Coopetition strategies are driven by the share of the risks and costs of innovation. However, to implement their strategy, coopetitors can rely on two separated projects teams or on a single Coopetitive Project Team (CPT). By pooling their resources in a CPT, coopetitors face a higher level of imitation and spoliation. The question becomes why coopetitors create a CPT and face higher levels of risks when they have other alternatives? Following the literature about risk management in strategic alliances, unilateral contract-based alliances are preferred to minimize relational risks while bilateral contract-based alliances are appropriate to minimize performance risks. We assume that coopetitors create CPT when the performance risks of the project are high. To illustrate our framework, we study the project portfolios of Astrium and TAS in the space industry. Our findings confirm that coopetitors accept higher levels of relational risks and create CPT when the performance risks of the project are high. On the contrary, coopetitors rely on two separated project teams and assume low relational risks when the performance risks of the project are low.
