host/run IT

More information

Motivations of hybrid wireless community participants: a qualitative analysis of Swiss FON members

Motivations of hybrid wireless community participants: a qualitative analysis of Swiss FON members Motivations of hybrid wireless community participants: a qualitative analysis of Swiss FON members Giovanni Camponovo Department of Management and Social Sciences University of Applied Sciences of Southern

More information

Constructivist and Ecological Rationality in Economics 1

Constructivist and Ecological Rationality in Economics 1 Constructivist and Ecological Rationality in Economics 1 Vernon L. Smith, 2 Professor of Economics and Law Interdisciplinary Center for Economic Science George Mason University When we leave our closet,

More information

Rolling out trust management. to cloud-based service ecosystems

Rolling out trust management. to cloud-based service ecosystems DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE SERIES OF PUBLICATIONS C REPORT C-2013-2 Rolling out trust management to cloud-based service ecosystems Sini Ruohomaa, Lea Kutvonen UNIVERSITY OF HELSINKI FINLAND Contact

More information



More information

Role of ICT for the growth of small enterprises in Ethiopia

Role of ICT for the growth of small enterprises in Ethiopia Role of ICT for the growth of small enterprises in Ethiopia Yasin Ali Hassen Supervisor: Maria Spante, PhD Examiner: Per Flensburg, PhD Master s Thesis in Information Systems Department of Economics and

More information

Trends, Challenges and Strategy in the Forensic Science Sector

Trends, Challenges and Strategy in the Forensic Science Sector Trends, Challenges and Strategy in the Forensic Science Sector Dr. T.B.P.M. Tjin-A-Tsoi Chief Executive Officer Netherlands Forensic Institute 1 - - - - - - - - - March 2013 1 The Netherlands Forensic

More information

Strategic Management of Intellectual Property:

Strategic Management of Intellectual Property: Strategic Management of Intellectual Property: AN INTEGRATED APPROACH William W. Fisher III Felix Oberholzer-Gee In many organizations, the R&D, strategy, and legal functions are poorly integrated. As

More information


SPECIFIC AND GENERAL KNOWLEDGE, AND ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE SPECIFIC AND GENERAL KNOWLEDGE, AND ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE Michael C. Jensen Harvard Business School mjensen@hbs.edu and William H. Meckling University of Rochester Abstract We analyze how the cost of

More information

journey 2018 the 3 rd digital revolution

journey 2018 the 3 rd digital revolution journey 2018 the 3 rd digital revolution agility and fragility Your business technologists. Powering progress Welcome The Scientific Community anticipates and crafts the Atos vision of the major trends

More information

COMMENTARY. The Entrepreneurial Development System: Transforming Business Talent and Community Economies

COMMENTARY. The Entrepreneurial Development System: Transforming Business Talent and Community Economies ECONOMIC Lichtenstein, Lyons DEVELOPMENT / ENTREPRENEURIAL QUARTERLY DEVELOPMENT / February 2001 SYSTEM COMMENTARY The Entrepreneurial Development System: Transforming Business Talent and Community Economies

More information

A Process for COTS Software Product Evaluation

A Process for COTS Software Product Evaluation A Process for COTS Software Product Evaluation Santiago Comella-Dorda John Dean Grace Lewis Edwin Morris Patricia Oberndorf Erin Harper July 2004 TECHNICAL REPORT ESC-TR-2003-017 Pittsburgh, PA 15213-3890

More information

If you cant beat them join them

If you cant beat them join them If you cant beat them join them Wolf-Dieter Eberwein, Schemeil Yves To cite this version: Wolf-Dieter Eberwein, Schemeil Yves. If you cant beat them join them. World International Studies Conference, Aug

More information



More information

Demand-side Issues of the Service Economy

Demand-side Issues of the Service Economy Demand-side Issues of the Service Economy Pascal Ughetto To cite this version: Pascal Ughetto. Demand-side Issues of the Service Economy. Review of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis (Routledge): SSH

More information

A Normative Multi-Agent Systems Approach to the Use of Conviviality for Digital Cities

A Normative Multi-Agent Systems Approach to the Use of Conviviality for Digital Cities A Normative Multi-Agent Systems Approach to the Use of Conviviality for Digital Cities Patrice Caire University of Luxembourg, Computer Science Department L-1359, Luxembourg, 6, Rue Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi,

More information

Introduction to Recommender Systems Handbook

Introduction to Recommender Systems Handbook Chapter 1 Introduction to Recommender Systems Handbook Francesco Ricci, Lior Rokach and Bracha Shapira Abstract Recommender Systems (RSs) are software tools and techniques providing suggestions for items

More information

Network security: Protecting our critical infrastructures

Network security: Protecting our critical infrastructures Network security: Protecting our critical infrastructures This paper was prepared by Professor Seymour E. Goodman, Pam Hassebroek, and Professor Hans Klein, Georgia Institute of Technology (United States).

More information

Educational Design Research. Edited by: Jan van den Akker University of Twente, the Netherlands

Educational Design Research. Edited by: Jan van den Akker University of Twente, the Netherlands Educational Design Research Edited by: Jan van den Akker University of Twente, the Netherlands Koeno Gravemeijer University of Utrecht, the Netherlands Susan McKenney University of Twente, the Netherlands

More information

NESSI White Paper, December 2012. Big Data. A New World of Opportunities

NESSI White Paper, December 2012. Big Data. A New World of Opportunities NESSI White Paper, December 2012 Big Data A New World of Opportunities Contents 1. Executive Summary... 3 2. Introduction... 4 2.1. Political context... 4 2.2. Research and Big Data... 5 2.3. Purpose of

More information

Master Education Programmes in Network and System Administration

Master Education Programmes in Network and System Administration Master Education Programmes in Network and System Administration Mark Burgess Oslo University College Karst Koymans Universiteit van Amsterdam ABSTRACT We report on and discuss our experiences with teaching

More information



More information



More information

Over-scripting CSCL: The risks of blending collaborative learning with instructional design.

Over-scripting CSCL: The risks of blending collaborative learning with instructional design. Over-scripting CSCL: The risks of blending collaborative learning with instructional design. Pierre Dillenbourg To cite this version: Pierre Dillenbourg. Over-scripting CSCL: The risks of blending collaborative

More information

The Relationship Between Intellectual Property Law and Competition Law: An Economic Approach

The Relationship Between Intellectual Property Law and Competition Law: An Economic Approach The Relationship Between Intellectual Property Law and Competition Law: An Economic Approach Pierre Régibeau and Katharine Rockett University of Essex and CEPR Revised, June 2004 Abstract This paper presents

More information

Customer Relationship Management: Emerging Practice, Process, and Discipline

Customer Relationship Management: Emerging Practice, Process, and Discipline Journal of Economic and Social Research 3(2) 2001, 2002 Preliminary Issue, 1-34 Customer Relationship Management: Emerging Practice, Process, and Discipline Atul Parvatiyar 1 & Jagdish N. Sheth 2 Abstract.

More information

Cloud Computing and Information Policy: Computing in a Policy Cloud? Forthcoming in the Journal of Information Technology and Politics, 5(3).

Cloud Computing and Information Policy: Computing in a Policy Cloud? Forthcoming in the Journal of Information Technology and Politics, 5(3). CLOUD COMPUTING AND INFORMATION POLICY 1 Cloud Computing and Information Policy: Computing in a Policy Cloud? Forthcoming in the Journal of Information Technology and Politics, 5(3). Paul T. Jaeger University

More information

<<213>> Can We Trust Trust? Diego Gambetta

<<213>> Can We Trust Trust? Diego Gambetta Citation: Gambetta, Diego (2000) Can We Trust Trust?, in Gambetta, Diego (ed.) Trust: Making and Breaking Cooperative Relations, electronic edition, Department of Sociology, University of Oxford, chapter

More information


BEST PRACTICE GUIDELINE: BIG DATA Association for Data-driven Marketing & Advertising BEST PRACTICE GUIDELINE: BIG DATA A guide to maximising customer engagement opportunities through the development of responsible Big Data strategies.

More information