Innovation, knowledge and relations – on the role of clusters for firms’ innovativeness

References

• Ai, C.-H., & Wu, H.-C. (2016). Where does the source of external knowledge come from? A case of the Shanghai ICT chip industrial cluster in China. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 29(2), 150–175. doi: 10.1108/jocm-04-2015-0056
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Al-Laham, A., Tzabbar, D., & Amburgey, T. L. (2011). The dynamics of knowledge stocks and knowledge flows: Innovation consequences of recruitment and collaboration in biotech. Industrial and Corporate Change, 20(2), 555–583. doi: 10.1093/icc/dtr001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Artz, K. W., Norman, P. M., Hatfield, D. E., & Cardinal, L. B. (2010). A longitude study of the impact of R&D, patents, and product innovation on firm performance. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 27(5), 725–740. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-5885.2010.00747.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arundel, A., & Smith, K. (2013). History of the community innovation survey. In F. Gault (Ed.), Handbook of innovation indicators and measures (pp. 60–87). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Aschhoff, B., Crass, D., Doherr, T., Hud, M., Hünermund, P., Iferd, Y., … Schwiebacher, F. (2014). Dokumentation zur Innovationserhebung 2013. Mannheim: ZEW.
   Google Scholar
• Aslesen, H. W., & Isaksen, A. (2016). Clusters initiatives, open innovation and knowledge bases. In R. Shearmu, C. Carrincazeaux, & D. Doloreux (Eds.), Handbook on the geographies of innovation (pp. 155–168). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Bahlmann, M. D., & Huysman, M. H. (2008). The emergence of a knowledge-based view of clusters and its implications for cluster governance. The Information Society, 24(5), 304–318. doi: 10.1080/01972240802356075
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Balland, P.-A., Boschma, R., & Frenken, K. (2015). Proximity and innovation: From statics to dynamics. Regional Studies, 49(6), 907–920. doi: 10.1080/00343404.2014.883598
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bathelt, H. (2004). Toward a multidimensional conception of clusters: The case of the Leipzig media industry, Germany. In D. Power & A. J. Scott (Eds.), Cultural industries and the production of culture (pp. 147–168). London, New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Bathelt, H. (2008). Knowledge-based clusters: Regional multiplier models and the role of ‘buzz’ and ‘pipelines’. In C. Karlsson (Ed.), Handbook of research on cluster theory (pp. 78–91). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Bathelt, H., & Glückler, J. (2011). The relational economy. Geographies of knowing and learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bathelt, H., Malmberg, A., & Maskell, P. (2004). Clusters and knowledge: Local buzz, global pipelines and the process of knowledge creation. Progress in Human Geography, 28(1), 31–56. doi: 10.1191/0309132504ph469oa
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bathelt, H., & Taylor, M. (2002). Clusters, power and place: Inequality and local growth in time-space. Geografiska Annaler B: Human Geography, 84(2), 93–109. doi: 10.1111/j.0435-3684.2002.00116.x
   Google Scholar
• Bathelt, H., & Turi, P. (2011). Local, global and virtual buzz: The importance of face-to-face contact in economic interaction and possibilities to go beyond. Geoforum; Journal of Physical, Human, and Regional Geosciences, 42(5), 520–529. doi: 10.1016/j.geoforum.2011.04.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bausch, A., & Rosenbusch, N. (2006). Innovation und Unternehmenserfolg: Eine meta-analytische Untersuchung. Die Unternehmung, 60(2), 125–140.
   Google Scholar
• Beaudry, C., & Schiffauerova, A. (2009). Who's right, Marshall or Jacobs? The localization versus urbanization debate. Research Policy, 38(2), 318–337. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2008.11.010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beaudry, C., & Swann, P. (2009). Firm growth in industrial clusters of the United Kingdom. Small Business Economics, 32(1–2), 409–424. doi: 10.1007/s11187-007-9083-9
   Google Scholar
• Bloom, N., Draca, M., Kretschmer, T., & Sadun, R. (2010). The economic impact of ICT. Lodon: Centre for Economic Performance.
   Google Scholar
• Boschma, R. A. (2005). Proximity and innovation: A critical review. Regional Studies, 39(1), 61–74. doi: 10.1080/0034340052000320887
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boschma, R. A., & Frenken, K. (2006). Why is economic geography not an elvolutionary sicence? Towards an evolutionary economic geography. Journal of Economic Geography, 6(3), 273–302. doi: 10.1093/jeg/lbi022
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boschma, R. A., & Frenken, K. (2010). The spatial evolution of innovation networks: A proximity perspective. In R. Boschma & R. Martin (Eds.), The handbook of evolutionary economic geography (pp. 120–135). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Boschma, R. A., & Frenken, K. (2011). The emerging empirics of evolutionary economic geography. Journal of Economic Geography, 11(2), 295–307. doi: 10.1093/jeg/lbq053
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boschma, R. A., & Iammarino, S. (2009). Related variety, trade linkages, and regional growth in Italy. Economic Geography, 85(3), 289–311. doi: 10.1111/j.1944-8287.2009.01034.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boschma, R. A., & Ter Wal, A. L. J. (2007). Knowledge networks and innovative performance in an industrial district: The case of footwear district in the South of Italy. Industry and Innovation, 14(2), 177–199. doi: 10.1080/13662710701253441
   Google Scholar
• Boshuizen, J. (2009). Join the club! Knowledge spillovers and the influence of social networks on firm performance. Enschede: CSTM/Universiteit Twente.
   Google Scholar
• Broekel, T., & Boschma, R. (2012). Knowledge networks in the Dutch aviation industry: The proximity paradox. Journal of Economic Geography, 12(2), 409–433. doi: 10.1093/jeg/lbr010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brunswicker, S., & Vanhaverbeke, W. (2015). Open innovation in small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs): external knowledge sourcing strategies and internal organizational facilitators. Journal of Small Business Management, 53(4), 1241–1263. doi: 10.1111/jsbm.12120
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Camisón, C., & Forés, B. (2008). The effect of absorptive capacity and organisational learning capacity on performance: The mediating role of innovation capacity. Paper presented at the Paper presented at the 9th International CINet Conference “Radical Challenges in Innovation Management”, Valencia, Spain. Retrieved from http://www.continuous-innovation.net/Members_Only/Publications/Papers_9th/camison_fores_cinet2008.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Camisón, C., & Forés, B. (2010). Knowledge absorptive capacity: New insights for its conceptualization and measurement. Journal of Business Research, 63(7), 707–715. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2009.04.022
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caniëls, M. C. J., & Romijn, H. A. (2005). What drives innovativeness in industrial clusters? Transcending the debate. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 29(4), 497–515. doi: 10.1093/cje/bei018
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cantner, U., Conti, E., & Meder, A. (2010). Networks and innovation: The role of social assets in explaining firms’ innovative capacity. European Planning Studies, 18(12), 1937–1956. doi: 10.1080/09654313.2010.515795
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Capaldo, A., & Petruzezelli, A. M. (2014). Partner geographic and organizational proximity and the innovative performance of knowledge-creating alliances. European Management Journal, 11(1), 63–84. doi: 10.1111/emre.12024
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Capello, R. (2011). Spatial transfer of knowledge - preconditions of collective learning processes. In H. Pechlaner, M. Bachinger, & E. Fischer (Eds.), Kooperative Kernkompetenzen (pp. 146–170). Wiesbaden: Gabler.
   Google Scholar
• Capello, R., & Faggian, A. (2005). Collective learning and relational capital in local innovation processes. Regional Studies, 39(1), 75–87. doi: 10.1080/0034340052000320851
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carlo, J. L., Lyytinen, K., & Rose, G. M. (2012). A knowledge-based model of radical innovation in small software firms. MIS Quarterley, 36(3), 865–895. doi: 10.2307/41703484
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cassi, L., & Plunket, A. (2014). Proximity, network formation and inventive performance: In search of the proximity paradox. The Annals of Regional Science, 53(2), 395–422. doi:10.1007/s00168-014-0612-6) doi: 10.1007/s00168-014-0612-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chesbrough, H. W. (2003). Open innovation: The new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
   Google Scholar
• Chesbrough, H. W. (2006). Open innovation: A new paradigm for understanding industrial innovation. In H. W. Chesbrough, W. Vanhaverbeke, & J. West (Eds.), Open innovation. Researching a new paradigm (Reprinted ed., pp. 1–12). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Chesbrough, H. W., & Bogers, M. (2014). Explicating open innovation. Clarifying an emerging paradigm for understanding innovation. In H. Chesbrough, W. Vanhaverbeke, & J. West (Eds.), New frontiers in open innovation (pp. 3–28). New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Chin, W. W. (1998). The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. In G. A. Marcoulides (Ed.), Modern methods for business research (pp. 295–336). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. L. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1, Special Issue: Technology, Organizations and Innovation), 128–152. doi: 10.2307/2393553
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cole, M. S., Bedeian, A. G., & Feild, H. S. (2006). The measurement equivalence of web-based and paper-and-pencil measures of transformational leadership: A multinational test. Organizational Research Methods, 9(3), 339–368. doi: 10.1177/1094428106287434
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cooke, P., Laurentis, C., Tödtling, F., & Trippl, M. (2007). Regional knowledge economies: Markets, clusters and innovation. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• de Jong, J. P. J., & Freel, M. (2010). Absorptive capacity and the reach of collaboration in high technology small firms. Research Policy, 39(1), 47–54. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2009.10.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Leeuw, E. D., & Hox, J. J. (2011). Internet survey as part of a mixed-mode design. In M. Das, P. Ester, & L. Kaczmirek (Eds.), Social and behavioral research and the internet: Advances in applied methods and research strategies (pp. 45–76). New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Delgado, M., Porter, M. E., & Stern, S. (2010). Clusters and entrepreneurship. Journal of Economic Geography, 10(4), 495–518. doi: 10.1093/jeg/lbq010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ding, R., Dekker, H. C., & Groot, T. (2013). Risk, partner selection and contractual control in interfirm relationships. Management Accounting Research, 24(2), 140–155. doi: 10.1016/j.mar.2013.04.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dosi, G. (1982). Technological paradigms and technological trajectories: A suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change. Research Policy, 11(1982), 147–162. doi: 10.1016/0048-7333(82)90016-6
   Google Scholar
• Dosi, G. (1988). Sources, procedures and micoreconomic effects of innovation. Journal of Economic Literature, 26(3), 1120–1171.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duschek, S. (2004). Inter-firm ressources and sustained competitive advantage. Management Revue, 15(1), 53–73. doi: 10.5771/0935-9915-2004-1-53
   Google Scholar
• Dyer, J. H., & Chu, W. (2011). The determinants of trust in supplier-automaker relationships in the US, Japan, and Korea. Journal of International Business Studies, 42(1), 10–27. doi: 10.1057/jibs.2010.34
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dyer, J. H., & Kale, P. (2007). Relational capabilities: Drivers and IMPLICATIONS. In C. E. Helfat, S. Finkelstein, W. Mitchell, M. A. Peteraf, H. Singh, D. J. Teece, & S. G. Winter (Eds.), Dynamic capabilities (pp. 65–79). Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub.
   Google Scholar
• Dyer, J. H., & Singh, H. (1998). The relational view: Cooperative strategy and sources of interorganizational competitive advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 660–679. doi: 10.5465/amr.1998.1255632
   Google Scholar
• Escribano, A., Fosfurib, A., & Tribób, J. A. (2009). Managing external knowledge flows: The moderating role of absorptive capacity. Research Policy, 38(1), 96–105. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2008.10.022
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Esposito Vinzi, V., Trinchera, L., & Amato, S. (2010). PLS path modeling: From foundations to recent developments and open issues for model assessment and improvement. In V. Esposito Vinzi, W. W. Chin, J. Henseler, & H. Wang (Eds.), Handbook of partial least squares (pp. 47–82). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. (2011). The 2011 EU industrial R&D investment scoreboard. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
   Google Scholar
• Eurostat. (2013a). Structural business statistics > SBS services > SMEs - annual detailed enterprise statistic by size class > Services by employment size class (NACE Rev. 2 H-N, S95) (sbs_sc_1b_se_r2). Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/structural-business-statistics/data/database
   Google Scholar
• Eurostat. (2013b). Structural business statistics > SBS regional data – all activities > SBS data by NTUS2-regions and NACE Rev. 2 (sbs_r_nuts06_r2). Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/structural-business-statistics/data/database
   Google Scholar
• Fitjar, R. D., & Huber, F. (2015). Global pipelines for innovation: Insights from the case of Norway. Journal of Economic Geography, 15(3), 561–583. doi: 10.1093/jeg/lbu017
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fitjar, R. D., & Rodríguez-Pose, A. (2011). When local interaction does not suffice: Sources of firm innovation in urban Norway. Environment and Planning A, 43(6), 1248–1267. doi: 10.1068/a43516
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fitjar, R. D., & Rodríguez-Pose, A. (2013). Firm collaboration and modes of innovation in Norway. Research Policy, 42(1), 128–138. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2012.05.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flatten, T. C., Engelen, A., Zahra, S. A., & Brettel, M. (2011). A measure of absorptive capacity: Scale development and validation. European Management Journal, 29(2), 98–116. doi: 10.1016/j.emj.2010.11.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frenken, K., Cefis, E., & Stam, E. (2015). Industrial dynamics and clusters: A survey. Regional Studies, 49(1), 10–27. doi: 10.1080/00343404.2014.904505
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frenken, K., van Oort, F., & Verburg, T. (2007). Related variety, unrelated variety and regional economic growth. Regional Studies, 41(5), 685–697. doi: 10.1080/00343400601120296
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fu, W. G., Schiller, D., & Revilla Diez, J. (2012). Strategies for using social proximity and organizational proximity in product innovation. Empirical insights from the Pearl River Delta. China. Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftsgeographie, 56(1–2), 80–96.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garbade, P. J. P., Omta, S. W. F., & Fortuin, F. T. J. M. (2016). The interplay of structural and relational governance in innovation alliances. Journal on Chain and Network Science, 16(2), 117–134. doi: 10.3920/JCNS2014.x016
   Google Scholar
• Gertler, M. S., & Wolfe, D. A. (2008). Spaces of knowledge flows: Clusters in global context. In B. T. Asheim, P. Cooke & R. Martin (Eds.), Clusters and regional development (Repr. ed., pp. 218–235). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Giuliani, E. (2007). The selective nature of knowledge networks in clusters: Evidence from the wine industry. Journal of Economic Geography, 7(2), 139–168. doi: 10.1093/jeg/lbl014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Giuliani, E. (2008). What drives innovative output in emerging clusters? Evidence from the wine industry. SPRU Electronic Working Papers, University of Sussex, Sussex.
   Google Scholar
• Giuliani, E. (2013). Network dynamics in regional clusters: Evidence from Chile. Research Policy, 42(8), 1406–1419. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2013.04.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gómez Vieites, Á, & Calvo González, J. L. (2012). A study of innovation activities in software and computer services companies. Management, 2(3), 49–58. doi: 10.5923/j.mm.20120203.01
   Google Scholar
• Gordon, I. R., & McCann, P. (2005). Clusters, innovation and regional development: An analysis of current theories and evidence. In C. Karlsson, B. Johansson & R. R. Stough (Eds.), Industrial clusters and inter-firm networks (pp. 29–57). Cheltenham: Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Grant, R. M. (1996). Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17 (Winter Special Issue), 109–122. doi: 10.1002/smj.4250171110
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grant, R. M. (2002). The knowledge-based view of the firm. In C. W. Choo & N. Bontis (Eds.), The strategic management of intellectual capital and organizationel knowledge (pp. 133–148). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Grant, R. M., & Baden-Fuller, C. (2004). A knowledge accessing theory of strategic alliances. Journal of Management Studies, 41(1), 61–84. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6486.2004.00421.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grillitsch, M., & Trippl, M. (2014). Combining knowledge from different sources, channels and geographical scales. European Planning Studies, 22(11), 2305–2325. doi: 10.1080/09654313.2013.835793
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grossetti, M. (2008). Proximities and embedding effects. European Planning Studies, 16(5), 629–642. doi: 10.1080/09654310802049133
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hagedoorn, J., & Zobel, A.-K. (2015). The role of contracts and intellectual property rights in open innovation. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 27(9), 1050–1067. doi: 10.1080/09537325.2015.1056134
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2017). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) (Second Edition ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2011). PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet. The Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 19(2), 139–152. doi: 10.2753/MTP1069-6679190202
   Google Scholar
• Hair, J. F., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., & Mena, J. A. (2012). An assessment of the use of partial least squares structural equation modeling in marketing research. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 40(3), 414–433. doi: 10.1007/s11747-011-0261-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hashi, I., & Stojčić, N. (2013). The impact of innovation activities on firm performance using a multi-stage model: Evidence from the community innovation survey 4. Research Policy, 42(2), 353–366. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2012.09.011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henseler, J., & Fassott, G. (2010). Testing moderating effects in PLS path models: An illustration of available procedures. In V. E. Vinzi, W. W. Chin, J. Henseler, & H. Wang (Eds.), Handbook of partial least squares (pp. 713–735). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115–135. doi: 10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sinkovics, R. R. (2009). The use of partial least squares path modeling in international marketing. Advances in International Marketing, 20, 277–319.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henttonen, K., Hurmelinna-Laukkanen, P., & Ritala, P. (2016). Managing the appropriability of R&D collaboration. R&D Management, 46(S1), 145–158. doi: 10.1111/radm.12121
   Google Scholar
• Hervás-Oliver, J.-L. (2011). When and why companies benefit from collocation in clusters? Paper presented at the DRUID Conference 2011 ‘NNNOVATION, STRATEGY, and STRUCTURE - Organizations, Institutions, Systems and Regions’, Copenhagen, Denmark. Retrieved from http://druid8.sit.aau.dk/druid/acc_papers/5r4exnutme5odliu3lby0tscfrn5.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Hervás-Oliver, J.-L., & Albors-Garrigós, J. (2009). The role of the firm’s internal and relational capabilities in clusters: When distance and embeddedness are not enough to explain innovation. Journal of Economic Geography, 9(2), 263–283. doi: 10.1093/jeg/lbn033
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hervás-Oliver, J.-L., Sempere-Ripoll, F., Rojas, A. R., & Estelles-Miguel, S. (2017). Agglomerations and firm performance: Who benefits and how much? Regional Studies, 1–12. doi10.1080/00343404.2017.1297895
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang, F., & Rice, J. (2013). Does open innovation work better in regional clusters? Australasian Journal of Regional Studies, 19(1), 85–120.
   Google Scholar
• Huber, F. (2012a). Do clusters really matter for innovation practices in information technology? Questioning the significance of technological knowledge spillovers. Journal of Economic Geography, 12(1), 107–126. doi: 10.1093/jeg/lbq058
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huber, F. (2012b). On the role and interrelationship of spatial, social and cognitive proximity: Personal knowledge relationships of R&D workers in the Cambridge information technology cluster. Regional Studies, 46(9), 1169–1182. doi: 10.1080/00343404.2011.569539
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hughes, M., & Morgan, R. E. (2007). Deconstructing the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and business performance at the embryonic stage of firm growth. Industrial Marketing Management, 36(5), 651–661. doi: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2006.04.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hult, T. G., Hurley, R. F., & Knight, G. A. (2004). Innovativeness: Its antecedents and impact on business performance. Industrial Marketing Management, 33(5), 429–438. doi: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2003.08.015
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Iammarino, S., & McCann, P. (2006). The structure and evolution of industrial clusters: Transactions, technology and knowledge spillovers. Research Policy, 35(7), 1018–1036. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2006.05.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jansen, J. J. P., Van Den Bosch, F. A. J., & Volberda, W. H. (2005). Managing potential and realized absorptive capacity: How do organizational antecedents matter? Academy of Management Journal, 48(6), 999–1015. doi: 10.5465/amj.2005.19573106
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jansen, J. J. P., van Den Bosch, F. A. J., & Volberda, H. W. (2006). Exploratory innovation, exploitative innovation, and performance: Effects of organizational antecedents and environmental moderators. Management Science, 52(11), 1661–1674. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.1060.0576
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jimenez, B., Angelov, B., & Rao, B. (2012). Service absorptive capacity: Its evolution and implications for innovation. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 3(2), 142–163. doi: 10.1007/s13132-011-0078-z
   Google Scholar
• Jiménez, K. P., & Junquera, B. (2010). Why are clusters beneficial?: A review of the literature. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries, 20(2), 161–173. doi: 10.1002/hfm.20207
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jiménez-Jiménez, D., & Sanz-Valle, R. (2011). Innovation, organizational learning, and performance. Journal of Business Research, 64(4), 408–417. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2010.09.010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karaev, A., Koh, L. S. C., & Szamosi, L. T. (2007). The cluster approach and SME competitiveness: A review. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 18(7), 818–835. doi: 10.1108/17410380710817273
   Google Scholar
• Karlsson, C., Maier, G., Trippl, M., Schiedschlag, I., Owen, R., & Murphy, G. (2010). ICT and regional economic dynamics: A literature review. In A. de Panizza & M. Bogdanowicz (Eds.), JRC scientific and technical reports (Series Ed., pp. 1–97). Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
   Google Scholar
• Kiese, M. (2008). Cluster approaches to local economic development: Conceptual remarks and case studies from Lower Saxony, Germany. In U. Blien & G. Maier (Eds.), The economics of regional clusters (pp. 265–299). Cheltenham: Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Koellinger, P. (2008). The relationship between technology, innovation, and firm performance—empirical evidence from e-business in Europe. Research Policy, 37(8), 1317–1328. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2008.04.024
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kogut, B., & Zander, U. (1992). Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology. Organization Science, 3(3), 383–397. doi: 10.1287/orsc.3.3.383
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kukalis, S. (2010). Agglomeration economies and firm performance: The case of industry clusters. Journal of Management, 36(2), 453–481. doi: 10.1177/0149206308329964
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Laursen, K., & Salter, A. (2006). Open for innovation: The role of openness in explaining innovation performance among U.K. Manufacturing firms. Strategic Management Journal, 27(2), 131–150. doi: 10.1002/smj.507
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Laursen, K., & Salter, A. J. (2014). The paradox of openness: Appropriability, external search and collaboration. Research Policy, 43(5), 867–878. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2013.10.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lavie, D. (2006). The competitive advantage of interconnected firms: An extension of the resource-based view. Academy of Management Journal, 31(3), 638–658.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, R., Lee, J.-H., & Garrett, T. C. (2017). Synergy effects of innovation on firm performance. Journal of Business Research, Article in press. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.08.032
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lengyel, B. (2012). The Hungarian ICT sector: A comparative CEE perspective with special emphasis on structural change. In P. J. J. Welfens (Ed.), Clusters in automotive and information & communication technology (pp. 113–134). Heidelberg, New York: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• LeSage, J. P., & Fischer, M. M. (2012). Estimates of the impact of static and dynamic knowledge spillovers on regional factor productivity. International Regional Science Review, 35(1), 103–127. doi: 10.1177/0160017611407767
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levy, R., & Talbot, D. (2015). Control by proximity: Evidence from the ‘Aerospace Valley’ competitiveness cluster. Regional Studies, 49(6), 955–972. doi: 10.1080/00343404.2013.840721
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lew, Y. K., & Sinkovics, R. R. (2013). Crossing borders and industry sectors: Behavioral governance in strategic alliances and product innovation for competitive advantage. Long Range Planning, 46(1–2), 13–38. doi: 10.1016/j.lrp.2012.09.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lichtenthaler, U. (2009). Absorptive capacity, environmental turbulence, and the complementarity of organizational learning processes. Technovation, 52(4), 822–846.
   Google Scholar
• Lippoldt, D., & Stryszowski, P. (2009). Innovation in the software sector. Paris: OECD.
   Google Scholar
• Liu, C.-L., Ghauri, P. N., & Sinkovics, R. R. (2010). Understanding the impact of relational capital and organizational learning on alliance outcomes. Journal of World Business, 45(3), 237–249. doi: 10.1016/j.jwb.2009.09.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lumineau, F., & Malhotra, D. (2011). Shadow of the contract: How contract structure shapes interfirm dispute resolution. Strategic Management Journal, 32(5), 532–555. doi: 10.1002/smj.890
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maine, E. M., Shapiro, D. M., & Vining, A. R. (2010). The role of clustering in the growth of new technology-based firms. Small Business Economics, 34(2), 127–146. doi: 10.1007/s11187-008-9104-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malmberg, A., & Maskell, P. (2002). The elusive concept of localization economies: Towards a knowledge-based theory of spatial clustering. Environment and Planning A, 34(3), 429–449. doi: 10.1068/a3457
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malmberg, A., & Maskell, P. (2006). Localized learning revisited. Growth and Change, 37(1), 1–18. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2257.2006.00302.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malmberg, A., & Maskell, P. (2010). An evolutionary approach to localised learning and spatial clustering. In R. Boschma & R. Martin (Eds.), The handbook of evolutionary geography (pp. 391–415). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Maskell, P., Bathelt, H., & Malmberg, A. (2006). Building global knowledge pipelines: The role of temporary clusters. European Planning Studies, 14(8), 997–1013. doi: 10.1080/09654310600852332
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maskell, P., & Malmberg, A. (2007). Myopia, knowledge development and cluster evolution. Journal of Economic Geography, 7(5), 603–618. doi: 10.1093/jeg/lbm020
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mattes, J. (2012). Dimensions of proximity and knowledge bases: Innovation between spatial and non-spatial factors. Regional Studies, 46(8), 1085–1099. doi: 10.1080/00343404.2011.552493
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCann, B. T., & Folta, T. B. (2011). Performance differentials within geographic clusters. Journal of Business Venturing, 26(1), 104–123. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2009.04.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mellewigt, T., Madhok, A., & Weibel, A. (2007). Trust and formal contracts in interorganizational relationships — substitutesand complements. Managerial and Decision Economics, 28(8), 833–847. doi: 10.1002/mde.1321
   Google Scholar
• Menzel, M.-P., & Fornahl, D. (2010). Cluster life cycles - dimensions and rationales of cluster evolution. Industrial and Corporate Change, 19(1), 205–238. doi: 10.1093/icc/dtp036
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mitchell, R., Burgess, J., & Waterhouse, J. (2010). Proximity and knowledge sharing in clustered firms. International Journal of Globalisation and Small Business, 4(1), 5–24. doi: 10.1504/IJGSB.2010.035328
   Google Scholar
• Moodysson, J., & Jonsson, O. (2007). Knowledge collaboration and proximity: The spatial organization of biotech innovation projects. European Urban and Regional Studies, 14(2), 115–131. doi: 10.1177/0969776407075556
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murovec, N., & Prodan, I. (2009). Absorptive capacity, its determinants, and influence on innovation output: Cross-cultural validation of the structural model. Technovation, 29(12), 859–872. doi: 10.1016/j.technovation.2009.05.010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. (1982). An evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Havard Univ. Press.
   Google Scholar
• Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. (2002). Evolutionary theorizing in economics. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 16(2), 23–46. doi: 10.1257/0895330027247
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Owen-Smith, J., & Powell, W. W. (2004). Knowledge networks as channels and conduits: The effects of spillovers in the Boston biotechnology community. Organization Science, 15(1), 5–21. doi: 10.1287/orsc.1030.0054
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2012). Sources of method bias in social science research and recommendations on how to control it. Annual Review of Psychology, 63, 539–569. doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100452
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Porter, M. E. (2000). Location, competition, and economic development: Local clusters in a global economy. Economic Development Quarterly, 14(1), 15–34. doi: 10.1177/089124240001400105
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prahalad, C. K., & Hamel, G. (1990). The core competence of corporation. Harvard Business Review, 68(3), 79–91.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rammer, C., & Schubert, T. (2011). EDV und Telekommunikation. ZEW Branchenreport Innovation. Ergebnisse der deutschen Innovationserhebung 2010. Mannheim: ZEW.
   Google Scholar
• Ringle, C. M., Wende, S., & Becker, J.-M. (2015). SmartPLS 3. Boenningstedt: SmartPLS GmbH. Retrieved from http://www.smartpls.com
   Google Scholar
• Ritala, P., Olander, H., Michailova, S., & Husted, K. (2015). Knowledge sharing, knowledge leaking and relative innovation performance: An empirical study. Technovation, 35, 22–31. doi: 10.1016/j.technovation.2014.07.011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ritter, T., & Gemünden, H. G. (2004). The impact of a company’s business strategy on its technological competence, network competence and innovation success. Journal of Business Research, 57(5), 548–556. doi: 10.1016/S0148-2963(02)00320-X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rocha, H. O., & Sternberg, R. (2005). Entrepreneurship: The role of clusters theoretical perspectives and empirical evidence from Germany. Small Business Economics, 24(3), 267–292. doi: 10.1007/s11187-005-1993-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenbusch, N., Brinckmann, J., & Bausch, A. (2011). Is innovation always beneficial? A meta-analysis of the relationship between innovation and performance in SMEs. Journal of Business Venturing, 26(4), 441–457. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2009.12.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rubera, G. K., & Kirca, A. H (2012). Firm innovativeness and its performance outcomes: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. Journal of Marketing, 76(3), 130–147. doi: 10.1509/jm.10.0494
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schiele, H. (2008). Nutzung innovativer cluster: Eine Aufgabe für die Unternehmensführung. In M. Kiese & L. Schätzl (Eds.), Cluster und Regionalentwicklung (pp. 127–143). Dortmund: Rohn.
   Google Scholar
• Singh, J., & Fleming, L. (2010). Lone inventors as sources of breakthroughs: Myth or reality? Management Science, 56(1), 41–56. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.1090.1072
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stockmeyer, B. (2001). Ansatzpunkte und Methoden zur Effizienzsteigerung im Innovationsmanagement der Ernährungsindustrie. München: VVF Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Strohmaier, R., & Rainer, A. (2016). Studying general purpose technologies in a multi-sector framework: The case of ICT in Denmark. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 36, 34–49. doi: 10.1016/j.strueco.2015.10.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tallman, S., Jenkins, M., Henry, N., & Pinch, S. (2004). Knowledge clusters and competitive advantage. Academy of Management Review, 29(2), 258–271. doi: 10.5465/amr.2004.12736089
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ter Wal, A. L. J., & Boschma, R. (2011). Co-evolution of firms, industries and networks in space. Regional Studies, 45(7), 919–933. doi: 10.1080/00343400802662658
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thornhill, S. (2006). Knowledge, innovation and firm performance in high- and low-technology regimes. Journal of Business Venturing, 21(5), 687–703. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2005.06.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Todorova, G., & Durisin, B. (2007). Absorptive capacity: Valuing a reconceptualization. Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 774–786. doi: 10.5465/amr.2007.25275513
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tödtling, F., Skokan, K., Hoglinger, C., Rumpel, P., & Grillitsch, M. (2013). Innovation and knowledge sourcing of modern sectors in old industrial regions: Comparing software firms in Moravia-Silesia and Upper Austria. European Urban and Regional Studies, 20(2), 188–205. doi: 10.1177/0969776411428498
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trippl, M., Grillitsch, M., Isaksen, A., & Sinozic, T. (2015). Perspectives on cluster evolution: Critical review and future research issues. European Planning Studies, 23(10), 2028–2044. doi: 10.1080/09654313.2014.999450
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trippl, M., Tödtling, F., & Lengauer, L. (2009). Knowledge sourcing beyond buzz and pipelines: Evidence from the Vienna software sector. Economic Geography, 85(4), 443–462. doi: 10.1111/j.1944-8287.2009.01047.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tsai, K.-H. (2009). Collaborative networks and product innovation performance: Towards a contingency perspective. Research Policy, 38(5), 765–778. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2008.12.012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Uzzi, B. (1997). Social structure and competition in interfirm networks: The paradox of embeddedness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(1), 35–67. doi: 10.2307/2393808
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Beers, C., & Zand, F. (2014). R&D cooperation, partner diversity, and innovation performance: An empirical analysis. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 31(2), 292–312. doi: 10.1111/jpim.12096
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van de Vrande, V., Vanhaverbeke, W., & Gassmann, O. (2010). Broadening the scope of open innovation: Past research, current state and future directions. International Journal of Technology Management, 52(3/4), 221–235. doi: 10.1504/IJTM.2010.035974
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vlaar, P. W. L., Klijn, E., Ariño, A., & Reuer, J. J. (2010). Preformation processes in interorganizational relationships: Determinants of search and negotiation efforts. In T. K. Das (Ed.), Researching strategic alliances: Emerging perspectives (pp. 105–131). New York: Information Age Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Wang, C., & Han, Y. (2011). Linking properties of knowledge with innovation performance: The moderate role of absorptive capacity. Journal of Knowledge Management, 15(5), 802–819. doi: 10.1108/13673271111174339
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang, C. L., & Ahmed, P. K. (2004). The development and validation of the organisational innovativeness construct using confirmatory factor analysis. European Journal of Innovation Management, 7(4), 1460–1060. doi: 10.1108/14601060410565056
   Google Scholar
• Weterings, A. (2006). Do firms benefit from spatial proximity? Testing the relation between spatial proximity and the performance of small software firms in the Netherlands. Utrecht: Koninklijk Nederlands Aardrijkskundig Genootschap.
   Google Scholar
• Wold, H. O. (1982). Soft modeling: The basic design and some extensions. In K.-G. Jöreskog & H. O. Wold (Eds.), Systems under indirect observation (pp. 1–53). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
   Google Scholar
• Wolfe, D. A., & Gertler, M. S. (2004). Clusters from the inside and out: Local dynamics and global linkages. Urban Studies, 41(5/6), 1071–1093. doi: 10.1080/00420980410001675832
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zaheer, A., & Bell, G. G. (2005). Benefiting from network position: Firm capabilities, structural holes, and performance. Strategic Management Journal, 26(9), 809–825. doi: 10.1002/smj.482
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zahra, S. A., & George, G. (2002). Absorptive capacity: A review, reconceptualization, and extension. Academy of Management Review, 27(2), 185–203. doi: 10.5465/amr.2002.6587995
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zeng, S. X., Xie, X. M., & Tam, C. M. (2010). Relationship between cooperation networks and innovation performance of SMEs. Technovation, 30(3), 181–194. doi: 10.1016/j.technovation.2009.08.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ZEW. (2012). Results of CIS 2010 for Germany. Retrieved from http://www.zew.de/de/publikationen/CIS2010_DE_final_web.xls
   Google Scholar
• ZEW. (2016). Results of CIS 2014 for Germany. Retrieved from http://www.zew.de/WS414-1
   Google Scholar
• Zhao, Y., Zhou, W., & Huesig, S. (2010). Innovation as clusters in knowledge intensive business services: Taking ICT services in Shanghai and Bavaria as an example. International Journal of Innovation Management, 14(1), 1–18. doi: 10.1142/S1363919610002520
   Google Scholar