ICs, RV and Stretching in HAv

Based on the results of conducted qualitative studies, the following findings can be formulated:

• The provision of ICs, i.e. the bundling of knowledge, business and policy, is embodied in the profile of HAv institutions. For instance, ZAL aims at being an interface of industry and science; at networking business, research and policy. It is further strengthened by simultaneous membership of these institutions in each other or by the co-ordinating role they play (ZAL for research. HECAS & Hansa Aerospace for supply chain and HCAT+ for education). Business relations and networking more than expected, the knowledge exchange matters mostly for cluster members, in particular, SMEs, for which cluster membership confers legitimacy (Ferreira, Raposo, Rutten & Varga, 2014). Access to large players—being the centre of gravity—and to political connections, is also relevant in the eyes of many small members. Future skills feature high on the cluster agenda. Securing future competences is the task of both HCAT+—in terms of foreseeing and developing them, and ZAL—with regard to integrating and applying them. Predicting and shaping future skills takes place in different dimensions. It is not only the above-mentioned specialised entities like HCAT+, but also dedicated programmes (DigiNet.air), regular training and events on skill development, and last, but not least, the local labour market with practices of job-hopping and post-switching possible, due to co- location and proximity. Anticipating future skills and delivering them is of utmost importance. At the same time, past developments, in particular, the previously destroyed industrial fabric, which is hard to be re-instated, impact on the current provision of ICs. In fact, the main task for CO is exactly finding the commons; that what binds, what local

Со троп ent/Process

Hubbing (geographical scale)

Blending (sectoral scope)

Industrial Commons = four universities, three big commercial players, research labs, initiatives and associations Three pillars: R&D moderated by ZAL; skills expertise moderated by HCAT+; SMEs supply chain by HECAS and Hansa Aerospace

Geogr aphical expansion on different scales:

  • region = via members from outside (Liibeck) and plants in Buxtehude, Stade and Finkenverder, although always ‘Metropolitan footprint’;
  • National = co-operation with DE aviation clusters—SCEI supply-chain excellence initiative;
  • EU level = Airbus, GYC links; Toulouse, direct indirect
  • Global = EACR New High-Tech Strategy of BMBF—Canada

J Often overlap with blending (e.g. 'Chemistry meets Aviation )

RV = complete life cycle of aircraft and entile value chain of aviation = cabin fitting, aircraft, transport, MRO; aviation, aerospace, aeronautics

■C proactive, pinposeful, initiated by> CO •S Overlap with hubbing (e.g. ‘how to do business in Japan ’)

  • • Co-leaming space = cross-clustering among eight Hamburg clusters (renewable energy, health, maritime, etc.)
  • • Meta-cluster co-operation nationwide—e.g. with chemical industry

J proactive, pinposeful, initiated by! CO

Source. Author’s own proposal entities share. They need to take the commons outside the bracket as a glue for collaboration.

  • • RV in HAv derives from the fact that the region covers the complete life cycle of aircraft and the entire value chain of aviation; it encompasses aerospace, aeronautics and aviation, production and assembling, as well as MRO services. This co-existence and co-creation (‘under one roof’) are facilitated by the universal nature of 14.0 and profoundly impacted by the nature of the aviation industry. However, it is not only adding, i.e. the co-creation with partners, which enables the emergence of RV, but also the multiplication, i.e. the spin-out and development of new clusters. The role of relatedness reflects upon the matrix approach adopted, when the silos of vertical specialisation are linked via the universal cross-sectoral topics—societal megatrends in fact, like 14.0—the digital transformation. The RV of the HAv cluster derives from the balance between specialisation and diversification defined by its members.
  • Blending builds upon the solving problem. Addressing jointly shared challenges seems to facilitate this sectoral expansion, which is also influenced by the universal, horizontal or cross-sectoral nature of 14.0 technologies. It happens, not only thanks to CO, and dedicated initiatives, such as co-learning and bridging or cross-clustering, but also by the spin-outs and new-bom clusters. Successfiil blending requires finding the ‘common ’ and using it as a glue for all activities.
  • Hubbing is a multi-scalar process, which is taking place at different levels and in different scales, from expanding the local footprint to concluding global partnerships. It should derive from actual cluster members’ preferences and requires, particularly at the international level, efforts and mechanisms to be naturally sustained. It is also difficult to be measured with the results not easy to be adequately captured by any quantitative indices. For SMEs, suffering the unconnectedness liability, the assistance of CO in the internationalisation, acts as a ‘door-opener’. However, it must also be noted that provided opportunities cannot often be exploited appropriately, due to resource constraints experienced by small firms, which creates some vicious circles.
  • • HAv actors reveal a sober approach towards blending and hubbing, as they stress the need for limited and cautious ‘de-focusing’ of activates, and strategic engagement with international expansion, mindfiil of the multiple risks involved.

The results obtained also highlight the previously identified aerospace industry attitude towards specialisation, as associated with risks of potential knowledge leakages (Speldekamp. Knoben & Saka-Helmhout, 2019). So, indirectly, they can confirm the possible detrimental effects of geographical specialisation (localisation economies), as well as confirming the capabilities of these companies to absorb spill-overs from other, sometimes unrelated industries. These observations lead to the identification of a particular pattern, whereby, the provision of IC and RV and processes of blending and hubbing are influenced by the moderating effects of industry (i.e. its propensity to 14.), key actors (size and power) and the universal nature of

14.0 technologies.

The co-learning initiatives, undertaken in Hamburg, seem to be an answer to the calls of adequate managing of knowledge networks in localities of learning (Brinklroff, Suwala & Kulke, 2016). Although it is assumed that ICs are associated with hubbing processes mainly and RV develops chiefly thanks to the blending process, all these concepts share some commonalities. As the HAv case shows, hubbing and blending can overlap, i.e. happen simultaneously, whereas RV might be perceived as a sub-category of ICs. All in all, HAv seems to follow the presumed path of becoming more interregional and also cross-sectoral. While blending, i.e. the sectoral expansion, is indeed lurked to the provision of RV (it seems difficult to absolutely decide which phenomenon reflects more—a process or the nature of cluster); the regional expansion, i.e. hubbing, does not seem to be contributing, particularly, to the development of ICs.

As the research followed the GTM, the main findings have been derived from the gradual iterative process of data collecting and analysing. Fust, the quotations ‘in extenso' gathered during interviews and via informant centric insight, have been analysed and critically assessed. It has led to the creation of second-order constructs—the codes which summarise the insight and give a label to aspects raised by interviewees. These codes—grouped and re-phrased—become in the next stages, the properties of the key categories defined hr this research (Figure 7.2). These four categories had been set in advance, which implies adopting the hybrid form of GTM.

In particular, by seeking to move ‘beyond the inductive theory building towards the contextualised explanation' (Welch, Piekkari, Plakoyiatmaki & Paavilaineu-Mantymaki, 2011), the provision of IC and RV and stretching processes in HAv can be diagnosed and explained.

Procedure adopted—provision of IC and RY and sti etching processes in HAv—GTM

Figure 7.2 Procedure adopted—provision of IC and RY and sti etching processes in HAv—GTM: from inductive theory building to contextualised explanation

Source: Author’s own proposal

104 Cluster -IC, RVand Stretching

< Prev   CONTENTS   Source   Next >