Organisational competence vs transferability of knowledge in cluster organisations and technology parks

• Autorzy: Lis Anna Maria , Žemgulienė Jolanta

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.2478/emj-2020-0013

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

The main paper aims to evaluate the impact of organisational competence on knowledge and information flows within cluster organisations and technology parks, with particular emphasis on innovative content knowledge. The paper addresses the research question: “What set of competencies of cooperating companies allows access to information and knowledge in cluster and parks structures?" The authors report their findings from a quantitative study carried out in four cluster organisations and three technology parks functioning in Poland. The research sample covered a total of 269 enterprises: 132 cluster members and 137 park tenants. The primary method of data collection was a survey questionnaire. Data analysis was conducted using the interdependence of variables, ANOVA, and logistic regression. The research showed that the surveyed enterprises from both analysed groups preferred cooperation with partners of a similar level of competence development and the same or complementary scope of competence. This set of competencies of cooperating organisations also guaranteed better access to information and knowledge resources, including confidential information and new knowledge. This study additionally indicated that the knowledge creation activities performed by the cooperating cluster organisations depended on the proximity of the competencies of organisations as well as on the nature of the information, disseminated within the cluster organisations. The theoretical contribution is related to the results obtained by analysing the phenomenon of information and knowledge dissemination in cluster and park structures, revealing the impact made by the competence proximity of cooperating organisations on the access to this such resources. Thus, the findings supplement the state-of-the-art knowledge of the concept of industrial clusters by presenting a broader view on cooperation developed in geographical proximity, based on a set of various partner competencies.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

cluster; cluster organisation; technology park; industrial park; competence; proximity; cooperation

PL

klaster; organizacja klastrowa; park technologiczny; park przemysłowy; kompetencja; bliskość; współpraca

• Wydawca: Oficyna Wydawnicza Politechniki Białostockiej
• Czasopismo: Engineering Management in Production and Services
• Rocznik: 2020
• Tom: Vol. 12, no. 2
• Strony: 83--98
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 31 poz., tab.

Twórcy

autor

Lis Anna Maria

• Gdańsk University of Technology, Poland

autor

Žemgulienė Jolanta

• Vilnius University, Lithuania

Bibliografia

• Amit, R., & Schoemaker, P. J. H. (1993). Strategic Assets and Organizational Rent. Strategic Management Journal, 14(1), 33-46.
• Boyatzis, R.E. (1982). The Competent Manager – A Model for Effective Performance. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
• Camison, C., & Forés, B. (2010). Knowledge absorptive capacity: New insights for its conceptualization and measurement. Journal of Business Research, 63, 707- 715. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2009.04.022
• Cohen, M. (1984). Conflict and Complexity: Goal Diversity and Organizational Search Effectiveness. American Political Science Review, 78(June), 435-454.
• Cohen, W.M., & Levinthal, D.A. (1990). Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, 128-152.
• Danneels, E. (2016). Survey measures of first- and secondorder competences. Strategic Management Journal, 37(10), 2174-2188. doi: 10.1002/smj.2428
• Dosi, G., & Marengo, L. (2000). Some elements of an evolutionary theory of organizational competences. In N.J. Foss (Ed.), The Theory of the Firm. Critical perspectives on business and management (pp. 50-73). London, United Kingdom: Routledge.
• Eisenhardt, K.M., & Martin, J.A. (2000). Dynamic capabilities: what are they? Strategic Management Journal, 21, 1105-1121.
• Heéraud, J.-A. (2003) Regional Innovation Systems and European Research Policy: Convergence or Misunderstanding? European Planning Studies, 11(1), 41-56. doi: 10.1080/09654310303658
• Kogut, B., & Kulatilaka, N. (2001). Capabilities as Real Options. Organization Science, 12(6), 661-777. doi: 10.1287/orsc.12.6.744.10082
• Lane, P.J., & Lubatkin, M. (1998). Relative absorptive capacity and interorganizational learning. Strategic Management Journal, 19, 461-477.
• Lindqvist, G., Ketels, C., & Sölvell, Ö. (2013). The Cluster Initiative Greenbook. Stockholm, Sweden: Ivory Tower Publishers.
• Lis, A.M. (2018). Współpraca w inicjatywach klastrowych. Rola bliskości w rozwoju powiązań kooperacyjnych [Cooperation in cluster initiatives: the role of proximity in the development of cooperative relationships]. Gdańsk, Poland: Wydawnictwo Politechniki Gdańskiej.
• Lis, A.M. (2019). The significance of proximity in cluster initiatives. Competitiveness Review: An International Business Journal, 29(3), 287-310. doi: 10.1108/CR08-2018-0050
• Lis, A.M., & Rozkwitalska, M. (2020). Technological capability dynamics through cluster organizations. Baltic Journal of Management, ahead-of-print. doi: 10.1108/BJM-02-2020-0046
• Miranda, S., Orciuoli, F., Loia, V., & Sampson, D. (2017). An ontology-based model for competence management. Data & Knowledge Engineering, 107, 51-66. doi: 10.1016/j.datak.2016.12.001
• Nelson, R.R., & Winter, S.G. (2002). Evolutionary Theorizing in Economics. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 16(2), 23-46.
• Niosi, J., & Bas, T. G. (2001). The Competencies of Regions – Canada’s Clusters in Biotechnology. Small Business Economics, 17, 31-42.
• Østergaard, Ch.R., & Park, E. (2015). What Makes Clusters Decline? A Study on Disruption and Evolution of a High-Tech Cluster in Denmark. Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, 49(5), 834-849. doi: 10.1080/00343404.2015.1015975
• Prahalad, C.K., & Hamel, G. (1990). The Core Competence of the Corporation. Harvard Business Review, May– June, 1-14.
• Santos, F.M., & Eisenhardt, K.M. (2005). Organizational boundaries and theories of organization. Organization Science, 16(5), 491-508. doi: 10.1287/orsc.1050.0152
• Sölvell, Ö., Lindqvist, G., & Ketels, C. (2003). The Cluster Initiative Greenbook. Stockholm, Sweden: Ivory Tower.
• Štverková, H., & Mynarzová, M. (2017). Cluster Initiatives in the Context of the BEE Model. Forum Scientiae Oeconomia, 5(3), 59-69. doi: 10.23762/FSO_vol5no3_17_4
• Świadek, A. (2015). Horizontal spatial proximity and innovation activity in Polish regions. Polish Journal of Management Studies, 11(1), 147-157.
• Tallman, S., Jenkins, M., Henry, N., & Pinch, S. (2004). Knowledge, Clusters, and Competitive Advantage. Academy of Management Review, 29(2), 258-271.
• Teece, D.J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509-533.
• Teece, D., & Pisano, G. (1994). The Dynamic Capabilities of Firms: An Introduction. Working Paper, WP-94-103, IIASA International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis A-2361. Laxenburg, Austria.
• Ter Wal, A.L.J., & Boschma, R.A. (2011). Co-evolution of Firms, Industries and Networks in Space. Regional Studies, 45(7), 919-933. doi: 10.1080/00343400802662658
• Wernerfelt, B. (1984). A Resource-Based View of the Firm. Strategic Management Journal, 5(2), 171-180.
• Wernerfelt, B. (1995). The resource-based view of the firm: ten years after. Strategic Management Journal, 16, 171-174. doi: 10.1002/smj.4250160303
• Winter, S.G. (2003). Understanding Dynamic Capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 24, 991-995. doi: 10.1002/smj.318