Title: Dancing with rivals: Managing coopetition in publicly initiated R&D consortia

Speaker: Audrey Rourye(MBS School of Business)

Date: Wecnesday, April 15

Time: 4:30–5:50 PM
Venue: SKKU, 90402 International Hall

Abstract: 

This paper examines how actors manage coopetition tensions during the formation of publicly initiated R&D consortia. While such consortia are increasingly used to address complex technological challenges, their formation phase remains underexplored—particularly when they involve direct competitors and are shaped by public authorities (Doz et al., 2000; Hagedoorn et al., 2000). Drawing on a longitudinal qualitative case study of the IRIS European satellite program, the study analyzes the creation of the SpaceRISE consortium, an extreme case of enforced multilateral coopetition at the formation stage of R&D consortium. IRIS² European satellite program aims at launching a new telecommunication satellite constellation to avoid overreliance on the American system, Starlink. This program was requested by the European Commission and involved three competing satellite operators: SES, Hispasat, Eutelsat, and two satellite manufacturers: Thales Alenia Space and Airbus Defence and Space. Based on 34 interviews and extensive secondary data, the findings reveal a threephase formation process. First, a publicly engineered coalition emerges, where collaboration is framed as a partnership among equals, temporarily masking underlying tensions. Second, as discussions move toward implementation, multilevel coopetition tensions intensify across vertical (operators vs. manufacturers) and horizontal (within each group) relationships, leading to limited knowledge sharing, conflicting interests, and coordination challenges (Bengtsson & Kock, 2000; Gnyawali & Park, 2011; Farazi et al., 2024). Third, these tensions are resolved through governance reconfiguration: the initial structure evolves into a hierarchical hybrid model, with operators assuming leadership and manufacturers repositioned as subcontractors. The study makes three main contributions. It reconceptualizes consortium formation as a politically embedded coordination process rather than a purely voluntary alignment among firms (Ring & Van de Ven, 1994). It advances coopetition research by highlighting the multilevel nature of tensions in consortia. Finally, it identifies governance reconfiguration— particularly structural separation—as a key mechanism for managing persistent coopetition tensions during formation (Provan & Kenis, 2008).