When trust is not enough: buyer orchestration modes and innovation in coopetitive automotive supply networks

Abstract

Purpose This study examines how buyer orchestration modes shape knowledge-sharing dynamics and innovation outcomes among competing suppliers in multi-tier automotive supply networks. While prior coopetition research emphasizes trust and voluntary collaboration as drivers of innovation, we investigate the underexplored role of the buyer as an active governance agent whose orchestration choices – ranging from coercive enforcement to collaborative co-development – shape whether competing suppliers share knowledge deeply enough to produce innovation. Design/methodology/approach Using multiple-perspective interviews, we conducted 28 in-depth interviews across six coopetitive relationships involving eight organizations in the Austrian and German automotive supply industries. Cases were purposefully selected to capture variation in buyer orchestration modes (enforcer, mandator, coordinator, facilitator, co-developer, partner), relationship formation (voluntary vs involuntary) and trust configurations. Data were analyzed using within-case and cross-case methods, with the relational view (RV) as the analytical lens. Findings We identify three theoretically distinct orchestration regimes – coercive, facilitative and collaborative – that shape how RV's four mechanisms (relation-specific assets, knowledge-sharing routines, complementary resources and governance) operate in coopetitive settings. Coercive orchestration (enforcer and mandator) generates compliance-based knowledge exchange but suppresses exploratory sharing – even when inter-supplier trust is high. Facilitative orchestration (coordinator and facilitator) creates structural conditions for sharing but cannot generate the relational motivation required for breakthrough innovation without pre-existing trust. Only collaborative orchestration (co-developer and partner), where the buyer signals vulnerability through co-investment of its own technical and organizational resources, enables suppliers to transition from protective to exploratory knowledge sharing, producing high innovation. Practical implications Supply chain managers should recognize that mandating collaboration is insufficient for innovation; the buyer's orchestration mode – not merely the existence of trust or voluntary engagement – is the primary lever. We provide actionable guidance for selecting and transitioning between orchestration modes based on relational conditions and innovation objectives. Originality/value This study reconceptualizes the buyer from a peripheral contextual node to the node that owns the primary governance mechanisms in coopetitive innovation. We extend the RV to buyer-orchestrated coopetition, showing that the four relational rent mechanisms are channeled and constrained by orchestration mode. Our framework explains why high trust fails to unlock innovation under coercive orchestration – a counterintuitive finding that challenges assumptions in both the coopetition and trust literatures.