Overcoming undesirable knowledge redundancy in territorial clusters

This work analyzes the existence of redundant knowledge associated to geographic networks of firms. Specifically, our research focuses on how firms can avoid inefficient redundancy ties derived from territorial clusters. We propose that firms embedded in a dense and strong-tie network generate redundant knowledge flows. However, they may use structural dispersion to mediate and overcome this limitation. Our empirical study was conducted drawing on the Spanish ceramic tile industrial cluster to test the potential association between social capital and redundancy. Our findings support the idea that structural dispersion mediates the effects of strong ties and the generation of knowledge redundancy.Molina Morales, FX.; Expósito Langa, M. (2013). Overcoming undesirable knowledge redundancy in territorial clusters. Industry and Innovation. 20(8):739-758. doi:10.1080/13662716.2013.856622S739758208Adger, W. N. (2009). Social Capital, Collective Action, and Adaptation to Climate Change. Economic Geography, 79(4), 387-404. doi:10.1111/j.1944-8287.2003.tb00220.xAdler, P. S., & Kwon, S.-W. (2002). Social Capital: Prospects for a New Concept. The Academy of Management Review, 27(1), 17. doi:10.2307/4134367Andersson, U., Forsgren, M., & Holm, U. (2002). The strategic impact of external networks: subsidiary performance and competence development in the multinational corporation. Strategic Management Journal, 23(11), 979-996. doi:10.1002/smj.267Bathelt, H., Malmberg, A., & Maskell, P. (2004). Clusters and knowledge: local buzz, global pipelines and the process of knowledge creation. Progress in Human Geography, 28(1), 31-56. doi:10.1191/0309132504ph469oaBecattini, G. (1990) The Marshallian industrial district as a socio-economic notion, in: F.Pyke, G.Becattini & W.Sengenberger (Eds), Industrial Districts and Local Economic Regeneration, pp. 37–51 (Geneva: International Institute for Labor Studies)Belussi, F., & Sedita, S. R. (2009). Life Cycle vs. Multiple Path Dependency in Industrial Districts. European Planning Studies, 17(4), 505-528. doi:10.1080/09654310802682065Benton, L. (1992) The emergence of the industrial district in Spain, in: F.Pyke, G.Becattini & W.Sengenberger (Eds), Industrial Districts and Local Economic Regeneration, pp. 81–128 (Geneva: International Institute for Labor Studies)Boix, R. (2009) The empirical evidence of industrial districts in Spain, in: G.Becattini, M.Bellandi & L.De Propris (Eds), A Handbook of Industrial Districts, pp. 343–359 (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar)Cantwell, J., & Piscitello, L. (2005). Recent Location of Foreign-owned Research and Development Activities by Large Multinational Corporations in the European Regions: The Role of Spillovers and Externalities. Regional Studies, 39(1), 1-16. doi:10.1080/0034340052000320824Boschma, R. A., & ter Wal, A. L. J. (2007). Knowledge Networks and Innovative Performance in an Industrial District: The Case of a Footwear District in the South of Italy. Industry & Innovation, 14(2), 177-199. doi:10.1080/13662710701253441Brown, D. W., & Konrad, A. M. (2001). Granovetter Was Right. Group & Organization Management, 26(4), 434-462. doi:10.1177/1059601101264003Burt, R. S. (1992a) Social structure of competition, in: N.Nohria & R. G.Eccles (Eds), Networks and Organizations: Structure, Form and Action, pp. 57–91 (Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press)Burt, R. S. (1992b) Structural Holes (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press)Burt, R. S. (1995) Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press)Burt, R. S. (2004). Structural Holes and Good Ideas. American Journal of Sociology, 110(2), 349-399. doi:10.1086/421787Capaldo, A. (2007). Network structure and innovation: The leveraging of a dual network as a distinctive relational capability. Strategic Management Journal, 28(6), 585-608. doi:10.1002/smj.621Coleman, J. S. (1990) Foundation of Social Theory (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press)Dakhli, M., & De Clercq, D. (2004). Human capital, social capital, and innovation: a multi-country study. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 16(2), 107-128. doi:10.1080/08985620410001677835Frenken, K., Van Oort, F., & Verburg, T. (2007). Related Variety, Unrelated Variety and Regional Economic Growth. Regional Studies, 41(5), 685-697. doi:10.1080/00343400601120296Frenzen, J., & Nakamoto, K. (1993). Structure, Cooperation, and the Flow of Market Information. Journal of Consumer Research, 20(3), 360. doi:10.1086/209355Galaskiewicz, J. (1985) Social Organization of an Urban Grants Economy (Orlando, FL: Academic Press)Gargiulo, M., & Benassi, M. (2000). Trapped in Your Own Net? Network Cohesion, Structural Holes, and the Adaptation of Social Capital. Organization Science, 11(2), 183-196. doi:10.1287/orsc.11.2.183.12514Giuliani, E., & Bell, M. (2005). The micro-determinants of meso-level learning and innovation: evidence from a Chilean wine cluster. Research Policy, 34(1), 47-68. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2004.10.008Glasmeier, A. (1991). Technological discontinuities and flexible production networks: The case of Switzerland and the world watch industry. Research Policy, 20(5), 469-485. doi:10.1016/0048-7333(91)90070-7Grabher, G. (1993) The weakness of strong ties: the lock-in of regional development in the Ruhr area, in: G.Grabher (Ed.), The Embedded Firm: On the Socioeconomics of Industrial Networks, pp. 255–277 (London: Routledge)Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The Strength of Weak Ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360-1380. doi:10.1086/225469Gulati, R. (1995). Social Structure and Alliance Formation Patterns: A Longitudinal Analysis. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(4), 619. doi:10.2307/2393756Gulati, R., Nohria, N., & Zaheer, A. (2000). Strategic networks. Strategic Management Journal, 21(3), 203-215. doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0266(200003)21:33.0.co;2-kHansen, M. T. (1999). The Search-Transfer Problem: The Role of Weak Ties in Sharing Knowledge across Organization Subunits. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(1), 82. doi:10.2307/2667032Hassink, R. (2010) Locked in decline? On the role of regional lock-ins in old industrial areas, in: R.Boschma & R.Martin (Eds), Handbook of Evolutionary Economic Geography, pp. 450–467 (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar)Hendry, C., Brown, J., & Defillippi, R. (2000). Regional Clustering of High Technology-based Firms: Opto-electronics in Three Countries. Regional Studies, 34(2), 129-144. doi:10.1080/00343400050006050Hervas-Oliver, J. L. and Albors-Garrigos, J. (2011) Resources and innovation in low-tech industries: an empirical study of clusters in Spain and Italy, in: P. L.Robertson & D.Jacobson (Eds), Knowledge Transfer and Technology Diffusion, pp. 35–63 (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar)Humphrey, J., & Schmitz, H. (2002). How does insertion in global value chains affect upgrading in industrial clusters? Regional Studies, 36(9), 1017-1027. doi:10.1080/0034340022000022198Ibarra, H. (1993). NETWORK CENTRALITY, POWER, AND INNOVATION INVOLVEMENT: DETERMINANTS OF TECHNICAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE ROLES. Academy of Management Journal, 36(3), 471-501. doi:10.2307/256589Inge Jenssen, J., & Greve, A. (2002). Does the degree of redundancy in social networks influence the success of business start‐ups? International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 8(5), 254-267. doi:10.1108/13552550210448357Kenny, D. A., Kashy, D. and Bolger, N. (1998) Data analysis in social psychology, in: D.Gilbert, S.Fiske & G.Lindzey (Eds), Handbook of Social Psychology, pp. 233–265 (New York: McGraw-Hill)Kogut, B. (2000). The network as knowledge: generative rules and the emergence of structure. Strategic Management Journal, 21(3), 405-425. doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0266(200003)21:33.0.co;2-5Krackhardt, D. (1992) The strength of strong ties: the importance of philos, in: N.Nohria & R. G.Eccles (Eds), Networks and Organizations: Structure, Form and Action, pp. 216–239 (Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press)Lane, P. J., & Lubatkin, M. (1998). Relative absorptive capacity and interorganizational learning. Strategic Management Journal, 19(5), 461-477. doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0266(199805)19:53.0.co;2-lLeana, C. R., & van Buren, H. J. (1999). Organizational Social Capital and Employment Practices. The Academy of Management Review, 24(3), 538. doi:10.2307/259141Li, W., Veliyath, R., & Tan, J. (2012). Network Characteristics and Firm Performance: An Examination of the Relationships in the Context of a Cluster. Journal of Small Business Management, 51(1), 1-22. doi:10.1111/j.1540-627x.2012.00375.xLorenzen, M. (2007). Social Capital and Localised Learning: Proximity and Place in Technological and Institutional Dynamics. Urban Studies, 44(4), 799-817. doi:10.1080/00420980601184752Malecki, E. (1995) Culture as mediator of global and local forces, in: B.Van Der Knaap & R.Le Heron (Eds), Human Resources and Industrial Spaces: A Perspective on Globalization and Localization, pp. 105–127 (Chichester: Wiley)Martin, R., & Sunley, P. (2006). Path dependence and regional economic evolution. Journal of Economic Geography, 6(4), 395-437. doi:10.1093/jeg/lbl012MASKELL, P. (2001). KNOWLEDGE CREATION AND DIFFUSION IN GEOGRAPHIC CLUSTERS. International Journal of Innovation Management, 05(02), 213-237. doi:10.1142/s1363919601000373McEvily, B., & Zaheer, A. (1999). Bridging ties: a source of firm heterogeneity in competitive capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 20(12), 1133-1156. doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0266(199912)20:123.0.co;2-7McFadyen, M. A., & Cannella, A. A. (2004). SOCIAL CAPITAL AND KNOWLEDGE CREATION: DIMINISHING RETURNS OF THE NUMBER AND STRENGTH OF EXCHANGE RELATIONSHIPS. Academy of Management Journal, 47(5), 735-746. doi:10.2307/20159615Menzel, M.-P., & Fornahl, D. (2009). Cluster life cycles--dimensions and rationales of cluster evolution. Industrial and Corporate Change, 19(1), 205-238. doi:10.1093/icc/dtp036Molina-Morales, F. X. (2002). Industrial districts and innovation: the case of the Spanish ceramic tiles industry. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 14(4), 317-335. doi:10.1080/08985620210144992Molina-Morales, F. X., & Martínez-Fernández, M. T. (2009). Too much love in the neighborhood can hurt: how an excess of intensity and trust in relationships may produce negative effects on firms. Strategic Management Journal, 30(9), 1013-1023. doi:10.1002/smj.766Molina-Morales, F. X., & Martínez-Fernández, M. T. (2010). Social Networks: Effects of Social Capital on Firm Innovation. Journal of Small Business Management, 48(2), 258-279. doi:10.1111/j.1540-627x.2010.00294.xNahapiet, J., & Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social Capital, Intellectual Capital, and the Organizational Advantage. The Academy of Management Review, 23(2), 242. doi:10.2307/259373Parrilli, M. D., & Sacchetti, S. (2008). Linking learning with governance in networks and clusters: key issues for analysis and policy. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 20(4), 387-408. doi:10.1080/08985620801886463Piore, M. J. (1990) Work, labor and action: work experience in a system of flexible production, in: F.Pyke, G.Becattini & W.Sengenberger (Eds), Industrial Districts and Inter-Firm Cooperation in Italy, pp. 52–74 (Geneva: International Institute for Labor Studies)Podolny, J. M., & Baron, J. N. (1997). Resources and Relationships: Social Networks and Mobility in the Workplace. American Sociological Review, 62(5), 673. doi:10.2307/2657354Porter, M. E. (1990) The Competitive Advantage of the Nations (New York: The Free Press)Porter, M. E. (1998) On Competition (Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review Press)Pouder, R., & St. John, C. H. (1996). Hot Spots and Blind Spots: Geographical Clusters of Firms and Innovation. Academy of Management Review, 21(4), 1192-1225. doi:10.5465/amr.1996.9704071867Powell, W. W., Koput, K. W., & Smith-Doerr, L. (1996). Interorganizational Collaboration and the Locus of Innovation: Networks of Learning in Biotechnology. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(1), 116. doi:10.2307/2393988Rowley, T., Behrens, D., & Krackhardt, D. (2000). Redundant governance structures: an analysis of structural and relational embeddedness in the steel and semiconductor industries. Strategic Management Journal, 21(3), 369-386. doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0266(200003)21:33.0.co;2-mSeibert, S. E., Kraimer, M. L., & Liden, R. C. (2001). A SOCIAL CAPITAL THEORY OF CAREER SUCCESS. Academy of Management Journal, 44(2), 219-237. doi:10.2307/3069452Sorenson, O. (2003). Interdependence and Adaptability: Organizational Learning and the Long–Term Effect of Integration. Management Science, 49(4), 446-463. doi:10.1287/mnsc.49.4.446.14418Sparrowe, R. T., Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., & Kraimer, M. L. (2001). SOCIAL NETWORKS AND THE PERFORMANCE OF INDIVIDUALS AND GROUPS. Academy of Management Journal, 44(2), 316-325. doi:10.2307/3069458Staber, U. (2001). The Structure of Networks in Industrial Districts. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 25(3), 537-552. doi:10.1111/1468-2427.00328Storper, M. (1997) The Regional World: Territorial Development in a Global Economy (New York: The Guilford Press)Stuart, T., & Sorenson, O. (2003). The geography of opportunity: spatial heterogeneity in founding rates and the performance of biotechnology firms. Research Policy, 32(2), 229-253. doi:10.1016/s0048-7333(02)00098-7Szulanski, G. (1996). Exploring internal stickiness: Impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17(S2), 27-43. doi:10.1002/smj.4250171105Tallman, S., Jenkins, M., Henry, N., & Pinch, S. (2004). Knowledge, Clusters, and Competitive Advantage. The Academy of Management Review, 29(2), 258. doi:10.2307/20159032Thomas, G. P., & Soldow, G. F. (1988). A Rules-Based Approach to Competitive Interaction. Journal of Marketing, 52(2), 63. doi:10.2307/1251265Trigilia, C. (2001). Social Capital and Local Development. European Journal of Social Theory, 4(4), 427-442. doi:10.1177/13684310122225244Tsai, W., & Ghoshal, S. (1998). SOCIAL CAPITAL AND VALUE CREATION: THE ROLE OF INTRAFIRM NETWORKS. Academy of Management Journal, 41(4), 464-476. doi:10.2307/257085Utili, G., Sarti, M. and Gobbo, F. (1983) L'industria delle piastrelle di ceramica nel mondo. I principali paese produttori (Modena: Nomisma-Edi)Uzzi, B. (1996). The Sources and Consequences of Embeddedness for the Economic Performance of Organizations: The Network Effect. American Sociological Review, 61(4), 674. doi:10.2307/2096399Uzzi, B. (1997). Social Structure and Competition in Interfirm Networks: The Paradox of Embeddedness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(1), 35. doi:10.2307/2393808Vives, X. (1990). Trade Association Disclosure Rules, Incentives to Share Information, and Welfare. The RAND Journal of Economics, 21(3), 409. doi:10.2307/2555617Von Hippel, E. (1987). Cooperation between rivals: Informal know-how trading. Research Policy, 16(6), 291-302. doi:10.1016/0048-7333(87)90015-1Weick, K. E. (1976). Educational Organizations as Loosely Coupled Systems. Administrative Science Quarterly, 21(1), 1. doi:10.2307/2391875Yli-Renko, H., Autio, E., & Sapienza, H. J. (2001). Social capital, knowledge acquisition, and knowledge exploitation in young technology-based firms. Strategic Management Journal, 22(6-7), 587-613. doi:10.1002/smj.18

The impact of cluster connectedness on firm innovation: R&D effort and outcomes in the textile industry

This is an Author's Accepted Manuscript of an article published in "The impact of cluster connectedness on firm innovation: R&D effort and outcomes in the textile industry" version of the article as published in the Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 2012 september,[copyright Taylor & Francis], available online at: http://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/08985626.2012.710260"[EN] Recent research into the clustering effect on firms has moved away from a simplistic view to a more complex approach. More realistic and complex causal relationships are now considered when analysing these territorial networks. Specifically, this paper attempts to analyse how cluster connect- edness moderates the relationship of a firm's innovation effort and the results obtained from this effort. We want to question the commonly accepted direct and positive impact of R&D effort, and moreover, we suggest the existence of a saturation effect and that the level of cluster's inter-connectedness in the cluster moderates this effect. We have developed our empirical study focusing on the Spanish textile industrial cluster. This is a complex manufacturing industry that uses relatively low-technology manufacturing and R&D. Our findings suggest that the degree to which a firm is involved with, or connected to, other firms in the cluster can moderate the effect of the R&D effort on its innovation results. More generally, we aim to contribute to the discussion on the degree to which firms should be involved in the cluster network in order to operate efficiently and gain the maximum competitive advantages. Our findings have implications both in recent cluster and network literature as well for institutional policy.Molina Morales, FX.; Expósito Langa, M. (2012). The impact of cluster connectedness on firm innovation: R&D effort and outcomes in the textile industry. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development. 24(7-8):685-704. doi:10.1080/08985626.2012.710260S685704247-8Agarwal, R., Audretsch, D., & Sarkar, M. B. (2007). The process of creative construction: knowledge spillovers, entrepreneurship, and economic growth. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 1(3-4), 263-286. doi:10.1002/sej.36Aharonson, B. S., Baum, J. A. C., & Feldman, M. P. (2007). Desperately seeking spillovers? Increasing returns, industrial organization and the location of new entrants in geographic and technological space. Industrial and Corporate Change, 16(1), 89-130. doi:10.1093/icc/dtl034Albino, V., Carbonara, N., & Giannoccaro, I. (2006). Innovation in industrial districts: An agent-based simulation model. International Journal of Production Economics, 104(1), 30-45. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2004.12.023Audretsch, D. B., & Lehmann, E. E. (2005). Does the Knowledge Spillover Theory of Entrepreneurship hold for regions? Research Policy, 34(8), 1191-1202. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2005.03.012Bell, G. G. (2005). Clusters, networks, and firm innovativeness. Strategic Management Journal, 26(3), 287-295. doi:10.1002/smj.448Bell, M., & Albu, M. (1999). Knowledge Systems and Technological Dynamism in Industrial Clusters in Developing Countries. World Development, 27(9), 1715-1734. doi:10.1016/s0305-750x(99)00073-xBelussi, F., & Arcangeli, F. (1998). A typology of networks: flexible and evolutionary firms. Research Policy, 27(4), 415-428. doi:10.1016/s0048-7333(98)00074-2Cantwell, J., & Piscitello, L. (2005). Recent Location of Foreign-owned Research and Development Activities by Large Multinational Corporations in the European Regions: The Role of Spillovers and Externalities. Regional Studies, 39(1), 1-16. doi:10.1080/0034340052000320824Boschma, R. A., & ter Wal, A. L. J. (2007). Knowledge Networks and Innovative Performance in an Industrial District: The Case of a Footwear District in the South of Italy. Industry & Innovation, 14(2), 177-199. doi:10.1080/13662710701253441Brass, D. J. (1984). Being in the Right Place: A Structural Analysis of Individual Influence in an Organization. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29(4), 518. doi:10.2307/2392937Breschi, S. (2001). Knowledge Spillovers and Local Innovation Systems: A Critical Survey. Industrial and Corporate Change, 10(4), 975-1005. doi:10.1093/icc/10.4.975CALANTONE, R. (1997). New product activities and performance: The moderating role of environmental hostility. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 14(3), 179-189. doi:10.1016/s0737-6782(97)00004-0Chell, E., & Baines, S. (2000). Networking, entrepreneurship and microbusiness behaviour. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 12(3), 195-215. doi:10.1080/089856200413464Chung, S. (Andy), Singh, H., & Lee, K. (2000). Complementarity, status similarity and social capital as drivers of alliance formation. Strategic Management Journal, 21(1), 1-22. doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0266(200001)21:13.0.co;2-pCockburn, I. M., & Henderson, R. M. (2003). Absorptive Capacity, Coauthoring Behavior, and the Organization of Research in Drug Discovery. The Journal of Industrial Economics, 46(2), 157-182. doi:10.1111/1467-6451.00067Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1989). Innovation and Learning: The Two Faces of R & D. The Economic Journal, 99(397), 569. doi:10.2307/2233763Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 128. doi:10.2307/2393553Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94, S95-S120. doi:10.1086/228943Coombs, J. E., Deeds, D. L., & Duane Ireland, R. (2009). Placing the choice between exploration and exploitation in context: a study of geography and new product development. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 3(3), 261-279. doi:10.1002/sej.74Crestanello, P., & Tattara, G. (2011). Industrial Clusters and the Governance of the Global Value Chain: The Romania–Veneto Network in Footwear and Clothing. Regional Studies, 45(2), 187-203. doi:10.1080/00343401003596299Dierickx, I., & Cool, K. (1989). Asset Stock Accumulation and Sustainability of Competitive Advantage. Management Science, 35(12), 1504-1511. doi:10.1287/mnsc.35.12.1504Dyer, J. H., & Singh, H. (1998). The Relational View: Cooperative Strategy and Sources of Interorganizational Competitive Advantage. The Academy of Management Review, 23(4), 660. doi:10.2307/259056Eraydin, A., & Armatli-Köroğlu, B. (2005). Innovation, networking and the new industrial clusters: the characteristics of networks and local innovation capabilities in the Turkish industrial clusters. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 17(4), 237-266. doi:10.1080/08985620500202632Evenson, R. E., & Kislev, Y. (1973). Research and Productivity in Wheat and Maize. Journal of Political Economy, 81(6), 1309-1329. doi:10.1086/260129Expósito-Langa, M., Molina-Morales, F. X., & Capó-Vicedo, J. (2011). New Product Development and Absorptive Capacity in Industrial Districts: A Multidimensional Approach. Regional Studies, 45(3), 319-331. doi:10.1080/00343400903241535Foss, N. J. (1996). Higher-order industrial Capabilities and competitive advantage. Journal of Industry Studies, 3(1), 1-20. doi:10.1080/13662719600000001George, G., Robley Wood, D., & Khan, R. (2001). Networking strategy of boards: implications for small and medium-sized enterprises. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 13(3), 269-285. doi:10.1080/08985620110058115Giuliani, E. 2005. The structure of cluster knowledge networks: Uneven and selective, not pervasive and collective. DRUID Working Paper no. 05-11Giuliani, E., & Bell, M. (2005). The micro-determinants of meso-level learning and innovation: evidence from a Chilean wine cluster. Research Policy, 34(1), 47-68. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2004.10.008Glasmeier, A. (1991). Technological discontinuities and flexible production networks: The case of Switzerland and the world watch industry. Research Policy, 20(5), 469-485. doi:10.1016/0048-7333(91)90070-7Grant, R. M. (1996). Prospering in Dynamically-Competitive Environments: Organizational Capability as Knowledge Integration. Organization Science, 7(4), 375-387. doi:10.1287/orsc.7.4.375Guerrieri, P., & Pietrobelli, C. (2004). Industrial districts’ evolution and technological regimes: Italy and Taiwan. Technovation, 24(11), 899-914. doi:10.1016/s0166-4972(03)00048-8Huggins, R., & Johnston, A. (2010). Knowledge flow and inter-firm networks: The influence of network resources, spatial proximity and firm size. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 22(5), 457-484. doi:10.1080/08985620903171350Ibarra, H. (1992). Homophily and Differential Returns: Sex Differences in Network Structure and Access in an Advertising Firm. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37(3), 422. doi:10.2307/2393451Lane, P. J., & Lubatkin, M. (1998). Relative absorptive capacity and interorganizational learning. Strategic Management Journal, 19(5), 461-477. doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0266(199805)19:53.0.co;2-lLechner, C., Frankenberger, K., & Floyd, S. W. (2010). Task Contingencies in the Curvilinear Relationships Between Intergroup Networks and Initiative Performance. Academy of Management Journal, 53(4), 865-889. doi:10.5465/amj.2010.52814620Levin, D. Z., & Cross, R. (2004). The Strength of Weak Ties You Can Trust: The Mediating Role of Trust in Effective Knowledge Transfer. Management Science, 50(11), 1477-1490. doi:10.1287/mnsc.1030.0136Madill, J. J., Haines, G. H., & Riding, A. L. (2004). Networks and linkages among firms and organizations in the Ottawa-region technology cluster. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 16(5), 351-368. doi:10.1080/0898562042000188414Maskell, P. (1998). Low-Tech Competitive Advantages and the Role Of Proximity. European Urban and Regional Studies, 5(2), 99-118. doi:10.1177/096977649800500201Maskell, P. (2001). Towards a Knowledge-based Theory of the Geographical Cluster. Industrial and Corporate Change, 10(4), 921-943. doi:10.1093/icc/10.4.921McEvily, B., & Marcus, A. (2005). Embedded ties and the acquisition of competitive capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 26(11), 1033-1055. doi:10.1002/smj.484McEvily, B., & Zaheer, A. (1999). Bridging ties: a source of firm heterogeneity in competitive capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 20(12), 1133-1156. doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0266(199912)20:123.0.co;2-7Xavier Molina-Morales, F., & Teresa Martínez-Fernández, M. (2006). Industrial districts: something more than a neighbourhood. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 18(6), 503-524. doi:10.1080/08985620600884750Molina-Morales, F. X., & Martínez-Fernández, M. T. (2009). Too much love in the neighborhood can hurt: how an excess of intensity and trust in relationships may produce negative effects on firms. Strategic Management Journal, 30(9), 1013-1023. doi:10.1002/smj.766Morrison, A. (2008). Gatekeepers of Knowledgewithin Industrial Districts: Who They Are, How They Interact. Regional Studies, 42(6), 817-835. doi:10.1080/00343400701654178Morrison, A., & Rabellotti, R. (2009). Knowledge and Information Networks in an Italian Wine Cluster. European Planning Studies, 17(7), 983-1006. doi:10.1080/09654310902949265Mowery, D. C., Oxley, J. E., & Silverman, B. S. (1996). Strategic alliances and interfirm knowledge transfer. Strategic Management Journal, 17(S2), 77-91. doi:10.1002/smj.4250171108Nahapiet, J., & Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social Capital, Intellectual Capital, and the Organizational Advantage. The Academy of Management Review, 23(2), 242. doi:10.2307/259373O’Connor, G. C. (1998). Market Learning and Radical Innovation: A Cross Case Comparison of Eight Radical Innovation Projects. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 15(2), 151-166. doi:10.1111/1540-5885.1520151Oba, B., & Semerciöz, F. (2005). Antecedents of trust in industrial districts: an empirical analysis of inter-firm relations in a Turkish industrial district. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 17(3), 163-182. doi:10.1080/08985620500102964Parrilli, M. D. (2009). Collective efficiency, policy inducement and social embeddedness: Drivers for the development of industrial districts. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 21(1), 1-24. doi:10.1080/08985620801886513Podolny, J. M., & Baron, J. N. (1997). Resources and Relationships: Social Networks and Mobility in the Workplace. American Sociological Review, 62(5), 673. doi:10.2307/2657354Porter, M. E. (1990). The Competitive Advantage of Nations. doi:10.1007/978-1-349-11336-1Pouder, R., & St. John, C. H. (1996). Hot Spots and Blind Spots: Geographical Clusters of Firms and Innovation. Academy of Management Review, 21(4), 1192-1225. doi:10.5465/amr.1996.9704071867Torre, A., & Rallet, A. (2005). Proximity and Localization. Regional Studies, 39(1), 47-59. doi:10.1080/0034340052000320842Rosenkopf, L., & Almeida, P. (2003). Overcoming Local Search Through Alliances and Mobility. Management Science, 49(6), 751-766. doi:10.1287/mnsc.49.6.751.16026Rosenthal, S. S., & Strange, W. C. (2003). Geography, Industrial Organization, and Agglomeration. Review of Economics and Statistics, 85(2), 377-393. doi:10.1162/003465303765299882Rowley, T., Behrens, D., & Krackhardt, D. (2000). Redundant governance structures: an analysis of structural and relational embeddedness in the steel and semiconductor industries. Strategic Management Journal, 21(3), 369-386. doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0266(200003)21:33.0.co;2-mRusso, M. (1985). Technical change and the industrial district: The role of interfirm relations in the growth and transformation of ceramic tile production in Italy. Research Policy, 14(6), 329-343. doi:10.1016/0048-7333(85)90003-4Sammarra, A., & Belussi, F. (2006). Evolution and relocation in fashion-led Italian districts: evidence from two case-studies. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 18(6), 543-562. doi:10.1080/08985620600884685Simmie, J. (2004). Innovation and Clustering in the Globalised International Economy. Urban Studies, 41(5-6), 1095-1112. doi:10.1080/00420980410001675823Sparrowe, R. T., Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., & Kraimer, M. L. (2001). SOCIAL NETWORKS AND THE PERFORMANCE OF INDIVIDUALS AND GROUPS. Academy of Management Journal, 44(2), 316-325. doi:10.2307/3069458STABER, U. (2007). Contextualizing Research on Social Capital in Regional Clusters. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 31(3), 505-521. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2427.2007.00742.xStock, G. N., Greis, N. P., & Fischer, W. A. (2001). Absorptive capacity and new product development. The Journal of High Technology Management Research, 12(1), 77-91. doi:10.1016/s1047-8310(00)00040-7Tallman, S., Jenkins, M., Henry, N., & Pinch, S. (2004). Knowledge, Clusters, and Competitive Advantage. The Academy of Management Review, 29(2), 258. doi:10.2307/20159032Thompson, P., & Fox-Kean, M. (2005). Patent Citations and the Geography of Knowledge Spillovers: A Reassessment. American Economic Review, 95(1), 450-460. doi:10.1257/0002828053828509Tsai, W. (2001). KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER IN INTRAORGANIZATIONAL NETWORKS: EFFECTS OF NETWORK POSITION AND ABSORPTIVE CAPACITY ON BUSINESS UNIT INNOVATION AND PERFORMANCE. Academy of Management Journal, 44(5), 996-1004. doi:10.2307/3069443Tsai, W., & Ghoshal, S. (1998). SOCIAL CAPITAL AND VALUE CREATION: THE ROLE OF INTRAFIRM NETWORKS. Academy of Management Journal, 41(4), 464-476. doi:10.2307/257085Tushman, M., & Nadler, D. (1986). Organizing for Innovation. California Management Review, 28(3), 74-92. doi:10.2307/41165203Uzzi, B. (1997). Social Structure and Competition in Interfirm Networks: The Paradox of Embeddedness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(1), 35. doi:10.2307/2393808Varaldo, R., & Ferrucci, L. (1996). The evolutionary nature of the firm within industrial districts. European Planning Studies, 4(1), 27-34. doi:10.1080/09654319608720327Waxell, A., & Malmberg, A. (2007). What is global and what is local in knowledge-generating interaction? The case of the biotech cluster in Uppsala, Sweden. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 19(2), 137-159. doi:10.1080/08985620601061184Yli-Renko, H., Autio, E., & Sapienza, H. J. (2001). Social capital, knowledge acquisition, and knowledge exploitation in young technology-based firms. Strategic Management Journal, 22(6-7), 587-613. doi:10.1002/smj.183ZUCKER, L. G., DARBY, M. R., & ARMSTRONG, J. (1998). GEOGRAPHICALLY LOCALIZED KNOWLEDGE: SPILLOVERS OR MARKETS? Economic Inquiry, 36(1), 65-86. doi:10.1111/j.1465-7295.1998.tb01696.

Scientists as Midwives to Cluster Emergence: An Institutional Work Framework

The question of how embedded actors can create institutions that support cluster emergence remains unsolved in the cluster and national innovation systems literature. The present paper extends the recent literature on institutional entrepreneurship and institutional work to solve this paradox of embedded agency in the context of science-based clusters. Building on a longitudinal single case study of a functional foods cluster in Finland, we present an institutional work framework for cluster formation. We argue that, in addition to ideational, material and bridging work, authentic leadership work is critical for cluster emergence. The results of the study highlight the opportunities that scientists have to act as midwives to cluster formation, but they also show that well-functioning clusters need a broader support base.Peer reviewe

The present state of research into industrial clusters and districts. Content analysis of material published 1997-2006

[EN] The aim of this work is to help gain a better understanding of the research conducted on territorial agglomerations of firms at a multidisciplinary level. To this end, an analysis was performed of the contents of the most significant scientific literature on economics, management, planning and development, urban studies and geography published over the period 1997-2006. From the results, a database of 142 papers from 43 journals was then elaborated. An analysis of these works reveals the level of development of the main lines of research in this field and, consequently, makes it possible to detect the topics that require greater attention and that can be the object of future research for researchers and academics. The main conclusions include the growing number of studies conducted on the subject in recent years, as well as a greater predominance of empirical research over conceptual work, and the existence of a significant change in the topics or lines of research throughout the period under study. © 2012 Copyright Taylor and Francis Group, LLC.This research was financed by the Spanish Ministry of Education and Science, National R&D & Innovation Plan 2007–2010, under the project entitled “El Distrito Industrial: el impacto del Capital Social sobre la Gestio´n de la Cadena de Suministro” (The Industrial District: the impact of Social Capital on the management of the Supply Chain) (SEJ2007- 62876/ECON).Martinez-Fernandez, M.; Capó Vicedo, J.; Vallet-Bellmunt, T. (2012). The present state of research into industrial clusters and districts. Content analysis of material published 1997-2006. European Planning Studies. 20(2):281-304. doi:10.1080/09654313.2012.650906S28130420

How hybrids manage growth and social–business tensions in global supply chains: the case of impact sourcing

This study contributes to the growing interest in how hybrid organizations manage paradoxical social–business tensions. Our empirical case is ‘‘impact sourcing’’— hybrids in global supply chains that hire staff from disadvantaged communities to provide services to business clients. We identify two major growth orientations— ‘‘community-focused’’ and ‘‘client-focused’’ growth—their inherent tensions and ways that hybrids manage them. The former favors slow growth and manages tensions through highly integrated client and community relations; the latter promotes faster growth and manages client and community relations separately. Both growth orientations address social–business tensions in particular ways, but also create latent constraints that manifest when entrepreneurial aspirations conflict with the current growth path. In presenting and discussing our findings, we introduce preempting management practices of tensions, and the importance of geographic embeddedness and distance to the paradox literature

The Online Shadow of Offline Signals: Which Sellers Get Contacted in Online B2B Marketplaces?

This article extends the understanding of what impels buyers to contact particular sellers in online business-to-business (B2B) marketplaces, which are typically characterized by sparse social structures and concomitant limitations in observing social cues. Integrating an institutional perspective with signaling theory, our core argument is that offline seller characteristics that are visible online—in particular, geographic location and legal status—convey credible signals of seller behavior because they provide buyers with information on sellers’ local institutional quality and the institutionally-induced obligations and controls acting on sellers. Using unique data from a large Italian online B2B marketplace between the fourth quarter of 1999 and July 2001, we find that both sellers’ local institutional quality and their legal statuses affect a buyer’s likelihood of contacting a seller. Moreover, consistent with the idea that a buyer’s own local institutional quality generates a relevant reference point against which sellers are evaluated, we find that a buyer is progressively more likely to contact sellers the higher their local institutional quality relative to the buyer. Jointly, our findings imply that in online B2B marketplaces, signals conveyed by sellers’ geographic locations and legal statuses may constitute substantive sources of competitive heterogeneity and market segmentation

Intra-cluster knowledge exchange and frequency of product innovation in a digital cluster.

We investigate how intra-cluster knowledge exchange affects the frequency of product innovation. Based on self-administered survey data of digital SMEs from Bournemouth and Poole regions of England, this study shows that digital firms that sustain both temporary and prolonged relationships with outbound employees have a higher probability of introducing frequent product innovation. Moreover, while cognitive proximity and the use of external knowledge providers increase the probability of frequent product innovation, geographical proximity reduces it. Our findings suggest that managers of young digital firms with limited resources in peripheral regions should ‘act near’ before reaching out

Theory and research in strategic management: Swings of a pendulum

The development of the field of strategic management within the last two decades has been dramatic. While its roots have been in a more applied area, often referred to as business policy, the current field of strategic management is strongly theory based, with substantial empirical research, and is eclectic in nature. This review of the development of the field and its current position examines the field’s early development and the primary theoretical and methodological bases through its history. Early developments include Chandler’s (1962) Strategy and Structure and Ansoff’s (1965) Corporate Strategy. These early works took on a contingency perspective (fit between strategy and structure) and a resource-based framework emphasizing internal strengths and weaknesses. Perhaps, one of the more significant contributions to the development of strategic management came from industrial organization (IO) economics, specifically the work of Michael Porter. The structure-conduct-performance framework and the notion of strategic groups, as well as providing a foundation for research on competitive dynamics, are flourishing currently. The IO paradigm also brought econometric tools to the research on strategic management. Building on the IO economics framework, the organizational economics perspective contributed transaction costs economics and agency theory to strategic management. More recent theoretical contributions focus on the resource-based view of the firm. While it has its roots in Edith Penrose’s work in the late 1950s, the resource-based view was largely introduced to the field of strategic management in the 1980s and became a dominant framework in the 1990s. Based on the resource-based view or developing concurrently were research on strategic leadership, strategic decision theory (process research) and knowledge-based view of the firm. The research methodologies are becoming increasingly sophisticated and now frequently combine both quantitative and qualitative approaches and unique and new statistical tools. Finally, this review examines the future directions, both in terms of theory and methodologies, as the study of strategic management evolves.Yeshttps://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/manuscript-submission-guideline