Avalikes ja eraorganisatsioonides on veidi erinevate rõhuasetuste, eesmärkide ning võimalustega üheks sageli tõusetunud (kuid teadvustamata?) dilemmaks küsimus sellest, kas keskenduda väärtuste (koos)loomisele või läbirääkimisvõimekuste arendamisele (täiendavateks või teistsugusteks ressurssideks). Siinviidatud artiklis lähtuvad autorid organisatsioonidest konkurentsitingimustes ning seetõttu artikkel siin oma koha leidiski. Ühe võimaliku ja sageli esitatava perspektiivina võib kohata seisukohta, et nii avalikud kui eraorganisatsioonid konkureerivad piiratud ressursside väljal. Avalike organisatsioonide puhul sobib siin näiteks Kaitseväe ja PPA orkestrite koondamise küsimused, mis avalikkuses äsja suurt vastukaja leidis, st mõlemad konkureerivad riigieelarve ressurssidele. Avalikus sektoris ei ole harvad need strateegiad, kus eesmärk on “rohkem välja rääkida” ning selle järgi ka juhtide tööd hinnata (näiteks, kas juht suutis välja kaubelda palgatõusu, uue hoone või sõidukid, jne).

Kontekstiks:

A critical strategy choice for a firm’s management is then on which domain to focus innovation efforts? At a high level, the firm may seek to innovate either by increasing the value it creates when working with other industry players, or by enhancing its ability to bargain for a greater share of the value created through those relationships. […] Building on the early work of Brandenburger and Stuart (1996) and MacDonald and Ryall (2004), the value-based perspective in strategy formally decomposes firm performance into the dual challenge of (i) contributing to joint value creation and (ii) bargaining for a greater share of the created value

Ambitsioon:

We extend biform games (Brandenburger & Stuart, 2007)—a staple in the formal value-based literature—to include innovation strategies aimed at enhancing a firm’s bargaining capabilities. 5 In doing so, we contribute to a nascent body of work (Bennett, 2013; Panico, 2017) that formally analyzes bargaining strategies in the value-based literature. […] In our model, two rival firms choose between two uncertain innovation strategies: they can either attempt to enhance their value creation capabilities or their bargaining capabilities.

Uurimustöö aluseeldus:

A central assumption in our model is that organizational tradeoffs require firms to choose between focusing their innovation efforts on either enhancing their value creation or enhancing their bargaining capabilities.

Kaks keskset tunnust mõistmaks organisatsioonide käitumist konkurentsitingimustes:

First, there is a complementarity between value creation and bargaining capabilities: the greater a firm’s level of value creation for buyers, the greater its returns from increasing its bargaining capability, and vice versa. […] Second, enhancements to a firm’s value creation capability have a negative competitive externality on the rival’s value capture by decreasing the rival’s expected added value for buyers, whereas enhancements to a firm’s bargaining capability do not have a direct externality on the rival.

Mõned järeldused:

We highlight that bargaining strategies can have implications for value capture that go beyond the redistribution of surplus between the counterparties that are directly negotiating. For example, we show that the availability of bargaining strategies can shift rival firms away from mutually harmful competition based on value creation. […] While app developers work to increase the functionality and ease of use of their apps (i.e., value creation), they have also been experimenting with a range of revenue models (e.g., fixed fees, in-app purchases, subscriptions, and freemium), to increase the value they extract from users. See, for example, Apple’s website for developers (Apple, 2021).

Almeida Costa, A., & Zemsky, P. (2021) The choice of value‐based strategies under rivalry: Whether to enhance value creation or bargaining capabilities. Strategic Management Journal.