Innovating in the Textile Industry: An Uncoordinated Dance between Firms and their Territory?

• Autorzy: Emilio Camarena-Gil , Carlos Garrigues , Francisco Puig
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

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)

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)

Słowa kluczowe

EN

Business cluster; Innovations; Clothing

PL

Klastry; Innowacje; Odzież

• Czasopismo: Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation (JEMI)
• Rocznik: 2020
• Tom: 16
• Numer: nr 3 Proximity and Innovation in Clusters: How Close, How Far?
• Strony: 47--76

Twórcy

autor

Emilio Camarena-Gil

• University of Valencia, Spain

autor

Carlos Garrigues

• University of Valencia, Spain

autor

Francisco Puig

• University of Valencia, Spain

Bibliografia

• 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
• 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.
• Audretsch, D. B., & Feldman, M. (1996). Spillovers and the geography of innovation and production. American Economic Review, 86(3), 630-640.
• 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
• 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
• Becattini, G. (2015). Beyond geo-sectoriality: The productive chorality of places. Investigaciones Regionales-Journal of Regional Research, 32, 31-41.
• 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.
• Boschma, R. (2005). Proximity and innovation: A critical assessment. Regional Studies, 39(1), 61-74. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0034340052000320887
• 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
• 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
• 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
• Canals, J. (2003). El sector textil- confección español: situación actual y perspectivas. Boletín ICE Económico: Información Comercial Española, (2768), 5-8.
• Cerverón, V., & Ybarra, J. A. (Eds.). (2016). La innovación empresarial en Ontinyent y su entorno. Alicante, Spain: Universidad de Alicante.
• 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
• Costa, M. T., & Duch, N. (2005). La renovación del sector textil-confección en España. Instituto de Economía de Barcelona, (355/356), 263-272.
• 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
• 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
• 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.
• European Commission. (2019). Textile and clothing industries. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/growth/sectors/fashion/textiles-clothing/eu_en
• 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
• 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
• Ghemawat, P. (2001). Distance still matters. Harvard Business Review, 79(8), 137-147.
• 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
• 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
• 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
• 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
• 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
• 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.
• 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
• 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.
• 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
• 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
• 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
• 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
• 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
• 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
• 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
• 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
• 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
• 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
• 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
• 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
• 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
• North, D. C. (1990) Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511808678
• OECD. (2005). Manual de Oslo. Guía para la recogida e interpretación de datos sobre innovación, 3ª ed. Paris: OECD and EUROSTAT.
• Porter, M. E. (1998). Clusters and the new economics of competition. Harvard Business Review, 76(6), 77-90.
• Puig, F., González-Loureiro, M., & Marques, H. (2014). Supervivencia, crecimiento e internacionalización en clústers industriales. Economía Industrial, 391, 133-140.
• Puig, F., & Marques, H. (2010). Territory, Specialization and Globalization: Recent Impacts on European Traditional Manufacturing. London, UK: Routledge.
• 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.
• 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
• SABI. (2019). Sistema de Análisis de Balances Ibéricos, Bureau van Dijk. Retrieved from http://www.sabi.com
• Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2009). Research Methods for Business Students (5th ed.). Harlow, UK: Pearson Education Limited.
• 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
• 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
• 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
• 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
• 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
• Taylor, S. J., Bogdan, R., & DeVault, M. (2015). Introduction to Qualitative Research Methods: A Guidebook and Resource. Chichester, UK: John Wiley and Sons Ltd.
• Tidd, J., & Bessant, J. (2018). Managing Innovation Integrating Technological, Market and Organizational Change (6th ed.). Hoboken, N.J.: John Wiley and Sons Ltd.
• 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
• Torre, A., & Rallet, A. (2005). Proximity and localization. Regional Studies, 39(1), 47-59. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0034340052000320842
• 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
• 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
• Yin, R.K. (2018). Case Study Research and Applications: Design and Methods (6th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• 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

Identyfikatory

DOI

https://doi.org/10.7341/20201632