Knowledge governance within clusters: the case of small firms

Abstract

Despite the vast literature on knowledge management, little research has addressed the specificities of knowledge integration at the cluster level. Moreover, the cluster literature has not focused on the role that governance may play in knowledge management. This paper aims at bridging these two fields and filling this gap by analyzing the role of cluster governance in knowledge management. An empirical study of two small French firm clusters was carried out. These clusters are characterized by distinct knowledge management processes. In both cases, governance is necessary in order to support knowledge integration by member firms. Our results suggest that establishing an initial common knowledge base seems a prerequisite in order for the external knowledge identification and acquisition processes to take place. The activist role played by governance also seems more efficient than that of a broker. We discuss these results and their implications for policy-makers and cluster players.

Can a governance structure foster cluster ambidexterity through knowledge management? An empirical study of two French SME clusters

“…In line with the previously mentioned studies on the role of intermediaries in knowledge management in clusters (Kauppila, 2007;Bocquet & Mothe, 2010;Spithoven et al, 2011), we propose an 'intermediated' cluster model of ambidexterity, in which cluster governance structures provide the necessary skills and processing abilities to support the acquisition, assimilation (potential absorptive capacity), transformation and exploitation (realised absorptive capacity) of knowledge (Zahra & George, 2002). In turn, they help specialised firms collaborate or enable each firm to become ambidextrous.…”

“…For SME clusters, the governance structure has a major role to play in organising efficient local interactions among players, as well as achieving ambidexterity at the cluster level. Prior research has validated the ambidexterity hypothesis for small firms (e.g., Lubatkin et al, 2006) but not addressed cluster ambidexterity or methods for managing underlying knowledge processes in clusters (Bocquet & Mothe, 2010). With this empirical study, we attempt to investigate the role of governance structures for managing knowledge and cluster ambidexterity in two small firm clusters.…”

“…At the operational level, a dedicated team or committee transforms and implements these rules into specific actions and programmes. Although most literature on cluster governance describes it as an informal process, France's competiveness poles instead are required to have formal structures that take responsibility for their governance (Bocquet & Mothe, 2010).…”

Analysis of the interplay between knowledge and performance management in industrial clusters

“…In spite of this multitude of actors, it is assumed in this paper that cluster associations and local firms are the actors who are most actively involved with setting up these initiatives. Cluster associations are believed to facilitate the operation of local joint projects among firms (Isaksen, 2009), as well as identify, acquire and utilize knowledge (Bocquet & Mothe, 2010). Table 1 summarizes the role of individual firms and cluster associations with respect to KM and PM.…”

“…The prevalence of specialized and tacit knowledge enables firms in industrial clusters to innovate more (Breschi & Lissoni, 2001;Gilbert et al, 2008). However, because knowledge is regionally embedded, firms have to develop processes to capture this external knowledge (Camisó n & Forés, 2011), which can be also facilitated by local institutions that emerge in industrial clusters (Bocquet & Mothe, 2010).…”