BazEkon - Biblioteka Główna Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego w Krakowie

BazEkon home page

Meny główne

Autor
Camarena-Gil Emilio (University of Valencia, Spain), Garrigues Carlos (University of Valencia, Spain), Puig Francisco (University of Valencia, Spain)
Tytuł
Innovating in the Textile Industry: An Uncoordinated Dance between Firms and their Territory?
Źródło
Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation (JEMI), 2020, vol. 16, nr 3, s. 47-76, tab., bibliogr. s. 70-75
Tytuł własny numeru
Proximity and Innovation in Clusters: How Close, How Far?
Słowa kluczowe
Klastry, Innowacje, Odzież
Business cluster, Innovations, Clothing
Uwagi
Klasyfikacja JEL: D22, L52, L67
streszcz., summ.
Kraj/Region
Hiszpania
Spain
Abstrakt
Biorąc pod uwagę proces rozwoju innowacji, celem niniejszego artykułu było zbadanie wpływu różnych wymiarów bliskości i poziomu koordynacji istniejącej w klastrze włókienniczym. W badaniu zastosowano metodę jakościową, opartą na pogłębionych wywiadach przeprowadzonych z dwoma wiodącymi firmami w klastrze tekstylnym w Walencji, w Hiszpanii, który jest przedmiotem intensywnej konkurencji producentów z Azji. Firmy zostały wybrane według kryteriów rozwoju innowacji i możliwości. Jest to badanie pilotażowe, które poprzedza bardziej zaawansowane. Wyniki sugerują, że innowacje firm są rozwijane w sposób izolowany, nieciągły, marginalny i nieskoordynowany, a grupowanie ma marginalny wpływ. Ponadto, pomimo dużej bliskości geograficznej i poznawczej, niewielką bliskość społeczną utrzymuje się niski poziom zaufania między firmami. Te ustalenia mogą mieć znaczącą wartość praktyczną dla praktyków i instytucji. Firmy mogą lepiej zrozumieć znaczenie lokalizacji w klastrze, ponieważ jest to kluczowy czynnik ich przetrwania w warunkach intensywnej konkurencji. Jednak bliskość geograficzna nie jest wystarczająca, a firmy muszą ze sobą współpracować i dzielić się swoimi pomysłami i doświadczeniami. Ponadto instytucje powinny w większym stopniu współdziałać z firmami, mówić ich językiem, zaspokajać ich potrzeby i opracowywać silne inicjatywy klastrowe. Badanie to zapewnia pełniejsze zrozumienie tego, w jaki sposób instytucje i firmy współdziałają w ramach klastra w procesie rozwoju innowacji, oraz opracowuje różne wymiary bliskości między firmami. (abstrakt oryginalny)

Considering the process of innovation development, this paper aimed to examine the effect of different dimensions of proximity and the level of coordination that exists in a textile cluster. This study employed a qualitative method, based on in-depth interviews that were conducted with two leading firms in a textile cluster in Valencia, Spain, which is subject to intense competition from producers in Asia. Firms were selected according to the criteria of innovation development and opportunity. This is a pilot study that precedes a more ambitious one. The results suggested that firms' innovations are developed in an isolated, discontinuous, marginal, and uncoordinated way, and clustering has a marginal effect. Furthermore, despite high geographical and cognitive proximity, low social proximity is maintained by the low level of trust between the firms. These findings may be of significant practical value for practitioners and institutions. Firms can gain a better understanding of the importance of being located in a cluster, as this is a key factor for their survival under intense competition. However, geographical proximity is not sufficient, and firms need to cooperate with each other and share their ideas and experiences. In addition, institutions should interact more with companies, speak their language, meet their needs, and devise strong cluster initiatives. This study provides a more comprehensive understanding of how institutions and firms interact within a cluster in the process of innovation development and elaborate upon different dimensions of proximity among firms. (original abstract)
Pełny tekst
Pokaż
Bibliografia
Pokaż
  1. Albors-Garrigós, J., Hervás-Oliver, J. L., & Hidalgo, A. (2009). Analyzing high technology adoption and impact within public supported high tech programs: An empirical case. The Journal of High Technology Management Research, 20(2), 153-168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hitech.2009.09.006
  2. ATEVAL. (2017). Estudio de impacto económico de la industria textil en las comarcas de la Vall d'Albaida, el Comtat y L'Alcoià, Ontinyent. Spain: Ateval.
  3. Audretsch, D. B., & Feldman, M. (1996). Spillovers and the geography of innovation and production. American Economic Review, 86(3), 630-640.
  4. Balland, P.A., Boschma, R., & Frenken, K. (2015). Proximity and innovation: From statics to dynamics. Regional Studies, 49(6), 907-920. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2014.883598
  5. Baptista, R., & Swann, P. (1998) Do firms in clusters innovate more? Research Policy, 27, 525-540. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(98) 00065-1
  6. Becattini, G. (2015). Beyond geo-sectoriality: The productive chorality of places. Investigaciones Regionales-Journal of Regional Research, 32, 31-41.
  7. Blanc, H., & Sierra, C. (1999). The internalization of R&D by multinationals: A trade-off between external and internal proximity. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 23, 187-206.
  8. Boschma, R. (2005). Proximity and innovation: A critical assessment. Regional Studies, 39(1), 61-74. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0034340052000320887
  9. Bramwell, A., Nelles, J., & Wolfe, D. A. (2008). Knowledge, innovation and institutions: Global and local dimensions of the ICT cluster in Waterloo, Canada. Regional Studies, 42(1), 101-116. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00343400701543231
  10. Camisón, C. (2004). Shared, competitive, and comparative advantages: A competence-based view of industrial-district competitiveness. Environment and Planning A, 36(12), 2227-2256. http://dx.doi.org/10.1068/a3759
  11. Cainelli, G., De Marchi, V., & Grandinetti, R. (2015). Does the development of environmental innovation require different resources? Evidence from Spanish manufacturing firms. Journal of Cleaner Production, 94, 211-220. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.02.008
  12. Canals, J. (2003). El sector textil- confección español: situación actual y perspectivas. Boletín ICE Económico: Información Comercial Española, (2768), 5-8.
  13. Cerverón, V., & Ybarra, J. A. (Eds.). (2016). La innovación empresarial en Ontinyent y su entorno. Alicante, Spain: Universidad de Alicante.
  14. Claver-Cortés, E., Marco- Lajara, B., Seva-Larrosa, P., & Ruiz-Fernández, L. (2019). Competitive advantage and industrial district: A review of the empirical evidence about the district effect. Competitiveness Review: An International Business Journal, 29(3), 211-235, http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/CR-08-2018-0048
  15. Costa, M. T., & Duch, N. (2005). La renovación del sector textil-confección en España. Instituto de Economía de Barcelona, (355/356), 263-272.
  16. Delgado, M., Porter, M., & Stern, S. (2010). Clusters and entrepreneurship. Journal of Economic Geography, 10, 495-518. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jeg/lbq010
  17. Dyer, W. G., & Wilkins, A. L. (1991). Better stories, not better constructs, to generate better theory: A rejoinder to Eisenhardt. Academy of Management Review, 16(3), 613-619. http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/amr.1991.4279492
  18. Edquist, C., & Johnson, B. (1997). Institutions and organizations in systems of innovation. In C. Edquist (Ed.), System of Innovation. Technologies, Institutions and Organizations. London, UK: Pinter.
  19. European Commission. (2019). Textile and clothing industries. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/growth/sectors/fashion/textiles-clothing/eu_en
  20. Freeman, C. (1987). Technical innovation, diffusion, and long cycles of economic development. In T. Vasko (Ed.), The Long-Wave Debate (pp. 295-309). Berlin, Germany: Springer. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-10351- 7_21
  21. Freije, I. (2015). The role of cluster initiatives in strategic alliances: a view from the Basque Country region. Harvard Deusto Business Research, 4(1), 2-16. https://doi.org/10.3926/hdbr.62
  22. Ghemawat, P. (2001). Distance still matters. Harvard Business Review, 79(8), 137-147.
  23. Golf-Laville, E., & Ortega-Colomer, F. J. (2012). Las fuentes de la innovación y el papel de las instituciones en el sistema de innovación de un distrito industrial. Arbor, 188(753), 75-96. http://dx.doi.org/10.3989/arbor.2012.753n1006
  24. Gordon, I., & McCann, P. (2000). Industrial clusters: Complexes, agglomeration and/or social networks?. Urban Studies, 37, 513-532. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0042098002096
  25. Grabher, G., Ibert, O., & Flohr, S. (2008). The neglected king: The customer in the new knowledge ecology of innovation. Economic Geography, 84 (3), 253-280. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-8287.2008.tb00365.x
  26. Granovetter, M. (1985): Economic action and social structure. The problem of embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology, 91, 481-510. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/228311
  27. Heinonen, T., & Ortega-Colomer, F. J. (2015). Regenerative medicine as an emergent cluster in Tampere Region. Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation, 11(4), 139-160. http://dx.doi.org/10.7341/20151146
  28. Herrigel, G. B. (1993) Power and the redefinition of industrial districts. The case of Baden-Wurttemberg. In G. Grabher (Ed.), The Embedded Firm. On the Socioeconomics of Industrial Networks (pp. 227-251). London, UK: Routledge.
  29. Hofmann, E., & Rüsch, M. (2017). Industry 4.0 and the current status as well as future prospects on logistics. Computers in Industry, 89, 23-34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2017.04.002
  30. Jankowska, B., Götz, M., & Główka, C. (2017). Intra-cluster cooperation enhancing SMEs' competitiveness-the role of cluster organisations in Poland. Investigaciones Regionales-Journal of Regional Research, 39, 195-214.
  31. Lambert, S. C., & Davidson, R. A. (2013). Applications of the business model in studies of enterprise success, innovation and classification: An analysis of empirical research from 1996 to 2010. European Management Journal, 31(6), 668-681. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2012.07.007
  32. Lazzeretti, L., & Capone, F (2016). How proximity matters in innovation networks dynamics along the cluster evolution. A study of the high technology applied to cultural goods. Journal of Business Research, 69, 5855-5865. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.04.068
  33. Lis, A. M. (2019). The significance of proximity in cluster initiatives. Competitiveness Review: An International Business Journal, 29(3), 287-310. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/CR-08-2018-0050
  34. Martin, R., & Sunley, P. (2003). Deconstructing clusters: Chaotic concept or policy panacea?. Journal of Economic Geography, 3(1), 5-35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jeg/3.1.5
  35. Maskell, P. (2001). Towards a knowledge-based theory of the geographical cluster. Industrial and Corporate Change, 10(4), 921- 943. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/icc/10.4.921
  36. Maskell, P., & Malmberg, A.(1999). The competitiveness of firms and regions. 'Ubiquitification' and the importance of localized learning. European Urban and Regional Studies, 6, 9-25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/096977649900600102
  37. Molina-Morales, X. (2001). European Industrial Districts: Influence of geographic concentration on performance of the firm. Journal of International Management, 7(4), 277-294. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1075-4253(01)00048-5
  38. Molina- Morales, F. X., & Martínez-Fernández, M. (2003). The impact of industrial district affiliation on firm value creation. European Planning Studies, 11(2), 155-170. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0965431032000072855
  39. Molina-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. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/smj.766
  40. Molina-Morales, F. X., Belso-Martínez, J. A., Más-Verdú, F., & Martínez-Cháfer, L. (2015). Formation and dissolution of inter-firm linkages in lengthy and stable networks in clusters.Journal of Business Research, 68(7), 1557-1562. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.01.051
  41. Müller, J. M., Kiel, D., & Voigt, K. I. (2018). What drives the implementation of Industry 4.0? The role of opportunities and challenges in the context of sustainability. Sustainability, 10(1), 247. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su10010247
  42. Najda-Janoszka, M., & Daba-Buzoianu, C. (2018). Editorial paper: Exploring management through qualitative research-introductory remarks. Journal of Entrepreneurship. Management and Innovation, 14(4), 5-16. http://dx.doi.org/10.7341/20181440
  43. Nooteboom, B. (2000). Learning and Innovation in Organizations and Economies. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199241002.001.0001
  44. North, D. C. (1990) Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511808678
  45. OECD. (2005). Manual de Oslo. Guía para la recogida e interpretación de datos sobre innovación, 3ª ed. Paris: OECD and EUROSTAT.
  46. Porter, M. E. (1998). Clusters and the new economics of competition. Harvard Business Review, 76(6), 77-90.
  47. Puig, F., González-Loureiro, M., & Marques, H. (2014). Supervivencia, crecimiento e internacionalización en clústers industriales. Economía Industrial, 391, 133-140.
  48. Puig, F., & Marques, H. (2010). Territory, Specialization and Globalization: Recent Impacts on European Traditional Manufacturing. London, UK: Routledge.
  49. Rallet, A., & Torre, A. (1999). Is geographical proximity necessary in the innovation networks in the era of the global economy?. GeoJournal, 49(4), 373-380.
  50. Rodríguez- Victoria, O. E., Puig, F., & Gonzalez-Loureiro, M. (2017). Clustering, innovation and hotel competitiveness: Evidence from the Colombia destination. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 29(11), 2785-2806. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-03-2016-0172
  51. SABI. (2019). Sistema de Análisis de Balances Ibéricos, Bureau van Dijk. Retrieved from http://www.sabi.com
  52. Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2009). Research Methods for Business Students (5th ed.). Harlow, UK: Pearson Education Limited.
  53. Schmitz, H. (1992). On the clustering of small firms. IDS Bulletin, 23(3), 64-69. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1759- 5436.1992.mp23003012.x
  54. Schumpeter, J. A. (1982). The Theory of Economic Development: An Inquiry into Profits, Capital, Credit, Interest, and the Business Cycle (1912/1934). New Brunswick, NJ. Transaction Publishers. http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9781315135564
  55. Sivadas, E., & Dwyer, F. R. (2000). An examination of organizational factors influencing new product success in internal and alliance-based processes. Journal of Marketing, 64(1), 31-49. http://dx.doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.64.1.31.17985
  56. Solow, R. M. (1956). A contribution to the theory of economic growth. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 70(1), 65-94. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1884513
  57. Sydow, J., & Staber, U. (2002). The institutional embeddedness of project networks: The case of content production in German television. Regional Studies, 36(3), 215-227. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00343400220122034
  58. Taylor, S. J., Bogdan, R., & DeVault, M. (2015). Introduction to Qualitative Research Methods: A Guidebook and Resource. Chichester, UK: John Wiley and Sons Ltd.
  59. Tidd, J., & Bessant, J. (2018). Managing Innovation Integrating Technological, Market and Organizational Change (6th ed.). Hoboken, N.J.: John Wiley and Sons Ltd.
  60. Tognazzo, A., & Mazzurana, P. A. M. (2017). Friends doing business: An explorative longitudinal case study of creativity and innovation in an Italian technology-based start-up. Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation, 13(2), 77-104. http://dx.doi.org/10.7341/20171324
  61. Torre, A., & Rallet, A. (2005). Proximity and localization. Regional Studies, 39(1), 47-59. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0034340052000320842
  62. Vandermerwe, S., & Rada, J. (1988). Servitization of business: Adding value by adding services. European Management Journal, 6(4), 314-324. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0263-2373(88)90033-3
  63. Von Krogh, G., Spaeth, S., & Lakhani, K.R. (2003). Community, joining, and specialization in open source software innovation: A case study. Research Policy, 32(7), 1217-1241. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(03)00050- 7
  64. Yin, R.K. (2018). Case Study Research and Applications: Design and Methods (6th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  65. Uzzi, B. (1997). Social structure and competition in interfirm networks: The paradox of embeddedness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(1), 35-67. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2393808
Cytowane przez
Pokaż
ISSN
2299-7075
Język
eng
URI / DOI
https://doi.org/10.7341/20201632
Udostępnij na Facebooku Udostępnij na Twitterze Udostępnij na Google+ Udostępnij na Pinterest Udostępnij na LinkedIn Wyślij znajomemu