Hot spots are fast-growing geographic clusters of competing firms. Drawing on several literature streams, we develop an evolutionary model that contrasts hot spot and non-hot spot competitors within the same industry. Initially, economies of agglomeration, institutional forces, and managers' mental models create an innovative environment within the hot spot. Over time those same forces create a homogeneous macroculture that suppresses innovation, making hot spot competitors more susceptible than non-hot spot competitors to environmental jolts.Hot spots are fast-growing geographic clusters of competing firms.Drawing on several literature streams, we develop an evolutionary model that contrasts hot spot and non-hot spot competitors within the same industry. Initially, economies of agglomeration, institutional forces, and managers' mental models create an innovative environment within the hot spot. Over time, those same forces create a homogeneous macroculture that suppresses innovation, making hot spot competitors more susceptible than non-hot spot competitors to environmental jolts.

No abstract

Hot spots are fast-growing geographic clusters of competing firms. Drawing on several literature streams, we develop an evolutionary model that contrasts hot spot and non-hot spot competitors within the same industry. Initially, economies of agglomeration, institutional forces, and managers' mental models create an innovative environment within the hot spot. Over time those same forces create a homogeneous macroculture that suppresses innovation, making hot spot competitors more susceptible than non-hot spot competitors to environmental jolts.Hot spots are fast-growing geographic clusters of competing firms.Drawing on several literature streams, we develop an evolutionary model that contrasts hot spot and non-hot spot competitors within the same industry. Initially, economies of agglomeration, institutional forces, and managers' mental models create an innovative environment within the hot spot. Over time, those same forces create a homogeneous macroculture that suppresses innovation, making hot spot competitors more susceptible than non-hot spot competitors to environmental jolts.

This research addresses the question, do categorical and continuous measures capture the same construct of diversity? Using analysis of variance, cluster analysis, and discriminant analysis, we investigated whether continuous measures (entropy and product count) differentiate between diversification categories, whether continuous measures converted to categories and subjectively assigned categories classified companies similarly, and whether continuous and categorical measures predicted similar diversity–performance relationships. We concluded that the techniques were associated but did not yield the same performance predictions. For researchers investigating diversity–performance relationships, choice of measurement technique will influence research results. Our research results suggest that attempts to combine categorical and continuous techniques as a way to overcome the limitations of both methods is not appropriate.

Drawing on multiple sources, we identify technological, global and workforce trends that will affect the formulation and implementation of manufacturing strategy in the next decade. We then describe several theories from economics, sociology, and psychology and show how they can be used to enrich our interpretations of the effects of these trends. Throughout, we offer suggestions for future research in manufacturing strategy.