Knowledge Transfer in or Through Clusters: Outline of a Situated Approach

Part of the Advances in Spatial Science book series (ADVSPATIAL)


Clusters usually assume a dynamic of innovation at the crossroad between proximity and distance. On the one hand, proximity triggers trust and a sense of common understanding between members that allow for the transfer of knowledge, especially its tacit components. But, at the same time, the innovativeness of the cluster also depends on distance: participants from different organizations with different skills, objectives, and interests interact in a joint network. It creates a complex context for knowledge sharing, full of creative tensions and power issues.


Knowledge Transfer Structuration Theory Knowledge Creation Regional Cluster Parent Organization 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Agrawal A (2001) University-to-industry knowledge transfer: literature review and unanswered questions. Int J Manag Rev 3(4):285–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Akrich M, Callon M, Latour B (1988) A quoi tient le succès des innovations? 1: L’art de l’intéressement. Gérer Comprendre Ann Mines 11:4–17Google Scholar
  3. Alter N (2000) L'innovation ordinaire. Sociologies. Presses Universitaires de France, ParisGoogle Scholar
  4. Andersen PH (2006) Regional clusters in a global world: production relocation, innovation, and industrial decline. Calif Manage Rev 49(1):101–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Anderson ML (2003) Embodied cognition: a field guide. Artif Intell 149(1):91–130. doi: 10.1016/S0004-3702(03)00054-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Asheim BT (2003) Regional innovation policy for small-medium enterprises. Edward Elgar Pub, NorthamptonGoogle Scholar
  7. Audretsch DB, Feldman MP (1996) R&D spillovers and the geography of innovation and production. Am Econ Rev 86(3):630–640Google Scholar
  8. Baba Y, Walsh JP (2010) Embeddedness, social epistemology and breakthrough innovation: the case of the development of statins. Res Policy 39(4):511–522CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Barney JB (2001) Is the resource-based “view” a useful perspective for strategic management research? Yes. Acad Manage Rev 26(1):41–56Google Scholar
  10. Bayenet B, Capron H (2007) Les pôles de compétitivité: effet de mode ou nouveau paradigme de politique industrielle. Paper presented at the 17ème Congrès des Economistes belges de langue française, Louvain-la-Neuve, 21 et 22 novembre 2007Google Scholar
  11. Bhaskar R (1989) Reclaiming reality: a critical introduction to contemporary philosophy. Verso, LondonGoogle Scholar
  12. Boschma R (2005) Proximity and innovation: a critical assessment. Reg Stud 39(1):61–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bourdieu P (1986) The forms of capital. In: Richardson JG (ed) Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education. Greenwood Press, New York, pp 241–258Google Scholar
  14. Bozeman B (2000) Technology transfer and public policy: a review of research and theory. Res Policy 29(4–5):627–655CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Bozeman B, Corley E (2004) Scientists’ collaboration strategies: implication for scientific and technical human capital. Res Policy 33:599–616CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Breznitz S, Feldman M (2012) The larger role of the university in economic development: introduction to the special issue. J Technol Transf 37(2):135–138Google Scholar
  17. Carland JA, Carland JW, Stewart WH (1996) Seeing what’s not there: the enigma of entrepreneurship. J Small Bus Strategy 7(1):1–20Google Scholar
  18. Chazel F (1983) Pouvoir, structure et domination. Rev Francaise Sociol 24:369–393CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Child J (1997) Strategic choice in the analysis of action, structure, organizations and environment: retrospect and prospect. Organ Stud 18(1):43–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Chua WF (1986) Radical developments in accounting thought. Account Rev 61(4):601–632Google Scholar
  21. Cohen WM, Levinthal DA (1990) Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation. Adm Sci Q 35(1):128–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Coleman JS (1990) Foundations of social theory. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  23. Cook SDN, Brown JS (1999) Bridging epistemologies: the generative dance between organizational knowledge and organizational knowing. Organ Sci 10(4):381–400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Cooke P, Uranga MG, Etxebarria G (1998) Regional systems of innovation: an evolutionary perspective. Environ Plan A 30(9):1563–1584CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Dasgupta P, David PA (1994) Toward a new economics of science. Res Policy 23(5):487–521CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Davenport S, Davies J, Grimes C (1999) Collaborative research programmes: building trust from difference. Technovation 19(1):31–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Debackere K, Veugelers R (2005) The role of academic technology transfer organizations in improving industry science links. Res Policy 34(3):321–342. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2004.12.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Decrop A (1999) Qualitative research methods for the study of tourist behavior. In: Pizam A, Mansfeld Y (eds) Consumer behavior in travel and tourism. Haworth Hospitality Press, New York, pp 335–365Google Scholar
  29. Dietz JS, Bozeman B (2005) Academic careers, patents, and productivity: industry experience as scientific and technical human capital. Res Policy 34(3):349–367. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2002.01.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Diez MA (2001) The evaluation of regional innovation and cluster policies: towards a participatory approach. Eur Plann Stud 9(7):907–923CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Easterby-Smith M, Crossan M, Nicolini D (2000) Organizational learning: debates past, present and future. J Manag Stud 37(6):783–796CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Easterby-Smith M, Graça M, Antonacopoulou E, Ferdinand J (2008) Absorptive capacity: a process perspective. Manag Learn 39(5):483–501CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Edmondson AC, Nembhard IM (2009) Product development and learning in project teams: the challenges are the benefits*. J Prod Innov Manag 26(2):123–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Etzkowitz H, Leydesdorff L (2000) The dynamics of innovation: from national systems and “mode 2” to a triple helix of university-industry-government relations. Res Policy 29(2):109–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Etzkowitz H, Webster A, Healey P (1998) Capitalizing knowledge: new intersections of industry and academia. State University of New York Press, AlbanyGoogle Scholar
  36. Felin T, Foss NJ (2005) Strategic organization: a field in search of micro-foundations. Strategic Organ 3(4):441–455CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Freeman C (1992) Formal scientific and technical institutions in the national system of innovation. In: Lundvall B-Å (ed) National systems of innovation: towards a theory of innovation and interactive learning. Pinter Publishers, LondonGoogle Scholar
  38. Friedberg E (1997) Le pouvoir et la règle: dynamiques de l’action organisée Seuil, ParisGoogle Scholar
  39. Gibbons M (1994) The new production of knowledge: the dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. Sage, LondonGoogle Scholar
  40. Gibson C, Vermeulen F (2003) A healthy divide: subgroups as a stimulus for team learning behavior. Adm Sci Q 48:202–239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Giddens A (1979) Central problems in social theory: action, structure, and contradiction in social analysis. University of California Press, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  42. Giddens A (1984) The constitution of society: outline of the theory of structuration. University of California Press, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  43. Gouvernement Wallon (2005) Les actions prioritaires pour l'Avenir wallonGoogle Scholar
  44. Grabher G, Ibert O (2006) Bad company? The ambiguity of personal knowledge networks. J Econ Geogr 6(3):251–271. doi: 10.1093/Jeg/Lbi014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Grant RM (1996) Toward a knowledge-based view of the firm. Strategic Manag J 17(2):109–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Hargadon A, Fanelli A (2002) Action and possibility: reconciling dual perspectives of knowledge in organizations. Organ Sci 13(3):290–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Harmon B, Ardishvili A, Cardozo R, Elder T, Leuthold J, Parshall J, Raghian M, Smith D (1997) Mapping the university technology transfer process. J Bus Venturing 12(6):423–434CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Hermans J (2011) Knowledge transfers in university-industry R&D projects: a situated approach. University of Namur, NamurGoogle Scholar
  49. Hermans J, Castiaux A, Dejardin M, Lucas S (2012) Configuration in the flesh: challenges in publicly promoted clusters. J Technol Transf 37(5):609–630Google Scholar
  50. Hirschman AO (1970) Exit, voice, and loyalty; responses to decline in firms, organizations, and states. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  51. Hollingsworth JR (2002) On multi-level analysis. In: Hollingsworth JR, Müller KH, Hollingsworth EJ (eds) Advancing socio-economics: an institutionalist perspective. Rowman & Littlefield, LanhamGoogle Scholar
  52. Jaffe AB (1989) Real effects of academic research. Am Econ Rev 79(5):957–970Google Scholar
  53. Jiang X, Li Y (2009) An empirical investigation of knowledge management and innovative performance: the case of alliances. Res Policy 38:358–368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Jones M (1997) Structuration theory and IT. In: Currie W, Galliers B (eds) Re-thinking management information systems. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 103–135Google Scholar
  55. Jones MR, Karsten H (2008) Giddens’s structuration theory and information systems research. Mis Q 32(1):127–157Google Scholar
  56. Katz JS, Martin BR (1997) What is research collaboration? Res Policy 26(1):1–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Ketels C (2004) European clusters. In: Innovative city and business regions, vol. 3. Structural change in Europe. Hagbarth Publications, BollschweilGoogle Scholar
  58. Kogut B, Zander U (1992) Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology. Organ Sci 3(3):383–397CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Kogut B, Zander U (1996) What firms do? Coordination, identity, and learning. Organ Sci 7(5):502–518CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Landry R, Amara N (1998) The impact of transaction costs on the institutional structuration of collaborative academic research. Res Policy 27(9):901–913CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Lawrence TB, Hardy C, Phillips N (2002) Institutional effects of interorganizational collaboration: the emergence of proto-institutions. Acad Manage J 45(1):281–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Lawrence TB, Mauws MK, Dyck B, Kleysen RF (2005) The politics of organizational learning: integrating power into the 4I framework. Acad Manage Rev 30(1):180–191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Leonard-Barton D (1990) A dual methodology for case studies: synergistic of a longitudinal single site with replicated multiple sites. Organ Sci 1(3):248–266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Leydesdorff L (2005) The triple helix model and the study of knowledge-based innovation systems. Int J Contemp Sociol 42(1):1–16Google Scholar
  65. Link AN, Rothaermel FT, Siegel DS (1998) University technology transfer: an introduction to the special issue. IEEE Trans Eng Manag 55(1)Google Scholar
  66. Lockett A, Thompson S (2001) The resource-based view and economics. J Manag 27(6):723–754CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Lorenzen M, Foss N (2003) Coordination, institutions, and clusters: an exploratory discussion. In: Fornahl D, Brenner T (eds) Cooperation, networks, and institutions in regional innovation systems. E. Elgar, CheltenhamGoogle Scholar
  68. Lubatkin M, Florin J, Lane P (2001) Learning together and apart: a model of reciprocal interfirm learning. Hum Relat 54:1353–1382Google Scholar
  69. Lundvall B-Å (1992) National systems of innovation: towards a theory of innovation and interactive learning. Pinter Publishers, LondonGoogle Scholar
  70. Luukkonen T (1998) The difficulties in assessing the impact of EU framework programmes. Res Policy 27(6):599–610CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Maskell P (2001) Towards a knowledge-based theory of the geographical cluster. Ind Corporate Change 10(4):921–943CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Meyer-Krahmer F, Schmoch U (1998) Science-based technologies: university-industry interactions in four fields. Res Policy 27(8):835–851CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Mintzberg H (1983) Power in and around organizations. Prentice Hall, Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar
  74. Morgeson FP, Hofmann DA (1999) The structure and function of collective constructs: implications for multilevel research and theory development. Acad Manage Rev 24:249–265Google Scholar
  75. Nahapiet J, Ghoshal S (1998) Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage. Acad Manage Rev 23(2):242–266Google Scholar
  76. Nelson RR (1993) National innovation systems: a comparative analysis. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  77. Nizet J (2007) La sociologie d’Anthony Giddens. Repères. La Découverte, ParisGoogle Scholar
  78. Nonaka I, Toyama R, Konno N (2000) SECI, ba and leadership: a unified model of dynamic knowledge creation. Long Range Plann 33(1):5–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Nonaka I, Takeuchi H (1995) The knowledge-creating company: how Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  80. Nooteboom B (1994) Innovation and diffusion in small firms—theory and evidence. Small Bus Econ 6(5):327–347CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Nooteboom B (2000) Learning and innovation in organizations and economies. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  82. Orlikowski WJ (1992) The duality of technology—rethinking the concept of technology in organizations. Organ Sci 3(3):398–427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Orlikowski WJ (2000) Using technology and constituting structures: a practice lens for studying technology in organizations. Organ Sci 11(4):404–428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Orlikowski WJ (2002) Knowing in practice: enacting a collective capability in distributed organizing. Organ Sci 13(3):249–273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Orlikowski WJ, Baroudi JJ (1991) Studying information technology in organizations: research approaches and assumptions. Inf Syst Res 2:1–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Phillips N, Lawrence TB, Hardy C (2000) Inter-organizational collaboration and the dynamics of institutional fields. J Manag Stud 37(1):23–43Google Scholar
  87. Ponds R, van Oort F, Frenken K (2007) The geographical and institutional proximity of research collaboration. Pap Regional Sci 86(3):423–443CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Porter ME (1998) On competition. The Harvard business review book series. Harvard Business School Publishing, BostonGoogle Scholar
  89. Pozzebon M (2004) The influence of a structurationist view on strategic management research. J Manag Stud 41(2):247–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Pozzebon M, Pinsonneault A (2005) Challenges in conducting empirical work using structuration theory: learning from IT research. Organ Stud 26(9):1353–1376. doi: 10.1177/0170840605054621 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Reinhardt R, Bornemann M, Pawlowsky P, Schneider U (2001) Intellectual capital and knowledge management. In: Dierkes M, Child J, Nonaka I (eds) Handbook of organizational learning and knowledge. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 775–793Google Scholar
  92. Ring PS, Van de Ven AH (1992) Structuring cooperative relationships between organizations. Strategic Manag J 13(7):483–498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Ring PS, Van de Ven AH (1994) Developmental processes of cooperative interorganizational relationships. Acad Manage Rev 19(1):90–118Google Scholar
  94. Rose J (2000) Evaluating the contribution of structuration theory to the information systems discipline. In: Proceeding of ECIT, pp 910–924Google Scholar
  95. Santoro MD, Saparito PA (2003) The firm’s trust in its university partner as a key mediator in advancing knowledge and new technologies. IEEE Trans Eng Manag 50(3):362–373. doi: 10.1109/Tem.2003.817287 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Sewell WL (1992) Toward a theory of structure: duality, agency, and transformation. Am J Sociol 98(1):1–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Spender JC (1996) Making knowledge the basis of a dynamic theory of the firm. Strategic Manag J 17:45–62Google Scholar
  98. Suchman LA (2007) Human-machine reconfigurations: plans and situated actions. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  99. Sydow J, Lerch F, Huxham C, Hibbert P (2011) A silent cry for leadership: organizing for leading (in)clusters. Leadersh Q 22:328–343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Sydow J, Windeler A (1998) Organizing and evaluating interfirm networks: a structurationist perspective on network processes and effectiveness. Organ Sci 9(3):265–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Tenkasi RV, Boland RJ (1993) Locating meaning making in organizational learning: the narrative basis of cognition. Res Org Change Dev 7:77–103Google Scholar
  102. Tywoniak SA (2007) Knowledge in four deformation dimensions. Organization 14(1):53–76. doi: 10.1177/1350508407071860 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. Van de Ven AH (1992) Suggestions for studying strategy process—a research note. Strategic Manag J 13:169–188Google Scholar
  104. Van der Vegt GS, de Jong SB, Bunderson JS, Molleman E (2010) Power asymmetry and learning in teams: the moderating role of performance feedback. Organ Sci 21(2):347–361 (orsc. 1090.0452 v1091)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Varga A (2002) Knowledge transfers from universities to the regional economy: a review of the literature. In: Varga A, Szerb L (eds) Innovation, entrepreneurship and regional economic development: international experiences and Hungarian challenges. University of Pécs Press, Pecs, pp 147–171Google Scholar
  106. von Krogh G, Roos J (eds) (1996) Managing knowledge: perspectives on cooperation and competition. Sage, LondonGoogle Scholar
  107. Whittington R (1992) Putting Giddens into action—social-systems and managerial agency. J Manag Stud 29(6):693–712CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Yin RK (1994) Case study research: design and methods. Applied social research methods series, vol 5, 2nd edn. Sage, LondonGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The Centre for Research in Regional Economics and Economic Policy (CERPE)University of NamurNamurBelgium

Personalised recommendations