Innovation Systems Research Network (ISRN) 7th Annual Conference (Graduate Student Session)

Understanding the ISRN conception of clusters: How

metaphors both reveal & concealPrepared by:

Amanda Williams Doctoral Student

Faculty of Communication and CultureUniversity of Calgary

The “Cluster Craze” Today it is nearly impossible to escape the

plethora of studies on clusters. As the ISRN work illsustrates, Canada has not

been immunune in trying to contribute to this growing body of work on clusters.

In reflexive spirit of work such as Malmberg & Maskell (2001) and Martin & Sunley (2003) this paper is an effort to start think critically about how clusters are being conceptualized discursively.

Introduction: My Motivation... This paper is inspired by an interest in how language in

general, and metaphors in particular, help structure the direction of academic and policy discourse.

Key research questions: how does the cluster metaphor function within ISRN documents; how do metaphors help to shape particular methodological and theoretical approaches to the study of clusters; and how might metaphorical constructions be modified to permit different spaces for future research and avenues of policy development in Canada?

Preliminary effort to try and think about metaphor as a useful tool for policy making.

Theoretical Considerations:A Battle Over Definitions Historical definitions (Aristotle & others) -Metaphors are ornamental, parasitic, deviant -This has in the words of Tilley (1999) “done considerable

intellectual damage to the concept”Versus

Contemporary definitions, which come mostly from cognitive linguistics (Lakoff & Johnson, 1980)

“Understanding and experiencing one thing in terms of another” -Source (concrete), target (abstract), mappings-LOVE (target) AS A JOURNEY (concrete)-Mappings (travelers as lovers, vehicle as the love relationship, destination as the purpose of the relationship etc...)

Contemporary Definition (Continued…) “Metaphor is not a harmless exercise

in naming. It is one of the principle means by which we understand our experience and reason on the basis of this understanding. To the extent that we act on our reasoning, metaphor plays a role in the creation of reality.”

(Lakoff & Johnson, 1987)

Theoretical Considerations:Why Use Metaphor?

Metaphors have real material consequences in the social world (ARGUMENT AS WAR versus ARGUMENT AS DANCE)

Tilley (1999) suggests we use metaphor for three distinct reasons:

1) Provides a way of giving form to ideas that cannot be expressed in literal words (tacit to codified knowledge);

2) Allows us to put complex ideas in to fewer words; and,

3) Are a vivid tool to help capture people’s imaginations.

Theoretical Considerations: The Challenges of Using Metaphor

Always mask some components of the social world “only partial view never total” (Lakoff & Johnson, 1980);

Involves directing intentions (Latour, 1999); and

Can be used, abused, and contested (Tilley, 1999).

Theoretical Considerations: Literature Review Interest in metaphor is on the rise. Studies in archaeology and anthropology,

communications, education, health, information technology, innovation and knowledge creation (Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995), law, management and politicalscience.

Collectively this work provides a convincing and engaging account of how metaphors function to guide both thinking and actions.

Methodology: Guidelines to Metaphor Analysis Core steps: identify metaphor;

explore how metaphor works & its implications; reflect upon why metaphor was used; and consider some alternatives.

Key question: how do metaphors function in ISRN texts?

Methodology: Data Selected Public face of ISRN findings.

Table 1.ISRN documents selected for analysis

Document Name Year #of references to clusterInitial Project ProposalIntroductory Chapter to Clusters Old and NewIntroductory Chapter to Clusters in a Cold Climate

nd20032004

9319333Total: 319

Recognize that data is limited because it does not look at the specific case studies.

Research Results:ISRN Metaphors The ISRN project uses Porter’s (1998)

definition of a cluster, which is a geographic concentration “of interconnected companies and institutions in a particular field” to help clarify what is meant by the term cluster.

Detailed analysis of the language within the ISRN documents also indicates that there are at least four prevalent metaphorical conceptions of clusters.

Research Results: CLUSTER AS A PERSON

Generally positive;looks at life-cycles;not just a snapshot in time.

Table 2. EXAMPLES OF THE MAPPING OF A CLUSTER AS A PERSON FOUND IN

ISRN TEXTS PERSON (Source) CLUSTER (Target) Traits Dominant, Bona fide Case, Impostor, Life Cycle Born, Grow, Develop, Evolve Activities Perform, Innovate Personality- Has Characteristics Weak, Strong, Celebrated, Resilient,

Robust, Innovative Diversity Local, Regional, talk of the individual

cluster as part of a larger group of clusters

History Origins Parents Research Institutes and Firms Source of life- Blood Source of life- Knowledge Flows

Research Results:CLUSTER AS A PLANT

Should the focus be on how firms or regions can replicate the cluster phenomenon? How useful are best practices?

Table 3. EXAMPLES OF THE MAPPING OF A CLUSTER AS A PLANT FOUND IN

ISRN TEXTS PLANTS (Source) CLUSTER (Target) Life cycle Has a measurable growth rate, viability Come from seeds Seeding of a cluster Have roots Roots and rooted Garden Economy Gardeners Policy-makers

Research Results:CLUSTER AS A FORCE

Interesting metaphor because force it still a relatively abstract source domain.

Table 4. EXAMPLES OF THE MAPPING OF A CLUSTER AS A FORCE FOUND IN

ISRN TEXTS FORCE (Source) CLUSTER (Target) Directionality Trajectories Field Magnetic, Attraction Power Boosts the economy

Research Results: CLUSTER AS AN ASSOCIATION or AN “ELITE GROUP”

Suggests membership has its advantages; is firm focused; bounded entity to an imaginary phenomenon.

Table 5. EXAMPLES OF THE MAPPING OF A CLUSTER AS AN ASSOCIATION

FOUND IN ISRN TEXTS FORCE (Source) CLUSTER (Target) Members Concrete Members- Firms, Anchor-

Firms, Entrepreneurs, Universities Abstract Members- Social Capital

Benefits Shared resources, Technology and Knowledge sharing

Marketing Cluster brand and Cluster marketing Self-contained with Specific spatial boundaries National, local, IT, bioscience,

industrial, specialized, celebrated, global, telecommunications, wireless, etc.

Research Results: Interpretations How might we extend these metaphors: person

(how does life-cycle link to local, regional, national fitness landscape?); plant (if not replication what generalizations can be made?); force (what do they repel as well as attract?); and association (should the analytic focus be primarily on firms?).

Most metaphors focused on highly positive attributes but what about the negative components such as local congestion, environmental pressures, labor cost inflation, institutional lock-ins, widening income disparities and over specialization.

Research Results: Interpretations (Continued…)

Could also consider alternative metaphors to a cluster (new industrial spaces, regional innovations milieus).

Need to question why we use cluster metaphors at all; what do we have trouble describing about clusters in literal language?

In final phase of research dissemination the ISRN is in an ideal position to think about the utility of this metaphor;do they limit the scope of the discourse; and how might these metaphors be redirected?

Concluding Thoughts:Areas for Future Research Tool for better understanding knowledge

creation process (Nonaka & Takeuchi’s, 1995, knowledge spiral) and policy-making.

Understanding how members of the cluster actually use the cluster metaphor(s) (e.g. entrepreneurs, universities and firms).

Questioning the development of the academic discourse itself over time.

Exploring popular discourses on clusters and innovation.

Questions/feedback What do you think about this

approach? Is it useful? Additional thoughts and,or,

questions…