, Volume 99, Issue 1, pp 77–95 | Cite as

The evolution of cluster network structure and firm growth: a study of industrial software clusters

  • Hee Dae Kim
  • Duk Hee Lee
  • Hochull Choe
  • Il Won Seo


Since the cluster began to receive attention as a critical environmental factor in geographical economics, it has provided a major research methodology across multiple disciplines from industrial organization, strategic management, regional innovation system, and Triple Helix to virtual clusters. Network structure analysis (NSA) offers a common framework to observe clusters that have been studied separately from the viewpoint of industrial organization and strategic management. Industrial structure analysis, is based on the externality of a network and the resource-based view, focused on the inherent network capacity, have been combined with the study of structural changes through cluster NSA, to create a new direction for the growth of industry and individual firms. This study aims to analyze the correlation between the networking of structural change and a firm’s performance by selecting a software industrial cluster as a representative case for the knowledge industry. We examine the network structural positions of each node during the cluster evolution process. This empirical study has significance for establishing a firm’s growth strategy as well as supporting the policy about clusters, through outlining the dynamic evolution process of the networking activities in a knowledge industry cluster.


Cluster Complexity Triple Helix Software Network Network structure analysis 

JEL Classification

C38 L16 L86 N95 



This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea, which is Grant funded by the Korean Government (NRF-2011-330-B00046).


  1. Ahuja, G. (2000). Collaboration networks, structural holes, and innovation: Longitudinal study. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45, 425–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arthurs, D., Erin, C., Charles, H. D., & Wolfe, D. (2009). Indicators to support innovation cluster policy. International Journal of Technology Management, 46(3/4), 263–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Audretsch, D. B., & Feldman, M. P. (1996). R&D spillovers and the geography of innovation and production. American Economic Review, 86(4), 253–273.Google Scholar
  4. Barabasi, A. L., & Albet, R. (1999). Emergence of scaling in random networks. Science, 268, 509–512.Google Scholar
  5. Burt, R. S. (1980). Models of network structure. Annual Review of Sociology, 6, 79–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Burt, R. S. (1992). Structural holes: The social structure of competition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Burt, R. S. (2007). Secondhand brokerage: Evidence on the importance of local structure for managers, bankers, and analysts. Academy of Management Journal, 50, 119–148.Google Scholar
  8. Capello, R. (1999). Spatial transfer of knowledge in high technology milieux: Learning versus collective learning processes. Regional Studies, 33(4), 353–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chell, E., & Baines, S. (2000). Networking, entrepreneurship and micro business behaviour. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 12(3), 195–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, 128–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94, 95–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cook, K. S., & Emerson, R. M. (1978). Power, equity and commitment in exchange networks. American Sociological Review, 43, 721–739.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cooke, P. (2002). Knowledge economies: Clusters, learning and cooperative advantage. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  14. Cooke, P., Uranga, M. G., & Etxebarria, G. (1997). Regional innovation systems: Institutional and organisational dimensions. Research Policy, 26, 475–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cross, R., & Prusak, L. (2002). The people who make organizations go or stop. Harvard Business Review, 80(6), 104–112.Google Scholar
  16. Dyer, J. H., & Singh, H. (1998). The relational view: Cooperative strategy and sources of interorganizational competitive advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23(4), 660–679.Google Scholar
  17. Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (1995). Triple Helix-university-industry-government relations: A laboratory for knowledge-based economic development. EASST Review, 14, 14–19.Google Scholar
  18. Farina, V. (2008). Network embeddedness, specialization choices and performance in investment banking industry. MPRA Paper 11701, University Library of Munich, Germany.Google Scholar
  19. Freeman, L. C. (1979). Centrality in social networks: Conceptual clarification. Social Networks, 1, 215–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gidden, A. (1993). New rules of sociological method: A positive critique of interpretative sociologies (2nd ed.). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Giuliani, E. (2007). The selective nature of knowledge networks in clusters: Evidence from the wine industry. Journal of Economic Geography, 7(1), 139–168.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  22. Granovetter, M. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78, 1360–1380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Huggins, R. (2000). The success and failure of policy-implanted inter-firm network initiatives: Motivations, processes and structure. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 12, 111–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Jarillo, C. J. (1989). Entrepreneurship and growth: The strategic use of external resources. Journal of Business Venturing, 4, 215–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Khan, G. F., Cho, S. E., & Park, H. W. (2012). A comparison of the Daegu and Edinburgh musical industries: a triple helix approach. Scientometrics, 90(1), 85–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Khan, G. F., & Park, H. W. (2012). Editorial: Triple helix and innovation in Asia using scientometrics, webometrics, and informetrics. Scientometrics, 90(1), 1–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kim, Y. H. (1991). Social network analysis. Seoul, Korea: Pakyoungsa.Google Scholar
  28. Kim, H., Huang, M., Jin, F., Bodoff, D., & Moon, J. (2012). Triple helix in the agricultural sector of Northeast Asian countries: a comparative study between Korea and China. Scientometrics, 90(1), 101–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kogut, B., & Zander, U. (1992). Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology. Organization Science, 3, 383–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Koka, B. R., & Prescott, J. E. (2002). Strategic alliances as social capital: A multidimensional view. Strategic Management Journal, 23, 795–816.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Koka, B. R., & Prescott, J. E. (2008). Designing alliance networks: The interacting effects of environmental change and firm strategy on alliance performance. Strategic Management Journal, 29(6), 639–661.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Koo, Y., & Park, S. O. (2012). Structural and spatial characteristics of personal actor networks: The case of industries for the elderly in Korea. Papers in Regional Science, 91(1), 43–64.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  33. Lechner, C., & Dowling, M. (2003). Firm networks: External relationships as sources for the growth and competitiveness of entrepreneurial firms. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 15(1), 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Lee, G. R. (2001). Analysis of the knowledge clusters of Korea for policy design to activate regional innovation 2001–2008, KISTEP. Policy Research.Google Scholar
  35. Leydesdorff, L. (1995). The challenge of scientometrics: The development, measurement, and self-organization of scientific communications. Leiden: DSWO Press, Leiden University. Retrieved from Accessed 18 Sept 2012.
  36. Liu, B., Madhavan, R., & Sudharshan, D. (2005). DiffuNET: The impact of network structure on diffusion of innovation. European Journal of Finance, 8(2), 240–262.Google Scholar
  37. Lorenzoni, G., & Lipparini, A. (1999). The leveraging of interfirm relationships as a distinctive organizational capability: A longitudinal study. Strategic Management Journal, 20(4), 317–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lorenzoni, G., & Ornati, O. A. (1988). Constellations of firms and new ventures. Journal of Business Venturing, 3, 41–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Madhavan, R. (1996). Strategic flexibility and performance in the global steel industry: The role of interfirm linkages. Unpublished dissertation, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA.Google Scholar
  40. Marsden, P. V. (1990). Network data and measurement. Annual Review of Sociology, 16, 435–463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Marshall, A. (1920). Principles of economics (Revised Edition ed.). London: Macmillan; reprinted by Prometheus Books. ISBN 1-57392-140-8.Google Scholar
  42. NISTEP (National Institute of Science and Technology Policy), (2004). A study on conditions and promotion policy for successful regional innovation. Developing Japanese-type sustainable regional cluster. Final Report, Policy Study No. 9. Tokyo: NISTEP.Google Scholar
  43. Nooy, W. D., Mrvar, A., & Batagelj, V. (2011). Exploratory Social Network Analysis with Pajek. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Passiante, G. (2002). From geographical innovation clusters towards virtual innovation clusters: The virtual innovation System. 42nd ERSA Congress, University of Dortmund (Germany), 27–31 Aug 2002.Google Scholar
  45. Pihkala, T., Varamäki, E., & Vesalainen, J. (1999). Virtual organization and the SMEs: A review and model development. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 11(4), 335–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Podolny, J. M. (2001). Networks as the pipes and prism of the market. American Journal of Sociology, 107(1), 33–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Porter, M. E. (1999). Clusters and competitions. In M. Porter (Ed.), On competition. London: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  48. Powell, W. W., Koput, K. W., & Smith-Doerr, L. (1996). Technological change and the locus of innovation: Networks of learning in biotechnology. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(1), 116–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Scott, J. (1991). Social network analysis: A handbook. London: Saga Publications. ISBN 0-8039-8480-4.Google Scholar
  50. Sohn, D. W. (2002). Social network analysis. Seoul, Korea: Kyung-Moon Publishers.Google Scholar
  51. Sparrowe, R. T., Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., & Kraimer, M. L. (2001). Social networks and the performance of individuals and groups. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 316–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Ter Wal, A. L. F. (2011). Cluster emergence and network evolution: A longitudinal analysis of the inventor network in Sophia-Antipolis. Regional Studies, 47(5), 651–668.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Trippl, M., Tödtling, F., and Lengauer, L. (2007). The Vienna software cluster: Local buzz without global pipelines? SREDiscussion Papers, Nr. 2007/07, 2007/07. Vienna.Google Scholar
  54. Webber, M. (1964). Culture, territoriality and the elastic Nile. Papers of the Regional Science Association, 11, 59–69.Google Scholar
  55. Zaheer, A., & Bell, G. (2005). Benefiting from network position: Firm capabilities, structural holes, and performance. Strategic Management Journal, 26, 809–825.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Zott, C. (2003). Dynamic capabilities and the emergence of intra-industry differential firm performance: Insights from a simulation study. Strategic Management Journal, 24, 97–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hee Dae Kim
    • 1
  • Duk Hee Lee
    • 1
  • Hochull Choe
    • 2
  • Il Won Seo
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Management ScienceKorea Advanced Institute of Science and TechnologyTaejonRepublic of Korea
  2. 2.Management Strategy TeamKorea Research Institute of Chemical TechnologyTaejonRepublic of Korea

Personalised recommendations