集群和新竞争经济学论文外文翻译-中英文论文对照翻译

合集下载

产业集群的外文翻译及原文(族群与集群竞争力)

产业集群的外文翻译及原文(族群与集群竞争力)

英文文献资料(一)Clusters and the New Economics of CompetitionMichael E. Porter(Harvard university)Why Clusters Are Critical to CompetitionModern competition depends on productivity, not on access to inputs or the scale of individual enterprises.Productivity rests on how companies compete,not on the particular fields they compete panies can be highly productive in any industry–shoes, agriculture, or semiconductors – if they employ sophisticated methods, use advanced technology,and offer unique products and services. All industries can employ advanced technology; all industries can be knowledge intensive.The sophistication with which companies compete in a particular location, however, is strongly influenced by the quality of the local business environment.1 Companies cannot employ advanced logistical techniques, for example, without a high quality transportation infrastructure. Nor can companies effectively compete on sophisticated service without well-educated employees. Businesses cannot operate efficiently under onerous regulatory red tape or under a court system that fails to resolve disputes quickly and fairly. Some aspects of the business environment, such as the legal system, for example, or corporate tax rates, affect all industries. In advanced economies, however, the more decisive aspects of the business environment are often cluster specific; these constitute some of the most important microeconomic foundations for competition.Clusters affect competition in three broad ways:first, by increasing the productivity of companies based in the area; second, by driving the direction and pace of innovation, which underpins future productivity growth; and third, by stimulating the formation of new businesses, which expands and strengthens the cluster itself. A cluster allows each member to benefit as if it had greater scale or as if it had joined with others formally – without requiring it to sacrifice its flexibility.Clusters and Productivity. Being part of a cluster allows companies to operate more productively in sourcing inputs; accessing information, technology,and needed institutions; coordinating with related companies; and measuring and motivating improvement.Better Access to Employees and Suppliers. Companies in vibrant clusters can tap into an existing pool of specialized and experienced employees, thereby lowering their search and transaction costs in recruiting. Because a cluster signals opportunity and reduces the risk of relocation for employees, it can also be easier to attract talented people from other locations, a decisive advantage in some industries.A well-developed cluster also provides an efficient means of obtaining other important inputs.Such a cluster offers a deep and specialized supplier base. Sourcing locally instead of from distant suppliers lowers transaction costs. It minimizes the need for inventory, eliminates importing costs and delays, and –because local reputation is important –lowers the risk that suppliers will overprice or renege on commitments. Proximity improves communications and makes it easier for suppliers to provide ancillary or support services such as installation and debugging. Other things being equal, then, local outsourcing is a better solution than distantoutsourcing, especially for advanced and specialized inputs involving embedded technology, information, and service content.Formal alliances with distant suppliers can mitigate some of the disadvantages of distant outsourcing. But all formal alliances involve their own complex bargaining and governance problems and can inhibit a company’s flexibility. The close, informal relationships possible among companies in a cluster are often a superior Arrangement.In many cases, clusters are also a better alternative to vertical pared with in-house units, outside specialists are often more cost effective and responsive, not only in component production but also in services such as training. Although extensive vertical integration may have once been the norm, a fast-changing environment can render vertical integration inefficient, ineffective, and inflexible.Even when some inputs are best sourced from a distance, clusters offer advantages. Suppliers trying to penetrate a large, concentrated market will price more aggressively, knowing that as they do so they can realize efficiencies in marketing and in service.Working against a cluster’s advantages in assembling resources is the possibility that competition will render them more expensive and scarce. But companies do have the alternative of outsourcing many inputs from other locations, which tends to limit potential cost penalties. More important, clusters increase not only the demand for specialized inputs but also their supply.Access to Specialized Information. Extensive market, technical, and competitive information accumulates within a cluster, and members have preferred access to it. In addition, personal relationships and community ties foster trust and facilitate the flow of information. These conditions make information more transferable.Complementarities. A host of linkages among cluster members results in a whole greater than the sum of its parts. In a typical tourism cluster, for example, the quality of a visitor’s experience depends not only on the appeal of the primary attraction but also on the quality and efficiency of complementary businesses such as hotels, restaurants, shopping outlets, and transportation facilities. Because members of the cluster are mutually dependent, good performance by one can boost the success of the others.Complementarities come in many forms. The most obvious is when products complement one another in meeting customers’ needs, as the tourism example illustrates. Another form is the coordination of activities across companies to optimize their collective productivity. In wood products, for instance, the efficiency of sawmills depends on a reliable supply of high-quality timber and the ability to put all the timber to use – in furniture (highest quality), pallets and boxes (lower quality), or wood chips (lowest quality). In the early 1990s, Portuguese sawmills suffered from poor timber quality because local landowners did not invest in timber management. Hence most timber was processed for use in pallets and boxes, a lower-value use that limited the price paid to landowners. Substantial improvement in productivity was possible, but only if several parts of the cluster changed simultaneously.Logging operations, for example, had to modify cutting and sorting procedures, while sawmills had to develop the capacity to process wood in more sophisticated ways. Coordination to develop standard wood classifications and measures was an important enabling step. Geographically dispersed companies are less likely to recognize and capture such linkages.Other complementarities arise in marketing. A cluster frequently enhances the reputation of a location in a particular field, making it more likely that buyers will turn to a vendor based there.Italy’s strong reputation for fashion and design, for example, benefits companies involved in leather goods, footwear, apparel, and accessories. Beyond reputation, cluster members often profit from a variety of joint marketing mechanisms, such as company referrals, trade fairs, trade magazines, and marketing delegations.Finally, complementarities can make buying from a cluster more attractive for customers. Visiting buyers can see many vendors in a single trip. They also may perceive their buying risk to be lower because one location provides alternative suppliers. That allows them to multisource or to switch vendors if the need arises. Hong Kong thrives as a source of fashion apparel in part for this reason.Access to Institutions and Public Goods. Investments made by government or other public institutions– such as public spending for specialized infrastructure or educational programs – can enhance a company’s productivity. The ability to recruit employees trained at local programs, for example, lowers the cost of internal training. Other quasi-public goods, such as the cluster’s information and technology pools and its reputation, arise as natural by-products of competition.It is not just governments that create public goods that enhance productivity in the private sector. Investments by companies –in training programs, infrastructure, quality centers, testing laboratories, and so on – also contribute to increased productivity. Such private investments are often made collectively because cluster participants recognize the potential for collective benefits.Better Motivation and Measurement. Local rivalry is highly motivating. Peer pressure amplifies competitive pressure within a cluster,even among noncompeting or indirectly competing companies. Pride and the desire to look good in the local community spur executives to attempt to outdo one another.Clusters also often make it easier to measure and compare performances because local rivals share general circumstances – for example, labor costs and local market access – and they perform similar activities. Companies within clusters typically have intimate knowledge of their suppliers’ costs. Managers are able to compare costs and employees’performance with other local companies. Additionally, financial institutions can accumulate knowledge about the cluster that can be used to monitor performance.Clusters and Innovation. In addition to enhancing productivity, clusters play a vital role in a company’s ongoing ability to innovate. Some of the same characteristics that enhance current productivity have an even more dramatic effect on innovation and productivity growth.Because sophisticated buyers are often part of a cluster, companies inside clusters usually have a better window on the market than isolated competitors do. Computer companies based in Silicon Valley and Austin, Texas, for example, plug into customer needs and trends with a speed difficult to match by companies located elsewhere. The ongoing relationships with other entities within the cluster also help companies to learn early about evolving technology, component and machinery availability, service and marketing concepts, and so on. Such learning is facilitated by the ease of making site visits and frequent face-to-face contact.Clusters do more than make opportunities for innovation more visible. They also provide the capacity and the flexibility to act rapidly. A company within a cluster often can source what it needs to implement innovations more quickly. Local suppliers and partners can and do get closely involved in the innovation process, thus ensuring a better match with customers’ requirements.Companies within a cluster can experiment at lower cost and can delay large commitments until they are more assured that a given innovation will pan out. In contrast, a company relying ondistant suppliers faces greater challenges in every activity it coordinates with other organizations –in contracting, for example, or securing delivery or obtaining associated technical and service support. Innovation can be even harder in vertically integrated companies, especially in those that face difficult trade-offs if the innovation erodes the value of in-house assets or if current products or processes must be maintained while new ones are developed.Reinforcing the other advantages for innovation is the sheer pressure – competitive pressure, peer pressure, constant comparison – that occurs in a cluster. Executives vie with one another to set their companies apart. For all these reasons, clusters can remain centers of innovation for decades.Clusters and New Business Formation.It is not surprising, then, that many new companies grow up within an existing cluster rather than at isolated locations. New suppliers, for example, proliferate within a cluster because a concentrated customer base lowers their risks and makes it easier for them to spot market opportunities. Moreover, because developed clusters comprise related industries that normally draw on common or very similar inputs, suppliers enjoy expanded opportunities.Clusters are conducive to new business formation for a variety of reasons. Individuals working within a cluster can more easily perceive gaps in products or services around which they can build businesses. Beyond that, barriers to entry are lower than elsewhere. Needed assets, skills, inputs, and staff are often readily available at the cluster location, waiting to be assembled into a new enterprise.Local financial institutions and investors, already familiar with the cluster, may require a lower risk premium on capital. In addition, the cluster often presents a significant local market, and an entrepreneur may benefit from established relationships. All of these factors reduce the perceived risks of entry – and of exit, should the enterprise fail.The formation of new businesses within a cluster is part of a positive feedback loop. An expanded cluster amplifies all the benefits I have described – it increases the collective pool of competitive resources, which benefits a ll the cluster’s members. The net result is that companies in the cluster advance relative to rivals at other locations.英文文献中文翻译(二)来源:哈佛商业评论Vol.76第6期 1998年作者:迈克·E. 波特出版时间:1998簇群与新竞争经济学(美)迈克·E. 波特为什么簇群对竞争至关重要?现代竞争取决于生产力, 而非取决于投入或单个企业的规模。

企业集群与新经济的竞争【外文翻译】

企业集群与新经济的竞争【外文翻译】

外文翻译原文Clusters and the new economics of competitionMaterial Source: Michael E. Porter. Clusters and the New Economies of Competition[J].Harvard Business Review,1998(3). Author: Michael E. Porter Abstract: Today's economic map of the world is dominated by what are called clusters: critical masses in one place of unusual competitive success in particular fields. Clusters are not unique, however; they are highly typical and therein lies a paradox: the enduring competitive advantages in a global economy lie increasingly in local things knowledge, relationships, motivation that distant rivals cannot match. Untangling the paradox of location in a global economy reveals a number of key insights about how companies continually create competitive advantage. What happens inside companies is important, but clusters reveal that the immediate business environment outside companies plays a vital role as well. This role of locations has been long overlooked, despite striking evidence that innovation and competitive success in so many fields are geographically concentrated.Key words: clusters; Competition; competitive advantage;developmentNow that companies can source capital, goods, information, and technology from around the world, often with the click of a mouse, much of the conventional wisdom about how companies and nations compete needs to be overhauled. In theory, more open global markets and faster transportation and communication should diminish the role of location in competition. After all, anything that can be efficiently sourced from a distance through global markets and corporate networks is available to any company and therefore is essentially nullified as a source of competitive advantage. But if location matters less, why, then, is it true that the odds of finding a world-class mutual-fund company in Boston are much higher than in most any other place? Why could the same be said of textile-related companies in North Carolina and South Carolina, of high-performance auto companies in southern Germany, or of fashion shoe companies in northern Italy? Although location remains fundamental to competition, its role today differs vastly from a generation ago. In an era when competition was driven heavily by input costs, locations with someimportant endowment natural harbor, for example, or a supply of cheap labor often enjoyed a comparative advantage that was both competitively decisive and persistent over time. Competition in today's economy is far more dynamic. Companies can mitigate many input-cost disadvantages through global sourcing, rendering the old notion of comparative advantage less relevant. Instead, competitive advantage rests on making more productive use of inputs, which requires continual innovation. Clusters affect competitiveness within countries as well as across national borders. Therefore, they lead to new agendas for all business executives not just those who compete globally. More broadly, clusters represent a new way of thinking about location, challenging much of the conventional wisdom about how companies should be configured, how institutions such as universities can contribute to competitive success, and how governments can promote economic development and prosperity.What is a Cluster? Clusters are geographic concentrations of interconnected companies and institutions in a particular field. Clusters encompass an array of linked industries and other entities important to competition. They include, for example, suppliers of specialized inputs such as components, machinery, and services, and providers of specialized infrastructure. Clusters also often extend downstream to channels and customers and laterally to manufacturers of complementary products and to companies in industries related by skills, technologies, or common inputs. Finally, many clusters include governmental and other institutions - such as universities, standards-setting agencies, think tanks, vocational training providers, and trade associations - that provide specialized training, education, information, research, and technical support. The California wine cluster is a good example. It includes 680 commercial wineries as well as several thousand independent wine grape growers. An extensive complement of industries supporting both wine making and grape growing exists, including suppliers of grape stock, irrigation and harvesting equipment, barrels, and labels; specialized public relations and advertising firms; and numerous wine publications aimed at consumer and trade audiences. A host of local institutions is involved with wine, such as the world-renowned viticulture and enology program at the University of California at Davis, the Wine Institute, and special committees of the California senate and assembly. The cluster also enjoys weaker linkages to other California clusters in agriculture, food and restaurants, and wine-country tourism.Consider also the Italian leather fashion cluster, which contains well-knownshoe companies such as Ferragamo and Gucci as well as a host of specialized suppliers of footwear components, machinery, molds, design services, and tanned leather. It also consists of several chains of related industries, including those producing different types of leather goods (linked by common inputs and technologies) and different types of footwear (linked by overlapping channels and technologies). These industries employ common marketing media and compete with similar images in similar customer segments. A related Italian cluster in textile fashion, including clothing, scarves, and accessories, produces complementary products that often employ common channels. The extraordinary strength of the Italian leather fashion cluster can be attributed, at least in part, to the multiple linkages and synergies that participating Italian businesses enjoy.A cluster's boundaries are defined by the linkages and complementarities across industries and institutions that are most important to competition. Although clusters often fit within political boundaries, they may cross state or even national borders. In the United States, for example, a pharmaceuticals cluster straddles New Jersey and Pennsylvania near Philadelphia. Similarly, a chemicals cluster in Germany crosses over into German-speaking Switzerland. Clusters rarely conform to standard industrial classification systems, which fail to capture many important actors and relationships in competition. Thus significant clusters may be obscured or even go unrecognized. In Massachusetts, for example, more than 400 companies, representing at least 30,000 high-paying jobs, are involved in medical devices in some way. The cluster long remained all but invisible, however, buried within larger and overlapping industry categories such as electronic equipment and plastic products. Executives in the medical devices cluster have only recently come together to work on issues that will benefit them all.Clusters promote both competition and cooperation. Rivals compete intensely to win and retain customers. Without vigorous competition, a cluster will fail. Yet there is also cooperation, much of it vertical, involving companies in related industries and local institutions. Competition can coexist with cooperation because they occur on different dimensions and among different players.Clusters represent a kind of new spatial organizational form in between arm's length markets on the one hand and hierarchies, or vertical integration, on the other.A cluster, then, is an alternative way of organizing the value chain. Compared with market transactions among dispersed and random buyers and sellers, the proximity of companies and institutions in one location and the repeated exchanges amongthem fosters better coordination and trust. Thus clusters mitigate the problems inherent in arm's-length relationships without imposing the inflexibilities of vertical integration or the management challenges of creating and maintaining formal linkages such as networks, alliances, and partnerships. A cluster of independent and informally linked companies and institutions represents a robust organizational form that offers advantages in efficiency, effectiveness, and flexibility. Access to Institutions and Public Goods. Investments made by government or other public institutions such as public spending for specialized infrastructure or educational programs can enhance a company's productivity. The ability to recruit employees trained at local programs, for example, lowers the cost of internal training. Other quasi-public goods, such as the cluster's information and technology pools and its reputation, arise as natural by-products of competition. It is not just governments that create public goods that enhance productivity in the private sector. Investments by companies in training programs, infrastructure, quality centers, testing laboratories, and so on, also contribute to increased productivity. Such private investments are often made collectively because cluster participants recognize the potential for collective benefits. Clusters also often make it easier to measure and compare performances because local rivals share general circumstances, for example, labor costs and local market access and they perform similar activities. Companies within clusters typically have intimate knowledge of their suppliers' costs. Managers are able to compare costs and employees' performance with other local companies. Additionally, financial institutions can accumulate knowledge about the cluster that can be used to monitor performance.In addition to enhancing productivity, clusters play a vital role in a company's ongoing ability to innovate. Some of the same characteristics that enhance current productivity have an even more dramatic effect on innovation and productivity growth. Clusters do more than make opportunities for innovation more visible. They also provide the capacity and the flexibility to act rapidly. A company within a cluster often can source what it needs to implement innovations more quickly. Local suppliers and partners can and do get closely involved in the innovation process, thus ensuring a better match with customers' requirements.译文企业集群与新经济的竞争资料来源:迈克尔·波特.企业集群与新经济的竞争.哈佛商业评论[J].1998(3) 作者:迈克尔·波特摘要:今天的经济世界地图充斥着所谓的集群:在某些方面特定领域的临界物质的不寻常的成功竞争。

经济学论文外文翻译

经济学论文外文翻译

经济学论文外文翻译In recent years, the global economy has undergone significant changes, with the rise of emerging markets and the increasing interconnectedness of financial markets around the world. These changes have led to a growing interest in understanding the factors that drive economic growth and development in different countries.One of the key factors that has been identified as a driver of economic growth is innovation. Innovation plays a crucial role in driving economic growth by creating new products, services, and technologies that can boost productivity and create new sources of wealth. Countries that are able to foster a culture of innovation and entrepreneurship are more likely to experience sustained economic growth and development over the long term.In addition to innovation, other factors such as human capital, infrastructure, and institutional quality also play important roles in driving economic growth. Human capital, in particular, is crucial for economic development as it allows countries to attract investment and talent from around the world. Investments in education and training can help to improve the skills and productivity of the workforce, leading to higher levels of economic growth.Infrastructure is another key factor that can have a significant impact on economic growth. Countries with well-developed infrastructure, such as transportation networks, communication systems, and energy supply, are better able to attract investment and support economic activity. Investing in infrastructure can also help to reduce costs, improve efficiency, and stimulate economicgrowth in the long term.Finally, institutional quality is an important determinant of economic growth. Countries with strong institutions, such as well-functioning legal systems, property rights protection, and effective governance, are more likely to attract investment and foster economic development. By creating a stable and predictable environment for businesses and investors, strong institutions can help to support economic growth and development.In conclusion, economic growth is driven by a complex interplayof factors, including innovation, human capital, infrastructure, and institutional quality. By understanding and promoting these factors, countries can create the conditions for sustained economic growth and development over the long term.。

经济学英文论文及翻译范文

经济学英文论文及翻译范文

经济学英文论文及翻译范文Economics is a field that is constantly evolving and changing, and the study of economics involves a deep understanding of how individuals, businesses, and governments make decisions about how to allocate resources. This paper will explore the concepts of supply and demand, elasticity, and market structures, and their impact on the economy.The concept of supply and demand is a fundamental principle in economics, and it refers to the relationship between the quantity of a good that producers are willing to sell and the quantity that consumers are willing to buy. When demand for a good increases, the price tends to rise, and when demand decreases, the price tends to fall. On the other hand, when supply increases, the price tends to fall, and when supply decreases, the price tends to rise. This interaction between supply and demand determines the equilibrium price and quantity of a good in a market.Elasticity is a measure of how much the quantity demanded of a good responds to a change in price. The price elasticity of demand measures the responsiveness of the quantity demanded to a change in price, and it is calculated as the percentage change in quantity demanded divided by the percentage change in price. If the price elasticity of demand is greater than 1, it is considered to be elastic, meaning that a small change in price leads to a relatively large change in quantity demanded. Conversely, if the price elasticity of demand is less than 1, it is considered to be inelastic, meaning that a change in price leads to a relatively small change in quantity demanded.Market structures refer to the characteristics of a market that affect the behavior of firms and the outcomes of the market. There arefour main types of market structures: perfect competition, monopolistic competition, oligopoly, and monopoly. In a perfectly competitive market, there are many small firms selling identical products, and there are no barriers to entry or exit. Monopolistic competition is similar to perfect competition, but firms sell differentiated products. In an oligopoly, a few large firms dominate the market, and there are significant barriers to entry. A monopolyis a market with only one seller, and there are high barriers to entry. In conclusion, the concepts of supply and demand, elasticity, and market structures play a crucial role in shaping the economy. Understanding how these concepts interact and influence eachother is essential for policymakers and businesses to make informed decisions that can lead to a more efficient allocation of resources and a more prosperous economy.翻译范文如下:经济学是一个不断发展和变化的领域,经济学的研究涉及对个人、企业和政府如何做出关于资源配置的决策有着深刻的理解。

经济学英文论文及翻译题目

经济学英文论文及翻译题目

经济学英文论文及翻译题目The Impact of Globalization on Income InequalityAbstract:This paper examines the impact of globalization on income inequality. Globalization has been a major force shaping the world economy in recent decades, leading to increased interconnectedness and integration of economies. While globalization has brought about many benefits such as increased trade and economic growth, it has also been associated with rising income inequality within and between countries. This paper reviews the existing literature on the subject and analyzes the various channels through which globalization can affect income distribution. In addition, it discusses the role of policies and institutions in mitigating the adverse effects of globalization on income inequality. The findings suggest that while globalizationhas the potential to reduce poverty and improve living standardsfor many, it has also contributed to widening income disparities. Effective policy interventions and institutional reforms are crucialin ensuring that the benefits of globalization are shared more equitably across society.全球化对收入不平等的影响摘要:本文考察了全球化对收入不平等的影响。

经济外文翻译外文文献英文文献产业集群中的竞争和合作应用于公共政策

经济外文翻译外文文献英文文献产业集群中的竞争和合作应用于公共政策

外文翻译之一Competition and Cooperation in Industrial Cluster: TheImplication for Public PolicyDavid NewlandsEnglishEuropean Planning Studies, , (2003)2. Industrial Clusters: A Critical Reading of Different TheoriesAgglomeration Theory, From Marshall OnwardsMarshall, in his writings on Sheffield, Lancashire and other British regions, viewed the main source of external economies as the ‘commons’, the infrastructure and other services from which each individual firm in an industrial district might draw (Marshall, 1921). Examples include, in modern terminology, improved job search and job matching, more favorable access to capital finance and inter-firm labor migration. The availability of such common resources to a number of firms then enhances their size and diversity as both capital and labor are attracted to such areas to exploit the larger markets for their services. This in turn leads to reductions in factor prices and/or increases in factor productivities. These are the ways in which the external benefit to firms of a location in the industrial district manifests itself. Unit production costs will be lower within the industrial district than out with it.Parallel to his studies of industrial organization, in the various editions of his Principles of Economics, Marshall (1890, 1920) helped develop what was to become standard agglomeration theory. This was then built upon subsequently by a number of writers. For example, Scitovsky (1954) identified a further category of ‘pecuniary external economies’, Perroux (1955) contributed his famous theory of growth poles, and Chinitz (1961) applied the notion of agglomeration economies to the economic development of New York and Pittsburgh. More recently, Krugman (1991, 1995) has emphasized the importance of increasing returns as a favorable condition for the development of external economies. Porter (1990) can also be understood as belonging to this lineage in the sense that external economies make up many of the keyrelationships within his famous ‘diamond’.Standard agglomeration theory provides an explanation of why firms might cluster together, sharing a ‘commons’ of business services and a diversified labour force, and forming extensive local linkages with other firms. However, it conforms to neo-classical theory in that local economies are viewed as collections of atomistic businesses, aware of one another solely through the intermediation of price/cost signals. Firms continue to compete with each other although Marshall was keen to warn of the risks that fir ms’ collaboration, in the development of shared inputs, risked blunting competitive forces.Transaction Costs: The ‘Californian School’In the writings of the ‘Californian school’, the disintegration of productive systems leads to an increase in firms’ tr ansaction costs (Scott & Storper, 1986; Scott, 1988; Storper, 1989). Changes in market and technological conditions have led to increased uncertainty and greater risks of over capacity (of labour and capital) and of being locked into redundant technologies.The response of deepening the organizational division of labour leads to an increase in the number of formal market transactions external to the firm. There may also be an increase in the unpredictability and complexity of transactions. The costs of carrying out certain types of transaction—especially those where tacit knowledge is important or trust is required and thus complete contracting is impossible—varies systematically with distance. Thus, agglomeration is the result of the minimization of these types of transactions costs in a situation where such minimization outweighs other production cost differentials.The Californian school sought to explain observed agglomerations of economic activity. The argument centered on the localization of traded interdependencies—or simple input–output relations—but this is at best only a partial explanation, not least in being unable to distinguish convincingly between ‘good’ and ‘bad’ agglomerations. Agglomerations have been found in high wage, technologically advanced industries and low wage technologically stagnant ones alike while there are technologically dynamic agglomerations which lack the dense inter-firm linkages and coordinating institutions of a ‘new industrial district’.Nor is it clear whether markets will succeed in coordinating transactions within clusters (Cooke & Morgan, 1993). The management of traded interdependencies is exactly what we think of as the business of markets but there may nevertheless be market failure. Thus, certain “transactions—in labor markets, in inter-firm relations, in innovation and knowledge development—tended to have points of failure in the absence of appropriate institutions” (Storper,1995, p. 199). With this concern for the institutional arrangements within clusters, the ‘Californian school’ came to share certain of the arguments of the flexible specialization theorists who are discussed next and the institutional and evolutionary economists who are considered shortly.Flexible Specialization, Trust and Untraded InterdependenciesWhile neo-classical economics views firms as atomistic businesses, aware of one another only through formal market signals, modern industrial district theory emphasizes the interdependence of firms, flexible firm boundaries, and the importance of trust in creating and sustaining collaboration between economic actors within the districts.These themes arose first in the literature on flexible specialization in the ‘Third Italy’(Brusco, 1982) but was later extended to Baden-Wu¨rtemberg and other regions (Piore & Sabel, 1984). The sources of flexibility lay in collaborative networks of (mostly) small firms and supporting institutions. These networks permitted the establishment of trust between actors, a crucial argument within most contemporary approaches to clusters. The reasoning is that firms within networks of trust benefit from the reciprocal exchange of information—particularly tacit information that cannot be codified—but are simultaneously bound by ties of obligation which regulate behavior. Trust thus reinforces mutually beneficial relationships between firms. The implicit assumption is that trust is more likely to be sustained in geographically concentrated networks than more dispersed ones (Belussi, 1996).Firms may cooperate in seeking to get new work and may bid together on large projects. They may form consortia to access cheaper finance. They may jointly purchase materials and conduct or commission joint research. They may plan together and receive technical, financial and other services from the ‘commons’. However, despite all these examples of cooperative relationships, founded on or reinforced by trust, because they remain privately ownedbusinesses, firms within clusters continue to compete, with one another and with other firms, often more on quality than price.The embedding of economic relations into a wider social framework appears to be most common where business activity is conditioned by local politics, religion and close kinship and friendship relationships. Thus, “it is probably not a coincidence that the most successful districts have tended to be the most racially and culturally homogeneous” (Harrison, 1992,p. 479). Equally, national (or other broader) economic, legal and policy traditions are relevant. The development of inter-firm cooperation is more likely in some countries, such as Italy, than in others, such as the UK, because of differences in the operation of labor markets and competition policy.According to theorists such as Granovetter (1985), trust arises from the ‘digestion’ of experience. Trust accumulates from repeated interactions between firms and other actors in which they contract and recontract, formally and informally, strike deals, and help each other out at times of crisis. Trust results from a process of learning through experience which actors can be relied upon. Personal contact facilitates such repeated interactions and this in turn is likely to depend on proximity. This focus on untraded interdependencies is very different to the transactions costs approach to agglomeration. The latter concerns the cost minimization of traded relations while untraded interdependencies point to wider processes of the optimization of non-market or non-contract exchanges (Raco, 1999).Finally, it is important to note that untraded interdependencies can not only facilitate effective collective learning and action but also impede it. Especially where familiar conventions become well established, ‘sclerosis’ can set in. Areas can become locked into outdated and inferior technologies and institutions.Innovative Milieux: The GREMI GroupThere have been various schools of thought on the relationship between innovation, high technology industry and regional development. One line of enquiry has focused on the conditions for the establishment and growth of such high technology complexes as Silicon Valley and Route 128. While many factors have been identified, the most discussed is the role of local research intensive universities, Stanford in the case of Silicon Valley and MIT in thecase of Route 128. A large literature on the relationship between innovation, research universities and regional development has been spawned (Saxenian, 1985; Castells & Hall, 1994; Storper, 1993).Another direction of research has been in pursuit of the notion of an innovative milieu, the key theoretical concept of the GREMI (Groupement Europe′en des Milieux Innovateurs) group of regional economists (Aydalot & Keeble, 1988; Camagni, 1995). Clustering enables firms to benefit from a ‘collective learning process’, operating “through skilled labor mobility within the local labor market, customer–supplier technical and organizational interchange, imitation processes …and informal ‘cafeteria’effects”(Camagni, 1991, p. 130). This processdraws upon “an intricate network of mainly informal contacts among local actors …made up of personal face-to-face encounters, casual information flows, customer–supplier cooperation and the like” (Camagni, 1991, p. 131).However, there is a certain ambiguity as to what precisely milieux are. By some readings, a milieu is a set of institutions, practices and rules which provide a framework for development which guides and coordinates the activities of innovators. By other readings, a milieu is a network, of firms, research institutes and policy-makers, which provides the necessary coordination for successful innovation.These different interpretations, together with the very intangibility of milieux, are the sources of major intellectual problems. Thus, the GREMI group “has never b een able to identify the economic logic by which a milieu fosters innovation. There is circularity: innovation occurs because of a milieu, and a milieu is what exists in regions where there is innovation … they do not specify the potential mechanisms and processes by which such milieux function” (Storper, 1995, p. 203).Institutional and Evolutionary EconomicsA further approach derives from institutional and evolutionary economics (Nelson & Winter, 1982; Amin & Thrift, 1992; Amin, 1999). Technological change is seen as path dependent since it involves sequenced, and not simultaneous, choices which are often irreversible. There is a spatial dimension to such choices with interdependencies between organizations being both traded and untraded. The latter include rules and conventionswhich shape the development and communication of knowledge between local actors. Given that there are strong irreversibilities, observed clusters are to some extent accidents of history, reflecting the impact of past choices, although their development is also influenced by the appearance and growth of reinforcing institutions.This approach is potentially very fruitful in understanding the nature of competition in contemporary capitalism (Dosi et al., 1987). Standard economic theory conceptualizes competition as the location on a production possibility frontier that maximizes a firm’s comparative advantage given an existing set of factor prices. Competition is a state, characterized by the absence or minimization of monopoly rents (Nickell, 1996). In contrast, drawing upon an Austrian perspective, institutional and evolutionary economics views competition as a process of economic change, spurred by constant technological change. Thus, if innovation is the driver of competition, a firm (or locality) may possess technologies which are superior to those of others regardless of the level of factor prices.This distinction has come to be known as that between ‘weak’ competition and ‘strong’ or Schumpeterian competition (Hudson, 1999). Weak competition involves the search for lower cost means of producing existing goods with existing technologies. Strong competition is a strategy which involves the creation of new goods or of new technologies to produce existing goods.产业集群中的竞争和合作:应用于公共政策David Newlands英国《欧洲策略研究》,2003年第11期2.产业集群:对不同理论的批判性解读标准的集聚理论——从马歇尔(Marshall)开始马歇尔在他关于Sheffield, Lancashire等其他英国地区的著作中认为外部经济的主要来源是共同的,即个体企业在一个产业地区可能享有的基础设施和其他服务等(Marshall, 1921)。

毕业论文文献外文翻译----危机管理:预防,诊断和干预文献翻译-中英文文献对照翻译

第1页 共19页中文3572字毕业论文(设计)外文翻译标题:危机管理-预防,诊断和干预一、外文原文标题:标题:Crisis management: prevention, diagnosis and Crisis management: prevention, diagnosis andintervention 原文:原文:The Thepremise of this paper is that crises can be managed much more effectively if the company prepares for them. Therefore, the paper shall review some recent crises, theway they were dealt with, and what can be learned from them. Later, we shall deal with the anatomy of a crisis by looking at some symptoms, and lastly discuss the stages of a crisis andrecommend methods for prevention and intervention. Crisis acknowledgmentAlthough many business leaders will acknowledge thatcrises are a given for virtually every business firm, many of these firms do not take productive steps to address crisis situations. As one survey of Chief Executive officers of Fortune 500 companies discovered, 85 percent said that a crisisin business is inevitable, but only 50 percent of these had taken any productive action in preparing a crisis plan(Augustine, 1995). Companies generally go to great lengths to plan their financial growth and success. But when it comes to crisis management, they often fail to think and prepare for those eventualities that may lead to a company’s total failure.Safety violations, plants in need of repairs, union contracts, management succession, and choosing a brand name, etc. can become crises for which many companies fail to be prepared untilit is too late.The tendency, in general, is to look at the company as a perpetual entity that requires plans for growth. Ignoring the probabilities of disaster is not going to eliminate or delay their occurrences. Strategic planning without inclusion ofcrisis management is like sustaining life without guaranteeinglife. One reason so many companies fail to take steps to proactively plan for crisis events, is that they fail to acknowledge the possibility of a disaster occurring. Like an ostrich with its head in the sand, they simply choose to ignorethe situation, with the hope that by not talking about it, it will not come to pass. Hal Walker, a management consultant, points out “that decisions will be more rational and better received, and the crisis will be of shorter duration, forcompanies who prepare a proactive crisis plan” (Maynard, 1993) .It is said that “there are two kinds of crises: those that thatyou manage, and those that manage you” (Augustine, 1995). Proactive planning helps managers to control and resolve a crisis. Ignoring the possibility of a crisis, on the other hand,could lead to the crisis taking a life of its own. In 1979, theThree-Mile Island nuclear power plant experienced a crisis whenwarning signals indicated nuclear reactors were at risk of a meltdown. The system was equipped with a hundred or more different alarms and they all went off. But for those who shouldhave taken the necessary steps to resolve the situation, therewere no planned instructions as to what should be done first. Hence, the crisis was not acknowledged in the beginning and itbecame a chronic event.In June 1997, Nike faced a crisis for which they had no existi existing frame of reference. A new design on the company’s ng frame of reference. A new design on the company’s Summer Hoop line of basketball shoes - with the word air writtenin flaming letters - had sparked a protest by Muslims, who complained the logo resembled the Arabic word for Allah, or God.The council of American-Islamic Relations threatened aa globalNike boycott. Nike apologized, recalled 38,000 pairs of shoes,and discontinued the line (Brindley, 1997). To create the brand,Nike had spent a considerable amount of time and money, but hadnever put together a general framework or policy to deal with such controversies. To their dismay, and financial loss, Nike officials had no choice but to react to the crisis. This incident has definitely signaled to the company that spending a little more time would have prevented the crisis. Nonetheless,it has taught the company a lesson in strategic crisis management planning.In a business organization, symptoms or signals can alert the strategic planners or executives of an eminent crisis. Slipping market share, losing strategic synergy anddiminishing productivity per man hour, as well as trends, issues and developments in the socio-economic, political and competitive environments, can signal crises, the effects of which can be very detrimental. After all, business failures and bankruptcies are not intended. They do not usually happen overnight. They occur more because of the lack of attention to symptoms than any other factor.Stages of a crisisMost crises do not occur suddenly. The signals can usuallybe picked up and the symptoms checked as they emerge. A company determined to address these issues realizes that the real challenge is not just to recognize crises, but to recognize themin a timely fashion (Darling et al., 1996). A crisis can consistof four different and distinct stages (Fink, 1986). The phasesare: prodromal crisis stage, acute crisis stage, chronic crisisstage and crisis resolution stage.Modern organizations are often called “organic” due tothe fact that they are not immune from the elements of their surrounding environments. Very much like a living organism, organizations can be affected by environmental factors both positively and negatively. But today’s successfulorganizations are characterized by the ability to adapt by recognizing important environmental factors, analyzing them, evaluating the impacts and reacting to them. The art of strategic planning (as it relates to crisis management)involves all of the above activities. The right strategy, in general, provides for preventive measures, and treatment or resolution efforts both proactively and reactively. It wouldbe quite appropriate to examine the first three stages of acrisis before taking up the treatment, resolution or intervention stage.Prodromal crisis stageIn the field of medicine, a prodrome is a symptom of the onset of a disease. It gives a warning signal. In business organizations, the warning lights are always blinking. No matter how successful the organization, a number of issues andtrends may concern the business if proper and timely attentionis paid to them. For example, in 1995, Baring Bank, a UK financial institution which had been in existence since 1763,ample opportunitysuddenly and unexpectedly failed. There wasfor the bank to catch the signals that something bad was on thehorizon, but the company’s efforts to detect that were thwarted by an internal structure that allowed a single employee both to conduct and to oversee his own investment trades, and the breakdown of management oversight and internalcontrol systems (Mitroff et al., 1996). Likewise, looking in retrospect, McDonald’s fast food chain was given the prodromalsymptoms before the elderly lady sued them for the spilling ofa very hot cup of coffee on her lap - an event that resulted in a substantial financial loss and tarnished image of thecompany. Numerous consumers had complained about thetemperature of the coffee. The warning light was on, but the company did not pay attention. It would have been much simplerto pick up the signal, or to check the symptom, than facing the consequences.In another case, Jack in the Box, a fast food chain, had several customers suffer intestinal distress after eating at their restaurants. The prodromal symptom was there, but the company took evasive action. Their initial approach was to lookaround for someone to blame. The lack of attention, the evasiveness and the carelessness angered all the constituent groups, including their customers. The unfortunate deaths thatptoms,occurred as a result of the company’s ignoring thesymand the financial losses that followed, caused the company to realize that it would have been easier to manage the crisis directly in the prodromal stage rather than trying to shift theblame.Acute crisis stageA prodromal stage may be oblique and hard to detect. The examples given above, are obvious prodromal, but no action wasWebster’s New Collegiate Dictionary, an acute stage occursacutewhen a symptom “demands urgent attention.” Whether the acutesymptom emerges suddenly or is a transformation of a prodromalstage, an immediate action is required. Diverting funds and other resources to this emerging situation may cause disequilibrium and disturbance in the whole system. It is onlythose organizations that have already prepared a framework forthese crises that can sustain their normal operations. For example, the US public roads and bridges have for a long time reflected a prodromal stage of crisis awareness by showing cracks and occasionally a collapse. It is perhaps in light of the obsessive decision to balance the Federal budget that reacting to the problem has been delayed and ignored. This situation has entered an acute stage and at the time of this writing, it was reported that a bridge in Maryland had just collapsed.The reason why prodromes are so important to catch is thatit is much easier to manage a crisis in this stage. In the caseof most crises, it is much easier and more reliable to take careof the problem before it becomes acute, before it erupts and causes possible complications (Darling et al., 1996). In andamage. However, the losses are incurred. Intel, the largest producer of computer chips in the USA, had to pay an expensiveprice for initially refusing to recall computer chips that proved unreliable o n on certain calculations. The f irmfirm attempted to play the issue down and later learned its lesson. At an acutestage, when accusations were made that the Pentium Chips were not as fast as they claimed, Intel quickly admitted the problem,apologized for it, and set about fixing it (Mitroff et al., 1996). Chronic crisis stageDuring this stage, the symptoms are quite evident and always present. I t isIt is a period of “make or break.” Being the third stage, chronic problems may prompt the company’s management to once and for all do something about the situation. It may be the beginning of recovery for some firms, and a deathknell for others. For example, the Chrysler Corporation was only marginallysuccessful throughout the 1970s. It was not, however, until the company was nearly bankrupt that amanagement shake-out occurred. The drawback at the chronic stage is that, like in a human patient, the company may get used to “quick fixes” and “band “band--aid”approaches. After all, the ailment, the problem and the crisis have become an integral partoverwhelmed by prodromal and acute problems that no time or attention is paid to the chronic problems, or the managers perceive the situation to be tolerable, thus putting the crisison a back burner.Crisis resolutionCrises could be detected at various stages of their development. Since the existing symptoms may be related todifferent problems or crises, there is a great possibility thatthey may be misinterpreted. Therefore, the people in charge maybelieve they have resolved the problem. However, in practicethe symptom is often neglected. In such situations, the symptomwill offer another chance for resolution when it becomes acute,thereby demanding urgent care. Studies indicate that today anincreasing number of companies are issue-oriented and searchfor symptoms. Nevertheless, the lack of experience in resolvinga situation and/or inappropriate handling of a crisis can leadto a chronic stage. Of course, there is this last opportunityto resolve the crisis at the chronic stage. No attempt to resolve the crisis, or improper resolution, can lead to grim consequences that will ultimately plague the organization or even destroy it.It must be noted that an unsolved crisis may not destroy the company. But, its weakening effects can ripple through the organization and create a host of other complications.Preventive effortsThe heart of the resolution of a crisis is in the preventiveefforts the company has initiated. This step, similar to a humanbody, is actually the least expensive, but quite often the mostoverlooked. Preventive measures deal with sensing potential problems (Gonzales-Herrero and Pratt, 1995). Major internalfunctions of a company such as finance, production, procurement, operations, marketing and human resources are sensitive to thesocio-economic, political-legal, competitive, technological, demographic, global and ethical factors of the external environment. What is imminently more sensible and much more manageable, is to identify the processes necessary forassessing and dealing with future crises as they arise (Jacksonand Schantz, 1993). At the core of this process are appropriate information systems, planning procedures, anddecision-making techniques. A soundly-based information system will scan the environment, gather appropriate data, interpret this data into opportunities and challenges, and provide a concretefoundation for strategies that could function as much to avoid crises as to intervene and resolve them.Preventive efforts, as stated before, require preparations before any crisis symptoms set in. Generally strategic forecasting, contingency planning, issues analysis, and scenario analysis help to provide a framework that could be used in avoiding and encountering crises.出处:出处:Toby TobyJ. Kash and John R. Darling . Crisis management: prevention, diagnosis 179-186二、翻译文章标题:危机管理:预防,诊断和干预译文:本文的前提是,如果该公司做好准备得话,危机可以更有效地进行管理。

集群和新竞争经济学外文翻译

中文4020字毕业论文(设计)外文翻译一、外文原文标题:CLUSTERS AND THE NEW ECONOMICS OF COMPETITION 原文:What Is a Cluster?Clusters are geographic concentrations of interconnected companies and institutions in a particular field. Clusters encompass an array of linked industries and other entities important to competition. They include, for example, suppliers of specialized inputs such as components, machinery, and services, and providers of specialized infrastructure. Clusters also often extend downstream to channels and customers and laterally to manufacturers of complementary products and to companies in industries related by skills, technologies, or common inputs. Finally, many clusters include governmental and other institutions –such as universities, standards-setting agencies, think tanks, vocational training providers, and trade associations – that provide specialized training, education, information, research, and technical support.The California wine cluster is a good example. It includes 680 commercial wineries as well as several thousand independent wine grape growers. (See the exhibit “Anatomy of the California Wine Cluster.”) An extensive complement of industries supporting both wine making and grape growing exists, including suppliers of grape stock, irrigation and harvesting equipment, barrels, and labels; specialized public relations and advertising firms; and numerous wine publications aimed at consumer and trade audiences. A host of local institutions is involved with wine, such as the world-renowned viticulture and enology program at the University of California at Davis, the Wine Institute, and special committees of the California senate and assembly. The cluster also enjoys weaker linkages to other California clusters in agriculture, food and restaurants, and wine-country tourism.Consider also the Italian leather fashion cluster, which contains well-known shoe companies such as Ferragamo and Gucci as well as a host of specialized suppliers of footwear components, machinery, molds, design services, and tanned leather. (See the exhibit “Mapping the Italian Leather Fashion Cluster.”) It also consists of several chains of related industries, including those producing different types of leather goods (linked by common inputs and technologies) and different types of footwear (linked by overlapping channels and technologies). These industries employ common marketing media and compete with similar images in similar customer segments. A related Italian cluster in textile fashion, including clothing, scarves, and accessories, produces complementary products that often employ common channels. The extraordinary strength of the Italian leather fashion cluster can be attributed, at least in part, to the multiple linkages and synergies that participating Italian businesses enjoy.A cluster’s boundaries are defined by the linkages and complementarities across industries and institutions that are most important to competition. Although clusters often fit within political boundaries, they may cross state or even national borders. In the United States, for example, a pharmaceuticals cluster straddles New Jersey and Pennsylvania near Philadelphia. Similarly, a chemicals cluster in Germany crosses over into German-speaking Switzerland.Clusters rarely conform to standard industrial classification systems, which fail to capture many important actors and relationships in competition. Thus significant clusters may be obscured or even go unrecognized. In Massachusetts, for example, more than 400 companies, representing at least 39,000 high-paying jobs, are involved in medical devices in some way. The cluster long remained all but invisible, however, buried within larger and overlapping industry categories such as electronic equipment and plastic products. Executives in the medical devices cluster have only recently come together to work on issues that will benefit them all.Clusters promote both competition and cooperation. Rivals compete intensely to win and retain customers. Without vigorous competition, a cluster will fail. Yet there is also cooperation, much of it vertical, involving companies in related industries and local institutions. Competition can coexist with cooperation because they occur ondifferent dimensions and among different players.Clusters represent a kind of new spatial organizational form in between arm’s-length markets on the one hand and hierarchies, or vertical integration, on the other. A cluster, then, is an alternative way of organizing the value chain. Compared with market transactions among dispersed and random buyers and sellers, the proximity of companies and institutions in one location – and the repeated exchanges among them–fosters better coordination and trust. Thus clusters mitigate the problems inherent in arm’s-length relationships without imposing the inflexibilities of vertical integration or the management challenges of creating and maintaining formal linkages such as networks, alliances, and partnerships. A cluster of independent and informally linked companies and institutions represents a robust organizational form that offers advantages in efficiency, effectiveness, and flexibility.Why Clusters Are Critical to CompetitionModern competition depends on productivity, not on access to inputs or the scale of individual enterprises. Productivity rests on how companies compete, not on the particular fields they compete in. Companies can be highly productive in any industry – shoes, agriculture, or semiconductors – if they employ sophisticated methods, use advanced technology, and offer unique products and services. All industries can employ advanced technology; all industries can be knowledge intensive.The sophistication with which companies compete in a particular location, however, is strongly influenced by the quality of the local business environment. Companies cannot employ advanced logistical techniques, for example, without a highquality transportation infrastructure. Nor can companies effectively compete on sophisticated service without well-educated employees. Businesses cannot operate efficiently under onerous regulatory red tape or under a court system that fails to resolve disputes quickly and fairly. Some aspects of the business environment, such as the legal system, for example, or corporate tax rates, affect all industries. In advanced economies, however, the more decisive aspects of the business environment are often cluster specific; these constitute some of the most important microeconomic foundations for competition.Clusters affect competition in three broad ways: first, by increasing the productivity of companies based in the area; second, by driving the direction and pace of innovation, which underpins future productivity growth; and third, by stimulating the formation of new businesses, which expands and strengthens the cluster itself. A cluster allows each member to benefit as if it had greater scale or as if it had joined with others formally – without requiring it to sacrifice its flexibility.Clusters and Productivity. Being part of a cluster allows companies to operate more productively in sourcing inputs; accessing information, technology, and needed institutions; coordinating with related companies; and measuring and motivating improvement.Better Access to Employees and Suppliers. Companies in vibrant clusters can tap into an existing pool of specialized and experienced employees, thereby lowering their search and transaction costs in recruiting. Because a cluster signals opportunity and reduces the risk of relocation for employees, it can also be easier to attract talented people from other locations, a decisive advantage in some industries.A well-developed cluster also provides an efficient means of obtaining other important inputs. Such a cluster offers a deep and specialized supplier base. Sourcing locally instead of from distant suppliers lowers transaction costs. It minimizes the need for inventory, eliminates importing costs and delays, and –because local reputation is important –lowers the risk that suppliers will overprice or renege on commitments. Proximity improves communications and makes it easier for suppliers to provide ancillary or support services such as installation and debugging. Other things being equal, then, local outsourcing is a better solution than distant outsourcing, especially for advanced and specialized inputs involving embedded technology, information, and service content.Formal alliances with distant suppliers can mitigate some of the disadvantages of distant outsourcing. But all formal alliances involve their own complex bargaining and governance p roblems and can inhibit a company’s flexibility. The close, informal relationships possible among companies in a cluster are often a superior arrangement.In many cases, clusters are also a better alternative to vertical integration.Compared with in-house units, outside specialists are often more cost effective and responsive, not only in component production but also in services such as training. Although extensive vertical integration may have once been the norm, a fast-changing environment can render vertical integration inefficient, ineffective, and inflexible.Even when some inputs are best sourced from a distance, clusters offer advantages. Suppliers trying to penetrate a large, concentrated market will price more aggressively, knowing that as they do so they can realize efficiencies in marketing and in service. Working against a cluster’s advantages in assembling resources is the possibility that competition will render them more expensive and scarce. But companies do have the alternative of outsourcing many inputs from other locations, which tends to limit potential cost penalties. More important, clusters increase not only the demand for specialized inputs but also their supply.Access to Specialized Information. Extensive market, technical, and competitive information accumulates within a cluster, and members have preferred access to it. In addition, personal relationships and community ties foster trust and facilitate the flow of information. These conditions make information more transferable.Complementarities. A host of linkages among cluster members results in a whole greater than the sum of its parts. In a typical tourism cluster, for example, the quality of a visitor’s experience depends not only on the appeal of the primary attraction but also on the quality and efficiency of complementary businesses such as hotels, restaurants, shopping outlets, and transportation facilities. Because members of the cluster are mutually dependent, good performance by one can boost the success of the others.Complementarities come in many forms. The most obvious is when products complement one another in meeting customers’ needs, as the tourism example illustrates. Another form is the coordination of activities across companies to optimize their collective productivity. In wood products, for instance, the efficiency of sawmills depends on a reliable supply of high-quality timber and the ability to put all the timber to use – in furniture (highest quality), pallets and boxes (lower quality), or wood chips (lowest quality). In the early 1990s, Portuguese sawmills suffered frompoor timber quality because local landowners did not invest in timber management. Hence most timber was processed for use in pallets and boxes, a lower-value use that limited the price paid to landowners. Substantial improvement in productivity was possible, but only if several parts of the cluster changed simultaneously. Logging operations, for example, had to modify cutting and sorting procedures, while sawmills had to develop the capacity to process wood in more sophisticated ways. Coordination to develop standard wood classifications and measures was an important enabling step. Geographically dispersed companies are less likely to recognize and capture such linkages.Other complementarities arise in marketing. A cluster frequently enhances the reputation of a location in a particular field, making it more likely that buyers will turn to a vendor based there. Italy’s strong reputation for fashion and design, for example, benefits companies involved in leather goods, footwear, apparel, and accessories. Beyond reputation, cluster members often profit from a variety of joint marketing mechanisms, such as company referrals, trade fairs, trade magazines, and marketing delegations.Finally, complementarities can make buying from a cluster more attractive for customers. Visiting buyers can see many vendors in a single trip. They also may perceive their buying risk to be lower because one location provides alternative suppliers. That allows them to multisource or to switch vendors if the need arises. Hong Kong thrives as a source of fashion apparel in part for this reason.Access to Institutions and Public Goods. Investments made by government or other public institutions –such as public spending for specialized infrastructure or educational programs – can enhance a company’s productivity. The ability to recruit employees trained at local programs, for example, lowers the cost of internal training. Other quasi-public goods, such as the cluster’s informa tion and technology pools and its reputation, arise as natural by-products of competition.It is not just governments that create public goods that enhance productivity in the private sector. Investments by companies –in training programs, infrastructure, quality centers, testing laboratories, and so on –also contribute to increasedproductivity. Such private investments are often made collectively because cluster participants recognize the potential for collective benefits.Better Motivation and Measurement. Local rivalry is highly motivating.Peer pressure amplifies competitive pressure within a cluster,even among noncompeting or indirectly competing companies. Pride and the desire to look good in the local community spur executives to attempt to outdo one another.Clusters also often make it easier to measure and compare performances because local rivals share general circumstances – for example, labor costs and local market access – and they perform similar activities. Companies within clusters typically have intimate knowledge of their suppliers’ costs. Managers are able to compare costs and employees’performance with other local companies. Additionally, financial institutions can accumulate knowledge about the cluster that can be used to monitor performance.Source:PorterM E. Clusters and the new economics of competition[ J ]. Harvard Business Review, 1998, 76 (6), pp.78-83二、翻译文章标题:集群和新竞争经济学译文:一、什么是集群产业集群是指与某一产业有关的企业和机构在地理位置上的集中,它包括一批对竞争起作用的、相互联系的产业和其他实体,例如包括零部件、机器和服务等专业化投入的供应商和专业基础设施的提供者。

外文文献及翻译:在全球经济中竞争:创新挑战

外文文献及翻译:在全球经济中竞争:创新挑战外文文献及翻译:在全球经济中竞争:创新挑战外文资料商管031 梅文飞 0364027Competing in the global economy: the innovation challenge Rt. Hon. Tony Blair, Lord Sainsbury. Innovation Report.2003.12: 17-31,52-65.Chapter 1 The innovation challengeSummaryGlobal competition is increasing as a result of trade liberalization, technological change and reductions in transport and communication costs. UK based businesses will find it increasingly difficult to compete onlow costs alone in labour intensive industries exposed to international competition. The challenge for businesses is to compete on the basis of unique value.We have defined innovation as the successful exploitation of newideas and it is central to meeting this challenge. It involves investments in new products, processes or services and in new ways of doing business. Measures to develop the skills and creativity of the workforce are often an essential prerequisite. The speed oftechnological change and market responses make the challenge to innovate urgent and continuous.Overall UK innovation performance appears to be, at best, average compared to our major competitors. This is reflected in the largeproductivity gap that exists between the UK and its major competitors. Innovation performance accounts for a significantproportion of this gap. On the whole, UK firms face a challenge: how to raise their rate of innovation?Innovation is a complex process so understanding why the UK has a relatively modest innovation performance is not straightforward. We drew on an extensive review of the international innovation literature and consulted with a group of leading experts in the field.As a result we have identified seven critical success factors for innovation performance. They are:Sources of new technological knowledge;Capacity to absorb and exploit new knowledge;Access to finance;Competition and entrepreneurship;Customers and suppliers;The Regulatory environment;Networks and collaboration.They help us to identify current strengths and weaknesses of the UK innovation system. A highly abridged summary is provided in this chapter but the more detailed1analysis is contained in an accompanying economic report.Our vision is of the UK as a key knowledge hub in the global economy.A country that will have maintained its outstanding tradition in theadvance of scientific and technological knowledge while developing a similar level of performance in turning knowledge into exciting and novel products and services.The Report complements the Lambert Review of University-Businesslinks as well as the cross-Government Skills Strategy. It makes proposals to strengthen UK performance against all the success factors building upon initiatives that have gone before.What is innovation?1.1. Innovation in this Report is defined as the successful exploitation of new ideas. Ideas may be entirely new to the market or involve the application of existing ideas that are new to the innovating organization or often a combination of both. Innovation involves the creation of new designs, concepts and ways of doing things, their commercial exploitation, and subsequent diffusion through the rest of the economy and society. It is this last–diffusion–phase from which the bulk of the economic benefits flow. Most innovations are incremental–a succession ofindividually modest improvements to products or services over their life cycle. But a few will be dramatic, creating entirely new industries or markets.1.2. Innovation involves experimentation and risk taking. Some attempts to innovate will fail, but across the economy the successes outweigh the failures. And the failures themselves generate newknowledge, which if evaluated correctly, can improve the chances for future success. The risk of failure justifies the potentially high returns from successes, which provide the incentive to innovate in the first place. Successful innovation-led companies have a number of common characteristics (Box 1.1).Characteristics of innovation-led companies:A worldwide focus, often requiring early expansion overseas;A balanced growth strategy, based on organic growth and targeted acquisitions to enter new markets or acquire criticalexpertise;A balanced investment strategy;Above average investment in market led research and development;A focus on what really matters to the customer;An innovation culture with corporate leadership that expects growth through development of new products and services.Why is it important now?1.3. Innovation is vital to most businesses operating in the UK if they are to survive and grow in the long term. But there are five reasons why innovation matters more for businesses and the people who work in them today.Markets around the world are being liberalised. This brings opportunities from expanding trade. And firms can locate all or part of the production process or service wherever the economic advantage is greatest. But UK-based firms also face competition from firms incountries with relatively low labour costs and where education andskills levels are high. For example, hourly labour costs in South Korea2are just over half UK levels, but the proportion of graduates in the working age population is almost identical.Long-term reductions in the costs of transportation and communication have also opened up new markets and faster global communications mean that consumers learn about new fashions, ideas and products faster than ever before. The cost of sea freight has fallen by two-thirds since 1920, air transport by five-sixths since 1930. Transatlantic telephone calls are nowalmost free on the Internet.Science and Technology are providing new opportunities for businesses to compete based on exploiting knowledge, skills and creativity to produce more valuable goods and services. Industries are being created, such as Biotechnology, and traditional ones are being transformed (e.g. growth of technical textiles). Because they rely on knowledge and skills, they provide areas where high wage, developed economies can maintain a competitive advantage over low wage, unskilled ones.Services, accounting for over 70% of the economy, are becoming more technology intensive. Technology is being used to improve business processes and customer service in sectors such as retail, hotels and banking, and to develop new products combining creative strengths with the latest technology, such as computer games. Many high technologymanufacturers now make more money from services than they do from manufacturing.Increasing environmental concerns are acting as a stimulus to innovation.for example, reducing CO emissions and Demand for environmental improvements–2volumes of waste – may require changes in the economy and to the way we live. To deliver these changes the market has to generate innovative uses of technology, new ways of doing business and new consumer attitudes.1.4.The speed of changing technology and the extent to which new products and services can change market conditions mean that the challenge to innovate is urgent and continuous. UK-based businesses will find it increasingly difficult to compete on low costs alone in labour intensive industries exposed tointernational competition. The challenge for businesses is to compete on the basis of unique value.1.5. The UK is not alone in facing this challenge. European leaders agreed at Lisbon in spring 2000 to make the EU “the most dynamic, knowledge-driveneconomy in the world by 2010”. Innovation is integral to achieving this vision.How is the UK doing?1.6.We have consulted a distinguished panel of leading academic experts in drawing up the analysis underpinning this Report. Thisanalysis has been published separately. The main points concerning the UK’s innovation performance are set out below.The latest international comparisons of data on business R&D showthe UK well behind the US and roughly equal to the EU average. However, it is encouraging that after a steady period of decline from 1.5% of GDP in 1981 to 1.16% in 1997, we have seen a move in the right direction, to 1.24% in 2002.Adjusting for size of eco nomy, UK firms’ patenting activity at patent offices inEurope, Japan and the US lies well behind firms in Japan, Germany and the US and is just below the European average.3Although systematic data is lacking, it appears that the UK lags behind the US and major Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) economies in the take- up of best practice improvements such as lean manufacturing.Data from surveys, which rely on broader measures of innovation, paint a similar picture with UK performance weakerinternational peers.1.7.The analysis suggests that UK business faces a challenge: how to raise its rate of innovation?How did we try to explain the causes of UK performance?1.8. Innovation is a complex process so understanding why the UK hasa relatively modest innovation performance is not straightforward. Tohelp us do this we drew on an extensive review of the international innovation literature, aided by a panel of experts. We also drew heavily on analysis by the AIM Management Research Forum and the OECD.As a result we have identified seven critical success factors for innovation performance. They help us to identify current strengths and weaknesses of the UK innovation system and to develop proposals to improve its performance.Success factors for UK innovation performance1.9.What follows is a highly abridged version of the supporting analysis, summarizing the UK’s performance against the seven factors: Sources of new technological knowledge play an important role in shaping innovation systems. Science-based technologies are increasing in importance. New products and services tend to embody a wider range of technologies, increasing the complexity faced by individual firms. UK-based firms make extensive use of customers and suppliers as knowledge sources. The UK Science, Engineering and Technology (SET) base is highly productive and the UK has world-class design expertise.The capacity to absorb and exploit knowledge defines aability to turn knowledge into new products, processes or services. Fundamentally it is people who create knowledge, manage businesses and innovate. Poor skills amongst managers and the workforce more generally have hindered performance. The culture within UK-owned firms appears to place less emphasis on creativity.All investments in innovation need access to finance. Relatively lower levels of innovation spend are probably more due to a lack of incentives and capacity than a shortage of funds, although some financing gaps exist.Competition provides a stimulus to innovation and helps determinethe intensity of competition and the ability of firms to spot opportunities and manage risks.Customers and suppliers put pressure on firms to deliver better quality goods and services and provide opportunities for innovation. Many UK-based firms compete in global markets and the UK is anattractive market for innovative firms from abroad.The regulatory environment affects the possibilities and incentive structures for innovation. OECD comparisons show the UK to be relatively lightly regulated, although there are continuing business concerns about the impact of new regulations.And networks and collaboration are important means of accessing knowledge. Businesses are increasingly looking outside their sectors for opportunities to4collaborate.Figure 1.4How Government policies influence innovationEnablers Advice and support for business Intellectual property framework Best practice programmers Measurement system OpportunitiesSupport for developing new lluyreyryreyt Standards Public procurement technology Bu Regulations Help accessing finance R&D tax creditsBusiness Innovation Support for inward investmentAccess to global knowledge baseBuilding blocks of innovation: a supportive climateMacroeconomic stability Education and training policy Trade policy Competition policy Physical and IT infrastructure Science policy Areas of Government influence1.10.Ultimately innovation depends on the knowledge, skills and creativity of those working in businesses. But Government has an important role in creating the right environment for innovation. Figure 1.4 sets out the main mechanisms and channels through whichGovernment – at various levels – influences businessinnovation.1.11.The Government has already laid the foundations of aninnovation-driven economy in areas such as macro-economic policy, fiscal policy, competition policy, trade policy and education and skills.1.12. Since 1997 we have pro duced three White Papers, “Our competitive future–Building a knowledge driven economy”(1998), “Excellence andOpportunity–a Science and Innovation Policy for the 21stCentury” (2000) and “Opportunity for All in a World of Change–Enterprise,Skills and Inno vation” (2001). In these we set in motion a series ofmicro-economic measures to stimulate innovation, such as increased investment in the science base, incentives to encourage research institutions and universities to commercialize their research, and measures to encourage more small businesses to start up and innovate.1.13. Policies and programmers affecting innovation are determinedat a variety of levels. In some cases, the role of the UK Government is to influence developments on a European or global scale.Chapter 3 Technology innovationSummary5Developed countries around the world have recognized that success in the future will come from businesses increasing the added value from their products, processes and services. Government action to encourage businesses to develop and implement new products and services has become a high priority. Given this, the UK Government needs to harness its resources more effectively in promoting technological innovation.The need to improve the take-up of new technologies3.1.The end of the 20th century witnessed a wave of scientific discovery and technology innovation in a range of areas that have only just begun to change the way we work and interact with our physical, natural and social environments. For example, the developments of the Internet and mobile communicationshave transformed people’s access to information.3.2.The pace of change is often quicker than anticipated and the impacts are fundamental. The growth of completely new industries such as biotechnology, software and the digital content industry in the UK, as well as the decline of more traditional sectors, bear very real testimony to this. For example during the 10 year period 1992-2002 the number of biotechnology businesses in the UK has increased0.5 from some 165 to 425, and turnover has increased by over sixfold (from ,billion to ,3.2 billion).3.3.The UK has a strong indigenous knowledge source available to business through the Science, Engineering and Technology (SET) base and we do have a strong presence in some science-based technologies such as pharmaceuticals, telecommunications and aerospace.Promoting knowledge transfer3.4. The SET base makes a major contribution to knowledge transfer through the publication of research results and the supply of highly skilled people capable of transferring and adapting codified and tacit knowledge. However, there is an additional role that Government can play in providing the opportunities and incentives for translating quality UK science into commercially successful applications.3.5.To simplify arrangements for universities, Higher Education Institutions(HEIF) is to be consolidated into a permanent third stream of knowledge transfer funding to universities, alongside that for teaching and research. More money will be put into the second round ofHEIF. The aim is to simplify the funding landscape and ensure that HEIsin England have greater discretion and the flexibility to develop their capacity in a way that best suits their needs and the needs of business.In future, support for technological innovation will be available through five products:Collaborative R&D support is available to meet some of the costs and risks associated with research and technology development, byfacilitating collaboration between different businesses and between business and the SET base across the UK.Knowledge Transfer Networks will encourage the diffusion of new and existing technology.Grant for R&D from June 2003 this has been available for individuals and SMEs, and it enables them to meet some of the costs of investing in technology innovation.6Grant for Investigating an Innovative Idea – this is a pilot,offering help to SMEsin England to look objectively at their ideas for innovative products, services or processes and to draw up an action plan to takethe idea forward.Knowledge Transfer Partnerships provide direct support for knowledge transfer by enabling universities and others in the SET base across the UK to work with businesses using recently qualified people, likegraduates, to undertake specific knowledge transfer projects in firms of all sizes.Technology IntermediariesTo complement the above actions, we will work more closely with technology intermediaries, whose role in technology development and transfer has been undervalued in recent years in both policy development and implementation. Technology intermediaries also have an importantrole to play at regional level.The principal members of the technology intermediaries’ community are the Research and Technology Organizations. They are a private sector community of effective knowledge-transfer companies. Their objective is knowledge transfer to industry to fill knowledge gaps and to stimulate innovation leading to higher value added products and services.7译文商管031 梅文飞 0364027在全球经济中竞争:创新挑战第一章创新挑战综述全球的竞争使贸易自由化的结果增加,技术变革以及运输和通讯费用减少。

2-8-群落和新竞争经济学 Clusters and the New Economics of Competition


CLUSTERS AND THE NEW ECONOMICS Of COMPETITION
BY MICHAEL E. PORTER
N
ow THAT COMPANIES can source capital; goods, information, and technology from around the world, often with the click of a mouse, much of the conventional wisdom ahout how companies and nations compete needs to he overhauled. In theory, more open glohal markets and faster transportation and communication should diminish the role of location in competition. After all, anything that can he efficiently sourced from a distance through glohal markets and corporate networks is availahle to any company and therefore is essentially nullified as a source of competitive advantage.
tion and competitive success in so many fields are geographically concentrated-wbetber it's entertainment in Hollywood, finance on Wall Street, or consumer eleetronics in Japan. Clusters affect competitiveness witbin countries as well as across national borders. Tberefore, tbey lead to new agendas for all business executivesnot just tbose wbo eompete globally. More broadly, clusters represent a new way of tbinking about location, cballenging mucb of the conventional wisdom about bow companies sbould be configured, bow institutions sucb as universities can contribute to competitive success, and bow governments can promote economic development and prosperity
  1. 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性,平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
  2. 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
  3. 3、如文档侵犯您的权益,请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间:9:00-18:30)。

中文4020字毕业论文(设计)外文翻译一、外文原文标题:CLUSTERS AND THE NEW ECONOMICS OF COMPETITION原文:What Is a Cluster?Clusters are geographic concentrations of interconnected companies and institutions in a particular field. Clusters encompass an array of linked industries and other entities important to competition. They include, for example, suppliers of specialized inputs such as components, machinery, and services, and providers of specialized infrastructure. Clusters also often extend downstream to channels and customers and laterally to manufacturers of complementary products and to companies in industries related by skills, technologies, or common inputs. Finally, many clusters include governmental and other institutions –such as universities, standards-setting agencies, think tanks, vocational training providers, and trade associations –that provide specialized training, education, information, research, and technical support.The California wine cluster is a good example. It includes 680 commercial wineries as well as several thousand independent wine grape growers. (See the exhibit “Anatomy of the California WineCluster.”) An extensive complement of industries supporting both wine making and grape growing exists, including suppliers of grape stock, irrigation and harvesting equipment, barrels, and labels; specialized public relations and advertising firms; and numerous wine publications aimed at consumer and trade audiences. A host of local institutions is involved with wine, such as the world-renowned viticulture and enology program at the University of California at Davis, the Wine Institute, and special committees of the California senate and assembly. The cluster also enjoys weaker linkages to other California clusters in agriculture, food and restaurants, and wine-country tourism.Consider also the Italian leather fashion cluster, which contains well-known shoe companies such as Ferragamo and Gucci as well as a host of specialized suppliers of footwear components, machinery, molds, design services, and tanned leather. (See the exhibit “Mapping the Italian Leather Fashion Cluster.”) It also consists of several chains of related industries, including those producing different types of leather goods (linked by common inputs and technologies) and different types of footwear (linked by overlapping channels and technologies). These industries employ common marketing media and compete with similar images in similar customer segments. A related Italian cluster in textile fashion,including clothing, scarves, and accessories, produces complementary products that often employ common channels. The extraordinary strength of the Italian leather fashion cluster can be attributed, at least in part, to the multiple linkages and synergies that participating Italian businesses enjoy.A cluster’s boundaries are defined by the linkages and complementarities across industries and institutions that are most important to competition. Although clusters often fit within political boundaries, they may cross state or even national borders. In the United States, for example, a pharmaceuticals cluster straddles New Jersey and Pennsylvania near Philadelphia. Similarly, a chemicals cluster in Germany crosses over into German-speaking Switzerland.Clusters rarely conform to standard industrial classification systems, which fail to capture many important actors and relationships in competition. Thus significant clusters may be obscured or even go unrecognized. In Massachusetts, for example, more than 400 companies, representing at least 39,000 high-paying jobs, are involved in medical devices in some way. The cluster long remained all but invisible, however, buried within larger and overlapping industry categories such as electronic equipment and plastic products. Executives in the medical devices cluster haveonly recently come together to work on issues that will benefit them all.Clusters promote both competition and cooperation. Rivals compete intensely to win and retain customers. Without vigorous competition, a cluster will fail. Yet there is also cooperation, much of it vertical, involving companies in related industries and local institutions. Competition can coexist with cooperation because they occur on different dimensions and among different players.Clusters represent a kind of new spatial organizational form in between arm’s-length markets on the one hand and hierarchies, or vertical integration, on the other. A cluster, then, is an alternative way of organizing the value chain. Compared with market transactions among dispersed and random buyers and sellers, the proximity of companies and institutions in one location – and the repeated exchanges among them– fosters better coordination and trust. Thus clusters mitigate the problems inherent in arm’s-length relationships without imposing the inflexibilities of vertical integration or the management challenges of creating and maintaining formal linkages such as networks, alliances, and partnerships. A cluster of independent and informally linked companies and institutions represents a robust organizational formthat offers advantages in efficiency, effectiveness, and flexibility.Why Clusters Are Critical to CompetitionModern competition depends on productivity, not on access to inputs or the scale of individual enterprises. Productivity rests on how companies compete, not on the particular fields they compete in. Companies can be highly productive in any industry – shoes, agriculture, or semiconductors –if they employ sophisticated methods, use advanced technology, and offer unique products and services. All industries can employ advanced technology; all industries can be knowledge intensive.The sophistication with which companies compete in a particular location, however, is strongly influenced by the quality of the local business environment. Companies cannot employ advanced logistical techniques, for example, without a highquality transportation infrastructure. Nor can companies effectively compete on sophisticated service without well-educated employees. Businesses cannot operate efficiently under onerous regulatory red tape or under a court system that fails to resolve disputes quickly and fairly. Some aspects of the business environment, such as the legal system, for example, or corporate tax rates, affect all industries. In advanced economies, however, the more decisiveaspects of the business environment are often cluster specific; these constitute some of the most important microeconomic foundations for competition.Clusters affect competition in three broad ways: first, by increasing the productivity of companies based in the area; second, by driving the direction and pace of innovation, which underpins future productivity growth; and third, by stimulating the formation of new businesses, which expands and strengthens the cluster itself.A cluster allows each member to benefit as if it had greater scale or as if it had joined with others formally – without requiring it to sacrifice its flexibility.Clusters and Productivity. Being part of a cluster allows companies to operate more productively in sourcing inputs; accessing information, technology, and needed institutions; coordinating with related companies; and measuring and motivating improvement.Better Access to Employees and Suppliers. Companies in vibrant clusters can tap into an existing pool of specialized and experienced employees, thereby lowering their search and transaction costs in recruiting. Because a cluster signals opportunity and reduces the risk of relocation for employees, itcan also be easier to attract talented people from other locations, a decisive advantage in some industries.A well-developed cluster also provides an efficient means of obtaining other important inputs. Such a cluster offers a deep and specialized supplier base. Sourcing locally instead of from distant suppliers lowers transaction costs. It minimizes the need for inventory, eliminates importing costs and delays, and – because local reputation is important –lowers the risk that suppliers will overprice or renege on commitments. Proximity improves communications and makes it easier for suppliers to provide ancillary or support services such as installation and debugging. Other things being equal, then, local outsourcing is a better solution than distant outsourcing, especially for advanced and specialized inputs involving embedded technology, information, and service content.Formal alliances with distant suppliers can mitigate some of the disadvantages of distant outsourcing. But all formal alliances involve their own complex bargaining and governance problems and can inhibit a company’s flexibility. The close, informal relationships possible among companies in a cluster are often a superior arrangement.In many cases, clusters are also a better alternative to vertical integration.Compared with in-house units, outside specialists are often more cost effective and responsive, not only in component production but also in services such as training. Although extensive vertical integration may have once been the norm, a fast-changing environment can render vertical integration inefficient, ineffective, and inflexible.Even when some inputs are best sourced from a distance, clusters offer advantages. Suppliers trying to penetrate a large, concentrated market will price more aggressively, knowing that as they do so they can realize efficiencies in marketing and in service. Working against a cluster’s advantages in assembling resources is the possibility that competition will render them more expensive and scarce. But companies do have the alternative of outsourcing many inputs from other locations, which tends to limit potential cost penalties. More important, clusters increase not only the demand for specialized inputs but also their supply.Access to Specialized Information. Extensive market, technical, and competitive information accumulates within a cluster, and members have preferred access to it. In addition, personal relationships and community ties foster trust and facilitate theflow of information. These conditions make information more transferable.Complementarities. A host of linkages among cluster members results in a whole greater than the sum of its parts. In a typical tourism cluster, for example, the quality of a visitor’s experience depends not only on the appeal of the primary attraction but also on the quality and efficiency of complementary businesses such as hotels, restaurants, shopping outlets, and transportation facilities. Because members of the cluster are mutually dependent, good performance by one can boost the success of the others.Complementarities come in many forms. The most obvious is when products complement one another in meeting customers’ needs, as the tourism example illustrates. Another form is the coordination of activities across companies to optimize their collective productivity. In wood products, for instance, the efficiency of sawmills depends on a reliable supply of high-quality timber and the ability to put all the timber to use – in furniture (highest quality), pallets and boxes (lower quality), or wood chips (lowest quality). In the early 1990s, Portuguese sawmills suffered from poor timber quality because local landowners did not invest in timber management. Hence most timber was processed for use in pallets and boxes, a lower-value use that limited the price paid to landowners.Substantial improvement in productivity was possible, but only if several parts of the cluster changed simultaneously. Logging operations, for example, had to modify cutting and sorting procedures, while sawmills had to develop the capacity to process wood in more sophisticated ways. Coordination to develop standard wood classifications and measures was an important enabling step. Geographically dispersed companies are less likely to recognize and capture such linkages.Other complementarities arise in marketing. A cluster frequently enhances the reputation of a location in a particular field, making it more likely that buyers will turn to a vendor based there. Italy’s strong reputation for fashion and design, for example, benefits companies involved in leather goods, footwear, apparel, and accessories. Beyond reputation, cluster members often profit from a variety of joint marketing mechanisms, such as company referrals, trade fairs, trade magazines, and marketing delegations.Finally, complementarities can make buying from a cluster more attractive for customers. Visiting buyers can see many vendors in a single trip. They also may perceive their buying risk to be lower because one location provides alternative suppliers. That allows them to multisource or to switch vendors if the need arises. Hong Kong thrives as a source of fashion apparel in part for this reason.Access to Institutions and Public Goods. Investments made by government or other public institutions – such as public spending for specialized infrastructure or educational programs –can enhance a company’s productivity. The ability to recruit employees trained at local programs, for example, lowers the cost of internal training. Other quasi-public goods, such as the cl uster’s information and technology pools and its reputation, arise as natural by-products of competition.It is not just governments that create public goods that enhance productivity in the private sector. Investments by companies –in training programs, infrastructure, quality centers, testing laboratories, and so on –also contribute to increased productivity. Such private investments are often made collectively because cluster participants recognize the potential for collective benefits.Better Motivation and Measurement. Local rivalry is highly motivating. Peer pressure amplifies competitive pressure within a cluster, even among noncompeting or indirectly competing companies. Pride and the desire to look good in the local community spur executives to attempt to outdo one another.Clusters also often make it easier to measure and compare performances because local rivals share general circumstances –for example, labor costs and local market access –and they perform similar activities. Companies within clusters typically have intimate knowledge of their suppliers’ costs. Managers are able to compare costs and employees’ performance with other local companies. Additionally, financial institutions can accumulate knowledge about the cluster that can be used to monitor performance.Source:PorterM E. Clusters and the new economics of competition[ J ]. Harvard Business Review, 1998, 76 (6), pp.78-83二、翻译文章标题:集群和新竞争经济学译文:一、什么是集群产业集群是指与某一产业有关的企业和机构在地理位置上的集中,它包括一批对竞争起作用的、相互联系的产业和其他实体,例如包括零部件、机器和服务等专业化投入的供应商和专业基础设施的提供者。

相关文档
最新文档