Interfirm collaboration as a modernization strategy: A survey of case studies

Kingsley, Gordon; Klein, Hans

doi:10.1007/bf02511618

Cited by 12 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Hadjimanolis' (2000) empirical work, however, shows evidence that organizational characteristics, namely technological resources (R&D intensity), organizational capabilities (technological information scanning and strategic planning) and external networking capabilities (the extent of co-operation with technology providers), affect the innovativeness of SMEs in Cyprus. Researchers (Caputo et al, 2002;Rothwell, 1991) suggest examining the strategic fit between the small firm and its external environments, specifically, variables like market pressure to innovate (Birchall, Chanaron, & Sonderquist, 1996), environmental hostility (Kim et al, 1993), external technological linkages (Rothwell & Dodgson, 1991), networking (Kingsley & Klein, 1998) and inter-firm co-operation (Hanna & Walsh, 2002).…”

Section: Conceptual Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

An institutional analysis of the new product development process of small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in China, Hong Kong and Taiwan

Siu

Lin

Fang

et al. 2006

Industrial Marketing Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Conceptual Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

An institutional analysis of the new product development process of small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in China, Hong Kong and Taiwan

Siu

Lin

Fang

et al. 2006

Industrial Marketing Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Curran and Blackburn's study interviewed 400 small business owners in the UK and found that business-to-business connections were largely trading relationships between buyers and sellers. In the USA, Rosenfeld (1996) and Kingsley and Klein (1998) have evaluated small fi rm networks and various approaches to cooperation (cluster formation, cooperation with the aid of a broker, etc.) but no particular approach was found to be appreciably more effectual.…”

Section: Interfi Rm Cooperationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The widespread reporting of rapid economic growth and the increased competitiveness of small fi rms triggered considerable interest in networking and public agencies fi nancially supported the creation, support and maintenance of networks among small fi rms. Despite their positive endorsement Curran et al (1993) showed that small fi rms devote little time to networks or networking and networks where public agencies are initiators have been shown as unlikely to succeed (Akers et al, 1998;Kingsley and Klein, 1998).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interfirm Cooperation among Small Manufacturing Firms

Hanna

Walsh

2008

International Small Business Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article evaluates interfirm cooperation among small manufacturing firms. Networks of small firms work together on numerous activities such as marketing, procurement or manufacturing; however, are certain `enablers' necessary for successful cooperation? To answer this question networking activities among small manufacturers were investigated. Over the course of 12 months 23 in-depth interviews were conducted: 7 with network brokers (network brokers identify opportunities, bring small firms together and facilitate cooperation), 2 with small firm business associations with an acknowledged stance on the benefits of small firm cooperation and 14 with small firms engaged in interfirm cooperation. These semi-structured discussions explored the key characteristics of successful networks, the motives for initiating a cooperative relationship, how firms managed appropriation concerns and how they coordinated tasks.The findings indicate a clear demarcation between networking activities that are led by brokers and those that are created of the participating firms' own volition.

show abstract

“…In 1996, the MEP funded USNet as a two-year pilot programme to explore the use of networks for service delivery; this pilot included an extensive evaluation component. Networks were found to yield positive net benefits to company participants, particularly those led by companies, but differences in the capacity of states to deliver services through networks limited their effectiveness (Shapira 1998, Kingsley andKlein 1998). Regeneris (2010) found significant qualitative benefits from UK's Knowledge Transfer Partnerships, including increased innovation capacity and positive spillovers with suppliers and other firms, as well as quantitative benefits in terms of sales, gross value added, and employment growth; the evaluation recommended more and higher impact partnerships and less bureaucratic application processes.…”

Section: Programme-level Findingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The impact of technology and innovation advisory services

Shapira¹,

Youtie²

2016

Handbook of Innovation Policy Impact

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This report identifies and reviews literature that evaluates the impacts of technology and innovation advisory services. These services provide information, technical assistance, consulting, mentoring, and other services to support enterprises in adopting and deploying new technologies and in commercialising innovations. Examples include the: Manufacturing Advisory Service (England), the Manufacturing Extension Partnership (USA), and the Industrial Research Assistance Program (Canada). Technology and innovation advisory services are also provided by technology centres and other business assistance programmes. Such services are typically targeted at small and medium-sized enterprises. A defining capability of technology and innovation advisory services is the offer of expert one-on-one guidance to individual companies through extension staff, field offices, or dispersed technology centres. The available studies generally find that technology and innovation advisory services provide positive benefits for participating firms. The types of benefits achieved include reductions in costs, improved quality, reduced waste and improved environmental performance, higher productivity, and new product development and innovation. Net benefits achieved are typically relatively modest, although commensurate with the relatively small amounts of public funding usually invested in technology and innovation advisory services. More intense and customised services can improve results. Applying best practices in the operation and delivery of technology and innovation services, including attention to outreach, staff capability, long-term engagement, flexibility, organisational stability, and linkage with other services, increases the likelihood of programme effectiveness and impact. The Compendium of Evidence on the Effectiveness of Innovation Policy Intervention Project is led by the Manchester Institute of Innovation Research (MIoIR), University of Manchester, and sponsored by Nesta, an independent charity with the mission to make the UK more innovative. The compendium is organised around innovation policy topics categorised primarily according to their policy objectives. All reports are available at http://www.innovation-policy.org.uk. Also at this location is an online strategic intelligence tool with an extensive list of references that present evidence for the effectiveness of each particular innovation policy objective. Summaries and download links are provided for key references. Corresponding Author: Philip Shapira, Manchester Institute of Innovation Research, H Hankins Building, Manchester Business School, University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL. Email: pshapira@mbs.ac.uk.The Nesta Working Paper Series is intended to make available early results of research undertaken or supported by Nesta and its partners in order to elicit comments and suggestions for revisions and to encourage discussion and further debate prior to publication (ISSN 2050-9820). © Year 2014 by the author(s). Short sections of text, tables and f...

show abstract

Interfirm collaboration as a modernization strategy: A survey of case studies

Cited by 12 publications

References 14 publications

An institutional analysis of the new product development process of small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in China, Hong Kong and Taiwan

An institutional analysis of the new product development process of small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in China, Hong Kong and Taiwan

Interfirm Cooperation among Small Manufacturing Firms

The impact of technology and innovation advisory services

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About