![Sample our Geography journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5937/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Geography.jpg"})
Abstract
Levy R. and Talbot D. Control by proximity: evidence from the ‘Aerospace Valley’ competitiveness cluster, Regional Studies. This paper is concerned with the links that exist between the control of inter-organizational relationships and effects of proximity. It proposes a theoretical framework that explains how geographical and organizational proximities reinforce formal and informal control mechanisms. This framework is then used to analyse mechanisms of control by proximity in a French aerospace cluster. It is observed that formal and informal control is concentrated in a small number of groups located near the majority of the establishments' members of the cluster. It is also shown that informal control mechanisms require a stronger geographical proximity than formal control mechanisms in order to operate.
Levy R. and Talbot D. 藉由邻近性控制：来自“航空谷”竞争集群的证据，区域研究。本文考量存在于控制跨组织关係与邻近性效应之间的关联。本文并提出一个解释地理和组织的邻近性如何强化正式与非正式控制机制的理论框架。此一框架随后将用来分析一个法国航空集群中藉由邻近性控制的机制。本研究观察到，正式与非正式的控制集中于坐落在邻近大部份集群创立成员的少数团体之中。研究亦显示，非正式控制机制较正式控制机制而言，必须有较为显着的地理邻近性以进行运作。
Levy R. et Talbot D. Le contrôle par moyen de la proximité: des preuves auprès du pôle de compétitivité ‘Aerospace Valley’, Regional Studies. Cet article aborde la question des liens qui existent entre le contrôle des relations interorganisationnelles et les effets de proximité. On propose un cadre théorique qui explique comment la proximité géographique et organisationnelle renforce les mécanismes de contrôle formels et informels. On emploie ce cadre pour analyser les mécanismes de contrôle dans un pôle de compétitivité aérospatiale en fonction de la proximité. Il est à constater que le contrôle formel et informel est concentré dans un petit nombre de groupes situés près de la plupart des membres du pôle. On démontre aussi que les mécanismes de contrôle informels nécessitent une proximité géographique plus forte que les mécanismes de contrôle formels afin de fonctionner.
Levy R. und Talbot D. Kontrolle durch Nähe: Belege aus dem Wettbewerbs-Cluster des ‘Aerospace Valley’, Regional Studies. Thema dieses Artikels sind die Verknüpfungen zwischen der Kontrolle von interorganisationellen Beziehungen und den Auswirkungen von Nähe. Wir entwickeln einen theoretischen Rahmen zur Klärung der Frage, wie eine geografische und organisationelle Nähe formelle und informelle Kontrollmechanismen verstärkt. Anschließend analysieren wir mit Hilfe dieses Rahmens die Mechanismen der Kontrolle durch Nähe in einem französischen Luft-und-Raumfahrt-Cluster. Wir beobachten, dass sich die formelle und informelle Kontrolle in einer kleinen Anzahl von Gruppen konzentriert, die in der Nähe der meisten zum Cluster gehörenden Unternehmen angesiedelt sind. Ebenso zeigen wir, dass zum Funktionieren von informellen Kontrollmechanismen eine größere geografische Nähe erforderlich ist als für formelle Kontrollmechanismen.
Levy R. y Talbot D. Control a través de la proximidad: evidencia de la aglomeración de competitividad ‘Aerospace Valley’, Regional Studies. Este artículo trata sobre los vínculos que existen entre el control de las relaciones interorganizativas y los efectos de proximidad. Proponemos un marco teórico para explicar el modo en que las proximidades geográficas y organizativas refuerzan los mecanismos de control formal e informal. Utilizamos luego este marco para analizar los mecanismos de control mediante la proximidad en una aglomeración aeroespacial francesa. Observamos que el control formal e informal está concentrado en un pequeño número de grupos situados cerca de la mayoría de los miembros de la aglomeración de establecimientos. Mostramos también que para poder funcionar, los mecanismos de control informal requieren una proximidad geográfica más sólida que los mecanismos del control formal.
Notes
1. The French public policy towards competitiveness clusters will be presented in the second section.
2. More generally, for a critical review of the literature on research into management control systems, cf. Chenhall (Citation2003).
3. Trust is used here in both its usual meanings (Dupuy and Torre, Citation2001): trust towards another and trust in the fact that one's expectations will be met in future.
4. This figure, like all others presented in this introductory paragraph on the Aerospace Valley, is taken from the Aerospace Valley competitiveness cluster performance indicators published by the Inter-ministerial Delegation for Regional Planning and Competitiveness in 2009 and available on the competitiveness clusters website (http://competitivite.gouv.fr).
5. In the case where two establishments work together within the framework of several collaborative projects but within the same SBU, these relationships are considered to be different and they are thus counted separately for the calculation of the weighting of the different forms of proximity and of the density of the network.
6. For more detail on the content of these perceptions in the aerospace industry, cf. Frigant and Talbot (Citation2005).
7. For more details concerning these categories, see http://www.insee.fr/fr/methodes/.
8. An urban area is defined as:
a group of communes, geographically contiguous and without any enclaves, consisting of an urban centre with more than 10,000 jobs, and of rural communes or urban units (peri-urban zone) of which at least 40% of the resident working population works in the urban centre or in communes attracted by it.
(INSEE, 2011; see http://www.insee.fr/fr/methodes/)
9. Centrality of degree is defined as:
where d(i) represents the degree, i.e. the number of links of an individual i in the network; and n is the number of individuals in the network.
10. Betweenness centrality is defined as:
where njh is the number of geodesics linking the individuals j and h; and njh (i) is the number of geodesics (minimum links) linking the individuals j and h involving the individual i, with i ≠ j ≠ h.
11. This methodology for measuring the two forms of control – formal and informal – as well as the information that is presented afterwards concerning the management of the SBUs was validated through interviews. These interviews were carried out between September 2008 and February 2010 as part of a research contract co-financed by the Aquitaine and Midi-Pyrénées Regions whose aim was to analyse organizational changes in the regional aerospace supply chain. In total, 38 interviews were carried out with companies, research laboratories and local authorities that support innovation. Carried out in a semi-directive fashion, these interviews were performed with people who are responsible for different SBUs. These interviewees were generally senior managers from major groups (Airbus, Thales, Safran) made available for the occasion. The interviews provided the opportunity to collect concrete data concerning formal control. The aim was to understand what were the formal control mechanisms set up (objectives, procedures, schedule, rules for evaluation) by these senior managers. Beyond the description of the tools, interviewing offers the advantage of being able to evaluate, by comparison and cross-referencing of the information collected, the effectiveness and intensity of their use. Fuller information concerning these results has been given by Gilly et al. (Citation2011).
12. With the exception of the ASOI SBU, which is highly specialized in the space industry and which is itself historically highly concentrated on Toulouse. On this last point, cf. Dupuy and Gilly (Citation1999).
13. For similar results in the global navigation satellite systems (GNSS) industry, cf. Vicente et al. (Citation2011).