INTRODUCTION

The business environment has been characterized by rapid transformations from globalization, interdependence, and technological advances. The characteristics of this new competitive environment have driven transformations within organizational configurations due to the associated benefits (Freitas Filhoet al., 2018).

In this perspective, research involving the subject supports that organizations in a cooperation network are more effective in the market, since each company, as a member, begins to develop capacities and competencies quickly, i. e., new learning, which increase their competitiveness power and, consequently, raise new business opportunities (Holubčík& Soviar, 2021).

New forms of organization based on cooperation strategies enable access to information, resources, markets, and technologies, connected to the advantage of learning and promoting economies of scale and scope. This enables the achievement of strategic objectives, such as sharing risks and outsourcing stages of the production chain and organizational functions (Balestrin & VerschoorE, 2016).

The collective efficiency resulting from network cooperation strategies has motivated small and medium-sized companies from various productive sectors to seek the competitive advantages arising from these types of configurations, based on the sum of efforts of actors' joint actions, involving entrepreneurs, institutions, and local development agents (Leme; Aguiar& Rezende, 2019).

The study on cooperation networks, mainly about small businesses, has rebounded important contributions to the competitiveness of traditional manufacturing industries and the retail industry, as well as to the development of production chains (Klein & Bortolaso, 2020) contributing to the dissemination of this theoretical field.

The combined articulations arised from interorganizational relationships are also important to promote the strengthening of production chains and regional development, promoting the production of primary goods and providing strategies that prioritize local autonomy and broad objectives of improvement in the regional community (Fante & Dallabrida, 2016; Rudder, Aguiar, & Rezende, 2019).

In addition, there are gaps related to investigations about behaviors and interactions of social actors in the process of assigning meanings to interorganizational relationships, producing value for the global chain (Kano, 2018). The importance of understanding the facilitators and hinders inherent to social interactions bases the perception of the social capital of the network, which results in competitive edges for the member organizations (Macedo, et al., 2017).

Both the scientific field and companies have a high interest in understanding the predominant roles in the creation of networks and their effects, as well as the importance of interorganizational relationships and their advantages for network development. Particularly for organizations, the contributions generated by the results of the studies are convenient to support strategic decisions to a better commercial, economic, political, social, or other desired performance.

This research analyzes how small and medium-sized companies producing and marketing biscuit, in the Southwest region of Bahia, seek new learning, competitiveness and business opportunities from the creation of a network of cooperation and the establishment of interorganizational relationships.

More precisely, the research focused on the theoretical reasons related to competitive market factors (Balestrin & Verschoore, 2008; 2016) that has motivated the creation of the biscuit cooperation network and stimulated the establishment of interorganizational bonds, describing relationship facilitators and hinders (Júnioret al., 2016; Albano, Araujo, &Reinhard, 2017).

The research involves the creation of a cooperation network between biscuit producers/traders and local development agents to the legal recognition of geographical indication. In this sense, the actors engaged in a project called Projeto do Biscoito (BiscuitProject), to aware, mobilize, and articulate the members of the production chain, as well as governments, development institutions, business entities, universities, and civil society, regarding the intangible value of biscuits and their potential for the regional socioeconomic development.

The study proposes to evaluate and characterize the competitive factors that have motivated the creation of the cooperation network and stimulated the establishment of interorganizational bonds, describing relationship facilitators and hinders.

COOPERATION NETWORKS

Cooperation networks are business management mechanisms resulting from the dynamics of the competitive environment. They are stimulated by the synergistic effects that emerge for the organizations involved, from the creation of common values, including conditional – objective – or unconditional expectations – aggregate effects (Holubčík& Soviar, 2021).

Incentives for strategic network cooperation include cost savings in manufacturing and research, increased market presence, access to intangible assets of other companies –management skills and knowledge of markets and customers (Soviar, Holubčíka, & Vodáka, 2017). The cooperative process provides flexible strategies, allowing companies to respond to changing market conditions and emergence of new competitors.

As a central point, networks focus on structuring and standardizing actions, based on organizational attributes and collective characteristics, as a way to obtain and/or maintain competitive advantages over non-associated companies. Network articulating also provides the satisfaction of other business needs, such as the improvement of purchasing power, the development of skills and know-how, and the improvement of products and services, which is not done unconnectedly. (Wegner, Durayski, & Verschoore Filho, 2017).

Interorganizational relationships are inherent to the cooperative process, acting as a competitive market force, since, despite a given openness to the implementation of isolated actions, the individuals who represent organizations are socially involved in webs and networks of relationships that condition them to cooperate (Balestrin & VerschoorE, 2016). This is translated into the perspective that networks promote social relations, reflected in reciprocity and information sharing among economic actors.

Cooperation networks assume a broad organizational perspective (Véraset al., 2019), represented by the conjunction of companies, some of them uses the geographical agglomeration to acquire advantages (Wilkinson, Cerdan, & Dorigon, 2017). In this way, cooperation networks overcome barriers and adversities that are now shared by different kinds of governance (Kano, 2018).

This governance, also conceived in the territorial context, can be implemented through formal social systems, as well as through organizational forms and processes used for the coordination and control of economic activities (Fante & Dallabrida, 2016). Network governance is necessary to face organizational and environmental contingencies, as well as to coordinate and preserve transactions (Mantovani & Guidone 2017).

In the context of social relations, the formalization of norms and procedures is a necessary measure for a better control of collective actions and efficiency in the management of a network, including as a mechanism for neutralizing opportunistic behaviors that weaken the confidence and commitment of actors (Freitas Filhoet al., 2018).

Creation of cooperation networks

The networking perspective strategy has motivated the cooperation relationships, interactions, and results from joint actions between small and medium-sized enterprises ( Klein, Bortolaso, & Minà, 2020). Cooperation networks derive from the creation of groups of companies that establish lasting relationships, developed through bonds and social relations to the detriment of common or complementary purposes, although legally separated (Júnior et al., 2016).

According to Balestrin and Verschoore (2016), cooperation networks emerge because of the need to better meet current market demands, with effective skills to complement those of one organization isolated. Organizations have different capacities and resources that distinguish them from each other, which contributes to flexibility and agility to face market demands and environmental uncertainties.

Some authors point to the essential benefits for training, maintenance, and development of networks, such as access to information, resources, markets, and technologies. Also, the advantage of learning and promoting economies of scale and scope is added, which allows the achievement of strategic objectives, such as sharing risks and outsourcing stages of the chain and organizational functions (Soviar, Holubčíka, & Vodáka, 2017).

Studies indicate motivating factors that influence the creation of cooperation networks related to the search of companies to obtain and/or sustain different resources to face competitors outside the network (Freitas Filhoet al., 2018). The motivating factors related to market competitiveness were systematized by Balestrin and Verschoore (2008; 2016), based on a literature review about the following propositions: scale and market power; access to solutions; learning and innovation; reduction of costs and risks, and social relationships, as shown in Table 1 below.

The understanding of the factors presented by the authors implicates the gains that companies want from the establishment of cooperation networks. According to Verschoore and Balestrin (2008; 2016), rational agents who act through networks are driven by the possibility of obtaining benefits collectively.

Thus, it is relevant to understand the importance of competitive motivating factors related to the establishment of networks and their implications in the interorganizational relationship. This understanding is part of one stage of the research conducted to identify the competitive factors that have motivated the formation of the biscuit cooperation network and stimulated the establishment of interorganizational bonds between companies, moved by the social actors representing them.

Facilitators and hinders of interorganizational relationships

In addition to identify the market factors that motivate the creation of networks, it is important to understand the conditions of interorganizational relationships and how they induce companies to develop joint actions, since the motivations inherent to social relationships can impact the level of trust and commitment and, consequently, the development of the network (Klein, Bortolaso, & Minà, 2020).

Studies point to the facilitating and hindering factors, which can be analyzed both at the organizational and interorganizational levels, which instigate or encourage the formation of cooperation networks, as well as influence the development and maintenance of relationships between organizations (Freitas Filhoet al., 2018).

For Albano, Araújo, and Reinhard (2017), facilitating factors are present in negotiations, agreements, and organizational routines; power, governance, reputation, information exchange, and specific assets can be analyzed. In Table 2, the authors take back some facilitating factors from empirical studies, as below:

Albano, Araújo, and Reinhard (2017) relate the power with the organization's ability to hold some necessary resources for the other participants of the network, so the property can sustain its position and participation in the network.

Governance relates to the management of network relationships (Mantovani & Guidone, 2017), which involves definition of roles, as interaction and collaboration between organizations, coordination mechanisms, competencies and resources involved, relational and financial risks, costs of transactions, strategic intention, and the complexity of the environment (Wegner, Durayski, & Verschoore Filho, 2017).

Also, as a facilitating factor of relationships there is emphasis on reputation, consolidated through recognition of honesty, when the partner acts as agreed (Soviar, Holubčíka, & Vodáka, 2017). In addition, the exchange of information generates impacts on power relationships and specific assets are assumed as investments for transactions (Balestrin& Verschoore, 2016).

To understand interorganizational relationships, it is also necessary to understand the factors that hinder the occurrence of interactions. Empirical evidence has revealed the main factors that hinder the creation of interorganizational relationships (Júnior et al., 2016; Silva Filhoet al., 2017; Freitas Filhoet al., 2018).

Table 3 relates the hinders, their importance, and the authors who refer to these factors in several studies.

Based on the theoretical/empirical evidence shown in Table 3, it is observed that cooperation between companies is not always balanced and easy to manage, since intense and recurrent interactions produce conflicts, for example, those related to the retention of benefits (Freitas Filhoet al., 2018). In cooperation networks relations must be kept close and harmonious in order to support joint actions.

Another issue related to the establishment of relationships concerns the obstacles originated when asymmetries are revealed, such as the rise of leaders who start to exert a strong influence on strategies of other companies in the network, inhibiting group cooperation actions (Klein & Bortolaso, 2020). The management of the network must flow from the decentralization of decisions, corroborating the group behavior, in addition to the decision-making process being more structured and formalized.

Interorganizational relationships are also strongly influenced by the level of cooperation. Thus, knowledge about the structuring and constitution of network relationships need to be clarified and improved among network members, in order to promote active participation in meetings and events, enhancing collaborative levels (Balestrin & Verschoore,2016).

Both facilitating and hindering factors are important perspectives to be analyzed, since they imply the starting point for articulation and cohesion of interorganizational relationships(Macedo etal., 2017). This understanding also integrates one of the stages of the research conducted to analyze the establishment of interorganizational bonds, describing facilitators and hinders to relationships.

METHODOLOGICAL PROCEDURES AND DATABASE

This study adopts the qualitative, exploratory, and descriptive method, under the interpretative bias (Creswell, 2014), to understand behaviors and interactions of actors in the creation of a biscuit cooperation network and, consequently, in the establishment of interorganizational relationships (Kalof, Dan, & Dietz, 2008).

As qualitative research, the study follows a typical inductive process, since, despite starting from a generic theoretical design, and proposes new theoretical contributions through insights from data collection and analysis (Kalof, Dan, & Dietz, 2008). The case study is applied as a research strategy, since it has the benefits from the previous development of theoretical propositions directing data collection and analysis (Gil, 2008).

The research was conducted by a single case study (Yin, 2015), represented by the Rede de Cooperação do Biscoito, located geographically in the Southwest Region of State of Bahia, Brazil. The network includes the municipalities of Condeúba/BA and Vitória da Conquista/BA, the latter city is considered the central place of meetings and headquarters of most companies and institutions, i. e., the stage of the main social relations.

Characterizing the selected case, Vitória da Conquista and Condeúba are municipalities in the state of Bahia, unit of the Brazilian Federation pointed out as a highlight in the national scenario in 2019 due to the growth (1.2%) of gross domestic product (GDP) having been higher than Brazilian GDP (1.1%), according to data released by the Superintendência de Estudos Econômicos e Sociais ( Superintendence of Economic and Social Studies - SEPLAN, 2020).

Vitória da Conquista/BA is the third largest among the 417 municipalities in the state of Bahia, behind Salvador and Feira de Santana, and the fifth largest city in the interior of the Northeast, after Feira de Santana/BA, Campina Grande/PB, Caruaru/PE, and Petrolina/PE (IBGE, 2020).

The unit of analysis (Yin, 2015) of this research comprises the formation of the network of cooperation analyzed at the organizational levels, because it focuses on organizations to understand the motivating factors to the assumption of new business forms based on cooperation, and the interorganizational, since it seeks a deepening in the understanding of social relations, through mobilizations and interactions between actors.

The subjects of analysis are the actors that represent the companies producing and marketing the biscuit, as well as by local development agents representing institutions such as Sebrae/BA, Movimento Pro-Conquista, Commercial and Industrial Associations of the municipalities of the region, Banks, Development Agencies, Business Entities, and Municipal Governments.

The subjects were identified through a list provided by the biscuit project manager, representative of Sebrae/BA. The list indicated 23 (twenty-three) actors between producers and traders, 10 (ten) of then with more actions in the cooperation network. In addition to the producers/traders, three other actors were identified among local development agents. The 13 (thirteen) actors identified as more involved with the actions of the cooperation network were selected for the application of the research instrument.

The research instruments used in the case study were the draft of the case study protocol, for recording the notes from direct observations, and the semi-structured script for conducting the interviews, both elaborated from the literature review and the theoretical framework. The draft and the interview script are part of the case study protocol (Yin, 2015). The semi-structured interview script consisted of 41 (forty-one) questions addressed to producers/traders and local development agents.

The sources of evidence for the case study were analysed by three techniques, documentary research, direct observations, and semi-structured interviews (Yin, 2015), and it was necessary to explore these techniques through data triangulation (primary and secondary) and information (Creswell, 2014) in order to make the study valid and reliable.

The multiple sources of evidence (Yin, 2015) were verified through the place where social relations, actors, events, and processes take place (Creswell, 2014). The method of data processing was conducted from content analysis, a set of methodological instruments applicable to descriptions, inferences, and interpretations of communications (Silva & Fossá, 2015; Bardin, 2016).

ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION OF RESULTS

Competitive motivating factors in the creation of cooperation networks

The research investigated the incidence of competitive motivating factors for the creation of the biscuit cooperation network. According to Verschoore and Balestrin (2008; 2016), the factors that motivate these new business configurations are related to market competitiveness, supported by the assumptions (A1) gaining scale and market power, (A2) access to solutions, (A3) learning and innovation, (A4) reducing costs and risks, and (A5) social relations. The meanings found in the statements of the actors of the biscuit production chain in relation to competitive motivating factors are shown in Figure 1.

Table 4 provides a synthesis of the main evidence regarding the competitive motivating factors of the biscuit cooperation network and the theoretical-practical importance.

Facilitators of interorganizational relationships

The investigation on the factors related to the creation of the cooperation network also reaches the facilitating factors of interorganizational relationships, present in negotiations, agreements, and organizational routines. Empirical studies reveal power, governance,

reputation, information exchange, and specific assets, as main facilitators incidents on interorganizational networks (Albano, Araújo, & Reinhard, 2017). The meanings found in the statements of the actors of the biscuit production chain in relation to the facilitating factors of interorganizational relationships are shown in Figure 2.

Chart 5 provides a synthesis of the main evidence regarding the facilitating factors of interorganizational relationships of the biscuit cooperation network and its theoretical-practical importance.

Interorganizational relationships hinderers

As for the hindering factors of relationships, empirical evidence points out the main elements involving the creation of interorganizational relationships, such as joint actions, communication, competition, market dynamics, centralization of decisions, suppliers, lack of knowledge of networks, and effectiveness in participation in meetings, among others (Júnior et al., 2016; Silva Filhoet al., 2017).

The meanings found in the statements of the actors of the biscuit production chain in relation to the facilitating factors of interorganizational relationships are shown in Figure 3.

Table 6 provides a synthesis of the main evidence scans in relation to the hindering factors of interorganizational relationships emerged in the biscuit cooperation network and the theoretical-practical importance.

FINAL CONSIDERATIONS

Cooperation networks emerge as differentiating factors for small and medium-sized enterprises, they take ownership of competitive advantages from new organizational configurations to quickly achieve skills and competences, i.e., new learning, which increase their competitiveness power and, consequently, create new business opportunities.

In this sense, the present research has achieved the goal ofcontributing in a theoretical-practical way, so entrepreneurs and agents of local development, related to the biscuitproduction chain, adapt the concepts and characteristics of the new business configurations based on network cooperation strategies to promote regional and market development in the Identity Territory of Southwest Bahia.

In general, from the results found, it is noted that the competitive market factors that have led to the creation of the cooperation network are related to the search for representativeness, credibility, and complementarity, aiming visibility and prospecting for new business, although, in practice, interorganizational relationships are quite limited.

In a network of cooperation, interorganizational relationships need to be promising, since successful cooperation is one of the elementary activities of the network and suitable for the strategic management of a group of companies, as suggested by Soviar, Holubčíka, and Vodáka (2017) in a study on the management of cooperation of soviet industry.

In addition, the decision to enter into interorganizational relationships in the biscuit cooperation network has been facilitated by associativism, local culture and the participation of local development agents, especially Sebrae (BA). However, the actions find hinders to strengthen the confidence and commitment of entrepreneurs in the joint actions of the cooperation network.

In a literature review, Kano (2018) raises the importance of engagement in a joint strategy, as well as the relevance of relational capital generation in the governance of a value chain. Although they are social mechanisms associated with challenges and limitations and, therefore, do not guarantee competitive success, when implemented in an integrative way, these mechanisms facilitate coordination (saving on limited rationality), reduce the risks of imperfect effort of partners (saving on limited reliability), and stimulate innovation and the development of new capabilities.

Therefore, for the advancement of the actions of the biscuit cooperation network, it is recommended that entrepreneurs take the preponderance of the network, from their already elected representatives, with the creation of clear social rules and ethical conduct as a measure of containment to the opportunistic behaviors observed. The rule of the network's actions contributes to better levels of trust and commitment of the actors echoing on the future perspectives of the biscuit entrepreneurs.

When assuming the role, entrepreneurs also need to develop the strategic planning of the cooperation network, with provision of a systematic plan of actions to working groups and individual actors, as well as a calendar of cyclical meetings and awareness-raising and exposure programs with the local market.

Finally, the research developed has some limitations providing reflections on the research carried out, especially by the qualitative nature of the investigation itself. The method of information collection was based on an intentional non-probabilistic sampling for convenience and accessibility, providing restrictions regarding the generalization of the results.

As recommendations for future studies, it is suggested to carry out: a) research on biscuit production chains from other Brazilian regions; b) research on production chains of other branches of activity but valuing local territorial identities; and c) research on cooperation networks with more advanced stages of development. From this complementarity, it will be possible to comparatively analyze the process of creating cooperation networks in regions and productive sectors.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Albano, C. S., de Araujo, M. H., & Reinhard, N. (2017). Fatores motivadores e facilitadores dos relacionamentos em redes: como os gestores públicos reconhecem esses fatores em dados governamentais abertos. NAVUS-Revista de Gestão e Tecnologia, 7(1), 73-92.

Balestrin, A., Verschoore, J. R. (2008). Fatores relevantes para o estabelecimento de redes de cooperação entre empresas do Rio Grande do Sul. Revista de Administração Contemporânea, 12, 1043-1069.

Balestrin, A., Verschoore, J. R. (2016). Redes de Cooperação Empresarial: Estratégias de Gestão na Nova Economia. Bookman editora.

Bardin, L. (2016). Análise de conteúdo. 3. reimp. da 1. ed. São Paulo: Edições, v. 70.

Creswell, J. W. (2014). Investigação qualitativa e projeto de pesquisa: escolhendo entre cinco abordagens. 3. ed., Porto Alegre.

Fante, C. C. de L., & Dallabrida, V. R. (2016). Governança territorial em experiências de Indicação Geográfica: análises e prospecções. Desenvolvimento Regional em Debate, 6(2), 228-246.

Freitas Filho, A. C., Klein, L. L., Alves, J. N., & Uliana, D. (2018). Motivos que levam uma empresa a trocar de rede de cooperação. RACE: Revista de Administração, Contabilidade e Economia, 17(2), 619-642.

Gil, A. C. (2008). Métodos e técnicas de pesquisa social. 6. ed. São Paulo: Atlas.

Holubčík, M., & Soviar, J. (2021). Growing importance of synergistic effects in the strategic management of cooperation. The Poprad Economic and Management, 25.

IBGE. Instituto Brasileiro de geografia e Estatística. (2020). Dados dos municípios. Disponível em: https://cidades.ibge.gov.br/pesquisas. Acesso em 30/07/2020.

Júnior, A. C. B., Júnior J. A. V. A., Kronbauer, C. A., & Deboçã, L. P. (2016). Fatores institucionais determinantes nas relações interorganizacionais: o caso da rede educar. Revista Estudo & Debate, 23(1).

Kalof, L., Dan, A., & Dietz, T. (2008). Essentials of Social Research. New York: McGraw Hill Open University Press.

Kano, L. (2018). Global value chain governance: A relational perspective. Journal of International Business Studies, 49(6), 684-705.

Klein, L. L., Bortolaso, I. V., & Minà, A. (2020). The impact of social features underlying inter-organizational networks on learning: insights from Brazilian evidence. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing.

Leme, P. H. M. V., Aguiar, B. H., & Rezende, D. C. de. (2019). A convergência estratégica em Arranjos Produtivos Locais: uma análise sobre a cooperação entre atores em rede em duas regiões cafeeiras. Revista de Economia e Sociologia Rural, 57, 145-160.

Macedo, R. de C., Martins, R. C., Rossoni, L., & Martins, G. S. (2017). Confiança nos relacionamentos em cluster de empresas. Revista de Administração de Empresas, 57(4), 330-341.

Mantovani, G. M., & Guidone, T. (2017). Governança corporativa ou de rede? O caso das cadeias produtivas italianas e sua abordagem de financiamento de andaimes. The Journal of Entrepreneurial Finance (JEF), 19(1), 1-27.

Seplan. Secretaria do Planejamento do Estado da Bahia. (2020). Disponível em: http://www.seplan.ba.gov.br/modules/conteudo/conteudo.php?conteudo=17. Acesso em 11/05/2020.

Silva, A. H., & Fossá, M. I. T. (2015). Análise de conteúdo: exemplo de aplicação da técnica para análise de dados qualitativos. Qualitas Revista Eletrônica, 16(1).

Soviar, J., Holubčík, M., & Vodák, J. (2017). Cooperation management on construction business market in the Slovak republican Insight from a Company. Procedia engineering, 192, 818-823.

Véras, A. R. M., Marques, A. B., Nascimento, C. C. C., et al. (2019). Estudo bibliográfico sobre as definições dos principais tipos de arranjos empresariais. Brazilian Journal of Business, 1(2), 253-279.

Wegner, Douglas, Durayski, Juliana, & de Souza Verschoore Filho, Jorge Renato. (2017). Governança e eficácia de redes interorganizacionais: Comparação entre iniciativas brasileiras de redes de cooperação. Desenvolvimento em Questão, 15(41).

Wilkinson, J., Cerdan, C., & Dorigon, C. (2017). Geographical indications and “origin” products in Brazil–the interplay of institutions and networks. World Development, 98, 82-92.

Yin, R. K. (2015). Estudo de Caso: Planejamento e métodos. Porto Alegre: Bookman Editora.