IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/tkmrxx/v13y2015i3p329-343.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

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

Author

Listed:
  • Rachel Bocquet
  • Caroline Mothe

Abstract

To identify how a governance structure leads to ambidexterity at the cluster level, in terms of knowledge management, this study draws on the knowledge -based view of clusters and on ambidexterity literature, thereby exploring an ‘intermediated’ cluster model of ambidexterity. Our aim is to explore the governance structure’s role and priorities in terms of knowledge management, as well as the underlying operational actions and programmes implemented to achieve cluster ambidexterity. Qualitative research, based on interviews with members of two French clusters, reveals that their governance structure is a crucial intermediary organisation that supports cluster ambidexterity. The results emphasise the role of governance structures for two types of ambidexterity in small and medium-sized enterprise (SME) clusters: First, SMEs may specialise in exploitative or exploratory knowledge, and the governance structure provides the missing knowledge (intermediated specialised model). Second, cluster governance may help each firm become ambidextrous (intermediated dual model). This study outlines the specificities of the two models and their contingency factors, which offer interesting implications, especially for policymakers devoted to innovation and clusters.

Suggested Citation

  • Rachel Bocquet & Caroline Mothe, 2015. "Can a governance structure foster cluster ambidexterity through knowledge management? An empirical study of two French SME clusters," Knowledge Management Research & Practice, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(3), pages 329-343, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:tkmrxx:v:13:y:2015:i:3:p:329-343
    DOI: 10.1057/kmrp.2013.53
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1057/kmrp.2013.53
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1057/kmrp.2013.53?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lee, Sungjoo & Park, Gwangman & Yoon, Byungun & Park, Jinwoo, 2010. "Open innovation in SMEs--An intermediated network model," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 290-300, March.
    2. Howells, Jeremy, 2006. "Intermediation and the role of intermediaries in innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 715-728, June.
    3. Paul E. Bierly III & Paula S. Daly, 2007. "Alternative Knowledge Strategies, Competitive Environment, and Organizational Performance in Small Manufacturing Firms," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 31(4), pages 493-516, July.
    4. Roderik Ponds & Frank Van Oort & Koen Frenken, 2007. "The geographical and institutional proximity of research collaboration," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 86(3), pages 423-443, August.
    5. Cristiano Antonelli, 2006. "The Business Governance of Localized Knowledge: An Information Economics Approach for the Economics of Knowledge," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(3), pages 227-261.
    6. Robert M. Grant, 1996. "Prospering in Dynamically-Competitive Environments: Organizational Capability as Knowledge Integration," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 7(4), pages 375-387, August.
    7. Ferrary, Michel, 2011. "Specialized organizations and ambidextrous clusters in the open innovation paradigm," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 181-192, June.
    8. Lynn, Leonard H. & Mohan Reddy, N. & Aram, John D., 1996. "Linking technology and institutions: the innovation community framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 91-106, January.
    9. Michael Lubatkin & Zeki Simsek & Yan Ling & John F. Veiga, 2006. "Ambidexterity and Performance in Small-to Medium-Sized Firms : The Pivotal Role of Top Management Team Behavioral Integration," Post-Print hal-02311781, HAL.
    10. Nathalie Lazaric & Christian Longhi & Catherine Thomas, 2008. "Gatekeepers of Knowledge versus Platforms of Knowledge: From Potential to Realized Absorptive Capacity," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(6), pages 837-852.
    11. Alessia Sammarra & Lucio Biggiero, 2008. "Heterogeneity and Specificity of Inter‐Firm Knowledge Flows in Innovation Networks," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(4), pages 800-829, June.
    12. Frank T. Rothaermel & David L. Deeds, 2004. "Exploration and exploitation alliances in biotechnology: a system of new product development," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(3), pages 201-221, March.
    13. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    14. Ikujiro Nonaka, 1994. "A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(1), pages 14-37, February.
    15. Avimanyu Datta, 2011. "Review and Extension on Ambidexterity: A Theoretical Model Integrating Networks and Absorptive Capacity," Journal of Management and Strategy, Journal of Management and Strategy, Sciedu Press, vol. 2(1), pages 2-22, March.
    16. Andre Torre & Alain Rallet, 2005. "Proximity and Localization," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(1), pages 47-59.
    17. A. Spithoven & B. Clarysse & M. Knockaert, 2009. "Building Absorptive Capacity to Organise Inbound Open Innovation in Low Tech Industries," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 09/606, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
    18. Zhiang (John) Lin & Haibin Yang & Irem Demirkan, 2007. "The Performance Consequences of Ambidexterity in Strategic Alliance Formations: Empirical Investigation and Computational Theorizing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(10), pages 1645-1658, October.
    19. Ron Boschma, 2005. "Proximity and Innovation: A Critical Assessment," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(1), pages 61-74.
    20. Rachel Bocquet & Caroline Mothe, 2010. "Knowledge governance within clusters: the case of small firms," Knowledge Management Research & Practice, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(3), pages 229-239, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Marco-Lajara, Bartolomé & Úbeda-García, Mercedes & Zaragoza-Sáez, Patrocinio del Carmen & García-Lillo, Francisco, 2022. "Agglomeration, social capital and interorganizational ambidexterity in tourist districts," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 126-136.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Rachel Bocquet & Caroline Danièle Mothe, 2014. "Le rôle de la gouvernance des clusters dans les capacités dynamiques d’absorption des PME," Post-Print hal-01133514, HAL.
    2. Adrián Kovács & Bart Looy & Bruno Cassiman, 2015. "Exploring the scope of open innovation: a bibliometric review of a decade of research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(3), pages 951-983, September.
    3. Rachel Bocquet & Caroline Mothe, 2010. "Knowledge governance within clusters: the case of small firms," Knowledge Management Research & Practice, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(3), pages 229-239, September.
    4. Anastasios KARAMANOS, 2015. "The Effects of Knowledge from Collaborations on the Exploitative and Exploratory Innovation Output of Greek SMEs," Management Dynamics in the Knowledge Economy, College of Management, National University of Political Studies and Public Administration, vol. 3(3), pages 361-380, September.
    5. Tina Wolf & Uwe Cantner & Holger Graf & Michael Rothgang, 2019. "Cluster ambidexterity towards exploration and exploitation: strategies and cluster management," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(6), pages 1840-1866, December.
    6. Partanen, Jukka & Kohtamäki, Marko & Patel, Pankaj C. & Parida, Vinit, 2020. "Supply chain ambidexterity and manufacturing SME performance: The moderating roles of network capability and strategic information flow," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 221(C).
    7. Carolina Rojas-Córdova & Amanda J. Williamson & Julio A. Pertuze & Gustavo Calvo, 2023. "Why one strategy does not fit all: a systematic review on exploration–exploitation in different organizational archetypes," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 17(7), pages 2251-2295, October.
    8. Vanhaverbeke, Wim & Li, Ying & Van de Vrande, Vareska, 2009. "The dual role of external corporate venturing in technological exploration," MPRA Paper 26488, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2010.
    9. Martin M�ller & Allison Stewart, 2016. "Does Temporary Geographical Proximity Predict Learning? Knowledge Dynamics in the Olympic Games," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 50(3), pages 377-390, March.
    10. Frank T. Rothaermel & Maria Tereza Alexandre, 2009. "Ambidexterity in Technology Sourcing: The Moderating Role of Absorptive Capacity," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 759-780, August.
    11. Graciela Corral de Zubielqui & Noel Lindsay & Wendy Lindsay & Janice Jones, 2019. "Knowledge quality, innovation and firm performance: a study of knowledge transfer in SMEs," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 53(1), pages 145-164, June.
    12. Lee, Cheng-Yu & Wang, Ming-Chao & Huang, Yen-Chih, 2015. "The double-edged sword of technological diversity in R&D alliances: Network position and learning speed as moderators," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 450-461.
    13. Karl Aschenbrücker & Tobias Kretschmer, 2022. "Performance-based incentives and innovative activity in small firms: evidence from German manufacturing," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 11(2), pages 47-64, June.
    14. O'Reilly, Charles A., III & Tushman, Michael L., 2013. "Organizational Ambidexterity: Past, Present and Future," Research Papers 2130, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    15. Wenjing Wang & Yiwei Liu, 2021. "Community-level characteristics and member firms’ invention: evidence from university–industry innovation community in China," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(11), pages 8913-8934, November.
    16. Stanko, Michael A. & Henard, David H., 2017. "Toward a better understanding of crowdfunding, openness and the consequences for innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(4), pages 784-798.
    17. Juha Uotila, 2018. "Punctuated equilibrium or ambidexterity: dynamics of incremental and radical organizational change over time," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 27(1), pages 131-148.
    18. Avimanyu Datta, 2011. "Combining Networks, Ambidexterity and Absorptive Capacity to Explain Commercialization of Innovations: A Theoretical Model from Review and Extension," Journal of Management and Strategy, Journal of Management and Strategy, Sciedu Press, vol. 2(4), pages 2-25, December.
    19. Owusu Sarpong & Peter Teirlinck, 2018. "The influence of functional and geographical diversity in collaboration on product innovation performance in SMEs," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(6), pages 1667-1695, December.
    20. Ellen Siu, 2018. "Interorganisational collaboration in Academic Health Science Centre: A case study on King’s Health Partnership," Working Papers 40, Birkbeck Centre for Innovation Management Research, revised Feb 2021.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:tkmrxx:v:13:y:2015:i:3:p:329-343. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/tkmr .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.