IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wiw/wiwrsa/ersa14p693.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Evolution of business models in French ?Pôles de compétitivité?: the role of intermediaries in horticultural varietal creation

Author

Listed:
  • Isabelle Leroux
  • Paul Muller
  • Béatrice Plottu
  • Caroline Widehem

Abstract

A device central to the French cluster (Competitiveness pole) policy is the financing of collaborative projects aimed at enhancing the innovation capacities of firms. In turn, increasing in innovation capacities give rise to new business opportunities that firms only can seize by evolving their business model. Business model accounts for the ways value is developed, delivered and captured by firms (Chesbrough 2007). However, internal and external constraints may impede their evolution. Those constraints are particularly harmful for SME: 1. Firms must dedicate specific resources to innovate their business models (Helfat and Winter 2011) but SME may arguably face strong constraints on devoted resources. 2. The capacity of innovating a business model may require firms to be able to influence local collective rules (Sabatier et al. 2012). However, unless being locally pivotal, a SME's influence may be too low to enable it to exert a significant influence on those rules, especially when significant business model innovation is at stake. Our paper discusses the role played by local institutions while addressing the issue of business model evolution in SME. It specifically focuses on the governing bodies of Competitiveness poles. We argue that those governing bodies play a central role in releasing stakeholders from business model evolution impediments as they act as innovation intermediaries. We base our research on the study of BRIO, a publicly funded collaborative project undertaken by members of Vegepolys, a Competitiveness pole located in French Pays-de-la-Loire Region and dedicated to specialized vegetal industries. Horticultural SMEs, INRA and the University of Angers have been involved in this project. It has aimed to design new tools and methodologies for creating new varieties of plants through varietal creation. Our case reveals that Vegepolys' governance body has played a key role in the success of the project by translating scientific (produced by INRA researchers) into technological knowledge and by being a go-between facilitating the establishment of new collective rules.

Suggested Citation

  • Isabelle Leroux & Paul Muller & Béatrice Plottu & Caroline Widehem, 2014. "Evolution of business models in French ?Pôles de compétitivité?: the role of intermediaries in horticultural varietal creation," ERSA conference papers ersa14p693, European Regional Science Association.
    • Handle: RePEc:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa14p693
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www-sre.wu.ac.at/ersa/ersaconfs/ersa14/e140826aFinal00693.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Geoffrey M. Hodgson, 2003. "The hidden persuaders: institutions and individuals in economic theory," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 27(2), pages 159-175, March.
    2. Cooke, Phil, 2005. "Regionally asymmetric knowledge capabilities and open innovation: Exploring 'Globalisation 2'--A new model of industry organisation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(8), pages 1128-1149, October.
    3. Dahlander, Linus & Gann, David M., 2010. "How open is innovation?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 699-709, July.
    4. Howells, Jeremy, 2006. "Intermediation and the role of intermediaries in innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 715-728, June.
    5. West, Joel, 2003. "How open is open enough?: Melding proprietary and open source platform strategies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(7), pages 1259-1285, July.
    6. Geoffrey M. Hodgson, 1998. "The Approach of Institutional Economics," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 36(1), pages 166-192, March.
    7. Fromhold-Eisebith, Martina & Eisebith, Gunter, 2005. "How to institutionalize innovative clusters? Comparing explicit top-down and implicit bottom-up approaches," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(8), pages 1250-1268, October.
    8. Sapsed, Jonathan & Grantham, Andrew & DeFillippi, Robert, 2007. "A bridge over troubled waters: Bridging organisations and entrepreneurial opportunities in emerging sectors," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(9), pages 1314-1334, November.
    9. Frederic Rychen & Jean-Benoit Zimmermann, 2008. "Clusters in the Global Knowledge-based Economy: Knowledge Gatekeepers and Temporary Proximity," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(6), pages 767-776.
    10. Andrea Morrison, 2008. "Gatekeepers of Knowledge within Industrial Districts: Who They Are, How They Interact," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(6), pages 817-835.
    11. Danièle Bénézech, 2012. "The Open Innovation model: some issues regarding its internal consistency," Journal of Innovation Economics, De Boeck Université, vol. 0(2), pages 145-165.
    12. Kirkels, Yvonne & Duysters, Geert, 2010. "Brokerage in SME networks," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 375-385, April.
    13. B. Demil & X. Lecocq, 2010. "Business model evolution : in search of dynamic consistency," Post-Print hal-00572915, HAL.
    14. Sabatier, Valerie & Craig-Kennard, Adrienne & Mangematin, Vincent, 2012. "When technological discontinuities and disruptive business models challenge dominant industry logics: Insights from the drugs industry," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 79(5), pages 949-962.
    15. Elisa Giuliani, 2011. "Role of Technological Gatekeepers in the Growth of Industrial Clusters: Evidence from Chile," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(10), pages 1329-1348, November.
    16. Ferrary, Michel, 2011. "Specialized organizations and ambidextrous clusters in the open innovation paradigm," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 181-192, June.
    17. Valérie Sabatier & Adrienne Kennard & Vincent Mangematin, 2012. "When technological discontinuities and disruptive business models challenge dominant industry logics: insights from the drugs industry," Grenoble Ecole de Management (Post-Print) hal-00658727, HAL.
    18. Sylvain Amisse & Isabelle Leroux & Paul Muller & Caroline Widehem, 2013. "Les réseaux de communautés de pratique dans la dynamique de la gouvernance territoriale horticole : le cas de l'Anjou," Géographie, économie, société, Lavoisier, vol. 15(3), pages 183-203.
    19. Valérie Sabatier & Adrienne Kennard & Vincent Mangematin, 2012. "When technological discontinuities and disruptive business models challenge dominant industry logics: insights from the drugs industry," Post-Print hal-00658727, HAL.
    20. Nicholas S. Argyres, 1999. "The Impact of Information Technology on Coordination: Evidence from the B-2 “Stealth” Bomber," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 10(2), pages 162-180, April.
    21. Bruce Kogut, 2000. "The network as knowledge: generative rules and the emergence of structure," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(3), pages 405-425, March.
    22. Sylvain Amisse & Isabelle Leroux & Paul Muller, 2012. "Proximities and Logics Underlying Cluster Dynamics: The Case of the Ornamental Horticulture Cluster in Maine-et-Loire," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(3), pages 265-283, April.
    23. Danièle Benezech, 2012. "The Open Innovation model: Some issues regarding its internal consistency," Post-Print halshs-00739441, HAL.
    24. Brusoni, Stefano & Prencipe, Andrea, 2001. "Unpacking the Black Box of Modularity: Technologies, Products and Organizations," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 10(1), pages 179-205, March.
    25. Elena de Vogeleer & Denis Lescop, 2011. "Plateformes, coordination et incitations," Post-Print hal-02413407, HAL.
    26. Ronald S. Burt & Marc Knez, 1995. "Kinds of Third-Party Effects on Trust," Rationality and Society, , vol. 7(3), pages 255-292, July.
    27. Lee Fleming, 2001. "Recombinant Uncertainty in Technological Search," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 117-132, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. José-Antonio Belso-Martínez & Manuel Expósito-Langa, 2015. "Persistence and extinction of brokerage roles in clusters: the role of status, former experiences and extra-cluster relationships," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 1501, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Jan 2015.
    2. Lehoux, P. & Daudelin, G. & Williams-Jones, B. & Denis, J.-L. & Longo, C., 2014. "How do business model and health technology design influence each other? Insights from a longitudinal case study of three academic spin-offs," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(6), pages 1025-1038.
    3. Gallo, Julie Le & Plunket, Anne, 2020. "Regional gatekeepers, inventor networks and inventive performance: Spatial and organizational channels," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(5).
    4. Kajikawa, Yuya & Mejia, Cristian & Wu, Mengjia & Zhang, Yi, 2022. "Academic landscape of Technological Forecasting and Social Change through citation network and topic analyses," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    5. Engwall, Mats & Kaulio, Matti & Karakaya, Emrah & Miterev, Maxim & Berlin, Daniel, 2021. "Experimental networks for business model innovation: A way for incumbents to navigate sustainability transitions?," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    6. Taewon Suh & Omar J. Khan & Benedikt Schnellbächer & Sven Heidenreich, 2019. "Strategic Accord And Tension For Business Model Innovation: Examining Different Tacit Knowledge Types And Open Action Strategies," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 24(04), pages 1-29, July.
    7. 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.
    8. Belussi, Fiorenza & Orsi, Luigi & Savarese, Maria, 2019. "Mapping Business Model Research: A Document Bibliometric Analysis," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 35(3).
    9. Boari, Cristina & Riboldazzi, Federico, 2014. "How knowledge brokers emerge and evolve: The role of actors’ behaviour," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(4), pages 683-695.
    10. Qingfeng Tian & Shuo Zhang & Huimin Yu & Guangming Cao, 2019. "Exploring the Factors Influencing Business Model Innovation Using Grounded Theory: The Case of a Chinese High-End Equipment Manufacturer," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-16, March.
    11. De Silva, Muthu & Howells, Jeremy & Meyer, Martin, 2018. "Innovation intermediaries and collaboration: Knowledge–based practices and internal value creation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 70-87.
    12. Raphaël Maucuer & Alexandre Renaud, 2019. "Business Model Research: A Bibliometric Analysis of Origins and Trends," Post-Print hal-01918188, HAL.
    13. Kirkels, Yvonne & Duysters, Geert, 2010. "Brokerage in SME networks," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 375-385, April.
    14. Mark Loon & Roy Chik, 2019. "Efficiency-centered, innovation-enabling business models of high tech SMEs: Evidence from Hong Kong," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 36(1), pages 87-111, March.
    15. José Antonio Belso-Martínez & Manuel Expósito-Langa & Francisco Mas-Verdú & F. Xavier Molina-Morales, 2017. "Dynamics of Brokerage Positions in Clusters: Evidence from the Spanish Foodstuffs Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-18, February.
    16. José Antonio Belso-Martínez & María José López-Sánchez & Rosario Mateu-García, 2018. "New MNE subsidiaries in old clusters: when, why, and how," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 12(2), pages 441-467, March.
    17. Emmanuel Coblence & Valérie Sabatier, 2014. "Articulating Growth and Cultural Innovation in Art Museums : The Louvre's Business Model Revision," Grenoble Ecole de Management (Post-Print) hal-01346974, HAL.
    18. Julie Le Gallo & Anne Plunket, 2016. "Technological gatekeepers, regional inventor networks and inventive performance," Working Papers hal-01422916, HAL.
    19. Run Wang & Abdella Kosa Chebo, 2021. "The Dynamics of Business Model Innovation for Technology Entrepreneurship: A Systematic Review and Future Avenue," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(3), pages 21582440211, July.
    20. Rémi Beulque & Franck Aggeri, 2015. "Circular economy at the glance of business models - learnings from automotive end-of-life - XXIVth International Conference on Strategic Management [L’économie circulaire au prisme des business mod," Post-Print hal-01168201, HAL.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • L10 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - General
    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • Q16 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - R&D; Agricultural Technology; Biofuels; Agricultural Extension Services

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa14p693. 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: Gunther Maier (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.ersa.org .

    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.