Firms that are located in a cluster may confront cooperation and competition at the same time. The advantage of cooperation and the disadvantage of competition on a firm may need to examine the firm survival in a cluster as the cluster evolves. Employing the population ecology viewpoint, this study tries to address coopetition issues in a cluster to examine the impact of coopetition on firm survival rate. Analyzing yacht industry data in Taiwan from 1957–2010, this study indicates that the founding rate of yacht firms will be positively related with the cluster size. Additionally, during the competition period, those firms located inside the cluster may have a higher dissolution rate than those firms outside the cluster, indicating the disadvantage of competition on the firm. Finally, this study finds that those firms located inside the cluster will be more likely to become larger and have capabilities to survive. The results in this study provide insights on addressing coopetition issues in a cluster.

From a coopetition perspective, we differentiate between a multinational enterprise's product-similar subsidiary network and product-different subsidiary network in a host country. We argue that the product-similar network will have a curvilinear (inverted U-shaped) effect on foreign subsidiary performance, whereas the product-different network will produce a monotonic (positive) effect. Moreover, we introduce host-country economic advantage and intangible resource of the subsidiary as moderators into the relationship between subsidiary network and performance. Using longitudinal panel data of foreign subsidiaries, we find evidence that when host-country economic advantage is large, and the level of intangible asset intensity is high, the inverted U-shaped effect of product-similar subsidiary network is less pronounced. Moreover, host-country economic advantage and intangible asset intensity both enhance the positive effect of product-different subsidiary network. However, the moderating effect of intangible asset intensity is opposite to our prediction.

Building on the co-opetition perspective, this study takes a unified approach to examine relationship benefits and transaction costs in buyer–supplier relationships. We argue that buyer–supplier vertical dyads fall into one of four distinct co-opetition types based on their respective degrees of cooperation and competition. Each co-opetition situation then corresponds to unique levels of relationship benefits and transaction costs. A sample of 225 supplier–buyer dyads from the Chinese home appliance industry confirms that competition has a positive effect on transaction costs and a negative effect on relationship benefits, while cooperation stimulates greater relationship benefits but affects transaction costs mainly at low competition levels. The results advance prior research on buyer–supplier relationships and co-opetition and offer valuable avenues for future research.