Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T16:45:43.189Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

How Early Entrants Impact Cluster Emergence: MNEs vs. Local Firms in the Bangalore Digital Creative Industries

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 June 2019

Mark Lorenzen
Mark Lorenzen*
Affiliation:
Copenhagen Business School, Denmark
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article addresses the question of how the emergence of a cluster in a global innovation system is influenced by early entrants. It does so by presenting an explorative study of the emerging digital creative industries cluster in Bangalore. I find that MNE entrants develop production and technological capabilities comparatively fast within a narrow range of value chain activities with limited spillovers to the cluster. In comparison, local entrants develop such capabilities more slowly, but within a broader range of value chain activities and with higher spillovers of skills and knowledge, as well as higher participation to building a local entrepreneurial ecosystem. I propose that these effects are moderated by the size of national consumer markets as well as industry context in the guise of project lengths and technological modularity. I also point to the role of global connectivity, proposing that local entrants, in particular, leverage international personal relationships for development of not only relational, but also production capabilities.

摘要

本文探讨全球创新系统中集群的产生是如何受到早期进入者影响的。本文报告一项针对班加罗尔兴起的数字创意产业集群的探索性研究。我发现跨国企业进入者在狭窄的价值链活动范围内比较快速地形成生产和技术能力，但外溢到集群却是有限的。相比之下，本地进入者发展这些能力的速度慢得多，但发生在更广的价值链活动范围内，并且具有更高的技能和知识外溢，也更深地参与到本地创业生态系统的建设当中。我认为这些效应受到国家消费者市场以及由项目时长和技术模块化为名义的行业情境的调节。我还指出全球连通性的作用，即本地进入者特别利用国际上的个人关系，建立关系能力和生产能力。

Аннотация

В этой статье рассматривается вопрос о том, как первые участники влияют на развитие кластера в глобальной инновационной системе. Данное исследование проводится на примере нового цифрового креативного кластера в Бангалоре. Я прихожу к выводу о том, что МНП, в качестве участников, сравнительно быстро развивают производственные и технологические возможности в узком диапазоне операций в производственной цепи и с ограниченными вторичными эффектами для кластера. Для сравнения, местные участники развивают такие возможности медленнее, но в более широком спектре операций в производственной цепи и с более обширным распространением навыков и знаний, а также с более активным участием в построении местной предпринимательской экосистемы. Я предполагаю, что на эти факторы влияют размер национальных потребительских рынков, а также отраслевой контекст, прежде всего продолжительность проектов и технологическая модульность. Я также подчеркиваю роль глобальной взаимосвязанности и предполагаю, что местные участники, в особенности, используют личные связи на международном уровне для развития не только личных отношений, но и производственных возможностей.

Resumen

Este artículo aborda la pregunta de cómo el surgimiento de un clúster en un sistema de innovación global está influenciado por quienes ingresaron tempranamente. Lo hace presentando un estudio exploratorio del clúster de industrias creativas digitales emergentes en Bangalore. Encuentro que las EMN que ingresan desarrollan capacidades de producción y tecnológicas comparativamente rápidas dentro de un rango estrecho de actividades de la cadena de valor con efectos secundarios limitados al clúster. En comparación, los locales desarrollan dichas capacidades más lentamente, pero dentro de una gama más amplia de actividades de la cadena de valor y con mayores efectos secundarios de habilidades y conocimientos, así como una mayor participación en la construcción de un ecosistema empresarial local. Propongo que estos efectos sean moderados por el tamaño de los mercados de consumo nacionales, así como también por el contexto de la industria en la forma de la duración de los proyectos y la modularidad tecnológica. También indico el papel de la conectividad global, proponiendo que los locales, en particular, aprovechen las relaciones personales internacionales para el desarrollo no sólo de capacidades relacionales, sino también de producción.

Keywords

capability developmentcluster emergenceconnectivityMNE entry能力发展集群产生连通性跨国企业进入развитие возможностейпоявление кластероввзаимосвязанностьвыход МНП на рынокdesarrollo de capacidadessurgimiento de clústeresconectividadentrada de MNE
Type
Special Issue: The Innovation and Entrepreneurship Ecosystem in India
Information
Management and Organization Review , Volume 15 , Special Issue 3: The Innovation and Entrepreneurship Ecosystem in India , September 2019 , pp. 495 - 531
Copyright
Copyright © The International Association for Chinese Management Research 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Accepted by: Guest Editors Suresh Bhagavatula and Ram Mudambi, and Deputy Editor Johann Peter Murmann

References

REFERENCES

Agarwal, S. 1994. Socio-cultural distance and the choice of joint ventures: A contingency perspective. Journal of International Marketing, 2(2): 63–80.Google Scholar
Agrawal, A., Cockburn, I., & McHale, J. 2006. Gone but not forgotten: Knowledge flows, labor mobility, and enduring social relationships. Journal of Economic Geography, 6(5): 571–591.Google Scholar
AIDB. 2018. Animation industry database. [Accessed 8 April 2018]. Available from URL: http://aidb.com/Google Scholar
Amin, A., & Cohendet, P. 2004. Architectures of knowledge: Firms, capabilities, and communities. Oxford: Oxford University Press on Demand.Google Scholar
Andersson, U., Forsgren, M., & Holm, U. 2002. The strategic impact of external networks: Subsidiary performance and competence development in the multinational corporation. Strategic Management Journal, 23(11): 979–996.Google Scholar
Argote, L., & Ingram, P. 2000. Knowledge transfer: A basis for competitive advantage in firms. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82(1): 150–169.Google Scholar
Arrow, K. 1962. Economic welfare and the allocation of resources for invention. In The rate and direction of inventive activity: 609-626. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Awate, S., Larsen, M. M., & Mudambi, R. 2012. EMNE catch-up strategies in the wind turbine industry: Is there a trade-off between output and innovation capabilities? Global Strategy Journal, 2(3): 205-223.Google Scholar
Awate, S., & Mudambi, R. 2018. On the geography of emerging industry technological networks: The breadth and depth of patented innovations. Journal of Economic Geography, 18(2): 391–419.Google Scholar
Baker, G., Gibbons, R., & Murphy, K. J. 2002. Relational contracts and the theory of the firm. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 117(1): 39–84.Google Scholar
Bartlett, C., & Ghoshal, S. 1989. Managing across borders: The transnational solution. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
Beaverstock, J. V., Doel, M. A., Hubbard, P. J., & Taylor, P. J. 2002. Attending to the world: Competition, cooperation and connectivity in the World City network. Global Networks, 2(2): 111–132.Google Scholar
Birkinshaw, J. 2000. Entrepreneurship in the global firm. London: Sage Publications Ltd.Google Scholar
Birkinshaw, J., & Hood, N. 1997. An empirical study of development processes in foreign-owned subsidiaries in Canada and Scotland. Management International Review, 37(4): 339–364.Google Scholar
Boschma, R. 2015. Do spinoff dynamics or agglomeration externalities drive industry clustering? A reappraisal of Steven Klepper's work. Industrial and Corporate Change, 24(4): 859–873.Google Scholar
Breschi, S., & Lissoni, F. 2001. Knowledge spillovers and local innovation systems: A critical survey. Industrial and Corporate Change, 10(4): 975–1005.Google Scholar
Bresnahan, T., Gambardella, A., & Saxenian, A. 2001. ‘Old economy’ inputs for ‘new economy’ outcomes: Cluster formation in the new Silicon Valleys. Industrial and Corporate Change, 10(4): 835–860.Google Scholar
Cano-Kollmann, M., Cantwell, J., Hannigan, T. J., Mudambi, R., & Song, J. 2016. Knowledge connectivity: An agenda for innovation research in international business. Journal of International Business Studies, 47(3): 255–262.Google Scholar
Cantwell, J., & Mudambi, R. 2005. MNE competence-creating subsidiary mandates. Strategic Management Journal, 26(12): 1109–1128.Google Scholar
Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. 1990. Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1): 128–152.Google Scholar
Cohendet, P., & Simon, L. 2013. Places, spaces and the dynamics of creativity: The video game industry in Montreal. Regional Studies, 47(10): 1701–1714.Google Scholar
Cyert, R. M., & March, J. G. 1963. A behavioral theory of the firm. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
D'Agostino, L. M., & Santangelo, G. D. 2012. Do overseas R&D laboratories in emerging markets contribute to home knowledge creation? Management International Review, 52(2): 251–273.Google Scholar
Dahl, M. S., & Pedersen, C. Ø. 2004. Knowledge flows through informal contacts in industrial clusters: Myth or reality? Research Policy, 33(10): 1673–1686.Google Scholar
deGraf, B. 2004. The balkanization of animation. Computer Graphics World, 27(8): 20–22.Google Scholar
Dey, I. 1993. Qualitative data analysis: A user friendly guide for social scientists. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Dosi, G., Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. 2000. The nature and dynamics of organizational capabilities. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dul, J., & Hak, T. 2008. Case study methodology in business research. Oxford, UK: Butterworth.Google Scholar
Eisenhardt, K. M. 1989. Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4): 532–550.Google Scholar
Ethiraj, S. K., Kale, P., Krishnan, M. S., & Singh, J. V. 2005. Where do capabilities come from and how do they matter? A study in the software services industry. Strategic Management Journal, 26(1): 25–45.Google Scholar
Feldman, M., Francis, J., & Bercowitz, J. 2005. Creating a cluster while building a firm: Entrepreneurs and the formation of industrial clusters. Regional Studies, 39(1): 129–141.Google Scholar
Florida, R., Mellander, C., & Adler, P. 2015. Creativity in the city. In Jones, C., Lorenzen, M., & Sapsed, J. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of creative industries: 96–115. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ge, G. L., & Ding, D. Z. 2008. A strategic analysis of surging Chinese manufacturers: The case of Galanz. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 25(4): 667–683.Google Scholar
George, A., & Bennett, A. 2005. Case studies and theory development in the social sciences. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Gereffi, G. 1999. International trade and industrial upgrading in the apparel commodity chain. Journal of International Economics, 48(1): 37–70.Google Scholar
Gereffi, G., Humphrey, J., & Sturgeon, T. 2005. The governance of global value chains. Review of International Political Economy, 12(1): 78–104.Google Scholar
Gerring, J. 2007. Is there a (viable) crucial-case method? Comparative Political Studies, 40(3): 231–253.Google Scholar
Ghoshal, S., & Nohria, N. 1993. Horses for courses: Organizational forms for multinational corporations. Sloan Management Review, Winter: 23–35.Google Scholar
Glaeser, E., Kallal, H., Scheinkman, J., & Schleifer, A. 1982. Growth in cities. Journal of Political Economy, 100(6): 1126–1152.Google Scholar
Government of Karnataka. 2017. Animation, visual effects, gaming and comics policy 2017–2022. Bangalore.Google Scholar
Grabher, G. 2002. Cool projects, boring institutions: Temporary collaboration in social context. Regional Studies, 36(3): 205–214.Google Scholar
Grant, R. 1996. Prospering in dynamically competitive environments: Organizational capability as knowledge integration. Organization Science, 7(4): 375–387.Google Scholar
Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. 2006. How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods, 18(1): 59–82.Google Scholar
Helfat, C. E., & Lieberman, M. B. 2002. The birth of capabilities: Market entry and the importance of pre-history. Industrial and Corporate Change, 11(4): 725–760.Google Scholar
Henderson, R. 1994. The evolution of integrative capability: Innovation in cardiovascular drug discovery. Industrial and Corporate Change, 3(3): 607–630.Google Scholar
Henderson, V. J. 1988. Urban development: Theory, fact and illusion. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hymer, S. 1976. The international operations of national firms: A study of direct foreign investment (Vol. 14): 139–155. Cambridge, MA: MIT press.Google Scholar
Klepper, S. 2010. The origin and growth of industry clusters: The making of Silicon Valley and Detroit. Journal of Urban Economics, 67(1): 15–32.Google Scholar
Knight, G. A., & Cavusgil, S. T. 2004. Innovation, organizational capabilities, and the born-global firm. Journal of International Business Studies, 35(2): 124–141.Google Scholar
Kogut, B., & Singh, H. 1988. The effect of national culture on the choice of entry mode. Journal of International Business Studies, 19(3): 411–432.Google Scholar
Kogut, B., & Zander, U. 1992. Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology. Organization Science, 3(3): 383–397.Google Scholar
Kogut, B., & Zander, U. 1993. Knowledge of the firm and the evolutionary theory of the multinational corporation. Journal of International Business Studies, 24(4): 625–645.Google Scholar
KPMG. 2013. The power of a billion: Realizing the Indian dream. Mumbai: KPMG.Google Scholar
Lafuente, E., Yancy, V., & Rialp, J. 2007. Regional differences in the influence of role models: Comparing the entrepreneurial process of rural Catalonia. Regional Studies, 41(6): 779–795.Google Scholar
Lane, P. J., & Lubatkin, M. 1998. Relative absorptive capacity and interorganizational learning. Strategic Management Journal, 19(5): 461–477.Google Scholar
Laursen, K., & Salter, A. 2014. The paradox of openness: Appropriability, external search and collaboration. Research Policy, 43(5): 867–878.Google Scholar
Levie, A. 2012. A tale of two cities: Silicon Valley and Hollywood. TechCrunch. [Cited 14 December 2017]. Available from URL: https://techcrunch.com/2012/01/23/silicon-valley-hollywoodGoogle Scholar
Levin, D. Z., Walter, J., & Murnighan, J. K. 2011. Dormant ties: The value of reconnecting. Organization Science, 22(4): 923–939.Google Scholar
Lewin, A. Y., Massini, S., & Peeters, C. 2009. Why are companies offshoring innovation? The emerging global race for talent. Journal of International Business Studies, 40(6): 901–925.Google Scholar
Lorenzen, M., & Frederiksen, L. 2008. Why do cultural industries cluster? Localization, urbanization, products and projects. In Cooke, P. & Lazzaretti, R. (Eds.), Creative cities, cultural clusters, and local economic development: 166–179. Cheltenham, UK: Elgar.Google Scholar
Lorenzen, M., & Mudambi, R. 2013. Clusters, connectivity and catch-up: Bollywood and Bangalore in the Global Economy. Journal of Economic Geography, 13(3): 501–534.Google Scholar
Luo, Y. 2001. Determinants of local responsiveness: Perspectives from foreign subsidiaries in an emerging market. Journal of Management, 27(4): 451–477.Google Scholar
Luo, Y., & Park, S. H. 2001. Strategic alignment and performance of market-seeking MNCs in China. Strategic Management Journal, 22(2): 141–155.Google Scholar
Luo, Y., Wang, S. L., Zheng, Q., & Jayaraman, V. 2012. Task attributes and process integration in business process offshoring: A perspective of service providers from India and China. Journal of International Business Studies, 43(5): 498–524.Google Scholar
Malecki, E. 2018. Entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial ecosystems. Geography Compass, 12(3): forthcoming.Google Scholar
Manning, S., Massini, S., & Lewin, A. 2008. A dynamic perspective on next-generation offshoring: The global sourcing of science and engineering talent. Academy of Management Perspectives, 22(3): 35–54.Google Scholar
Marshall, A. 1920. Principles of economics. London, UK: MacMillan.Google Scholar
Martin, R., & Sunley, P. 2006. Path dependence and regional economic evolution. Journal of Economic Geography, 6(4): 395–437.Google Scholar
Maskell, P., & Lorenzen, M. 2004. The cluster as market organisation. Urban Studies, 41(5–6): 991–1009.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.Google Scholar
Metcalf, G. 2012. Hollywood vs. Silicon Valley. SPUR. [Cited 14 December 2017]. Available from URL: http://www.spur.org/publications/urbanist-article/2012-07-10/hollywood-vs-silicon-valley.Google Scholar
Meyer, K. E., Mudambi, R. & Narula, R. 2011. Multinational enterprises and local contexts: The opportunities and challenges of multiple embeddedness. Journal of Management Studies, 48(2): 235–252.Google Scholar
Mikkola, J. H. 2003. Modularity, component outsourcing, and inter-firm learning. R&D Management, 33(4): 439–454.Google Scholar
Mudambi, R. 1998. International financial management: A review. Journal of Finance, 53(3): 1194–1197.Google Scholar
Mudambi, R. 2008. Location, control and innovation in knowledge-intensive industries. Journal of Economic Geography, 8(5): 699–725.Google Scholar
Mudambi, R., & Swift, T. 2012. Multinational enterprises and the geographical clustering of innovation. Industry and Innovation, 19(1): 1–21.Google Scholar
Mudambi, R., Saranga, H.,& Schotter, A. 2017. Mastering the ‘Make-in-India’ challenge. MIT Sloan Management Review, 58(4): 59–66.Google Scholar
NASSCOM. 2015. Contributions of India's tech industry to the U.S. economy. Delhi, India: NASSCOM.Google Scholar
Numagami, T. 1998. Perspective–The infeasibility of invariant laws in management studies: A reflective dialogue in defense of case studies. Organization Science, 9(1): 1–15.Google Scholar
Piore, M. J., & Sabel, C. F 1984. The second industrial divide: Possibilities for prosperity. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Porter, M. E. 2000. Location, competition, and economic development: Local clusters in a global economy. Economic Development Quarterly, 14(1): 15–34.Google Scholar
Qiu, Y. 2005. Personal networks, institutional involvement, and foreign direct investment flows into China's interior. Economic Geography, 81(3): 261–281.Google Scholar
Romer, P. M. 1986. Increasing returns and long-run growth. Journal of Political Economy, 94(5): 1002–1037.Google Scholar
Sako, M. 2006. Outsourcing and offshoring: Implications for productivity of business services. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 22(4): 499–512.Google Scholar
Sako, M., & Helper, S. 1998. Determinants of trust in supplier relations: Evidence from the automotive industry in Japan and the United States. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 34(3): 387–417.Google Scholar
Sanchez, R., & Mahoney, J. T. 1996. Modularity, flexibility, and knowledge management in product and organization design. Strategic Management Journal, 17(S2): 63–76.Google Scholar
Saxenian, A. 2006. International mobility of engineers and the rise of entrepreneurship in the periphery. United Nations University. World Institute for Development Economics Research (UNU-WIDER).Google Scholar
Saxenian, A., & Hsu, J. Y. 2001. The Silicon Valley–Hsinchu connection: Technical communities and industrial upgrading. Industrial and Corporate Change, 10: 893–920.Google Scholar
Schmitz, H. 1995. Collective efficiency: Growth path for small-scale industry. Journal of Development Studies, 31(4): 529–566.Google Scholar
Shaver, J. M., & Flyer, F. 2000. Agglomeration economies, firm heterogeneity, and foreign direct investment in the United States. Strategic Management Journal, 21(12): 1175–1194.Google Scholar
Shenkar, O. 2001. Cultural distance revisited: Towards a more rigorous conceptualization and measurement of cultural differences. Journal of International Business Studies, 32(3): 519–535.Google Scholar
Sirén, C. A., Kohtamäki, M., & Kuckertz, A. 2012. Exploration and exploitation strategies, profit performance, and the mediating role of strategic learning: Escaping the exploitation trap. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 6(1): 18–41.Google Scholar
Spigel, B. 2017. The relational organization of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 41(1): 49–72.Google Scholar
Stake, R. E. 1995. The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Storper, M., & Christopherson, S. 1987. Flexible specialization and regional industrial agglomerations: The case of the US motion-picture industry. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 77(1): 260–282.Google Scholar
Sydow, J., Schreyögg, G., & Koch, J. 2009. Organizational path dependence: Opening the black box. Academy of Management Review, 34(4): 689–709.Google Scholar
Tschang, F., & Goldstein, A. 2004. Production and political economy in the animation industry: Why insourcing and outsourcing occur. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 57(1): 132–143.Google Scholar
Vivek, S. D., Richey, R. G., & Dalela, V. 2009. A longitudinal examination of partnership governance in offshoring: A moving target. Journal of World Business, 44(1): 16–30.Google Scholar
Westcott, T. 2011. An overview of the global animation industry. Creative Industries Journal, 3(3): 253–259.Google Scholar
Winter, S. G. 2003. Understanding dynamic capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 24(10): 991–995.Google Scholar
Xin, K. K., & Pearce, J. L. 1996. Guanxi: Connections as substitutes for formal institutional support. Academy of Management Journal, 39(6): 1641–1658.Google Scholar
Yin, R. 2003. Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Yoon, H. 2017. Globalization of the animation industry: Multi-scalar linkages of six animation production centers. International Journal of Cultural Policy, 23(5): 634–651.Google Scholar
Yoon, H., & Malecki, E. J. 2010. Cartoon planet: Worlds of production and global production networks in the animation industry. Industrial and Corporate Change, 19(1): 239–271.Google Scholar
Zaheer, S., Lamin, A., & Subramani, M. 2009. Cluster capabilities or ethnic ties & quest; Location choice by foreign and domestic entrants in the services offshoring industry in India. Journal of International Business Studies, 40(6): 944–968.Google Scholar
Zahra, S. A., Sapienza, H. J., & Davidsson, P. 2006. Entrepreneurship and dynamic capabilities: A review, model and research agenda. Journal of Management Studies, 43(4): 917–955.Google Scholar
Zollo, M., & Winter, S. G. 2002. Deliberate learning and the evolution of dynamic capabilities. Organization Science, 13(3): 339–351.Google Scholar