Through Synergy in Cooperation towards Sustainable Business Strategy Management

Abstract

In our research we have focused our effort on answering one major question: could theory about synergy effects help to strengthen the cooperation between organizations to achieve more sustainable business? In order to do that, we set up three main research domains: (1) synergies and synergy effects; (2) cooperation and the cooperation environment; and (3) strategic management. From the methodological point of view, besides literature review, we combined content analysis of relevant internet sources (both quantitative and qualitative) and sociological survey in the years 2014 to 2018. The results show us strong connections between the effective usage of cooperation and synergy effect in strategic management and market competitiveness. They also show as that certain way of strategic cooperation between organizations could be significantly beneficial towards business sustainability. In our paper we present data from our research, our main significant findings, and also recommendations and tools for utilizing them in practice.

1. Introduction

Today’s business environment is taking market competition to a whole new level. This level involves mastering a strategic framework consisting of cooperation and competitive relationships with peer enterprises. However, the theme of the article goes even deeper and goes as far as stimulating the emergence of synergistic effects of actors in the business environment. The topic of the article is the following: strategic management of cooperation-based organizational forms based on synergy effect. The article focuses on the interconnection of three research areas, which include the following: (1) synergies and synergy effects; (2) cooperation and the cooperation environment; and (3) strategic management. The reason for focusing on the areas in question is the positive assumption of finding appropriate intersections to address the issues. The importance of examining synergies in the business environment is the current state of the interaction environment, in which behaviors that are on the one hand competitive but also cooperative are becoming more and more recurrent. Such behavior is now proving to be an advantageous strategy in terms of financial performance and the long-term sustainability of the business in a globalized market.

Considering the complex results in the subject area, we can confirm: synergy has a positive impact on a long-term and sustainable cooperative relationship. A cooperative strategy is one of the main ways in which businesses can obtain synergistic effects that support the sustainability of the relationship. The importance of examining synergistic effects in the business environment is the current state of mutual interactions in the environment, in which behavior that is on the one hand competitive but also cooperative is increasingly beginning to be repeated. Such behavior is currently proving to be an advantageous strategy in the form of financial indicators, increasing customer loyalty and increasing reputation, which can build long-term business sustainability in the globalized market. The number of competitors and elements of the environment that provide their services in the market encourages the business to think ahead. The synergistic effect is precisely the competitiveness and sustainability in the market, which arises from the constant development of the market. The reason for forward thinking is precisely the limited number of customers. The company’s intention is to stay on the market, cut its share of the created demand (attract new customers), and at the same time keep regular customers.

1.1. Objective Formulation

Synergy effects can be stimulated by certain elements and processes in the management of the enterprise. In our case, these are interactions within cooperation-based organizational forms established for a specific purpose. It is important to draw attention to strategic management—how to organize groups of enterprises in such a way that managers are able to increase the performance, profitability, and competitiveness of groups of enterprises—and thus build synergy effects. Carrying out a comprehensive analysis of the studied issues in the field of synergy and strategic management should help identify the appropriate elements of the strategic management of cooperation-based organizational forms—the creation of a synergistic relationship—in order to create synergistic effects. The main objective of the article is to identify the elements of strategic management of cooperation-based organizational forms and the occurrence of synergy effects. On the basis of this identification, we propose recommendations for the strategic management of cooperation-based organizational forms oriented to stimulate the emergence and maintenance of synergies.

No enterprise can operate successfully without resources, especially human capital. A manager is a person who makes decisions and implements the strategy of an enterprise. We consider the application of elements of strategic management within cooperation clusters to be a problem with no synergistic effect. The identified problem belongs to an area where many organizations lack a coherent framework and methodology to ensure that strategic management is successfully executed under collaborative conditions in order to generate added synergy effects (synergy effects). The issue and the problem itself is thus the ineffective use of strategic management tools and methods within the framework of cooperation organizational forms (there is no synergistic effect compared to effective seamless bilateral cooperation, in which synergistic effects arise).

1.2. Formulation of a Practical Problem

No enterprise can successfully execute a strategy without the right people, processes, and technological (and information) capabilities. Therefore, the current problem identified is in an area where many enterprises lack a coherent framework and methodology to ensure that the strategy can be implemented in a cooperation setting in order to generate added synergy effects (synergies). The problem is the application of the elements of strategic management within cooperation clusters without synergies.

The essence of the cooperation environment in the business environment is based on the mutual interactions between individual business entities in defined areas of cooperation. Currently, it is possible to see great potential in the results of cooperation relationships in the business environment as a response to the current state of the market environment. The knowledge gathered so far and the analyses and proposals made (study of the field of management; the issue of cooperation; articles and papers produced in 2013–2016) point to the complexity of cooperation and its use. At this stage of research of the issue, one parameter of the cooperation relationship is found interesting from the point of view of researching and creating a starting point for the management of contemporary enterprises. This parameter is the synergy effect and the synergistic approach. The area of synergy in the business sector has been addressed and reported by a number of prominent authors [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18]. However, synergy is a specific topic specifically because of its application and applicability in specific business conditions. It is this background that introduces the issue of the use of synergy in the strategic management of cooperation organizational forms.

The solution to the problem is therefore based on a more comprehensive examination of the area in question. Synergy arises in a cooperation relationship between two enterprises, whereby these enterprises, under certain conditions and set goals and objectives, are able to (1) cooperate, (2) meet the objectives, and (3) create synergies. These three phases of a cooperation relationship can be terminated at any time; the cooperation may not be implemented, objectives may not be met, or synergies may not be created. The baseline assertion is: synergy has a high potential for creating conditions for cooperation in the selection of appropriate and effectively used methods of strategic management. Behind the scope of this issue is a comprehensive analysis of theory and case studies within the following areas: cooperation, cooperation management, management, strategic management, synergy, and synergy effect.

The problem and goal of the paper creates the research environment in which we set out to accomplish the four research tasks: (1) a comprehensive content analysis of the phenomena under study; (2) identification of synergies and elements of strategic management; (3) comparison of findings across qualitative and quantitative research; and (4) proposal of recommendations for strategic management.

The article links the results of the authors’ primary research: analysis of case studies, sociological surveys with the results of secondary sources by various prominent authors with outputs from peer-reviewed journals, proceedings, and databases (Web of Science; Scopus; Springer; and others), and case studies and research from major organizations (Harward Business Review; Paladium Group; BSC Group; and others).

1.3. Theoretical Review

The cooperation works in various researched areas. It is important to see the contribution of cooperation, which can solve current problems, but also contribute to development and progress in various areas and activities of human knowledge, research, and activities. Achieving a common goal is the basis of cooperation [18]. Business managers should build credibility [11] and accountability and enhance compliance in individual interactions with their stakeholders in their environment and outside of that environment [9,19,20]. Individual learning skills in cooperation action are important for full cooperation for some payoff [21,22]. The starting cooperation elements for the given environment are [9,11,13,18,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33]: evaluation, similarity, experience, competitiveness, culture, rules, mutual interactions (power, aggression, punishment, associative learning, altruism, reciprocity), structure of behavior of human society, and synergistic effect. The basis for the proper functioning and creation of links in the system, i.e., in a dynamic market environment, is their management, where the system as a whole of interacting elements is managed in such a way as to achieve the set goals (cooperative management).

According to Griffin [6,34,35], synergy is an important managerial concept based on coordinated cooperation. The existence of a joint synergistic effect suggests that joint strategy plays a pivotal role in overall firm performance; also, the weight of reputation in this context is important [4,8,36]. The consequence of the interactive connection and cooperative action between partial business units results in the creation of added value, better reputation, or another synergistic effect [2,7,37,38]. Due to the combination of different contributions of individuals in the system in question, it is necessary to manage and direct the synergistic effect, which can bring about its much higher effect to build and maintain a relationship [39,40]. Synergy increases the bargaining position with respect to company aggregations [9,41]. Synergy is important for creating a qualitatively better effect of cooperating subjects [24,42].

The creation of new and the repetition of old links between cooperating entities should be dynamic (dynamic cooperation) within the framework of increasing the benefits resulting from cooperation [3,4,5,43]. Cooperation has a higher chance of surviving if, in past interactions, it has resulted in a merger and brought benefits to the relationship. Trust is abstracted through experience. The basis for evaluating an individual in a cooperation relationship is obtained by gathering information about past behavior and interactions and updating reputation. Reputation and experience are vital in assessing the partner and their future cooperation (information environment) [9,10,11,12,13]. “Reputation-based cooperation based on partner choice might often be less cognitively demanding than that based on indirect reciprocity” [44]. Affinity, locality, and similarity also support cooperation. The risk of cooperation, reciprocity, and mutual assistance based on past interactions and similarity in the relationship is considered, and the benefits and possibilities of the relationship are compared. Quantification of potential as well as current interactions with partners is viewed as an opportunity in a cooperation environment [18,28,29,30,31].

It is advantageous to define a certain number of members of the cooperation environment in the cooperation environment. For example, finding partners who meet the specified conditions: cost savings to maintain cooperation, manage cooperation, and more. Subsequently, appropriately set the combination of resources (tangible and intangible resources): sharing and providing, efficient use of resources, supplier-customer relations, and investment in joint research and development. Common resources should be used to reduce the risk of failure, strengthen investment in innovation, and overcome short-term (operational) problems [13,16,29]. Structural capital has a significant positive effect on business innovation [45]. By evaluating individual cooperation relations before and after establishing cooperation, the actor of the cooperation relationship determines its value. A decision is made based on this value. The structure of internal relations influences the result of cooperation. The decision to stay in a cooperative environment is influenced by evaluating current interactions with the partner. We can make a better decision by comparison of the potential competitive advantage (existing, required) against the value created by the cooperation relationship [25,26,27]. In the author’s study [46], it is shown that a high intensity of cooperation combined with a high intensity of competition is significant for the joint creation of values.

Additionally, more recent research confirms that effective and intensive cooperation between organizations can have a major impact on the creation of positive synergies. These concern economic sectors as diverse as transport, logistics and regional mobility [46,47], tourism [48,49], or university research [50].

1.4. Scientific Research Hypotheses

Based on the previous parts of the research, such as determining the aim and objectives of the research, it is necessary to formulate research hypotheses. It is necessary to keep their focus in the plane of the solved problem, i.e., the strategic management of cooperation forms aimed at synergy effects. It should be added that the hypotheses in this article are also formulated on the basis of theoretical knowledge (comprehensive content analysis) and practical experience in the field of cooperation (research area, focus of papers and articles, field research). The hypotheses that were generated and verified throughout the research in the subject area are presented in the

Table 1. Research hypotheses and their identifiers.

Sign in Text	Hypothesis	Identifier
H1	If we learn more about the conditions and linkages between the strategic management of cooperation in the context of the emergence of synergies, we can identify emerging strategic management based on the principle of synergy.	The importance and relevance of exploring synergies in management.
H2	If synergy effects arise in cooperation, one of these effects is the achievement of strategic competitiveness.	Identified synergy effects and their occurrence. Competitiveness of the cooperating enterprise.
H3	If we apply the recommendations for the strategic management of the cooperation based organizational form, we will stimulate the emergence of synergy effects.	Designed solution. Synergy effects.

below.

The analytical part of the research is an iterative process in order to record the observed (unknown) reality as accurately as possible. However, this observation refers to identifiers that are the basis not only for testing hypotheses but also for building new knowledge. The verification of the hypotheses is the subject of the empirical research contained in the authors’ research paper. The evaluation of the results of the hypotheses is also supported by the opinions of experts from academia and business.

Hypotheses are formulated on the basis of “grounded theory”. This means that a comprehensive knowledge of the issue under study was used to formulate the hypotheses. An article with hypotheses and propositions to explore the issue under study more deeply and to subject it to observation is the long term, continuous work of the researcher in conducting the research.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Sociological Survey

A total of 373 questionnaires were purposefully collected in the form of a questionnaire survey within the Slovak Republic in 2014, 2015, and 2016. The individual questions in the questionnaires focused on three main areas of survey:

• Current cooperation (motives for cooperation, areas of cooperation, benefits of cooperation, what cooperation has improved, problems of cooperation).
• Potential for future cooperation (importance of cooperation, partner selection criteria).
• Strategic cooperation management (strategic elements of cooperation management, involvement of employees and managers, internal environment).

The outputs from this questionnaire survey are linked with identifiers. These identifiers were determined on the basis of secondary data analysis and create a comparison apparatus for observations of their occurrence with survey results.

The research results are classified into observed elements (A–H), which represent individual monitored identifiers and their use by managers in enterprises. These results point us to the cooperation of companies—the strategic management of cooperative organizational forms in order to create synergistic effects:

• Identification of the current state of the cooperation environment (search for a cooperating company, selection of a cooperating company).
• Common goals in terms of long-term and sustainable goals of the company, which will determine the direction of cooperation and ensure competitiveness in the current market.
• Determination of conditions and rules of cooperation (mutual trust, benefit of cooperation, compliance with contractual conditions, introduction of information system).
• Mutual two-way communication in selected ways and information sharing within defined boundaries during cooperation.
• The internal cooperative environment depends on the behavior of employees and managers. Businesses consider corporate culture to be very important.

The base set represented a file size of 309,427 economic entities registered in the business register, according to the Statistical Office of the Slovak Republic (hereinafter referred to as the Statistical Office of the Slovak Republic) for 2016.

The sample set consisted of business entities that (quota selection):

• Two forms of business are selected: limited liability companies and public limited companies. According to the Slovak Statistical Office, it is clear that the majority of medium and large enterprises in the territory of the Slovak Republic are established as the following legal form: limited liability company or joint-stock company, i.e., 60, 44% of legal entities in this range. It should be added, however, that budgetary organizations account for 21.98% of the remainder part. A further 17.58% were represented by enterprises with another legal form of business, as well as enterprises in the public administration.
• In the context of data distortion and data integrity, enterprises that did not operate in the territory of the Slovak Republic are also excluded (filtering according to the location and activity of the enterprise).
• According to the European Commission 2003/361/EC, these are classified as medium and large enterprises, i.e., annual turnover is between 10–50 million € (medium-sized enterprises) and above 50 million € (large enterprises). The number of employees is defined as between 50–250 employees for medium-sized enterprises and over 250 employees for large enterprises.
• The sample set size is 2997 subjects. At the 90% confidence level, data need to be collected from at least 249 subjects. At this size, we can generalize the given results to the whole sample. However, it should be recalled that the results refer to: (a) a specific time period; (b) geographical location; (c) the economic situation in the country in question; (d) other factors.

Respondents had to be adjusted according to whether they met the sample criteria. The following data represent the number of enterprises represented in the research, broken down by headquarters and branch locations. We can see that the majority of respondents are located in the western and central part of the Slovak Republic, mainly from Žilina (47.44%), Trenčín (19.23%), and Bratislava regions (18.91%). Other counties are covered by 9.94%.

A total of 258 responses were collected. The sample was reduced from 258 to 249 (after adjusting the respondents who did not fit into the sample set, the final sample size is 249 respondents). The largest share of respondents (83.11%) is represented by limited liability companies and joint stock companies. The size of enterprises is also a criterion in the selection and adjustment of respondents, from which we can infer a slightly smaller proportion of large enterprises (42.64%) and a larger number of medium-sized enterprises (57.36%). The average period of operation of the enterprises on the Slovak market is 23 years. The largest number of enterprises range from 10–19 to 20–39 years in business—a significantly positive characteristic for the research.

Thus, the analyzed set represents 258 respondents. The reasons for establishing the sample set in question after adjusting the respondents, as well as for defining the adjustment criteria, are as follows:

• The enterprise has been active for a longer period of time in the relevant market compared to small and newly established enterprises. According to the pre-research, the average period of operation of medium and small enterprises in the Slovak Republic is 23 years.
• The long-term presence of enterprises on the market creates the potential for many interactions with other business entities. Competitive and cooperation relationships that have been built, strengthened, modified, or dissolved over the years represent an important area of research in terms of their proper management and the identification of management problems.
• The positive and negative experiences they have gained during their many years on the market are an important mechanism for comparison with the theoretical knowledge of contemporary management.

Research into the effective use of strategic cooperation management between businesses and stakeholders sheds light on the current state of cooperation management and identifies current problems in cooperation relationships and current approaches to solving them.

2.2. Exploring Cooperation Relationships

So far, 29 cooperation relationships have been explored, including those that were processed in the pre-survey and primary part of the research. Three cooperation relationships (Disney and Pixar, Danish Food Cluster, One World) were explored in the pre-research, with the main aim being to identify whether it was possible to investigate the phenomenon: (1) investigate through content analysis, and (2) sufficiently substantiate with relevant information.

The cooperation relationships investigated were selected on the basis of purposive sampling. However, according to [51], it is important to keep saturation under control, i.e., the discovery of negative information can be an opportunity for new insights to emerge. Model saturation occurs when the new information obtained can only affect the stability of the model to a small extent. Relationships were selected which the authors considered to have a high potential for cooperation relationships and a significant impact and influence on the market. The following characteristics were used to decide on the selection of the study subjects:

• diverse relationships and interactions in the market with different partners (stakeholders),
• a competitive position in changing market conditions and,
• a positive and growing economic result, as well as growing financial indicators (the company is currently successful—it is not making a loss).

The pre-research also establishes the relevance and importance of exploring synergies in the strategic management of cooperating enterprises. In the primary part of the research, multiple cooperation relationships of the five selected enterprises (Starbucks, IBM, Intel, Tesla, Dupont) were collected, i.e., for each enterprise, between two and four different cooperation relationships with the selected enterprise were examined. This research of single enterprise relationships was necessary for a more rigorous and in-depth examination of the strategic management of the enterprise and the emergence of synergies of the enterprise as well as of the individual collaborations.

Because of the similarity of the other results for the individual cases analyzed, the other cooperation relationships are only presented in the form of their basic characteristics.

An overview of the cases reviewed is given in the following text. Up to 80% of the cooperation relationships were established between 2005 and 2016. Strategic alliances represent up to 45% of the cases studied. These relationships are built on a contractual relationship (agreement) and defined resource contributions to the joint relationship. A joint venture has been formed mainly when a new business unit is created that is characterized by joint development, research, or production. Clusters represented the most numerous groups of diverse cooperating entities in a single common area. Mergers and acquisitions represented the disappearance of one cooperation partner in the sense of its independence on the market, the alignment of internal processes took place at an efficient cooperation level. More data is presented in the following Figure 1.

Enterprises are trying to find different strategies to increase their chances of succeeding in the market. From the analyzed cooperation relationships, we can see the prevalence of global presence of individual cases; up to 83% of the cases analyzed develop activities for the global market. On the other hand, 10% of the cases involved assistance in establishing themselves in a foreign market, including sharing the domestic market with a cooperating partner.

For comparison, a breakdown of cooperation relationships into selected economic sectors is also provided. Most of the cases were from the food sector, followed by the automotive sector and information and communication technologies. Interestingly, the cooperation relationships in question mostly covered cooperation in more than two areas ranging from research, development, and production to distribution and sales.

As part of the content analysis, the construction of the case studies needs to link the findings from the theoretical knowledge with practical analyses of the subject environment of cooperation and thus contributes to a more accurate identification of the strategic management of enterprises. In the framework of such a linking of results, i.e., its comparison, an initial verification took place:

• Strategic management identifiers examined (their application).
• Synergistic effects studied (their occurrence and conditions of occurrence).

From the survey in the selected links, it is possible to identify relatively accurately the synergies and synergy effect that are related to strategic management. The current cooperation environment shows many cooperation linkages, but the strategic steps behind success or failure need to be continuously analyzed. The following part of the article discusses the above-mentioned five enterprises and their cooperation relations. It is a demonstration of the processing of individual cooperation cases in terms of the methodological procedure.

Starbucks’ cooperation relationships are characterized by enhanced global competitiveness. Starbucks has a strong brand but had a weakness in the distribution of its coffee to the market, which it was eliminating with the help of strategic management cooperation relationships. IBM, on the other hand, focused on the continuous development of technology (hardware and software), which was matched by cooperation relationships and their management. Intel continuously builds a win-win strategy in all of the studied cooperations and achieves positive financial results, which demonstrates the effectiveness of its strategic management in the cooperations. However, Dupont is specific in that it has strengthened its external competitiveness precisely through internal management processes focused on the strategic management of the business.

Each investigated enterprise was evaluated on the basis of the collected data, i.e., the actual observed situation in the management of cooperation relationships. An evaluation of the information collected on each of the enterprises analyzed in detail has been included in three scorecards, which are discussed in more detail in Appendix A.

3. Results

3.1. Primary Research Results—Slovak Republic

If we take the successful management concepts of the Western world, we can see similarities in achieving competitiveness and success on the market within Central Europe, specifically the Slovak Republic. However, economic and social disparities do exist. These differences are reflected in the management elements and processes of businesses that have been in the market for a longer period of time. The results of the research in the Slovak cooperation environment follow the enterprises that are characteristic on the market: (a) they have been operating for an average of 23 years; (b) they represent medium and large enterprises; and (c) they have survived various economic crises and social upheavals on the market. The main findings consist of the following generalized knowledge and experiences of enterprises (structured main starting points are located in Appendix E,

Table A7. Summary of the examined elements of strategic management.

Elements of Strategic Management	Starbucks (Starbucks and Tata Global Beverages)	Starbucks (Starbucks and Kraft Foods)	IBM (IBM and Watson)	IBM (IBM and Apple)	Intel (Intel and Google)	Intel (Intel and Micron)	Tesla	DuPont	Average of Values
Identification of the current state of the cooperation environment	4	4	4	3	3	5	5	5	4.13
Strategic planning of common objectives	5	2	3	4	4	4	5	4	3.88
Strategic moves update	5	2	5	4	4	5	5	5	4.38
Setting common terms and rules for cooperation	4	1	4	4	4	4	4	5	3.75
Mutual cooperation interactions	4	2	5	4	5	5	5	4	4.25
Mutual Communication	5	1	4	4	4	4	4	4	3.75
Suitable combination of sources	4	3	3	5	5	5	5	5	4.38
Human capital	4	3	5	4	4	5	3	5	4.13
Evaluation of the progress and results of the cooperation	5	1	5	5	4	5	5	5	4.38
Total cooperation potential of the relationship	4.44	2.11	4.22	4.11	4.11	4.67	4.56	4.67	4.11

, within the study area):

• Search and selection of a cooperating company. The initiation of the process of creating a cooperation relationship and its strategic management depends on its necessity—that is, the importance of cooperation. The selection of enterprises for cooperation activities is based on the importance of this link for the current competitiveness of the enterprise. Expanding and intensifying cooperation is included in the company’s short-term plans (confirmed by 50% of respondents). However, the other half of the respondents do not plan to establish any cooperation in the near future nor have not even considered it yet. The greatest influence on the decision to cooperate is created by maintaining the competitiveness of the enterprise and enhancing the attractiveness of the enterprise. The decision to form a cooperation relationship is made by the top management of the enterprise, subject to certain partner selection criteria (mainly financial resources and market position of the enterprise).
• Strategic planning of common objectives. Up to 75% of enterprises create a joint plan with a cooperating entity. Enterprises create this strategic plan to achieve common goals for a short period of time (most up to 1 year).
• Setting common terms and rules for cooperation. For the enterprises studied, the most frequent managerial act is the establishment of a contractual relationship between the cooperating enterprises. Conditions of cooperation (criteria, rules) are necessary for a properly and beneficially functioning relationship. Mutual trust, the benefits of cooperation, adherence to contractual terms and conditions, and the level of communication create the main conditions for cooperation. According to the results, trust and compliance with contractual terms and conditions can be judged to be poorly exercised in the market environment studied. Communication and the benefits of cooperation also do not meet the desired performance of enterprises in terms of importance. The effectiveness of communication and access to information in a collaborative relationship influences the behavior of the actors. The information system for cooperation clusters, according to the data, represents the most debated area. The involvement of information technology in the management activities of the cooperation relationship is unclear (diversity of responses).
• Mutual communication: most often, partners define only access to the necessary information for the implementation of the cooperation, thus ensuring the protection of non-shared data. They only have full access to jointly created information.
• The culture in the researched environment is very important. Management processes are influenced by the cultures of the cooperating enterprises. The internal environment of a company creates a significantly important area for setting appropriate conditions for cooperation and management. It influences all management processes as well as the fulfilment of common goals within the cooperation; it also influences the behavior of employees and managers. Enterprises are most likely to engage employees in a cooperation relationship in joint projects where they allocate project teams. Enterprises are willing to exchange knowledge and experience within the employees involved in the cooperation.
• Management processes are influenced by business managers. The functioning of the managerial part depends on the relationships with the employees of the enterprise: the attitude of the manager, the working environment of the employee and the motivation of the employee. The success of strategic management of cooperation organizational forms depends on managers. Their management skills and abilities can influence the formation, course, and outcome of a cooperation relationship.

The strategic management of cooperation organizational forms in the conditions of the Slovak market is influenced by all the previous findings. We can generalize three strategic steps of cooperation relationships in the studied environment: 1. Jointly setting and agreeing objectives where some potential cooperation relationships may disappear at the outset. 2. Setting the rules of cooperation. 3. Based on this, the strategic management of the cooperation relationship starts to be set up, e.g.,: division of responsibilities and powers, communication, information exchange, evaluation of results.

In the

Table 2. Evaluation of the application of the strategic management elements of the Slovak Republic (average).

Elements of Strategic Management	Slovak Enterprise (Average)
Identification of the current state of the cooperation environment	3
Strategic planning of common objectives	4
Strategic moves update	3
Setting common terms and rules for cooperation	5
Mutual cooperation interactions	4
Mutual Communication	4
Suitable combination of sources	4
Human capital	3
Evaluation of the progress and results of the cooperation	3
Total cooperation potential of the relationship	3.67

below, we have rated each of the identifiers of strategic management exploration according to the assessment mechanism in Appendix A: Assessment mechanism of the investigated elements of strategic management. The numbers and colors are aligned according to the application of the strategic management elements in the studied environment, thus the value 5 (green color) represents the applied element in the studied environment. Shades of red (a value of 3 or less) represent low effectiveness in the application of management elements, or a lack of knowledge or problems in management that prevent their effective application.

According to the findings from the environment of medium and large enterprises in the territory of central and western Slovakia. Among the values, we can identify the bottlenecks precisely in the identification of the cooperation, the updating of the strategy, and the evaluation of the results that the cooperation relationship can bring. Enterprises are very good at defining the terms of the relationship (most often this is a formal definition of terms of a contractual nature). However, the other identified elements suitable for strategic management are applied to a standard extent and have the potential for improvement in the light of the proposed recommendations.

Overlapping with the identified research identifiers, the previous findings can be used to confirm: (a) their relevance in the issue under study; (b) they serve as a basis for proposing recommendations for the strategic management of cooperation based organizational forms based on the synergy effect.

Synergy can only be achieved through cooperation and interconnection. Therefore, enterprises that have decided to cooperate choose to work together to achieve common goals, thus being able to measure common results. In each cooperation relationship, the interaction of the two members was identified, as what one party cannot offer the other will complement and vice versa. As a result, both sides actively engage in cooperation and prosper more. It is the same with the use of resources and processes in a given cooperation, because by combining them we achieve much better and more visible results than by using only some of these resources. Enterprises have identified the following synergies (benefits) arising from existing cooperation relationships (benefits are ranked from most to least):

• Exchange of knowledge and experience (know-how, market information, customer information) and joint training. Providing each other with valuable and practical information.
• Cost savings (most often in production) and access to investment.
• Improving the company’s position (competitiveness, promotion, reputation).
• Increasing the efficiency and quality of the article (time, flexibility, expertise).
• Expanding the customer base (new customers) and business contacts.
• Resource sharing (combining resources, sharing spare capacity).
• Expanding the product portfolio and streamlining the services provided.
• Innovation and continuous improvement.
• Increasing sales (higher financial benefit).
• Mutual growth and common development.

These benefits should be considered as full-fledged synergies because they are created by the mutual cooperation of two or more members, and also most of them go beyond the stated objectives of the cooperation. However, these synergies did not arise in a short period of time, but were achieved in a relationship of synergy, i.e., a certain level of interconnectedness, engaging enterprises to work together within a certain environment, where this environment is changing, evolving, and reacting. This environment must also include reciprocal two-way interactions, which form one of the fundamental elements of the essence of synergy.

3.2. Primary Research Results—Global Environment

A substantial part of the primary research is focused on the compilation of case studies from secondary information from the real co-operative environment of the enterprises under study. The methodology consists of a case-by-case review based on the identification of the elements under study for their application in a cooperation relationship. This section indicates the main results that have been found by the research, in three essential areas:

• Summarizing the problematic nature of the cooperation environment of the studied relationships.
• Summary of the degree of application of the studied elements of strategic management of cooperation.
• Joint identification of the occurrence of synergies.

For each of these three areas, a summary of the basic data is shown graphically. The tables use the same methodology as the individual cases analyzed, which we directly evaluate according to the scoring mechanism in the tables in Appendix A.

3.3. The Problematic Nature of the Cooperation Environment of the Investigated Relationships

In

Table 3. Summary of identified problems of cooperation relations.

Cooperating Entities	Problematic Nature of the Studied Environment (Individual)	Problematic Nature of the Studied Environment (Total)
Starbucks	2.4	2.38
Ibm	2.17	2.38
Intel	2.4	2.38
Tesla	2.6	2.38
DuPont	2.33	2.38

below we can see the rating of the degrees of risk of the identified problems. For each environment, the identified problem posed a different degree of risk. Therefore, it is not possible to categorize individual problems into basic categories of high, medium, and low risk. Each cooperation relationship studied is specific and is based on certain stimuli that resulted in the emergence of cooperation. We can classify individual problems into four main problem areas:

• The first is the expansion of enterprises to new markets, to new customers. Establishing a foothold in a new market most often requires connecting with a domestic market player who knows the market (legislative and legal conditions) and has built up a certain awareness, a brand. Such a combination is not easy, and both parties have to give up something and invest something in the relationship. The distribution of input sources and outcomes represents the basic parameters of conflicts.
• The second problem area is culture. In the cooperation environments studied, the following stand out: the internal culture and the external culture of the environment. The external culture of the environment includes customers, employees, and the public. The internal culture is formed by employees. In case of mutual cooperation of two enterprises, there can be conflict between the cultures and the environments in which they operate together. Conflict can manifest itself in the implementation of a single unified strategy.
• The third area is the violation of rules and conditions of cooperation (formal and informal). A positive experience leads to more open cooperation in the future. However, there is a high risk in case of cooperation with enterprises with which past relationships have not turned out positively and the cooperation was terminated on the basis of disagreements, cheating, and violation of defined rules and conditions of the cooperation relationship (the principle of game theory). Cooperation with competitors also affects the relationship negatively or encourages unfair play.
• The fourth area is characterized by the costs and investments that enterprises need to make to produce and develop their products and services. Linking enterprises in order to obtain resources and share costs and investments in joint activities increases their competitiveness. At the same time, however, there is internal competition that influences the stakes in joint action. These stakes may not be the same and expectations may be different.

These problems have prompted changes in the behavior of the surveyed business entities. This involved mainly changing the approach to the cooperation relationship with the selected company:

• If past collaborations did not turn out positively, they tried to learn from the mistakes they made and apply solutions in the new relationship.
• They established strategic alliances in which they clearly defined the parties and their contributions within the framework of joint cooperation.
• They have fostered joint development (research and development in the field) and individual growth.

The problematic nature of the examined cooperation environment of each selected case has a value of 2.38 points. This indicates a moderate to highly problematic environment in which cooperation relationships were explored (the highest value is 3). As we can see in the following Table 3 and

Table A5. Legend to the individual issues of cooperation relations of the surveyed enterprises.

Identification		Problem Areas
Starbucks	A.	Expand into a new market without knowing the legislative conditions and the domestic partner.
	B.	Difference in the culture of the country (new market)
	C.	Maintaining production costs—price level and product quality
	D.	Unfair competition—Violation of rules and conditions (formal and informal)
	E.	High investment in the relationship (financial, material and human resources)
IBM	Problem areas
	A.	Resumption of cooperation with a partner with whom cooperation has been terminated for the first time
	B.	Expanding into a new market with the support of competition
	C.	Differences in the culture of cooperating companies
	D.	Customer involvement in product development
	E.	Unfair competition in open innovation, knowledge and experience transfer (cheating)
	F.	Investing in risky projects (lack of resources for other projects)
INTEL	Problem areas
	A.	Technological performance (continuous innovation)
	B.	Maintaining production costs—price level and product quality
	C.	Expand into a new market without the support of a knowledgeable domestic partner
	D.	Securing enough customers (filling production capacity)
	E.	Significant cooperation with competitors
Tesla	Problem areas
	A.	Technological intensity of innovation (new generation of cars)
	B.	Car manufacturers (internal combustion engines)
	C.	Changing the mindset of customers
	D.	Expanding portfolio of the company
	E.	Exchanges of company shares for finance
DuPont	Problem areas
	A.	Implementation of a single strategy
	B.	Different management within strategic units
	C.	Placement of employees and managers in strategic units
	D.	Changing the business model
	E.	Compliance with legislative and legal conditions
	F.	Obtaining shareholder support

, IBM creates a cooperation environment in which the degree of risk of problems is at a medium level: 2.17 points. In contrast, Tesla’s current cooperation environment creates a riskiness score of 2.60, which is high. However, both companies were able to manage these risk intentions in a cooperation environment. A detailed identification of the problem values can be found in Appendix B.

Therefore, the problems identified represent important information in terms of how the companies addressed these problems, how they dealt with them, and how they were able to influence the strategic management of cooperation synergies in such a risky environment (value of 2.38 out of 3 points). Comparing the high problematic nature cooperation relationships and their positive outcomes points to an environment that needs to be explored. To identify the elements and processes of business management in a cooperation relationship that can sustain cooperation in a risky environment and produce positive outcomes. The following legend in Appendix C provides an explanation of the abbreviations.

3.4. Identification of the Occurrence of Synergies in Comparison with Selected Cooperation Cases

The cooperation relationships studied are most often with a competitor in the same industry. Connection is not about the superiority of strategies, but about their equivalence and combinability. This joint strategic management demonstrates real results (synergy effects). The overall results are shown in Appendix D.

The following table on synergy effects (

Table 4. Summary of the occurrence of synergy effects.

Synergy Effects	Average of Values
Increase in target economic values	2.25
Improving market competitiveness (market position)	2.88
Joint launch of product portfolio in new markets	1.38
Expansion of the product portfolio with new products and services	2.63
Changing behavior in a cooperation relationship	0.63
Creating a new common business culture	1.25
Creating new joint solutions (improvement, innovation)	2.38
Exchange of knowledge and experience (increased expertise)	2.63
Development and growth of the individual entities of the cooperation (evolution)	3
Customer base expansion (trust)	2.5
The emergence of new business cooperation links	2.25

and

Table A6. Summary of the examined occurrence of synergy effects.

Synergy Effects	Starbucks (Starbucks and Tata Global Beverages)	Starbucks (Starbucks and Kraft Foods)	IBM (IBM and Watson)	IBM (IBM and Apple)	Intel (Intel and Google)	Intel (Intel and Micron)	Tesla	DuPont	Average of Values
Increase in target economic values	3	0	0	3	3	3	3	3	2.25
Improving market competitiveness (market position)	3	2	3	3	3	3	3	3	2.88
Joint launch of product portfolio in new markets	2	1	0	3	0	3	0	2	1.38
Expansion of the product portfolio with new products and services	3	0	3	3	3	3	3	3	2.63
Changing behaviour in a cooperation relationship	0	2	0	1	0	0	1	1	0.63
Creating a new common business culture	0	0	0	0	1	3	3	3	1.25
Creating new joint solutions (improvement, innovation)	3	0	3	1	3	3	3	3	2.38
Exchange of knowledge and experience (increased expertise)	2	2	3	2	3	3	3	3	2.63
Development and growth of the individual entities of the cooperation (evolution)	3	3	3	3	3	3	3	3	3.00
Customer base expansion (trust)	3	2	0	3	3	3	3	3	2.50
The emergence of new business cooperation links	2	1	3	1	3	2	3	3	2.25

) shows the following negative synergy effects or outcomes that were not beneficial to the results of the cooperation relationship:

• In the studied cooperation relationships, there was no change in behavior after the initiation of cooperation; we consider this effect to be absent (lower bound of low incidence) with a value of 0.63 points, which means no or very unlikely occurrence. The exception is the Starbucks and Kraft Foods co-op, where a well-negotiated cooperation relationship with defined terms and roles ended in a breakdown, before which both partners lost trust in each other and mutually harmed each other. They went from a cooperation relationship to a detrimental relationship, which subsequently ended in litigation, a negative synergy effect.
• In most of the relationships studied (5/8) the creation of a common culture did not occur or was at a low level, so we determine a low occurrence of this type of synergy effect with a value of 1.25 points, which means low incidence. We can confirm that culture is a problem area in cooperation relationships.
• In the case of Starbucks, the joint marketing of the product portfolio was conflicting. The relationships studied were more likely to present negative synergy effects, e.g., lack of information about legislative requirements in the market and cooperation with the domestic enterprise, mutually damaging behavior. The rating for the occurrence of this type of effect is low at 1.38 points.

The following table shows the results of the occurrence of positive synergy effects. The top five most occurring, ranging in value from 2.50 to 3.00, include the following:

• Development and growth of the individual entities of the cooperation (evolution)
• Improving market competitiveness (market position)
• Exchange of knowledge and experience (increased expertise)
• Expansion of the product portfolio with new products and services
• Customer base expansion (trust)

Overall, from the summary table with the occurrence of synergy effects, we can confirm their occurrence in a ratio of 8 occurring out of 11 in total. The current strategic management supports the emergence of 8 synergy effects with an emergence value of 2.16 out of 3.00 points, which we characterize as a medium occurrence. The development and growth of the individual cooperation entities (evolution) is the main synergy effect of the studied cooperation environments with a value of 3.00 points. This result confirms the relevance of the studied issue in terms of its importance for the emergence of the identified synergy effects through the real environment of strategic management of cooperation.

3.5. Degree of Application of the Investigated Elements of the Strategic Management of Cooperation

The following

Table 5. Summary of the elements of strategic management.

Elements of Strategic Management	Average of Values
Identification of the current state of the cooperation environment	4.13
Strategic planning of common objectives	3.88
Strategic moves update	4.38
Setting common terms and rules for cooperation	3.75
Mutual cooperation interactions	4.25
Mutual Communication	3.75
Suitable combination of sources	4.38
Human capital	4.13
Evaluation of the progress and results of the cooperation	4.38
Total cooperation potential of the relationship	4.11

and Table A7 evaluate selected elements of strategic management in terms of their application in the actual cooperation relationships studied. Elements of 10 indicate a very good application in the studied environment. The lower-rated elements were not applied correctly in terms of strategic management of the cooperation. Different deviations and issues have been identified in their application. The individual elements are further elaborated in the case studies of selected cooperation connections. Comprehensive results are presented in Appendix E.

We evaluate a cooperation relationship with a total cooperation potential above 4.5 points as exemplary for the purpose of generalizing recommendations for strategic cooperation management. The cooperation management of the examined cooperation cases rated in the range of 4.44 to 5.00 points is characteristic by the following:

• Joint planning of the strategy (strategic steps) to meet the set common objectives of the cooperation. The individual values and mission of the company should be fulfilled by these common goals or should support the implementation of the strategy. On the other hand, it is also about the skills and knowledge of the company, which should be directed towards their appropriate combination with the resources of the cooperating partner in the implementation of the strategy. Checking the status of objectives or milestones in the objectives creates a transparent assessment mechanism—quantification of the achievement of the objectives. The updating of the strategic management of the cooperation should be directly dependent on the current state (based on changes in the environment) and the results of the cooperation.
• Strategic steps promoting mutual interactions, where the aim is the progressive achievement of common goals. Through mutual interactions, cooperation actors are able to move forward and positively enrich each other; for example, in the production, research, and development of new products and service solutions. Interaction processes in product development and production must be at a high level. A high degree of process integration will ensure a better cooperation outcome. This positive outcome has resulted in continued cooperation and the setting of new common goals.
• Building awareness of the cooperation relationship. This reputation is beneficial for cooperating actors in terms of attracting new investors, cooperating entities, customers, or public support.
• A unified focus on setting the rules and conditions of the cooperation relationship (formal and informal) so that they are directly dependent on the intermediate results and especially the objectives of the cooperation. In cooperation relationships it is necessary to apply a win-win strategy, where both cooperating parties have achieved their goals, certain benefits of cooperation, by means of a mutual and transparent combination of resources. Transparency in the implementation of the joint strategy is built on trust.
• High confidence identified. Diminished trust in a relationship affects its maintenance and development in the long-term continuation of the relationship. Trust is therefore essential not only for the fulfilment of common goals, but also for increasing the likelihood of a successful continuation of the relationship in the future.
• To some extent by unifying the organizational structures of cooperation actors in joint projects, production, or business units. These structures appropriately combined and linked: human capital, material, and financial resources, knowledge (know-how), communication, and information. The application of agile management, which was dependent on the superior market unit but could adapt management to its current state and the current environment, proved to be the best in these joint units. In this structure, there is a need to align all of the above elements with a common strategy. On the other hand, companies are characterized by a rather dynamic culture, which consists of a willingness to take risks, share new experiences and knowledge, and make quick decisions. This shapes the dynamic management of the enterprise.
• A reciprocal combination of resources that is built on the appropriate involvement of stakeholders (setting up internal processes and activities), so that together they meet the objective of cooperation.
• Managers in individual companies. These managers personally ensure and create a long-term relationship with all stakeholders of the company, including employees. They represent business leaders who implement strategy as their own and uphold the values of the business.
• Building a customer relationship not only in terms of business transactions, but creating a more direct relationship with customers, for example on product development and research in the subject area.

If we look at the averaged value of the application of the different elements of strategic management in the studied environment, we can see their values range from 4.13 to 4.38 points. This implies that the environment under study has room for improvement in the management of cooperation. These results of the individual values of the investigated management elements are lower than the four cooperation potentials of the investigated cooperation relationship management. This fact contradicts the clarity of the results (the recommendations from the successful cases). However, as we mentioned in the previous findings of the article, cooperation is individual for each common link; hence, governance has to be understood as dynamic rather than orthodox. Therefore, we consider the results of the cases in terms of the previous characteristic ranging from 4.44 to 5.00 points to be significant and relevant to address the issue of proper strategic management of cooperation.

4. Discussion

Hypotheses have the task to describe the topic and the problem so that their confirmation or refutation, by subsequent research, allows to analytically describe the current state of the investigated issue: strategic management of cooperation organizational forms based on synergy effect. To test the hypotheses, it is necessary to draw on the entire research article (analysis, results).

The following context is devoted to the evaluation of the hypotheses. The main characteristics of the hypotheses are included in the following tables, which consist of:

• hypothesis formulation,
• determining the identifiers of the hypothesis,
• determination of the hypothesis-driven research in question,
• selection of the method of hypothesis verification and
• decisions to confirm or refute the hypothesis.

This characteristic of the hypothesis includes a qualitative view of its verification by the results obtained in the study area.

Previous findings on synergies in the business environment have defined an environment that the authors agree is suitable for the emergence of synergies. This put us at the beginning of thinking about synergies in business management. If we start from the known knowledge about synergy effects, we assume that their emergence is stimulated by certain behaviors from individual enterprises in a certain environment. The environments we have chosen for initial examination are cooperation interactions or relationships in the global marketplace and also in the domestic environment with the selected firm. The following

Table 6. Definition and verification of hypothesis H1.

Formulation of H1	If we learn more about the conditions and linkages between the strategic management of cooperation in the context of the emergence of synergies, we can identify emerging strategic management based on the principle of synergy.
Identifiers (indicators)	The importance and relevance of exploring synergies in management.
Area of investigation in research	Confirm the feasibility of the research through selected methods, modalities, and areas of investigation.
Method of verification	A content analysis of the phenomenon under study in three selected cases of cooperation alliances on a global scale and one case from the domestic market. Qualitative evaluation in the form of summary baselines.
Confirmation decision	Based on the examined cases and their results, it is possible to evaluate hypothesis H1 as confirmed.

presents the characteristics of the second hypothesis, which verified the feasibility of investigating the synergy effect in management.

Synergy effects in the domestic environment are important for the development of businesses in the marketplace, but, in order to meaningfully create them, the link between synergies and the strategic management of collaborations needs to be further explored—collecting more diverse and extensive data. A cooperation strategy applied in a global environment is an appropriate approach to face the current dynamic market environment. In the environments studied (global and domestic), the number of interacting cooperation and competitive interactions is increasing. The starting points for strategic management in the studied cases can be considered as a wide range of options for solving certain problems and objectives, most often with a focus on ensuring competitiveness and long-term market presence. Strategic management identifiers create a strategic framework for managing cooperation alliances. The current state of affairs thus points to the feasibility of applying strategic management in co-operations, where synergistic effects can arise after the application of the defined elements. A closer understanding of the conditions for the emergence of synergy effects will provide us with a more detailed specification of the emerging strategic management of cooperation.

Our third hypothesis was to define dependencies and determine the relationship between synergy effects and market competitiveness. The following

Table 7. Definition and verification of hypothesis H2.

Formulation of H2	If synergy effects arise in cooperation, one of these effects is the achievement of strategic competitiveness.
Identifiers (indicators)	Identified synergy effects and their occurrence. Competitiveness of the cooperating enterprise.
Area of investigation in research	Definition of synergy effect. Identifying the occurrence of synergy effect in a real environment.
Method of verification	Case study methodology—results. Sociological survey in the form of questionnaires—results. Qualitative assessment.
Confirmation decision	Based on the above findings, hypothesis H2 can be confirmed.

describes its characteristics.

To verify hypothesis H2, it is necessary to compare the results of the analyses. The first side of the comparison consists of the defined synergy effects. These results point to different variations of synergy effects. The second side consists of the results from the study of the cooperation environment. We consider market competitiveness as a separate synergy effect. From our study of the literature, we defined competitiveness as the value created through joint interactions within a co-created strategy. This definition is also supported by several of the authors listed in the table in question. Subsequently, we investigated the occurrence of synergy effects: competitiveness in individual cooperation cases. From the results, we can confirm that achieving strategic competitiveness is one of the synergy effects of strategically managed cooperation. Its occurrence is substantiated.

The following hypothesis H3 verifies whether the strategic management recommended management elements stimulate the emergence of synergy effects. Strategic cooperation management should be understood as a set of elements and processes by which the common objectives of the cooperation relationship are achieved. If these objectives have been exceeded or unexpected results have emerged from the cooperation, we can identify synergy effects. From a comprehensive review of the theory, however, we must add that synergy effects may not only be results but may also be improvements in internal processes (positive interactions, process alignment), acceptance or change in culture, increased sustainability of joint solutions, increased customer loyalty, or other development and growth of businesses in a cooperation relationship. The outcomes to be achieved by the cases thus defined relate directly to their strategic management—the recommended management elements.

The following

Table 8. Definition and verification of hypothesis H3.

Formulation of H3	If we apply the recommendations for the strategic management of the cooperation organizational form, we will stimulate the emergence of synergy effects.
Identifiers (indicators)	Elements and processes of strategic cooperation management. Synergy effects
Area of investigation in research	Research findings and discussion of the results.
Method of verification	Qualitative assessment. Evaluation through contingency tables.
Confirmation decision	Based on the findings and several qualitative investigations and comparisons, we can consider hypothesis H3 to be confirmed.

characterizes the aforementioned hypothesis, H3. The hypothesis is comprehensively tested by all the strategic management identifiers, implying its high importance. Its confirmation or refutation has implications for the fulfilment of the purpose of the research, the goal of the research article.

We first defined the elements and processes of strategic management in terms of secondary sources identified as a set of initial research identifiers. This set of identifiers served as a comparative mechanism across the cases studied. By monitoring these indicators in a real-world setting, we have established a knowledge base from which we can verify this hypothesis H3. A summary of the elements of strategic management highlights the application of selected elements in the environments studied. Based on the results from the table in question, we can agree that strategic management is located in cooperation relationships. If we link this to the results, we can directly observe that synergy effects arise in environments that are controlled. Elements and processes of strategic management occur and are applied in the observed cases (case analysis, sociological survey). For example:

• Setting common goals as a means of achieving competitive advantage also within enterprises in a cooperation relationship.
• The right combination of resources, such as human potential, financial resources, technology, customer base, and supply routes, helps to achieve synergy.
• Conflict situations influence actors’ decisions; actors reassess and update the strategic management of cooperation relationships.
• The effectiveness of strategic management is ensured by two-way communication and trust in mutual cooperation interactions.
• Other significant findings.

On the other hand, three of the eleven synergy effects examined were not confirmed by research results. Therefore, hypothesis H3 needs to be confirmed. This is due to the research results, which specify the area in detail. However, even if we meet a certain strategic cooperation management framework, some of the identified synergy effects may not arise. The results show a 27% share of non-produced types of synergy effects. In case the cooperation was intended to achieve a synergy effect, which belongs to the set of unconfirmed (non-occurring), we can challenge the recommendations of strategic management as erroneous. However, this error is reduced precisely by a coherent set of recommendations that respond precisely to the environment in which these synergy effects have not been fulfilled. We can say the following about the problems faced by the cooperation: no cooperation relationship can be described as 100% because the best ones (long-term relationship, positive results, multiple synergy effects) faced a number of problems, which they gradually eliminated through cooperation interactions (joint strategic management). They have adapted and responded to conditions and changes in their internal and external environments. This result correlates with the result of the application of the selected identifiers of cooperation management, which is also not 100%. Therefore, the management of the cooperation environment in the current market conditions cannot be considered ideal. This confirms the relevance of the proposed recommendations for the strategic management of cooperation organizational forms in order to create and maintain synergies.

In the sociological survey, we also asked about the willingness of companies to apply appropriate elements of strategic management. The following

Table 9. Verified survey statements of willing to manage cooperation.

Statement In the case of cooperation, our enterprise is willing to select appropriate and effective elements of strategic business management

confirms that the enterprise is willing to strategically manage cooperation by selecting effective management elements. There are more and more interactions in today’s market and, therefore, companies start to approach market interactions differently (competitively or cooperatively). Hypothesis H3 moves the strategic management of the cooperation relationship closer to the emergence of a synergy effect and thus can be confirmed through this finding. If cooperation interactions are important for achieving synergies, it is important that businesses have the knowledge to manage them properly. From the point of view of the issues studied in the environment in question, it can be concluded that enterprises consider cooperation important and are willing to invest their resources in it if it takes place, but they also expect certain benefits. The following statement T1 supports hypothesis H3 (

Table 10. Verified survey statements of maintain cooperation for synergistic effects.

Statement Groups of companies today, such as the various cooperation clusters, point to the need to be able to maintain cooperation relationships not only for long-term competitiveness, but also for the purpose of creating synergies.

). Enterprises implement and recognize specific cooperation relationships, such as different types of alliances, mergers, clusters and other joint groupings of enterprises. They consider it important to create added value, a synergy relationship in cooperation. On the one hand, this effect will bring them certain advantages and positively influence decisions that will affect the development of the cooperation relationship.

Based on the above data and hypothesis verification, we argue that the purpose of current cooperation, and thus the decision criterion determining the future of cooperation, is synergy effects. Achieving synergy effects influences the decision on problem solving and the choice of strategic management elements and processes (application).

The current investigation of the research issue from 2018 until now deals with the creation of documents for the construction of a tool that will process complex information about strategic management, manager’s decision-making, cooperative elements, and the results of cooperation (or competition) within one evaluation system. Our goal is to identify basic areas suitable for use in a new tool for assessing the synergistic effects of businesses. Analyze and experiment with known variables so that they can serve in the future in an advanced method of assessing and measuring the company’s potential for the emergence of positive synergistic effects.

5. Limitations and Problems of Research

We consider the research as a whole to be relevant. We include the following among its possible shortcomings (

Table 11. The most common mistakes and problems in research.

Selected Errors and Problems	Signs	Measures Used in the Research
Methodological formalism	The author places a higher value in research on the methodology of survey than on its content.	The methodology is well defined, but the intention is to observe the environment under study in a relevant way and to produce reliable data from which to clarify the current state of play and address the issues. (Chapter 2, Appendix A)
Book theorizing	Management as well as economic systems in Central Europe mainly adopt successful examples from Western Europe and the USA. These often already take the form of theoretical knowledge. At a general level, there are similarities, particularly in terms of the ways in which competitiveness is achieved through effective cooperation.	However, there are some differences—specifics. These relate to the environment of Slovakia and Central Europe itself—where the whole economic and social context is specific in itself, so the theoretical and methodological procedures have to be adapted. Therefore, the results from secondary sources need to be linked and updated according to the current state of governance in the market. (Chapter 2)
Raw data production (sterile and discontinuous data)
Distortion	We recognize different types of distortions, the most common being: spurious correlation, developmental sequence, missing middle term, and dual cause.	These distortions involve the inadvertent failure to recognize a variable, relationship, cause, or situation affecting the object under study. (Specified hypotheses in chapter 1.3)
Information Reduction/Limited Specification	The reduction arises from: not including variables in the analysis, treating the analyzed relationships as absolute, defining the selected set, incorrectly defining the temporal aspect.	The research is defined on specific research areas: the performance of strategic management elements, the occurrence of synergy effects, selected cooperation relationships. Each area is delimited in detail by individual identifiers and their parameters. (Appendix C)
Transformation of information	It is the transcription of data characterizing the reality of the environment under study into textual and graphical representations.	This transcription varies in difficulty, depending on the discipline, and also on the choice of the method of investigation (observation, enquiry). Exploration creates a coherent whole that interprets the objective nature of the reality under research. (Chapter 1, Chapter 2)

):

• In the selected sample of respondents, as well as the selected global cooperation cases, a high impact on the issue under study is assigned. Considering the relevance of the sample, we filled the 90% confidence interval with a population size of 2997.
• A number of identifiers specified for observation in research may contain hidden links between them. Additionally, the number of identifiers may not be complete. Identifiers were selected on the basis of qualitative (verification of significance by selected important authors) and quantitative (verification directly through their occurrence in individual cases) investigation). (Reference to subjects of investigation identified in chapter 2).
• The quantitative survey does not include data from respondents from the Prešov and Košice regions. The survey involved mainly companies cooperating with the University of Žilina. Considering the population size, the amount of collected data is sufficient to achieve a 90% confidence interval. From the point of view of the geographical territory of the Slovak Republic and business mobility, in most cases their nationwide scope is identified.
• The qualitative research (case studies) does not include cases from the Slovak Republic. These are exclusively global corporations. Considering the experience in the given issue, it is more relevant to examine the environment of international companies with an overlap and scope even in the territory where their headquarters are not directly located.
• Sociological research dealt with a more general level and did not deal with individual situations and the strategic management that was applied in these situations. Sociological inquiry is thus limited to precisely defined questions. Therefore, for further investigation, we decided to use case study analyses from a global environment.
• Small businesses are unintentionally missing from the sociological survey. This fact is due to the cleaning of the total number of responses in view of these long-term market conditions. This means that we have cleaned the file from companies that have not been active on the market for many years, and thus we reflect on less experience with cooperation and the creation of synergistic effects.
• The processing of individual data from partial research was lengthy due to the links of individual results through the investigated identifiers. The research took place between 2014 and 2018. Data processing was from 2019-2021, and in 2020 there was processing the presentation of the results.
• Based on this research, it is crucial to form general recommendations instrumental for other companies. These recommendations and results can be used as a status before current global events such as COVID-19 and the war in Ukraine.

We consider the above to be shortcomings, which have some bearing on the relevance of the survey carried out. The validity of research results is a supporting metric for the correct formulation of a new theory. It is about comparing research results with:

• placement in a laboratory environment (conducting research); elaboration of case studies.
• and comparison with another theory: a comprehensive content analysis at the beginning of the research provides a rich theoretical apparatus against which we can compare the proposed recommendations.

6. Conclusions

Synergy effects can be seen as a whole within certain approaches (the seven basic approaches of synergy). These approaches also identify the approach within the business environment. It is important to recall that the different approaches are interlinked (contexts). We have defined the synergy approach within the business environment as follows: “Interactions in the business environment across different management approaches, cooperation coordination, common strategy, subsystem alignment, and competitiveness provide a mechanism for gaining benefits that would not have been achieved without the value created in synergy.”

The authors define it similarly: Ansoff, 1965; Porter, 1985; Mintsberg, 1991; Thompson a Strickland, 1992; Hittmár a Jankal, 2013. The strategy process consists of three basic processes: the goal formulation process, the strategy formulation process, and the strategy implementation process. The following recommendations will be categorized into the following three areas. However, the recommendations are influenced by the area under study—focusing on creating synergy effects through appropriate management of cooperation. The answered research question is: How should the elements and processes of strategic management of cooperating enterprises in a global environment be properly set up to achieve synergy effects?

The following recommendations A–H are formulated on the basis of research in the given issue, namely content analysis of relevant internet sources (both quantitative and qualitative) and sociological survey in the years 2014 to 2018.

The following recommendations A–H represent the final starting points for the strategic management of cooperation organizational forms that will stimulate synergy effects. The following recommendations for strategic management:

A.

Focus on the acquisition of new abilities of successful businesses, which directly affect strategic management are:

• The ability to adapt when the external or internal environment of the enterprise changes.
• Based on the observed situation within the overall global environment, one of the main challenges, and the point of current business strategies, is to be able to compete and cooperate at the same time.

B.

Incorporate cooperation objectives into the company’s mission

• The initiation of the process of creating a cooperation relationship and its strategic management depends on its necessity—that is, the importance of cooperation. The selection of enterprises for cooperation activities is based on the importance of the link. The goal is the basis of the established cooperation, but the intention of the cooperation relationships should be understood as their common mission towards the current changes in the market with the help of cooperation activities. The following cooperation objectives stand out within the individual relationships examined: (a) strengthening global competitiveness. (b) Innovative development (strengthening the sustainability of products and services and development and production of a new generation). (c) Gaining time in terms of fast pace in the market (loss of competitiveness in a certain area). (d) Building a strong reputation.
• Enterprises need to think about cooperation activities in the long term. Therefore, the top management should consider the outputs of the internal and external environment analyses as well as the criteria for selecting a cooperation partner, accumulate a database of possible cooperation relationships and start to create potential cooperation. These can provide solutions when unexpected market situations or market changes occur.

C.

Clearly define the objective and the area of cooperation from which the conditions and rules of cooperation will be derived

• Goals should be set right at the beginning of any relationship. Strategic planning of common goals implies, among other things, to have clearly specified expected results of cooperation, e.g.,: cost savings, new solution (product, service), sharing of resources and knowledge, etc. Results are often not achievable in the short term, so businesses should incorporate long-term plans for achieving goals into strategic management. By jointly planning the strategy (strategic steps), a clear vision and values of the cooperation relationship is created, where the chosen strategy creates the growth potential of the enterprises. To achieve these results, it is necessary to set certain rules and conditions for cooperation, e.g.,: the size of the contribution to the relationship, information sharing, education, but also profit sharing and pricing.
• Jointly set the terms and rules of the cooperation relationship. A unified focus on setting the rules and conditions of the cooperation relationship (formal and informal) should be directly dependent on the intermediate results and especially the objectives of the cooperation. In cooperation relationships it is necessary to apply a win-win strategy, where both cooperating parties have achieved their goals, certain benefits of cooperation, by means of a mutual and transparent combination of resources. Conditions of cooperation (criteria, rules) are necessary for a properly and beneficially functioning relationship. Mutual trust; the benefits of cooperation; adherence to contractual terms and conditions; and the level of communication create the main conditions for cooperation. Accepting compliance with conditions and rules is about improving cooperation with actors in the environment and correctly creating new agreements. Transparency in the implementation of the joint strategy, compliance with the conditions and rules of the cooperation relationship is built on trust. Controlling the activities and results of the cooperation (meeting the objectives) or milestones in the objectives creates a transparent assessment mechanism. The control is intended to help increase the degree of interdependence with the cooperating enterprise.

D.

To steer the internal corporate culture towards a cooperation environment

• Internal corporate culture is created in the internal relationships of employees and managers. The culture in the cooperation environment is very important. The internal environment of a company creates a significantly important area for setting appropriate conditions for cooperation and management. Management processes are influenced by the cultures of the cooperating enterprises. Fostering a unified and shared culture; fostering mutual cooperation is achieved by: unifying behavior, mutual learning and training (sharing knowledge and experience), strengthening the core competencies of employees and managers, focusing on teamwork, and emphasizing employee leadership. It influences all management processes as well as the fulfilment of common goals within cooperation; it also influences the behavior of employees and managers. The work environment should support the performance of current and future tasks. It is intended to support the alignment of culture towards commonly identified strategic objectives.
• Upgrade the skills and knowledge of managers and staff who form the core and active management element of well-functioning strategic management. Employees need not only to be managed, but to be in contact with them, coach them and develop their potential. Additionally, identifying decision-making principles across the enterprise helps to open communication and reduce misunderstandings when managing and implementing change.

E.

Strengthen the manager’s role

• Management processes are influenced by business managers. The functioning of the managerial part depends on the relationships with the employees of the enterprise: the attitude of the manager, the working environment of the employee and the motivation of the employee. Thus, the success of strategic management of cooperation organizational forms depends on managers, and that is why they are the main coordinators of joint strategic management. Their role is to support the emergence of a cooperation culture. Managers are important for sharing strategic information among employees.
• Managers have to create a long-term relationship with cooperation actors. These leaders are able to implement the chosen strategy as their own while upholding the values of the enterprise. They personally ensure and establish relationship with all stakeholders of the enterprise, including employees. Their management skills and abilities can influence the formation, course, and outcome of a cooperation relationship.

F.

Strengthen mutual trust to support effective communication with each other

• Mutual trust in cooperation activities is based on the sustainability of the way to achieve goals, which means that a higher degree of trust is achieved if strategic management is properly set up internally between the different actors. Diminished trust in a relationship affects its maintenance and development in the long-term period for the continuation of the relationship. Trust is therefore essential not only for the fulfilment of common goals but also for increasing the likelihood of a successful continuation of the relationship in the future.
• Effective communication is central to managing cooperation between links. Trust needs to be built at the outset, after which effective two-way communication can begin. This will foster mutual cooperation and provide an environment for the exchange of mutual information.

G.

Create a collaborative organisational structure

• A collaborative organizational structure of different business environments will support the integration of individuals (teamwork) as well as individual business units (company departments). Such integration within the organizational structure contributes to increasing the efficiency of processes such as: production, sales, distribution, expanding the customer base, supporting research and development, sharing people’s knowledge and experience. Interaction processes must be at a high level. A high degree of process integration will ensure a better cooperation outcome. Positive outcome has resulted in continued cooperation and the setting of new common goals.
• An option is to create a new separate department, business unit, or project. In doing so, they will assign selected staff members (project teams) where the alignment of business environments needs to be supported.
• The application of agile management, which is dependent on the superior market unit but can adapt management to its current state and the environment in which it operates, will help in unifying organizational structures. For example, the current dynamic culture of successful new businesses consists of a willingness to take risks, to share new experiences and knowledge, and to make decisions quickly. These approaches shape dynamic governance.
• In the joint structure, it is also necessary to introduce a mutual combination of resources that is based on the appropriate involvement of the tangible and intangible resources of the parties involved so that together they form the input to the cooperation processes and fulfil the objective of the cooperation. The ability and knowledge of enterprises in combining resources influences their effective use in the relationship.
• Strategic management firms have been able to achieve positive changes in the areas of human capital, culture, and organizational redesign. These areas were, and are at the same time, their strongest areas in terms of the management of the enterprise and its parts.

H.

Update strategic management

• The updating of the strategic management of the cooperation should be directly dependent on the current state and the results of the cooperation. It is necessary to start from the condition of the diversity of cooperation areas and the specific objectives of cooperation, whereby changes in the current environment and the problems of enterprises also come into play. These conditions influence the design, implementation, and results (including intermediate results) of the chosen strategy.
• Approach management dynamically. It is necessary to focus the manager’s thinking on the current dynamic changes in the environment, globalization, the increasing number of cooperation, and competitive interactions. This focus influences the approach to managing staff.

The subject of the research was to find suitable elements of strategic management of cooperative organizational forms in order to create synergistic effects. Considering the complex results, we can confirm: synergy has a positive impact on a long-term and sustainable cooperative relationship. Cooperative strategy is one of the main ways in which businesses can obtain synergistic effects. By observing the performance of cooperating companies, internal management processes and management decisions against the results and impact on individual cooperative interactions, we identify complex strategic management. It is not just one element, but a complex of elements and processes that interact with each other. Therefore, if the company is to achieve synergistic effects through its strategic management, it is necessary to deal with recommendations for the strategic management of cooperating companies in the sense of the whole. We clarified the issue sufficiently considering the defined boundaries of the investigation, which represented the strategic management of cooperating organizational forms. On the other hand, these outputs represent the basis for further investigation of synergistic effects arising in the business environment through appropriately chosen and implemented management.

Strategic management within the framework of the above-identified starting points represents basic elements and processes for verification and further investigation of the emergence of synergistic effects. A significant contribution is the assembled evaluation apparatus, with the help of which the collected data were compiled and evaluated.