Frank Lerch

Planning for Path Dependence? The Case of a Network in the Berlin‐Brandenburg Optics Cluster

abstract Much research on regional business clusters refers to path dependence as a central feature in the evolution of cluster structures. In many cases, however, little is known about the agentic processes and mechanisms that underlie path dependence. In this article, we explore changes in a specific network in the optics cluster in the German region of Berlin-Brandenburg to show that development of clusters can be driven by elements of both emergence and planning. In particular, we argue that current actors actively and purposively draw upon rules and resources that were shaped not only in the long and discontinuous history of the cluster but also in the recent process of network development that involves careful planning and well-structured planning tools. Using central concepts from structuration theory, we show how agency is implicated in the coordination of the network and how agency turns coordination into a self-reinforcing mechanism. The findings suggest that purposive planning involves a fundamental ambivalence in the processes and outcomes of path dependence, at the level of both the cluster and its constituent networks.

Planning for path dependence

abstract Much research on regional business clusters refers to path dependence as a central feature in the evolution of cluster structures. In many cases, however, little is known about the agentic processes and mechanisms that underlie path dependence. In this article, we explore changes in a specific network in the optics cluster in the German region of Berlin-Brandenburg to show that development of clusters can be driven by elements of both emergence and planning. In particular, we argue that current actors actively and purposively draw upon rules and resources that were shaped not only in the long and discontinuous history of the cluster but also in the recent process of network development that involves careful planning and well-structured planning tools. Using central concepts from structuration theory, we show how agency is implicated in the coordination of the network and how agency turns coordination into a self-reinforcing mechanism. The findings suggest that purposive planning involves a fundamental ambivalence in the processes and outcomes of path dependence, at the level of both the cluster and its constituent networks.

Barriers to process learning: Authority and anomie in regional clusters

In this article we consider the nature and implications of barriers to collaborative process learning that may occur in regional clusters. Our approach is rooted in research in interorganizational collaboration and focuses on interview-based research in photonics clusters in: Scotland and the West Midlands in the United Kingdom; Berlin-Brandenburg in Germany; and Arizona in the United States of America. From this research we develop characterizations of the barriers to collaborative process learning in clusters at three levels of analysis—the macro, micro and meso levels. We also develop an integrated conceptualization of these barriers, which reveals a difficult tension between ‘authority’ and ‘anomie’. This tension has implications for the management of process learning, but also connects with recent debate about whether learning is most helpfully understood as an individual or collective process.

Developing Photonics Clusters - Commonalilties, Contrasts and Contradictions

This paper compares the development of four leading photonics clusters: Arizona, Berlin-Brandenburg, Midlands and Scotland. A structuration framework is used to explore the cluster processes that are guided by cluster rules and resources.