Institutions and coordination: what is the contribution of a proximity-based analysis? The case of Airbus and its relations with the subcontracting network

Abstract

In this paper, we propose to expound the various dimensions of proximity with a view to emphasizing the institutional and organizational dimensions of inter-firm relations. To that end, we set out to define, in a first part, the various forms of geographic, institutional and organizational proximity, and to put them into perspective. The dual role of geographic proximity as a source of conflicts and resource for collective action is underlined. We then intend to show that the institution generates a so-called form of institutional proximity which, for the actors, refers to common meanings they have to share, as well as to the setting of complementary roles they have to play in collective action. As for organizational proximity, it is understood as a particular form of institutional proximity combining cognitive coordination with political coordination. In a second part, we propose to apply the theoretical framework so conceived to analyse the vertical relations between Airbus and its subcontracting network.

Leading Firms in Technology Clusters: The Role of Alenia Aeronautica in the Campania Aircraft Cluster

“…From this plot we can already detect how the Campania cluster extends beyond its territorial boundaries through consolidation of relationships between Alenia Aeronautica and foreign system integrators, thus following a well-established pattern for the aeronautics sector (Biggiero and Samarra, 2010;Kechidi and Talbot, 2010). However, more accurate analysis of the relationships makes it clear that the international relationships are concentrated on Alenia, and that the other firms in the region have relationships with foreign companies only through the single large Campania firm.…”

“…By applying network analysis and gathering opinions through interviews, we have shown that Alenia Aeronautica can be identified as the central firm of the cluster, but that it is unable to completely fulfill its role as anchor tenant. The literature has described several recent trends in the aeronautics industry, which also seem very evident in the Campania cluster: i) greater fragmentation among the various actors in the production chain (Kechidi & Talbot, 2010); ii) continually greater interdependence among the various actors, which favors the birth of relationship networks that go beyond national borders, to unite clusters and firms that operate in very distant geographic areas (Biggiero & Samarra, 2010); iii) attention to innovation, in part through interaction with the new materials sector and other sectors (Benzler & Wink, 2010). Faced with these phenomena, Alenia does not seem to have taken an adequate role.…”

“…In recent years, the evolution of the aeronautical industry has been characterized by: i) greater production fragmentation among different actors in the chain (Kechidi & Talbot, 2010); ii) ever greater interdependence among the various actors of the system, which often favors development of networks that surpass national boundaries and unite enterprises and clusters operating in very distant areas (Biggiero & Samarra, 2010); iii) attention to innovation, which extends to processes of interaction with other sectors, such as the new materials sector (Benzler & Wink, 2010). Benzler and Wink also argue that the focal firm plays an even more central role than in the past.…”

“…In addition, it is necessary to have a coordinating body in order to respond to the needs for continual innovation, which are often satisfied by drawing on innovations developed in other sectors (Benzler & Wink, 2010) and for management of the extensive networks of relationships at both local and international level (Biggiero & Samarra, 2010;Kechidi & Talbot, 2010). Zhegu (2005, 2010) have demonstrated that the presence of leading firms enhances the process of knowledge diffusion, and has favored the birth and development of aircraft clusters in many parts of the world (Niosi & Zhegu, 2005;.…”

Introduction: the role of proximity relations in regional and territorial development processes

“…These explorations also deal with the issues of institutional dynamics, expressed through the analysis of the modes, of the causes and effects of the processes of institutional innovation on the coordination between actors and the dynamics of local development. Let us note that other analyses, focusing on the very definition of proximity, see in the latter a profoundly institutional phenomenon (Kechidi and Talbot, 2010).…”