**1. Introduction**

Studies of organizational interdependence distinguish between two contrasting phenomena: symbiosis and exploitation. These are often discussed separately, as if they were isolated patterns. Such dichotomy is clearly evident in the sports field, where scholars often emphasize either cooperation and symbiosis or competition and exploitation when studying the relationships of sports organizations with their environment. I argue here that this binary misses the delicate intricacy of organizational interdependencies. While most organizational relations exhibit forms of symbiosis and exploitation, these are not exclusive patterns. Rather, symbiotic cooperation and opportunistic exploitation exist side by side in organizational alliances. Furthermore, these are dynamic patterns, sensitive to changes in the organization's environmental context. This proposition is demonstrated through a case study of the long-lasting alliance between Maccabi Tel-Aviv basketball club and the Israeli Public Channel. This alliance has been characterized by ongoing cooperation and symbiotic rent, but also by altering exploitive behaviors. At different times both organizations used their structural advantages to attain exploitive rents at the expense of the other side.

The literature on organizational interdependence has a long tradition, going back to the early 1950s (e.g. Hawley 1950; Katz & Kahn 1966; Aiken & Hage 1968; Pfeffer 1972; Hannan & Freeman 1988; Gulati & Singh 1998). Scholars of organizational relations often distinguish between two prominent and contrasting phenomena: Symbiosis (e.g. Pfeffer & Nowak 1976; Hannan & Freeman 1977; Deutsch 1980; Koka & Prescott 2000) and exploitation (e.g. Burt 1992; Larson et al. 1998; Sorenson 2000; Das et al. 2003). Dyadic symbiotic interdependence occurs when two individuals or organizations cooperate in order to achieve desired goals. This symbiosis leads to what Marshall (1949 [1920]) had termed *composite rent*—the gains resulting from cooperation in excess to the returns in a non-cooperative situation. In exploitive relations actors take advantage of their structural social position to maximize returns at the expense of another party. I will refer to such gains here as *exploitive rent*.

The current paper wishes to break a common dichotomy in organizational literature between cooperation and exploitation. Building on the ideas of Barnett and Carroll (1987) I argue that these two practices are rarely (if ever) exclusive. Rather, they tend to exist side by side in organizational interrelations. Cooperation, trust, and the perception of mutual gains

Symbiosis and Exploitation in Sports-Media Interrelations:

symbiosis and exploitation patterns.

(Hannan & Freeman 1977).

alliance and complements the other.

and emotional level (Tjosvold 1986, 1990; Uzzi 1997).

stringency.

The Israeli Case of Maccabi Tel-Aviv Basketball Club and the Public Channel 343

broadcastings franchise. Following the ingress of other television channels into the market, at the beginning of the 1990s, the tables have turned. Maccabi Tel-Aviv began to employ its rising market power and the Public Channel's growing dependence to demand and receive massive financial royalties from the channel, regardless of the latter's increasing financial

The current chapter begins with a theoretical analysis of organizational dependence and interdependence, concentrating on patterns of symbiosis and trust on the one hand, and power and exploitation on the other. This is followed by a short review of these contrasting patterns in the interdependent relations between sports and media organizations. Next, I introduce briefly the historical setting of the two organizations that stand in the focus of the paper—Maccabi Tel-Aviv Basketball Club and the Israeli Public Channel. The long-lasting alliance between these two organizations and their changing interdependence comprise the core part of the paper. Finally, I situate the Israeli case in the wider context of interdependence in the sports field and examine other examples for the interlocking of

The term organizational dependence is often used to describe the gap between the vital resources a given organization has and the vital resources it needs (Samuel 2002). Hence, the term draws our attention to the limitations of organizations: their necessity to consider the demands of other organizations in their environment and to adjust some of their operations accordingly. According to the ecological school in organizations studies, organizational dependence is better described and understood as interdependence. Organizations, while being influenced by their environments, also influence and shape these environments

When examining these interrelations many have stressed the positive consequences for those involved (Barnett and Carroll 1987; Hannan & Freeman 1988; Pfeffer & Nowak 1976). These scholars term the beneficial cooperation between organizations *Symbiotic Organizational Interdependence*: interdependence which emerges when organizations perceive their own goals as positively correlated with the goals of other organizations. This perception yields reciprocity and further cooperation. Each side sees the other's success as facilitating its own success, and therefore is tuned towards an auxiliary orientation (Deutsch 1980). In the ideal type symbiotic interdependence each side brings its advantages to the

Symbiotic interdependence facilitates the emergence of mutual *trust***:** an expectation that others will help you when in need and that they can be counted on, because helping you will eventually serve their own interests, as well as your own (Coleman 1988; Deutsch 1980; Putnam 2000). In other words, trust is the belief that neither side is going to take advantage of the other; that cooperation and partnership precede individual and personal interests (Uzzi 1997). The development of mutual trust in a dyadic relationship allows both sides to take a risk and share valuable resources. Such sharing is based on the assumption that the other means well, which in turn facilitates further cooperation (Nahapiet & Ghoshal 1998). When trust develops, relations often exceed the professional level and reach a more personal

**2. Organizational interdependence: Symbiosis and exploitation** 

are necessary components of organizational interdependencies. Indeed, as myriad studies have shown, without these elements strategic alliances fall apart quite abruptly (e.g. Gulati 1995; Uzzi 1997; Nahapiet & Ghoshal 1998; Zaheer et al. 1998; Putnam 2000; Whipple & Frankel 2000). However, alongside cooperation and trust, most dyadic alliances are also characterized by elements of opportunistic exploitation. Since alliances are rarely egalitarian, there is an imbalance of power, where one side holds greater power than the other. This power position will most likely be used to acquire excess returns at the expense of the other side. Nevertheless, an alliance may still be preserved as long as the exploited organization perceives the returns it derives from it as exceeding the returns it would have achieved without it.

Furthermore, I suggest that the nexus of exploitation and cooperation is mostly fluid, volatile and dynamic, rather than stable or fixed. There is a delicate balance between enjoying synergetic symbiosis and taking advantage of the other side. This balance quite often changes over different settings and time periods, depending on the environmental context. Changes in the organizational environment can take the form of a cut off in governmental support, the establishment or elimination of a monopolistic status, the introduction of new competing organizations into the market, changes in the availability of raw materials, changes in market demand, and more. Such turnabouts may lead to a change in the balance of powers between interdependent organizations. While at times such changes lead to the disintegration of the alliance, the alliance may also be preserved, but with the formerly exploited side now becoming the exploiter. Such changes illustrate that Power is not a fixed part of the social structure, but rather a volatile ongoing social relationship, which is sensitive to transformations in the environmental context.

The divide between symbiosis and exploitation is clearly evident in research on organizational interdependence in the field of sports. Most studies of the field emphasize the symbiosis and composite rents derived from cooperation between sports organizations, sponsors, the media, and other social actors (e.g. McChesney 1989; Koppett 1994; Williams 1994). Others stress mainly the exploitation involved in these relationships (e.g. Hargreaves 1986; Quirk & Rodney 1999). The current study, however, demonstrates that in the sports arena, much like in other environments, dyadic organizational interdependencies often incorporate elements of symbiosis and exploitation.

This contention is illustrated by an Israeli case study of interdependence between a basketball club and a television channel. For almost forty years Maccabi Tel-Aviv basketball club and the Public Israeli Channel (Channel 1) maintained an alliance, in which the latter held the franchise for the broadcasting of the teams' matches in the European arena. Throughout this period both sides enjoyed an evident composite rent. For the team the broadcastings served at first as leverage for exposure, which promoted the acquisition of national audience support. Later on, the broadcastings also became a major source of income, as broadcasting franchise royalties increased dramatically. For the public television channel the matches served as a primal source of ratings and as a tool to retain legitimacy in an expanding television market.

Yet, throughout the years, dimensions of exploitation were also clearly present in the alliance. First, until the early 1990s, it was the Public Channel which used its monopoly in the Israeli television market to avoid almost completely any financial compensation for the

are necessary components of organizational interdependencies. Indeed, as myriad studies have shown, without these elements strategic alliances fall apart quite abruptly (e.g. Gulati 1995; Uzzi 1997; Nahapiet & Ghoshal 1998; Zaheer et al. 1998; Putnam 2000; Whipple & Frankel 2000). However, alongside cooperation and trust, most dyadic alliances are also characterized by elements of opportunistic exploitation. Since alliances are rarely egalitarian, there is an imbalance of power, where one side holds greater power than the other. This power position will most likely be used to acquire excess returns at the expense of the other side. Nevertheless, an alliance may still be preserved as long as the exploited organization perceives the returns it derives from it as exceeding the returns it would have

Furthermore, I suggest that the nexus of exploitation and cooperation is mostly fluid, volatile and dynamic, rather than stable or fixed. There is a delicate balance between enjoying synergetic symbiosis and taking advantage of the other side. This balance quite often changes over different settings and time periods, depending on the environmental context. Changes in the organizational environment can take the form of a cut off in governmental support, the establishment or elimination of a monopolistic status, the introduction of new competing organizations into the market, changes in the availability of raw materials, changes in market demand, and more. Such turnabouts may lead to a change in the balance of powers between interdependent organizations. While at times such changes lead to the disintegration of the alliance, the alliance may also be preserved, but with the formerly exploited side now becoming the exploiter. Such changes illustrate that Power is not a fixed part of the social structure, but rather a volatile ongoing social

relationship, which is sensitive to transformations in the environmental context.

incorporate elements of symbiosis and exploitation.

an expanding television market.

The divide between symbiosis and exploitation is clearly evident in research on organizational interdependence in the field of sports. Most studies of the field emphasize the symbiosis and composite rents derived from cooperation between sports organizations, sponsors, the media, and other social actors (e.g. McChesney 1989; Koppett 1994; Williams 1994). Others stress mainly the exploitation involved in these relationships (e.g. Hargreaves 1986; Quirk & Rodney 1999). The current study, however, demonstrates that in the sports arena, much like in other environments, dyadic organizational interdependencies often

This contention is illustrated by an Israeli case study of interdependence between a basketball club and a television channel. For almost forty years Maccabi Tel-Aviv basketball club and the Public Israeli Channel (Channel 1) maintained an alliance, in which the latter held the franchise for the broadcasting of the teams' matches in the European arena. Throughout this period both sides enjoyed an evident composite rent. For the team the broadcastings served at first as leverage for exposure, which promoted the acquisition of national audience support. Later on, the broadcastings also became a major source of income, as broadcasting franchise royalties increased dramatically. For the public television channel the matches served as a primal source of ratings and as a tool to retain legitimacy in

Yet, throughout the years, dimensions of exploitation were also clearly present in the alliance. First, until the early 1990s, it was the Public Channel which used its monopoly in the Israeli television market to avoid almost completely any financial compensation for the

achieved without it.

broadcastings franchise. Following the ingress of other television channels into the market, at the beginning of the 1990s, the tables have turned. Maccabi Tel-Aviv began to employ its rising market power and the Public Channel's growing dependence to demand and receive massive financial royalties from the channel, regardless of the latter's increasing financial stringency.

The current chapter begins with a theoretical analysis of organizational dependence and interdependence, concentrating on patterns of symbiosis and trust on the one hand, and power and exploitation on the other. This is followed by a short review of these contrasting patterns in the interdependent relations between sports and media organizations. Next, I introduce briefly the historical setting of the two organizations that stand in the focus of the paper—Maccabi Tel-Aviv Basketball Club and the Israeli Public Channel. The long-lasting alliance between these two organizations and their changing interdependence comprise the core part of the paper. Finally, I situate the Israeli case in the wider context of interdependence in the sports field and examine other examples for the interlocking of symbiosis and exploitation patterns.
