Sergey Morgulis-Yakushev and Örjan Sölvell
This paper empirically aims to examine the relationship between collaboration initiatives of cluster organizations (COs) and improved innovation and financial performance among…
Abstract
Purpose
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.
Design/methodology/approach
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.
Findings
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.
Practical implications
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.
Originality/value
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.
Details
Keywords
Abstract
Details
Keywords
The purpose of this study is to analyze how The Competitive Advantage of Nations project led by Professor Michael E. Porter has opened up new perspectives on competitiveness of…
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this study is to analyze how The Competitive Advantage of Nations project led by Professor Michael E. Porter has opened up new perspectives on competitiveness of nations and firms for scholars, practitioners and policymakers. With the publication of The Competitive Advantage of Nations (CAON) book in 1990, Professor Michael E. Porter opened up a whole new perspective on competitiveness and clusters, including both new research avenues and new perspectives for practitioners and politicians. By questioning the traditional, more static and macroeconomic, views on competitiveness, he opened up for a new model of microeconomic drivers of long-run firm competitiveness. The new conceptual model, the Diamond model, pointed to the importance of healthy rivalry and dynamic clusters, in the proximate firm environment, as central to our understanding of how firms build sustainable competitive advantages in global markets.
Design/methodology/approach
Literature review and conceptual.
Findings
To distinguish between short-term, more static, and long-term, more dynamic competitiveness of firms, and the competitiveness of nations and regions, the paper proposes a conceptualization into three interrelated concepts: competitiveness and innovativeness of firms, and attractiveness of nations and regions.
Originality/value
This paper summarizes 40 years of Professor Porter’s seminal research with a focus on the CAON project that began with the 1990 book on The Competitive Advantage of Nations. The paper proposes three interrelated concepts to cover issues of competitiveness: competitiveness (firm’s static advantages), innovativeness (firm’s dynamic advantages) and attractiveness (national/regional advantages).
Details
Keywords
Örjan Sölvell, Christian Ketels and Göran Lindqvist
The purpose of this paper is to provide an analysis of regional concentration patterns within ten new European Union (EU) member states, EU10, and make comparisons with EU15 and…
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to provide an analysis of regional concentration patterns within ten new European Union (EU) member states, EU10, and make comparisons with EU15 and the US economy.
Design/methodology/approach
Industrial specialization and clusters are measured as employment in the intersection between a sector (three‐digit NACE data) and a particular region (NUTS 2 level), with a total of 38 sectors and 41 regions within EU10. Regional cluster size and degree of specialization is measured along 3D: absolute number of employees (>10,000 jobs is used as cut‐off for a regional cluster), degree of specialization (regional sector employment is at least two times expected levels) and degree of regional market labor dominance (>3 per cent of total employment in a particular sector). Each of these three measures of cluster size, specialization and labor market focus are classified with a “star”. The largest and most specialized clusters receive three stars.
Findings
EU10 exhibits 19 three‐star regional clusters, which display high values for each of the three measured parameters. In addition, there are 92 two‐star regional clusters and 313 one‐star regional clusters. The analysis also suggests that regional concentration in EU10 is clearly lower than in the USA, and slightly lower than in the old EU member states. In a few cases – IT, biopharmaceuticals and communications equipment – where the total size of the cluster is small, and there is little historical legacy in Eastern Europe, the EU10 exhibits higher geographical concentration than EU15.
Research limitations/implications
Overall, the economies of EU10 exhibit a pattern of geographical concentration close to a random distribution, i.e. the process of regional concentration and redistribution of industry is in a very early phase. If Europe is to build a more competitive economy, industrial restructuring towards larger clusters must be allowed and pushed by policy makers both at the national and EU levels.
Practical implications
Policymakers must be well informed about geographical concentration patterns of industry. The research offers a consistent methodology of mapping regional clusters and geographical concentration patterns across sectors.
Originality/value
This paper is the first in measuring regional concentration patterns in Europe at this fine level, and is based on a new methodology developed by Professor Michael E. Porter at Harvard University. The paper has also introduced a new method of ranking clusters according to the star model.
Details
Keywords
Aim of the present monograph is the economic analysis of the role of MNEs regarding globalisation and digital economy and in parallel there is a reference and examination of some…
Abstract
Aim of the present monograph is the economic analysis of the role of MNEs regarding globalisation and digital economy and in parallel there is a reference and examination of some legal aspects concerning MNEs, cyberspace and e‐commerce as the means of expression of the digital economy. The whole effort of the author is focused on the examination of various aspects of MNEs and their impact upon globalisation and vice versa and how and if we are moving towards a global digital economy.