covid
Buscar en
Revista Europea de Dirección y Economía de la Empresa
Toda la web
Inicio Revista Europea de Dirección y Economía de la Empresa Relaciones de gobernanza e innovación en la cadena de valor: nuevos paradigmas ...
Información de la revista
Vol. 21. Núm. 2.
Páginas 205-214 (abril - junio 2012)
Compartir
Compartir
Descargar PDF
Más opciones de artículo
Vol. 21. Núm. 2.
Páginas 205-214 (abril - junio 2012)
Artículo
Open Access
Relaciones de gobernanza e innovación en la cadena de valor: nuevos paradigmas de competividad
Governance Relationships and Innovation in the Value Chain: New Paradigms of Competitiveness
Visitas
4192
José Albors Garrigósa,
Autor para correspondencia
jalbors@doe.upv.es

Autor para correspondencia.
, Antonio Hidalgo Nucherab
a Departamento de Organización de Empresas, Universidad Politécnica de Valencia, 46022 Valencia, España
b ETSII, Departamento de Economía y Organización de Empresas, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, 28010 Madrid, España
Este artículo ha recibido

Under a Creative Commons license
Información del artículo
Resumen

Como resultado del desarrollo de los nuevos países emergentes, China y Brasil entre otros, los paradigmas competitivos tradicionales basados en las ventajas relacionadas con costes y eficiencias de calidad ya no son suficientes. Estos paradigmas relacionaban la competitividad clásica con el grado de innovación tecnológica y el empleo de los recursos del cluster por sus miembros. Sin embargo, la combinación de un conocimiento adecuado y la gestión del marketing relacional aporta una reconsideración de los modelos actuales de competencia que van más allá del análisis del cluster tradicional. El objetivo de este trabajo es analizar la estructura de gobernanza de la cadena de valor territorial en el cluster cerámico español, a través de la comprensión de las funciones anteriores y actuales de los diversos sectores involucrados en el sistema de creación de valor. Por medio de un estudio de casos y el enfoque de la metodología cuantitativa, se explora el cambio de paradigma donde los actores tradicionales de la cadena de valor están perdiendo el control de su contribución al sistema de creación de valor territorial, a la vez que aparecen nuevos actores con una función más estable y prometedora.

Palabras clave:
Innovación tecnológica
Cluster
Sector cerámico
Cadena de valor
Abstract

As a result of the development of emerging countries such as China and Brazil, the traditional competitive paradigm based on the cost benefits and efficiencies related to quality, are not enough nowadays. These paradigms related the classical competitive with the degree of technological innovation and the use of cluster resources by its members. However, the combination of adequate knowledge and relationship marketing management provides a review of current models of competition that goes beyond the traditional cluster analysis. The aim of this study is to analyze the governance structure of the territorial value chain in the Spanish ceramic tile cluster, through the understanding of past and current roles of the various sectors involved in the creation of the value system. Through the case study approach and quantitative methodology, the study explores the paradigm shift where the traditional actors in the value chain are losing their control over their contribution to the value creation system, while new players with a more stable and promising role are emerging.

Keywords:
Technological innovation
Cluster
Ceramic industry
Value chain
El Texto completo está disponible en PDF
Bibliografía
[Acs and Varga, 2005]
Z.J. Acs, A. Varga.
Entrepreneurship, agglomeration and technological change.
Small Business Economics, 24 (2005), pp. 323-334
[Albors, 2000]
J. Albors.
Estudio diagnóstico del sector de fabricantes de maquinaria para la industria cerámica.
Técnica Cerámica, 306 (2000), pp. 1128-1131
[Albors, 2002]
J. Albors.
Networking and technology transfer in the Spanish ceramic tiles cluster: Its role in the sector competitiveness.
Journal of Technology Transfer, 27 (2002), pp. 263-273
[Albors and Molina, 2001]
J. Albors, X. Molina.
La difusión de la innovación, factor competitivo en redes interorganizativas. El caso de la cerámica valenciana.
Economía Industrial, 339 (2001), pp. 167-175
[Albors and Hervás, 2006]
J. Albors, J.L. Hervás.
The European tile ceramic industry in the XXI century. Challenges of the present decade.
Boletín de la Sociedad Española de Cerámica y Vidrio, 45 (2006), pp. 13-21
[Albors et al., 2008]
J. Albors, P. Márquez, J.L. Hervás.
Relationships manufacturer distributor as key competitive elements in the case of the Spanish tile ceramic cluster. Empirical analysis of the moderating factors.
Boletín de la Sociedad Española de Cerámica y Vidrio, 47 (2008), pp. 339-344
[Albors, 2010]
J. Albors, et al.
El caso Kerajet.
Sectores de la Nueva Economía 20+20. Economía Digital,
[Almeida and Kogut, 1999]
P. Almeida, B. Kogut.
Localization of knowledge and the mobility of engineers in regional networks.
Management Science, 45 (1999), pp. 905-917
[ASCER, 2010]
ASCER.
Los sectores español y mundial de fabricantes de baldosas cerámicas en el año.
autor, (2010),
[Asheim and Coenen, 2005]
B.T. Asheim, L. Coenen.
Knowledge bases and regional innovation systems: comparing Nordic clusters.
Research Policy, 34 (2005), pp. 1173-1190
[Breschi and Malerba, 1997]
S. Breschi, F. Malerba.
Sectoral innovation systems: technological regimes, Schumpetarian dynamics and spatial boundaries.
Systems of Innovation, Technologies, Institutions and Organizations,
[Capo-Vicedo et al., 2009]
J. Capo-Vicedo, J.V. Tomás, M. Exposito-Langa.
Redes virtuales de PYMES. Un caso de estudio en el sector textil español.
Dirección y Organización, 38 (2009), pp. 66-77
[Cooke, 2001]
P. Cooke.
Regional innovation systems, clusters and the knowledge economy.
Industrial Corporate Change, 10 (2001), pp. 945-974
[Coriat and Weinstein, 2004]
B. Coriat, O. Weinstein.
National institutional frameworks, institutional complementarieties and sectoral systems of innovation.
Sectoral Systems of Innovation: Concepts, Issues and Analyses of Six Major Sectors in Europe,
[Dalmau and De Miguel, 1991]
J.I. Dalmau, E. De Miguel.
El Azulejo.
Universidad Politécnica de Valencia, (1991),
[Di Gregorio and Shane, 2003]
D. Di Gregorio, S. Shane.
Why do some universities generate more start-ups than others?.
Research Policy, 32 (2003), pp. 209-227
[Djokovic and Souitaris, 2008]
D. Djokovic, V. Souitaris.
Spinouts from academics institutions: a literature review with suggestions for further research.
Journal of Technology Transfer, 33 (2008), pp. 225-247
[Etzkowitz and Klofsten, 2005]
H. Etzkowitz, M. Klofsten.
The innovating region: toward a theory of knowledge-based regional development.
R&D Management, 35 (2005), pp. 243-255
[Foster, 1986]
R. Foster.
Innovation. The Attackers Advantage.
McKinsey, (1986),
[Freeman, 1996]
C. Freeman.
Innovation and growth.
The Handbook of Industrial Innovation,
[Fujita and Thisse, 1996]
M. Fujita, J.F. Thisse.
Economics of agglomeration.
Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, 10 (1996), pp. 339-378
[Humphrey and Schmitz, 2004]
J. Humphrey, H. Schmitz.
Governance in global value chains.
Local Enterprises in the Global Economy,
[Johannisson et al., 2002]
B. Johannisson, M. Ramirez-Pasillas, G. Karlsson.
The institutional embeddedness of local inter-firm networks: a leverage for business creation.
Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 14 (2002), pp. 297-315
[John and Pouder, 2006]
C.H. John, R.W. Pouder.
Technology clusters versus industrial clusters: resources, networks and regional advantages.
Growth and Change, 37 (2006), pp. 141-171
[Kaplinsky and Morris, 2001]
R. Kaplinsky, M.A. Morris.
Handbook for Value Chain Research. Institute of Development Studies.
University of Sussex, (2001),
[Lavie, 2006]
D. Lavie.
The competitive advantage of interconnected firm: an extension of the resource-based view.
Academy of Management Review, 31 (2006), pp. 638-658
[Lockett and Wright, 2005]
A. Lockett, M. Wright.
Resources, capabilities, risk capital and the creation of university spin-out companies.
Research Policy, 34 (2005), pp. 1043-1057
[Lorenzen, 2001]
M. Lorenzen.
Localized learning and policy: academic advice on enhancing regional competitiveness through learning.
European Planning Studies, 9 (2001), pp. 164-185
[Masci and Russo, 2000]
G. Masci, M. Russo.
L'attività brevettuale nel distreto cerámico, 1971–1998. Materiali di Discussione, N. 296.
Dipartamento di Economia Politica, Università di Modena e Reggio Emilia, (2000),
[Maskell, 2001]
P. Maskell.
Towards a knowledge-based theory of the geographical cluster.
Industrial and Corporate Change, 10 (2001), pp. 921-943
[McCormick and Schmitz, 2001]
D. McCormick, H. Schmitz.
Manual for value chain research on homeworkers in the garment industry. Institute for Development Studies.
University of Sussex, (2001),
[Nelson, 1993]
R.R. Nelson.
National Innovation Systems. A comparative analysis.
Oxford University Press, (1993),
[Nursall, 2003]
A. Nursall.
Building public knowledge: collaborations between science centres, universities and industry.
International Journal of Technology Management, 25 (2003), pp. 381-389
[Owen-Smith and Powell, 2001]
J. Owen-Smith, W.W. Powell.
Careers and contradictions: faculty responses to the transformation of knowledge and its uses in the life sciences.
Research in the Sociology of Work, 10 (2001), pp. 109-140
[Patel and Pavitt, 1994]
P. Patel, K. Pavitt.
The nature and economic importance of National Innovation Systems.
Science and Technology Industry Review, 14 (1994), pp. 9-32
[Pavitt, 1984]
K. Pavitt.
Sectoral patterns of technical change: towards a taxonomy and a theory.
Research Policy, 13 (1984), pp. 343-373
[Rasmussen et al., 2006]
E. Rasmussen, O. Moen, M. Gulbrandsen.
Initiatives to promote commercialization of university knowledge.
Technovation, 26 (2006), pp. 518-533
[Rogers et al., 2001]
E.M. Rogers, S. Takegami, J. Yin.
Lessons learned about technology transfer.
Technovation, 21 (2001), pp. 253-261
[Schumpeter, 1911]
J. Schumpeter.
The Theory of Economic Development: An Inquiry into Profits, Capital, Credit, Interest and the Business Cycle. 1934 translation.
Harvard University Press, (1911),
[Sorenson and Audia, 2000]
O. Sorenson, P.G. Audia.
The social structure of entrepreneurial activity: geographic concentration of footwear production in the United States, 1940–1989.
American Journal of Sociology, 106 (2000), pp. 424-461
[Stuart and Sorenson, 2003]
T. Stuart, O. Sorenson.
The geography of opportunity: spatial heterogeneity in founding rates and the performance of biotechnology firms.
Research Policy, 32 (2003), pp. 229-253
[Trienekens and Beulens, 2001]
J.H. Trienekens, A.J.M. Beulens.
Views on inter-enterprise relationships.
Production Planning & Control, 12 (2001), pp. 466-477
Copyright © 2012. AEDEM
Opciones de artículo