Search results

This chapter aims to enrich knowledge about cluster initiatives acting as intermediaries primarily between members in a cluster or in regional context. This is a practically oriented manuscript written to contribute to refinement of existing policies by proposing recommendations based on recent empirical studies regarding funding, actors’ and activities’ content, as well as cluster initiatives’ assessment. It is proposed that public support should be balanced, targeting new as well as established, well-functioning cluster initiatives. Furthermore, regional authorities should encourage multifaceted collaboration (e.g., Triple Helix), stimulate variation in activities to maximize the benefit of cluster initiatives as well as define and communicate success factors that make it possible to evaluate cluster initiatives from a holistic perspective. These recommendations are primary aimed for regional authorities and reflect a bottom-up perspective where both logic of initiatives’ actions and their development are captured. Yet, even national authorities can make use of the recommendations in this chapter to improve governance of cluster initiatives and to determine further directions of regional policies.

The purpose of this paper is to analyse relations between geographical and competence proximity and development of cooperation in cluster initiatives.

The research was based on an original theoretical concept referring to the trajectory of the development of cooperative relations in cluster initiatives. The research was carried out in mid-2017, in four purposefully selected cluster initiatives. The research sample was 132 cluster enterprises. The main research strategy involved non-experimental models; the basic method of data collection was an online questionnaire.

The results indicated that the role of geographical and competence proximity depends on the level of cooperation in a cluster initiative. In both these dimensions, proximity was important during the initial stage of cluster development: to start cooperation between the members, however, when more mature forms of cooperation were undertaken, the factor of common location was not so crucial any longer. It was also recommended to maintain some competence distance between the partners.

The main limitations referred to the static character of the data, the use of original measurement tools, which had not been tested before, the small and little differentiated research sample and the subjective nature of the research. The above-mentioned limitations should be viewed as a starting point for further empirical research.

Knowledge on the significance of geographical and competence proximity at various levels of cooperation in clusters is valuable for efficient management of a cluster and for higher competitiveness that it can achieve.

The research study contributes to the literature, which refers to the question of proximity in clusters through the analysis of relations between geographical and competence proximity and development of cooperation in cluster initiatives. The results of the research point out that the role of geographical and competence proximity evolves with the development of cooperation in cluster initiatives.

This paper aims at assessing the impacts of the national cluster policy, cluster age, cluster development benchmarks of neighbouring regions and the cumulative level of regional innovative capacity on the quantity and quality of cluster initiatives in Russia.

Hypotheses’ testing was carried out by a series of calculations comparing the qualitative and quantitative characteristics of cluster initiatives; the number of new cluster initiatives to the number of neighbouring regions, where cluster initiatives had begun to develop earlier; and ranks of regions within the Russian regional innovation scoreboard to the quantity and quality characteristics of cluster initiatives therein.

The results of the study empirically confirm that the national cluster policy significantly influenced the emergence and advancement of cluster initiatives in Russia. The proximity to the regions, having previously launched cluster support programmes, also had an impact on the emergence of new cluster initiatives. The cluster initiatives’ age had an ambiguous effect on their performance. Finally, the level of regional innovative capacity was correlated only with the number of cluster initiatives localised therein.

The findings show that along with the direct effects of the national cluster policy for the government-supported clusters, there are positive externalities, e.g. the emergence of new cluster initiatives throughout the country.

The research database of 277 cluster initiatives has been drawn up as a part of the first national cluster mapping and covers almost a decade of clustering activity in Russia. The study analyses not only the cluster initiatives supported by the federal government but also those developed independently.

The purpose of this paper is twofold. First, it aims at reconciling the literature on creating shared value (CSV) with the one on cluster development, searching for complementarities and similarities. Second, it aims at understanding the role of cluster development in CSV. For these reasons, the authors operationalized the general idea of cluster development with the widely accepted concept of cluster initiatives, i.e. systematic efforts aimed at cluster development. The authors focused on exploring the process of launching and supporting local cluster initiatives through empirical evidence. In particular, the authors aimed at analyzing how a CSV strategy can be defined and developed when adopted within a cluster initiative.

The research draws on a critical review of the literature focusing on CSV and on a conceptual reconciliation between the literature on the CSV ecosystem with the one on clusters, and more specifically on those initial cluster initiatives. The authors relied on an exploratory case study of an Italian cluster initiative in CSV, i.e. the Science and Innovation Food District (SIFooD) cluster promoted by Whirlpool. Thanks to the richness and great availability of information about the case, this study primarily relied on the use of secondary data.

The case of SIFooD has highlighted how Whirlpool promoted the cluster initiative within its CSV framework to achieve sustainable and collaborative innovation in food waste prevention and, conversely, how SIFooD enhanced CSV of its cluster members. To arrange its network development process, SIFooD has implemented all the elements that prior literature has considered fundamental for launching and supporting a successful cluster initiative. On the other hand, SIFooD was able to adopt a collective-impact approach, implementing the five elements needed in its ecosystem to create shared value. Moreover, thanks to all the activities comprised in the SIFooD cluster initiative, shared value was actually created.

The present paper has some limitations. First of all, the empirical analysis focuses only on one cluster initiative; thus, cross/comparative analyses with other cluster initiatives may illuminate the findings better. Second, the authors relied on a very recent cluster initiative in a particular field (food waste prevention) and in one specific institutional context (Italy); thus, data may suffer from temporal, industrial and geographical biases.

Literature on the border between CSV and clusters is still in its infancy and almost nothing is known about their relationship, despite them being intimately related since the inception of this field. The paper qualifies for a very first attempt to understand how firms promote clusters, through cluster initiatives, for the sake of CSV and how clusters may enhance CSV of firms.

This paper empirically aims to examine the relationship between collaboration initiatives of cluster organizations (COs) and improved innovation and financial performance among cluster firms. Moreover, the paper proposes a method for the development of cluster initiatives and evaluating their performance.

COs in North Mid Sweden have been studied between 2005 and 2014, where 12 COs have focused on collaboration, ranging from process industries, such as forestry, paper and steel, to tourism and information and computer technology (ICT). A survey method was used to collect data for some 1,000 firms engaging in cluster activities. A new method of analysis, which associates initiatives of COs with cluster members’ innovation and financial performance, has been developed and used in the paper.

The paper finds that cluster initiatives (enhancing collaboration across different types of actors in clusters) improve innovation and financial performance among involved cluster firms. But the effect of the cluster initiatives depends, to a large degree, on the policy of the CO. Results show large differences in performance among cluster initiatives, leaving room for the benchmarking and cross-cluster learning.

The new method proposed in this paper can help to formulate and implement cluster initiatives. Evaluation of COs can be improved through the new method.

The major contribution of this work is the association of CO initiatives with the performance of cluster member firms. Additionally, this work provides a new statistical instrument for assessing the impact of cluster initiatives on cluster members’ performance.

This study aims to explore the role played by a formal cluster initiative in supporting small firms' internationalization processes. Taking a public–private interaction perspective, this study aims to understand interaction mechanisms within an internationalization project implemented by a formal cluster initiative.

This study uses a qualitative approach based on a case study of a Swedish formal cluster initiative involved in an internationalization project. The case is analyzed through the industrial marketing and purchasing approach, relying on the Actors–Resources–Activities (ARA) framework.

The analysis highlights the role of formal clusters as supporters and “accelerators” of internationalization processes. Based on the ARA framework, the roles of the public and private actors emerge: the cluster plays the role of orchestrator, supporter and financer, while on the businesses' side, participants assumed the role of customers, displaying various degrees of interest and commitment and giving rise to a leader–follower pattern. Activities occurred at multiple levels, interorganizational, intraproject, interprojects, through different timings and typologies. The main resources at stake were the combination of knowledge, complementary capabilities and financial incentives.

This empirical study provides novel empirical evidence and theoretical development over the phenomenon of formal clusters. This study contributes to the current debate on public–private interaction mechanisms and to the upgrading and circulation of international business knowledge.

Purpose – The purpose of this chapter is to advance understanding of regional industry or innovation clusters and the opportunities that the cluster framework provides policymakers for delivering economic impact, clarifying economic priorities, and coordinating disparate programmatic efforts, and to articulate some basic principles for formulating cluster strategies.

Methodology/approach – As the cluster concept enters its third decade and the body of related literature reaches a new level of maturity a consensus has emerged among academics and policy thinkers on the economic benefits of clusters. In fact, clusters have emerged as major focus of economic and policy discussion just now – in what the authors dub a “cluster moment” – by dint of their demonstrated practical impact, their value in paradigm discussions, and their potential utility in policy reform. The chapter reviews the benefits of clusters and traces their ascendance – and re-emergence post-recession – among policy thinkers.

Findings – New research confirms that strong clusters tend to deliver positive benefits to workers, firms, and regions. As a paradigm, they reflect the nature of the real economy and as a matter of policymaking, clusters provide a framework for rethinking and refocusing economic policy. In pursuing cluster-based economic development strategies, policy leaders should not try to create clusters; use data to target interventions, drive design, and track performance; focus initiatives on addressing discrete gaps in performance or binding constraints on cluster growth; maximize impact by leveraging pre-existing cluster-relevant programs; align efforts vertically as well as horizontally; and let the private sector lead. All three tiers of the nation's federalist system have distinct and complementary roles to play in advancing the cluster paradigm.

Research limitations/implications (if applicable) – The paper includes no new/original data.

Practical implications (if applicable) – Given that clusters have emerged as a major focus of economics and policy, this chapter lays out a core set of general principles for pursuing cluster-based economic development strategies – and for avoiding common pitfalls – to which policymakers can adhere.

Originality/value of paper – The chapter advances cluster thinking and cluster strategies as a paradigm with the potential to accelerate regional economic growth and assist with the nation's needed restructuring and rebalancing toward a more productive post-recession economy.

The Malaysian Government through the interventionist stance created an enabling environment for SMEs. Deliberate efforts for economic development started in the form of Industrial Estates and Export Processing Zones since early 1990s. This paper is a brief account of government efforts and its result for cluster development, in the light of recent literature. It is found that despite consistent efforts, the Malaysian answer to Silicon Valley – Multimedia Super Corridor (MSC) – could not become an industrial cluster in a strict manner of the term used in the industrial cluster literature. This review highlights an array of bottlenecks that impede the competitiveness of MSC. The critical observation is that the SME firms in this “constructed cluster” are not enjoying the benefits of co-location externalities rather consider government’s financial support as an important factor affecting their co-location decision. In the absence of the significant qualitative research in the Malaysian cluster milieu, the purpose of this paper is the unique attempt to compile the previous results of significant work on the MSC and proposes future directions of research on policy-led clusters.

This paper synthesized and arranged most recent literature on economic development efforts made by Malaysian Government. Furthermore, it highlights the issues faced by policy-led cluster of MSC.

There is scant research on policy-led clusters like MSC where government plays an instrumental role from conception of this ICT cluster to development of programs and initiatives for the sustainability of it. However, the review of recent studies indicates that MSC faces some limitations to perform as cluster. There is a strong evidence that firms are not enjoying the benefits of clustering rather are attracted toward the financial incentives offered by the government in return of the firms co-location decision.

The theoretical contribution of the review is that it signals the scarcity of both breadth and depth of literature on policy-driven cluster. Although, few notable attempts indicated how cluster initiatives influence the clusters, yet various dimensions need to be explored in order to reach the conclusive findings. The current review provides a strong foundation for further empirical research. For example, the other possible avenues could be, cluster evaluation practices in policy-led clusters; enablers and barriers to innovation in policy-led clusters; development of comprehensive indicators for principled engagement, shared motivation and joint actions in collaborative initiative development and the relational dimension of networks like technological distance between the focal firms and local SMEs.

The review highlights that government agencies and the firms in the policy-led clusters perceive the cluster initiatives differently. For government an initiative may be a success but for firms it may be just eyewash. This perceptual difference can disrupt the government efforts for this cluster. Firms are dependent on Multimedia Development Corporation. They consider themselves as a guest in the cluster and expect that government will provide everything. Mere presence/attendance of firms in the programs may not indicate the effectiveness of the initiative.

The prime objective of the review was to highlight an array of bottlenecks that impede the competitiveness of MSC to become an ICT cluster. Since there is a dearth of significant qualitative research in the Malaysian cluster milieu particularly with respect to cluster initiatives taken in MSC, this review therefore is a unique attempt that compiles the previous results of significant work on a policy-driven MSC (ICT cluster) and proposes future direction of research on policy-led clusters.

Organizations facing issues related to growth, innovation, and strategy are embracing design thinking, a problem-solving process. This study explores 40 design thinking initiatives and identifies operational practices emerge and empirical categories across various contexts. Quantitative analyses of the initiatives and qualitative interview data are used to distinguish four configurations of action analogous to races: training, emphasizing learning-by-doing; marathons, capturing personal reflection over a long project; relays, highlighting team collaboration; and sprints, reflecting fast-paced product innovation. The initiatives are differentiated as designer-led versus team-driven and, low-urgency versus high-urgency. Implications of practicing design thinking in Organization Development and Change are discussed.

This study aims to determine how much company participation in a type of cluster affects its economic performance.

This study includes companies operating in seven industries (automotive, engineering, textiles, information technology (IT) services, furniture, packaging and nanotechnology) in the Czech Republic. The companies are divided into three groups: members of institutionalized cluster, operating in the same region (natural clusters) and operating in other regions. Data envelopment window analysis is used to measure their performance for 2009–2019.

Results show that the effect of clustering differs among industries. Companies in three industries (automotive, engineering, nanotechnology) reveal a positive impact of the cluster initiative on performance growth. Two industries (textile, packaging) with companies operating in a natural cluster show better performance than those in an institutionalized cluster. Moreover, the IT services and the furniture industries show no positive effect of clustering on corporate performance.

This research includes 686 companies from seven industries and monitored for 11 years. On the one hand, the sample includes a relatively high number of companies overall; but on the other hand, the sample is relatively small, especially for nonclustered companies. The reason is the lack of available financial statements for small companies.

From the perspective of practical cluster policy, the authors can recommend that monitoring the performance of member companies in clusters must be one of the criteria for evaluating the success of a cluster, such as cluster initiatives.

This study distinguishes between long-standing natural clusters in a given industry and institutionalized ones that have emerged because of a top-down initiative. An original database is created for clustered and nonclustered companies in seven industries, covering the entire Czech Republic.