Highlights A systematic literature review on governance for sustainable innovations. The 'who-how-what' framework is used to deconstruct and organise the field The move beyond the hierarchy-market-network trichotomy is proposed The need to shift the focus from the 'who' to 'how' of governance is highlighted Networks, trust, knowledge and 'common good' as keywords for stakeholder engagement
In this paper, we aim at exploring whether and how ‘organised’ clusters can be conceived of as deliberate actors within their contexts. Seeing such clusters as meta-organisations, we suggest that these can make ‘organisationality’ design choices, or decisions regarding full or partial implementation of the five elements constitutive of formal organisations: membership, hierarchy, rules, monitoring, and sanctions. To explore the relationship between clusters’ organisationality and actorhood, we conduct two qualitative case studies of organised clusters in Australia. Our findings suggest that clusters can deliberately ‘construct’ themselves both as organisations and social actors. Furthermore, drawing upon the institutional work perspective, we propose that clusters can engage in deliberate identity, boundary, and practice work. However, in doing so, they address both internal and external legitimating audiences. Finally, our findings suggest that clusters’ organisationality design choices may influence the locus of their actorhood resulting in more or less collaborative approaches to institutional work.
In this article, we explore whether organized clusters can act as institutional entrepreneurs to create conditions favorable to innovation in their constituent members. We view self-aware and organized clusters as “context-embedded meta-organizations” which engage in deliberate decision- and strategy-making. As such, clusters are not only shaped by their environments, as “traditional” cluster approaches suggest but can also act upon these. Their ability to act as “change agents” is crucial in countries with high institutional barriers to innovation, such as most transition economies. Focusing on Russia, we conduct two cluster case studies to analyze the strategies these adopt to alter and shape their institutional environments. We find that clusters have a dual role as institutional entrepreneurs. First, these can act collectively to shape their environments due to the power they wield. Second, they can be mechanisms empowering their constituent actors, fostering their reflexivity and creativity, and allowing them to engage in institutional entrepreneurship. Moreover, both collective and individual cluster actors adopt “bricolage” approaches to institutional entrepreneurship to compensate for the lack of resources or institutional frameworks or avoid the pressures of ineffective institutions.
This research develops insight into the functioning of self-aware and organised clusters seeing these as ‘context-embedded meta-organisations’. Specifically, it builds a theoretical framework for strategy-making in organised clusters, elaborates on their ‘agentic’ nature and ability to shape their environments. Contrary to a more ‘traditional’, determinist, approach in cluster studies, viewing clusters solely as ‘geographic concentrations’ of organisations, the perspective adopted in this research conceptualises clusters as ‘organisations of organisations’. This suggests a more voluntarist stance where self-aware and organised clusters are perceived as intentional actors within their environments implementing deliberate strategies and pursuing system-level goals. This perspective is rather novel in cluster studies and opens up interesting research directions. This thesis explores two major implications of the ‘meta-organisational’ view of clusters: (1) the deliberate nature of collective strategy-making in these and (2) clusters’ ‘actorhood’ and their interactions with their contexts. First, seeing clusters as ‘organisations of organisations’, suggests that these can be deliberately managed and calls for the application of management studies to the cluster context. However, to date, most strategy tools and frameworks have been developed with an individual firm in mind. As a consequence, these cannot reflect the complexity of the ‘meta-organisational’ setting where a number of interests are at play, and strategy-making is a collective exercise. Thus, the ‘meta-organisational’ perspective on clusters calls for the adaptation of the extant strategy frameworks to account for the specifics of the setting. To answer the need for strategy tools and approaches adapted to the context of clusters seen as meta-organisations, this thesis proposes a novel framework of the ‘cluster business model’. This topic is addressed in Article 1 adopting a design science approach to develop a practical tool for strategy- and decision-making in clusters. The article proposes a model describing value creation in the cluster context, develops a method for its application in practice as well as a visual representation of both. Moreover, as clusters are increasingly seen as drivers of innovations and mechanisms for a transition towards the knowledge economy, this thesis develops a set of interventions for cluster business model design fostering the innovativeness of its members. Article 2 addresses this topic and applies a mixed methodology combining a systematic literature review with a design-oriented synthesis. This allows to uncover the generative mechanisms of cluster innovativeness and formulate a set of interventions aimed at shaping cluster business model elements with a view to fostering its innovativeness. Second, the meta-organisational perspective on clusters raises important questions about their intentionality and ‘actorhood’. Indeed, seeing clusters as ‘organisations of organisations’ implies that these can deliberately act, just as individual organisations. This view, again, has not yet been explored in the cluster studies, still dominated by the ‘traditional’, determinist, approach. Recent research in the field of organisation studies suggests that organisations may display different levels of ‘organisationality’ depending on the extent to which the attributes of formal organisations are present. Applying this knowledge to clusters allows uncovering the yet unexplored mechanisms of cluster ‘actorhood’ and its limitations. Article 3 explores this topic and applies a theory-elaborating multiple case study method to gather insight into the clusters’ ability to shape their environments mediated by their level of ‘organisationality’. The article develops a set of theoretical propositions based on the case studies of two clusters in Australia. It suggests that clusters can deliberately ‘construct’ themselves both as organisations and social actors. However, their ‘organisationality’ design choices influence the locus of their actorhood resulting in more or less collaborative approaches to social action. Finally, and related to the previous point, viewing clusters as intentional actors capable of interaction with their environments, suggests that these can adopt deliberate strategies in response to external pressures. Going further, clusters can be seen as change agents or institutional entrepreneurs in unsupportive institutional settings. Article 4 explores this topic and adopts a theory-elaborating embedded multiple case study method. It studies two clusters in the context of a transition economy (Russia) presenting a range of institutional barriers to innovation. The article uncovers the dual role of clusters as institutional entrepreneurs. It suggests that clusters may both act collectively due to their powerful position grouping a number of players, and, at the same time, these can contribute to creating enabling conditions for the individual acts of institutional entrepreneurship. While this thesis offers a range of implications for research and practice in the cluster field, its most broad and significant contribution lies in the further development of the novel ‘meta-organisational’ perspective on self-aware and organised clusters. This research thus contributes to the consolidation of the ‘meta-organisational’ perspective and coins new language for addressing the topic of ‘managed’ or ‘organised’ clusters. This perspective has not yet drawn wide attention in cluster research and practice but can be valuable for empowering clusters and giving them practical tools to exercise their collective power and shape their environments. In a way, this ‘meta-organisational’ view of clusters might become ‘self-fulfilling’ by contributing to shaping the perception of clusters as deliberate and organised actors, triggering a reflection of cluster practitioners and providing them with adapted conceptual frameworks and practical tools
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.