Upload
uniurb
View
0
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
The role of business associations in promoting networking. The Italian case
of the “network contracts”
Abstract This paper investigates the role of business associations (BAs) in promoting inter-firm
collaboration, in particular through the use of the network contract (NC) – a particular type of
formal collaboration recently introduced in Italy.
The analysis reveals that BAs can favor and promote inter-firm collaboration in two ways:
directly, being formally involved in a NC and indirectly, through a number of initiatives (eg.
matching meetings, workshops and so on), acting as facilitators of forms of inter-firm
collaboration and, specifically, of NCs.
Moreover, analysis shows that the presence of a BA can influence the network contract’s
effects and improve local entrepreneurs’ attitude towards collaboration and networking.
Key words: institutions, business associations, inter-firm collaboration, network contract,
small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs)
2
The role of business associations in promoting networking. The Italian case
of the “network contracts”1
by Aureli, S., Cesaroni, F.M, Ciambotti, M. and Del Baldo, M.
Aureli, Selena
Department of Business studies
University of Bologna
Rimini Campus, Via Angherà, 22 – Rimini (RN) – ITALY
e-mail: [email protected]
Cesaroni, Francesca Maria
Department of Economics, Society, Politics (DESP)
University of Urbino “Carlo Bo”
Via Saffi 42 – 61029 URBINO (PU) – ITALY
e-mail: [email protected]
Ciambotti, Massimo
Department of Economics, Society, Politics (DESP)
University of Urbino “Carlo Bo”
Via Saffi 42 – 61029 URBINO (PU) – ITALY
e-mail: [email protected]
Del Baldo, Mara
Department of Economics, Society, Politics (DESP)
University of Urbino “Carlo Bo”
Via Saffi 42 – 61029 URBINO (PU) – ITALY
e-mail: [email protected]
1 This paper is the product of a joint research project, however, M. Del Baldo has written sections 1 and 2, S.
Aureli has written sections 3 and 4.2., F. Cesaroni has written section 4.1. and M. Ciambotti has written section
5.
3
1. Introduction In Italy, in addition to traditional forms of formalized inter-firm collaboration (i.e. consortia,
temporary associations among enterprises, joint ventures, franchising contracts), a new
juridical instrument, named “network contract” (hereafter NC), has been recently introduced.
It records a steady increase in usage among enterprises (Iamiceli, 2009; Cafaggi, 2010, 2011;
Cuffaro, 2010): from its introduction in 2009, now there are almost 700 contracts involving
about 3500 organisations (Unioncamere, 2013).
Designed by the Italian Government to favor networks among small and medium-sized
enterprises and increase their level of innovation and competitiveness, this contract has also
attracted different types of organisations and additional goals have been attributed to it in
practice (Aureli et al., 2011; Rapporto Unicredit, 2011; Cafaggi et al., 2012a-b). For example,
it may involve no-profit organisations, universities and other type of institutional entities such
as charitable bank foundations, cooperatives, consortia and business associations representing
specific categories of enterprises, in addition to traditional for profit enterprises. Moreover, in
some cases NCs have been assigned to pursue environmental protection, improve the work
culture of a territory, create new job opportunities, besides promoting network members’
development and profitability.
With these premises, authors aim to investigate the presence of institutional organisations
among network’s participants with a special attention to associations that represent
businesses. Business associations (hereafter BAs) are important as they do not only provide
services for their members, they are also actively involved in creating the best legal and
political conditions to support entrepreneurial activity and economic development in general.
Thus, it is possible to suppose that BAs are actively involved in promoting collaboration
among businesses through the implementation of NCs. These contracts may involve only
internal affiliated businesses, or both affiliated and non-affiliated businesses. In some cases,
BAs may prefer to limit their activity to promote collaboration between businesses and favour
the diffusion of an entrepreneurial culture in their local area through the organisation of
seminars and meetings. However, BAs may also directly participate to NCs as active
members, working together with other businesses.
Mainstream research on entrepreneurship and strategy analyses the capabilities of individuals
or single enterprises to recognise and exploit opportunities deriving from collaborations with
other entities (Zahra et al., 2005; Kontinen and Ojala, 2011; Ellis, 2000; Singh, 2000).
Authors’ attention is directed towards the business environment and the entrepreneurial culture
created by BAs that help generate opportunities to collaborate with other enterprises (Baumol,
1993; Aidis et al., 2007; Acs et al., 2008; Hwang and Powell, 2005; Butera and Alberti, 2013).
Through an empirical analysis performed in April-July 2013 on all Italian NCs subscribed at
February, 2013, the present study aims to answer to the following research question: do BAs
promote networking through the use of the NC? In order to answer this question, authors: a)
classify the different type of BAs involved in NCs; b) evaluate the presence of this type of
organisations compared to for profit organisations; c) analyze NCs involving BAs, focusing
on formal networks’ objectives and the role BAs play in the network; d) evaluate how BAs
promote collaboration among members.
The analysis reveals that BAs can favour and promote inter-firm collaboration in two ways: 1)
directly, being formally involved in a NC, as a “node” of the network, and 2) indirectly,
through a number of initiatives (e.g. matching meetings, workshops), acting as facilitators or
promoters of forms of inter-firm collaboration and, specifically, of NCs.
It’s interesting to observe that, contrary to what expected, when BAs are involved in a NC,
promoting networking is not the main formal objective of the contract. Nevertheless BAs can
play an important role in favouring networking. In fact BAs contribute to service development
and promote information sharing among their members, and so produce indirect and positive
4
effects outside the networks’ boundaries, intended as positive impacts on the economic and
social conditions of the local area (e.g. development of new business initiatives, creating
relational, informative and/or technological infrastructures).
Consequently, the concluding reflections emphasise how the presence of a BA in a NC can
influence the nature of contract’s real effects and improve local entrepreneurs’ attitude
towards collaboration and networking.
The paper proceeds as follows. In section 2 a literature review is presented in order to draw
the interpretative framework (focused on institutions and networks, networking strategies and
SMEs, and on the role of BAs in promoting networks); section 3 outlines the research
methodology, whereas the findings of the analysis are presented in section 4. Finally
discussions and conclusions follow in section 5.
2. Literature Framework 2.1 Institutions and networks
The term “institutions” encompasses a complex concept, which is the focus of studies
belonging to various disciplines (organisation, economics, sociology and managerial studies).
In a first approximation it is possible to state that there are two prevailing interpretations. On
the one hand, institutions are systems of established and embedded social rules (socially
embedded systems of rules) that structure social interactions among single individuals or
agents. Thus, past economic literature has usually kept separate institutions from individuals
acting in the institutional environment. On the other hand, an institution is intended as
established organisation or foundation, usually committed to education, public service, or
culture.
However, when agents are grouped into organisations bounded together by some common
purpose to achieve certain objectives (like political parties, trade unions, BAs, and so on) and
structured around specific rules, it is possible to define organisations as a type of institution: a
social system with boundaries and rules (Hodgson, 2006).
At the same time, organisations can act to modify the larger institutional environment, as in the
case of NGOs interacting with national governments and multinational corporations to create
the conditions for foreign direct investments (Doh and Teegen, 2002). Their activity defines
these organisations as institutional entities. They try to establish institutional stability, fairness,
and predictability that are key to economic growth (North, 1990, 2005). In other words,
institutions are conceived as organisations that aim to become more integrated into the
institutional environment and play a role in defining the components (legal, societal and
economic elements) of the institutional setting. This second conception and interpretation is
also the one adopted in the present work. Therefore it is used to refer to institutional entities,
including BAs, which have a relevant role in the development of inter-firm forms of
collaboration or networks and networking strategies.
Although research on institutions and networks has proceeded on largely separate trajectories
over the past decades, a number of linkages exist between these subfields, whereas the former
is prevalently associated with works in organisational and political sociology, and the latter
rooted in economic sociology literature (see Owen-Smith and Powell, 2008: 594). Putting these
two perspectives in dialogue, different contributions address attention on the relationships
between networks and institutions (Pratt, 1997) focusing on the role of institutions in
promoting learning regions (Morgan, 1995) and on the social context of industrial development
(Grabher, 1993; Amin and Thrift, 1994). Entrepreneurial support services (developed through
actions and projects promoted by BAs), as well as research universities and research centres,
are the conditions that facilitate the successful establishment of an entrepreneurial culture
(Feldman, 2001).
5
In the context of institutional theory, DiMaggio and Powell (1983) stressed the role of
professional networks (like BAs) in the rapid spread of various models of organising social
and economic activities through increasing interactions among participants, information
sharing, mutual awareness and responsiveness. Networks are carriers of institutional effects
(Scott et al., 2000). Numerous scholars identify networks as the channels through which
institutional effects flow; networks and institutions mutually shape one another and this co-
evolutionary process creates and transforms the social (and economic) world (Owen-Smith
and Powell, 2008). Institutions are critical determinants of economic behaviour (North, 1990)
and economic transactions (Williamson, 1998) in general. The examination of institutional
and environmental conditions is especially useful for public policy planning, since the
dynamics of entrepreneurship can be vastly different depending on the institutional context
and the level of economic development (see Zoltan et al., 2008: 219 and 232).
Different contributions highlighted the relationship between the institutional environment and
entrepreneurship development both under the theoretical (Baumol, 1990, 1993; North, 1990,
2005) and empirical perspective (Aidis et al., 2007).
According to North (1990), entrepreneurs are the main agents of change. Organisations such
as firms set up by entrepreneurs will adapt their activities and strategies modelled to fit the
opportunities and limitations provided through the formal and informal institutional
framework. Baumol (1993) provides greater analysis of the types of entrepreneurship that
may emerge under different institutional environments. Institutions are important as they
represent structures that provide incentives for different types of economic activity.
Entrepreneurs will weigh the incentives present in the environment both in the form of regulations (formal rules) as well as in terms of the prevailing cultural values and norms
(informal rules according to North).
Also Pratt (1997) stresses the importance of a concern with network and institution
(considered as a sort of a meso-level intermediary) in relation to the development of the social
and economic context and in promoting innovation through the realisation of conditions and
contexts in which entrepreneurship and inter-firm collaboration can develop (i.e. science
parks, the formation and grow of knowledge-based business, the transfer of technology and
business skills). The network builders are predominantly represented by universities, local
authorities, and agents of the central government (this author does not explicitly cite BAs).
Similarly, Hwang and Powell (2005) underline how only recently scholars have attended to
the legal and political conditions that support entrepreneurial behaviour, focusing on
institutional aspects of entrepreneurship. Specifically, authors address their attention on the
role of various institutional entities and processes in fostering entrepreneurial behaviour. They
also take into consideration the relevance of shifts in the institutional environment and the
role of institutions in creating new combinations that generate social, political, or economic
change. Among the different key forces in the redefinition of organisational practices and
structures (processes of institutional changes) that act as institutional entrepreneurs, they
focus on professional knowledge and rule making. Particularly, professionals (professional
groups, personnel experts, and lawyers) reshape the landscape, with respect to definitions of
the law or though the creation of standards.
Finally, among several contributions that analyse the reciprocal dependence between
businesses and territories (i.e. the territorialised innovation or the knowledge network strands;
see Moulaert and Sekia, 2003; Cedrola et al., 2011), another interesting stream of research
identifies knowledge assets as those critical and strategic knowledge resources affecting the
performance and the value creation dynamics and the competitiveness and sustainable growth
6
of a specific territorial system (Marr and Schiuma, 2001; Lerro and Schiuma 2009)2. Authors
provide a knowledge-based interpretation of regional development, identifying three main
knowledge assets categories affecting regional development dynamics: human capital,
relational capital and networking capabilities, and structural capital. With reference to a
regional context, human capital3 essentially comprises the know-how characterizing the
entities operating within a region. Relational capital and networking capabilities emerge from
the set of formal and informal relationships among the different regional stakeholders to
activate and sustain value creation dynamics (Becattini, 1989, 1990; Brusco, 1982, 1986;
Piore and Sabel, 1984; Storper, 1997; Cappellin, 2003).
Thirdly, structural capital includes all those assets that are not tangible in nature but play a
fundamental role in the acquisition, management and diffusion of knowledge at regional level
(i.e. technological infrastructures, digital communications systems and networks). Social
capital is a special component of structural regional capital (Schiuma et al., 2005; Schiuma
and Lerro, 2008) that comprises the knowledge assets related to the soft infrastructures of a
region, which are the result of the dynamic interdependencies linking in networks regional
entities. Among these, particular attention should be paid toward the role of local firms as
knowledge repositories, as well as to universities and research centres. Authors do not
expressly mention BAs.
2.2. Networks, networking strategies and SMEs
“Network” is a broad concept that can describe many types of interconnected relationships
occurring among firms, economic entities and/or individual subjects. Networks may be
interpersonal or organisational; they may be limited to bilateral (or dyadic) relations, or they
might assume the form of a combination of multiple sub-systems of links. They range from
informal relationships to formal agreements, strategic alliances, constellations, consortia,
industrial districts and groups (Lorenzoni, 1992; Ferrero, 2001).
In general, networks assist entrepreneurs in accessing the resources needed for business
formation (Aldrich et al 1987; Johanisson, 2000), to obtain tangible and intangible resources
(such as information, finance and labour) and to enhance the entrepreneur’s opportunity
recognition capabilities (Hills et al, 1997).
Such inter-organisational relationships seem to be more important for SMEs than for their
larger counterparts (Golden and Dollinger, 1993): by collaborating, small firms can share and
reduce costs; obtain complementary resources, knowledge and capital; improve learning; start
or increase international expansion and, consequently, enhance their competitiveness and
profitability (Welch, 1992; BarNir and Smith, 2002; Coviello, 2006; Wright et al., 2007).
Kontinen and Ojala, 2011).
The main theories that have interpreted businesses collaboration can be synthesized into two
approaches: the cost argument (that suggests that networks help individual firms overcome
their financial and personnel constraints, which hinder internationalisation, while also
providing the best alternative to both transaction costs and coordination costs) (Williamson,
1991) and the resource-based explanation (Grant, 1991). However, most recent studies refer
to the network theory perspective (Johanson & Mattsson, 1988) affirming that a firm’s
strategy is influenced by a variety of network relationships (with customers, suppliers,
distributors, regulatory and public agencies as well as other market actors).
Drawing from the afore mentioned theoretical lenses (transaction cost theory, resource-based
view and strategy management approach), literature has mainly focused on enterprise motives
for collaboration (Glaister and Buckley, 1996), types of relationships, coordination and
2 This approach is strongly based on the concept of a ‘‘learning region’’, which considers the ability of a local
system to evolve strictly related to its capacity to sustain a continuous learning process (Morgan, 1995). 3 Human capital refers to skills, knowledge and expertise owned by individuals or collectively.
7
governance problems (Lorenzoni, 1992) and possible effect of inter-firm network structure to
performance outcomes such as growth (e.g., Powell et al., 1996).
Other scholars emphasise the importance of the entrepreneur’s contacts with other people
(Ellis, 2000; Singh, 2000; Crick & Spence, 2005), suggesting that opportunity recognition is
positively related to an entrepreneur’s social network.
Networking strategies represent a valuable approach for companies and particularly for SMEs
to fill their shortage of capabilities and financial resources and foster innovation and growth.
(Birley, 1985; Golden & Dollinger, 1993; Hara & Kanai, 1994; Håkansson and Snehota, 1995;
BarNir & Smith, 2002).
NCs are contextualised within the vast theme of business networks, and, more generally, of
inter-firm collaboration. NCs are a new and formal tool aimed at enhancing cooperation among
firms. It has been recently introduced by the Italian government to support company innovation
and competitiveness. Previous researches (Aureli et al., 2011; Aureli and Del Baldo, 2012;
Cafaggi et al., 2012a-b) show that NCs are widespread among SMEs (Rapporto Unicredit,
2011). NCs have been used for different purposes (to implement long-term projects, as well as
to assist a small group of enterprises in promoting their products and services), as it is very
flexible. Moreover NCs may aggregate businesses from different sectors and geographic areas
– differently from collaborations in classical industrial districts (Becattini, 1990). Their
flexibility, together with the preservation of firms’ independence, seems to represent the most
important aspect that fosters contract’s use among organisations.
2.3. Business associations as institutional entities promoting networks
In international literature there are few contributions that specifically address the role of BAs
in promoting collaboration between companies, and almost none focused on the role of BAs
in developing NCs. Therefore, in this section results from empirical research are briefly
presented. They provide some insights about the role of BAs in promoting entrepreneurship
and collaboration between businesses.
Haug and Sommer (2008) show that, in the formation of networks among entrepreneurs,
external partners or third person parties - such as economic development agencies - play an
important role in helping define realistic goals, set up stable cooperative arrangements, and
carefully assess the motivations of the entrepreneurs involved in the project (allowing the
search of partners with similar interests).
A survey on the diffusion of NCs in Italy – which covered a sample of 304 firms involved in
159 NCs (Solaro, 2013) shows that a significant percentage of the companies became aware
of the existence of the NC through other entrepreneurs or professional consultants (45.1%)
and BAs (43.1%). Only a minority was informed by local Chambers of Commerce and the
Ministry of Economic Development. This result highlights the relevance of the informative-
channel role played by BAs, in comparison to other institutional entities, such as local public
authorities, government bodies and media. This result is also confirmed in term of the role
played by BAs in providing technical assistance during the implementation and development
phases of a NC. Among the improvements to the NC suggested by the firms interviewed,
entrepreneurs suggest the dissemination of information on the NC and the possibility of
extending the contract to universities, research centres, and foreign companies. In summary,
the NC needs to be more advertised and supported by public entities and BAs.
Another study (Carnazza, 2008) reveals that among the industrial policy measures that could
facilitate the development of partnerships and push entrepreneurs to create alliances and
networks, more emphasis should be attributed to public institutions, BAs and banks, which
represent the leading actors in favouring the processes of cultural and managerial growth of
the companies belonging to local networks. The design and implementation of projects of
“strong” aggregation (formalized and structured, as in the case of NCs) depend on strategic
8
and trustees factors. About the 60% of the interviewed entrepreneurs stress the need for the
participation of a third party which should operate in a non-partisan way, reinforce trust
among participants, and ensure positive results to everyone.
The importance of relationships among companies and other institutional entities is shown in
an Italian survey (Unioncamere-Istituto Tagliacarne, 2007) which demonstrates how SMEs
with stable relationships with other companies, consortia, and BAs record better performances
compared to "not related” SMEs. These results suggest the usefulness of facilitations
especially designed at rewarding collaboration agreements involving a large number of
companies and other institutions and the relevance of third party entities (particularly BAs) in
developing aggregation processes and supporting micro and small businesses.
Similarly, another Italian study (Oliva, 2006) shows that cultural change (strengthening of the
aggregation propensity and culture) can derive from a commitment of BAs, and their role as
“third parties” to help businesses in the early stages of networks design, and implementation.
The presence of a “third” entity is desired by more than half of the entrepreneurs. It should
sustain the project’s proposal, help in the choice of partners, and in the management and
governance of the different phases. Its contribution also regards possibilities of learning from
positive experiences that already exist, increasing the degree of trust in collaborative forms,
and making companies aware of the direct and indirect benefits of the networking strategy.
Only a minority of entrepreneurs, however, believes that the third party should simply
propose the project or act as a legal entity that realizes the initiative in the name and on behalf
the companies adhering to the network.
Finally, insights from a recent study (Butera and Alberti, 2013) on networks’ governance
show that: 1) the development of networks is not always tied to the pre-existence of dense
systems of relationships. If networks do not emerge spontaneously, they can be developed by
various institutional entities through training and information initiatives that trigger
relationships and facilitate the contamination; 2) the role of BAs is essential to help
businesses formalise collaboration and networks objectives, strengthen the relational context
and bring out the structure best suited to the objectives of the network and ensure consistency
of motivations, democratic balance and transparency; 3) different institutional entities emerge:
municipal and provincial administrations, BAs, trade unions, local banks, banking
foundations, schools, universities and research centres, Chambers of Commerce and service
centres. These entities are able to generate positive externalities for local areas providing
“industrial commons” (Pisano and Shih, 2009) such as agglomeration of skills, infrastructure
and services that support the competitive advantage of networks and territories.
The active role of the different institutional entities leads to revise the current
policies directed to support the firms’ competitiveness and change the focus of managerial
models and industrial policies, taking into consideration both the geographical boundaries
typical of traditional networks (i.e. the districts), the cognitive proximity (the structure of
shared values, beliefs, knowledge, skills and visions) and the relational proximity of the
network’s nodes. The policy maker can then encourage the creation of synergies in the
relational structure of a network. This has occurred, for example, in the case of the first NC
(named RaceBo) signed in Bologna: the local BA supported the creation of the NC, as it
provided important organisational and legal services.
The protagonists of the network governance can then be organisations and associations that
meet a variety of purposes and they assume profoundly different structural characteristics:
operating centres, development agencies, business innovation centres (BIC)4, banks and BAs.
Especially BAs, during the years, have changed several times their own role, triggering
processes of strategic and organisational areas. Some are being proposing as centres of high
4
BIC have been commissioned by the European Union in 1984, and defined in the Document XVI/C3/354/1988
the European Commission.
9
value-added, allowing particularly for associated small businesses with developing projects
that individually they would not be able to do. Consequently, they can be conceived as
"system agents” or "network operators" capable of providing advanced services to business
networks. In this perspective, institutional entities (and among these BAs) can also have a role
of a network meta-manager, in order to: a) provide and address the local system toward a
strategic goal; b) govern the internal political processes of the network, managing the power
and distributing resources; c) create the cultural, strategic and organisational background
favourable to the network development. Thus, it is possible to affirm that BAs can stimulate
the socio-economic progress through the support of aggregative processes and networks
development, playing four different roles and acting as: a controller and supervisor; a
propeller and envisioner; a catalyst; and as a informer and educator (administrator of the
knowledge). When switching from the first role (which it traditionally deputed to public
institutions) to the next ones there is a gradual orientation toward the improvement of the
general well-being of the society, collaborating with other private and public entities and
giving form to hybrid and synergistic networks (Niccolini, 2008).
3. Methodology
Authors have opted for a mixed method of research that combines qualitative and quantitative
approaches. The use of mixed methods has been already found fruitful in several disciplines
(Wolfram and Hassard, 2005; Model, 2009). In particular two methods have been used:
document analysis and a self-administrated questionnaire. Document analysis is functional to
identify and classify the different type of BAs involved in NCs; verify whether they represent
a minority in networks because networks are composed mainly by enterprises or they
predominate compared to traditional for profit organisations; classify formal networks’
objectives and their programs to evaluate their role in promoting collaboration.
Collection of above mentioned information is possible as the NC is a formal agreement
regulated by the law (introduced through law no. 33 on 9 April 2009 and subsequently
modified) that have to contain all the following information: the network’s strategic
objectives; the network program, that is activities needed to reach the objective; the common
entity (like a Board) entrusted with the execution of the contract; members’ obligations; the
mutual fund (desirable but not compulsory) for the realization of the network’s projects.
With respect to typical contractual networks, which are formed through interconnected
bilateral or multilateral contracts (a network of connected contracts), and differing from
traditional forms of collaboration undertaken through consortia, joint ventures, franchising
contracts, etc., this new juridical instrument is characterized by mandatory outcomes (the
parties must agree on a common scope that is they must work together on one or more
activities) and a predetermined content (the law indicates that the contract has to build the
parties’ innovative capacities and to improve their competitiveness) (Cuffaro, 2010).
Existing NCs and members’ names have been obtained by the information system of the
Italian Chambers of Commerce, which provided the authors with a list of 678 NC, involving a
total of 3,659 enterprises. The list refers to all Italian NCs subscribed up to February 2013.
Then, after having selected the networks relevant for this research (networks which entail at
least one BAs), their written contracts have been analyzed. The selection process and the
document analysis have been performed in the period of April-July 2013.
In addition, an exploratory survey was carried out by administering a structured questionnaire
to a group of Italian enterprises. Questionnaires have been used to catch entrepreneurs and
managers’ beliefs about the role of BAs in promoting collaboration among enterprises. A total
of 112 completed questionnaires returned, which helped understand the efficacy of such
initiatives sponsored by BAs to promote inter-firm collaboration.
10
4. Findings
4.1. Business associations’ active participation in networks: minority
partners or incubators? In Italy as well as in other countries BAs’ activities mainly refer to the provision of services to
their members (informative, legal, administrative, fiscal, etc.) and the establishment of a
continuous dialogue with national and local entities (i.e. the Government, local municipalities,
universities, job agencies) that regulate or influence market and business conditions. In fact,
past research has suggested that BA’s membership is driven either by the logic of service or
the logic of collective influence (associations lobby on behalf of businesses’ interests when
the Government examines issues about industrial policy, environmental regulations,
international relations and transport). Nevertheless, BAs can also provide unique
opportunities for businesses to engage in collaboration with other businesses (Perry, 2007).
Among the different ways that BAs can use to favour inter-firm collaborations (i.e. meetings,
seminars), a special attention is here devoted to their direct participation in business networks.
So authors analyse BAs that actually become an active network’s member.
In order to identify networks involving BAs, the database of Italian Chambers of Commerce
has been searched, where a specific form of formal networks is recorded: the NC. Considering
all 678 NCs signed up to February, 2013, only 20 of them (about 3%) are characterized by the
presence of at least one formal association, representing a structured group of manufacturing
and/or service companies, with national relevance. In fact, looking at networks members, only
in minority of cases it has been possible to detect the presence of a BA with national
relevance (usually its local unit or a branch specialized in providing some services).
BAs involved in NCs represent businesses of a specific geographical area. They operate at the
local level but are guided by a national body - called confederation - that coordinates all local
units5. Their aim is to support the economic activity of members, provide value-added
services to them, but also to dialogue with local and national political and administrative
institutions to favour economic, social and cultural growth of the enterprises.
Although also consortia can be defined as a form association which groups enterprises with
similar characteristics and common goals, these have not been considered in this study. First,
because consortia are not easy to identify (their name does not always reveal the presence of a
networked group of enterprises). Second, consortia are small associations that do not belong
to a national system (they do not have a national organisation representing them). Their main
objective is to create shared services for their members, favour members’ collaboration and
establish external relationships. Compared to local BAs and their confederations, consortia are
less involved in defending the general interests of the industry towards public administration,
fiscal authority and trade unions.
Empirical data indicate that organisations belonging to the Confederation of Italian Industries
are the most involved in NCs. 12 of them directly participate to one or more NCs. Also
organisations belonging to the Confederation of Small Enterprises are quite active: 4 of them
are members of different NCs. Probably this result reflects the large number of local units
belonging to these two confederations but it may also be related to the type of businesses
associated. In fact, self-employed people or very small businesses may prefer informal
cooperation and perceive too costly participating to a formal agreement that requires
professional assistance (usually a solicitor and a notary) like the NC.
5 In Italy the most famous confederations are: the Confederation of Italian Industries (Confindustria), the
Confederation of Small Enterprises (Confapi), the Confederation of Craftsmen (Confartigianato), the
Confederation of Trade enterprises and Self-employed (Confcommercio) and the Confederation of Cooperatives
(Confcooperative).
11
A brief description of the 20 NCs is provided in the Appendix. The table reported indicates
that the first NC involving a BA has been signed in July 2011, two years after the enactment
of the law. This may suggest that business organisations have not immediately interpreted the
NC as useful or that it was initially designed only for traditional for profit enterprises.
Looking at the number and geographical location of networks’ nodes, it is possible to find
both very small networks (with only two members) and groups with ten nodes. A higher
number of nodes is not associated to a geographically wider network. Moreover, in the
majority of cases (in 13 NCs out of 20) the size of the network is limited to one single region.
Another interesting information refers to the number of BAs involved in each contract. Data
indicate that these 20 NCs can be classified as:
- business networks (5 contracts), mainly composed by industrial or trade companies.
- institutional networks (15 NCs in total), composed only by BAs.
In the first group, the presence of one or two Bas - analysed together with the governance
rules that administer these networks - suggests that associations have a residual role.
Considering that each node of the network has usually a representative in the network’s
common body and the Head or President of the common body is the deputy of an enterprise, it
is probable that the involved BA plays the role of the facilitator or it provides advices to all
other network’s members. In other terms, information derived from NCs indicates that the BA
represents only one minority partner of the network, eventually providing some administrative
or other types of services.
Networks of the second group represent aggregations among local BAs. Most of them are
associations belonging to the same confederation. Thus, the aggregation is mainly made to
create synergies and reduce costs, balancing advantages and disadvantages of
decentralization. In only two cases, networks nodes belong to different confederations.
Reported network’s strategic objectives denote that BAs or their branches essentially create
formal networks to increase internal efficiency and develop the business of selling services to
members and non members. The most recurrent objective is commercial expansion of
network’s nodes (e.g. expansion in the field of training, internationalisation, finance
counselling) by exchanging customers’ information, developing new services in common and
promoting the network to enterprises not affiliated to any BA.
In addition, BAs organised in networks aim to increase knowledge and capabilities of their
internal staff (e.g. through the exchange of information and best practices among nodes) and
improve their ability to access to public funds. Only in three cases, it has been possible to
detect the formal goal and/or the program of favouring aggregations and creation of consortia
and NCs among businesses located in the geographical area of relevance.
Thus, it is possible to argue that BAs grouped into networks do not seem to be strongly
committed to play the role of ‘network incubators’, which means favouring the creation of
networks among their members. They have the opportunity to increase the diffusion of new
organisational models of collaboration that change the direction and flow of organisational
activity of enterprises. However, objectives (at least formal ones inserted in the contract) do
not emphasize this direction.
4.2. Firms’ attitudes toward collaborations and the role of business
associations as facilitators to networks creation In order to understand the role of BAs in encouraging collaboration and NCs among firms, a
questionnaire survey was carried out involving a group of Italian businesses. The
questionnaire was distributed during a meeting to set up matches (from here on MM will be
used for matching meeting), held in Pesaro (Marche Region, in central-eastern Italy) in May
2013. An Italian BA with several local offices organised the meeting. The purpose of the
meeting was to offer businesses an opportunity to meet and know each other, to find new
12
partners to develop new projects or possible customers. A total of 158 enterprises, mostly
located in Pesaro province, attended the meeting. The questionnaire consisted of 14 questions,
mainly closed-ended questions, intended to obtain information about: 1) Business profile:
size, industry, etc. (5 questions); 2) Role of BAs in promoting and favoring collaboration
between firms (8 questions); 3) Firms attitudes and involvement in NCs (9 questions).
A total of 146 questionnaires were distributed and 112 questionnaires were returned and duly
completed. The response rate was very high, 77%, mainly thanks to the fact that two authors
of this study distributed the questionnaire and attended the meeting throughout the day.
Results from the questionnaire survey are outlined below.
Enterprises responding to the questionnaire have been classified according to the European
Union dimensional parameters6. They are mainly micro-enterprises (53,35) and small-sized
enterprises (30,8%). Mid- and large-sized enterprises are less present (respectively 7,5% and
8m,4%) consistent with the characteristics of Marche Region’s economic system.
Businesses are mainly (70%) independent. Only 30% of them are part of corporate groups.
Enterprises operate in very different business sectors. The most represented sector is manufacturing
(29,5%), followed by professional consulting (18,8%) and by information and communication
businesses (15,2%) (Fig. 1).
Fig. 1 – Business sectors
The central part of the questionnaire has been devoted to the role of BAs in promoting
cooperation between firms. To do this, respondents were first asked to express on a 5-point
Likert scale their opinion about BA’s ability to carry out this role. Answers reveal that about
50% of the respondents express a strong belief about the possibility that BAs can foster
cooperation between firms. There are however many respondents that are less convinced
(26.7%). Around 16% of respondents express a very negative opinion.
In the respondents opinion the most effective initiatives to foster collaborative relationships
between firms are organisation of meetings between associate entrepreneurs, cited by more
than half of respondents (54%), and technical workshops (46%). The former are “generic”
meetings among entrepreneurs, open to any association members to discuss various issues
related to their business and the association. Technical workshops, in contrast, are organised
to address specific issues that are controversial, critical, relevant and urgent. Technical
workshops often involve external experts. In the opinion of respondents, therefore, workshops
6 Recommendation of the European Commission 2003/361/CE of May, 6 2003.
13
specifically devoted to inter-firm collaboration issues – e.g. technical solutions to create
partnerships – are considered particularly useful and effective. Other useful initiatives are
training courses (44%) and MMs (40%) (Fig. 2).
Fig. 2 – Business associations’ initiatives to promote inter-firm collaboration
It is interesting to note that MMs are only fourth in the list of activities to promote
collaboration between businesses, even if they are events primarily aimed at encouraging the
meeting, exchange and collaboration among the participants. During these events, in fact,
entrepreneurs, professionals, consultants, etc. have the opportunity of one to one meetings
with other participants in order to exchange experiences, share projects and find partners to
create joint initiatives. The views expressed through the questionnaire suggest that these
events are not very common and not very well known by the entrepreneurs, who do not have
sufficient information to assess their actual effectiveness. Another possible explanation is
negative feedback from previous MM.
Indeed a significant percentage of entrepreneurs (42%) did not participate in previous MMs.
And not everyone who has already participated in other MMs expressed a positive opinion
about their usefulness. In fact, only just over a third of respondents think that these meetings
have been useful in facilitating the creation of partnerships between businesses. 45% of
respondents are more doubtful and the remaining 20% have a negative opinion.
Those who have benefited from participation in previous MMs have succeeded in starting
joint projects with other enterprises, mainly:
- marketing and commercial projects (42% of respondents);
- innovation and R&S projects (28% of respondents);
- internationalization projects (19% of respondents).
The entrepreneurs’ opinion about the MMs changes radically when you ask them to evaluate
the usefulness of the specific initiative in which they are involved at the moment of the
survey. More than 72% of the respondents, in fact, believe that the meeting in which they are
participating is helpful to promote collaboration between companies. Only 7 out of 100
respondents express scepticism (Fig. 3).
Fig. 3 – Do you believe that this kind of events is helpful in fostering inter-firm collaboration?
(1= Absolutely NO; 5 = Absolutely YES)
14
These contrasting opinions may arise from businesses’ confidence towards "their" BA, while
they show a greater scepticism about similar events organised by other entities. However, it is
possible that their positive response has been conditioned by the belief that their BA
organised the survey. The respondents, however, were clearly informed that the research was
sponsored by Urbino University.
What are the main results that respondents expect by participating in such meetings?
In this case, an open question has been included in the questionnaire, in order to allow
respondents to freely express their expectations, without being conditioned by the answer
choices included in the questionnaire. The answers show that the main reason for attending
MMs is the possibility of finding business contacts (customers and suppliers). This suggests
that firms are more interested in finding business opportunities rather than in finding
collaboration opportunities to launch joint projects with other companies. Finding customers
and suppliers is indeed the priority shown by 47% of respondents. About 19% of the
respondents attend the meeting to meet other entrepreneurs. In these cases, however,
respondents don’t mention the will to realize joint projects, but they express only a general
intention to meet other entrepreneurs and make new contacts. An equal number of
respondents (19%) explicitly express the desire to find partners to start joint projects.
Fig. 4 – Do you think that your business association pays enough attention to its members
needs to promote inter-firm collaboration? (1= Absolutely NO; 5 = Absolutely YES)
In general, with respect to the role of BAs in fostering collaboration between firms,
respondents are only partly satisfied. Little more than a third of respondents express a very
positive opinion about the ability of their BA to effectively meet the businesses’ needs and to
encourage inter-firm collaboration. Instead the majority of respondents are less positive
towards their BA and 23% are definitely critical (Fig. 4).
15
The third part of the questionnaire was devoted to check: if companies know what NCs are
and if they are involved in some NCs to formalize partnerships with other businesses.
The first response to the questionnaire is that respondents know little about this type of
contract: respondents that say they don’t know and have never heard of this type of contract
are in fact 42,5%
Even less, only 7.5%, are companies already involved in one or more NCs. It's also interesting
to note the presence of 13.2% of respondents who say they don’t know whether or not their
company is involved in a NC.
This data therefore seems to demonstrate that the commitment of BAs and other institutional
entities to encourage the adoption of NCs by businesses has not been sufficient. Therefore
NCs are not well known and promoted. Probably businesses and other entities – consultants,
lawyers, accountants, banks, notaries – have not yet enough information to get a complete
picture of the characteristics of this instrument and its legal implications. Despite this general
lack of information about the characteristics of NCs, the interest of firms is high. About two-
thirds of respondents (78.5%), in fact, are willing to consider a NC in the future. In this regard
it is interesting to note that the willingness to enter into NCs in the future has been declared
by a total of 73 entrepreneurs. These include even those who are not currently involved in any
NCs (61 to 73) and even several entrepreneurs who said they don’t know (28 of 73) what they
are.
The respondents would be interested in signing NCs especially to carry out projects aimed at:
internationalization, innovation and R & D and marketing. It’s interesting to observe that
companies have cited the same types of projects about possible inter-firm collaborations. This
suggests that businesses are aware of the fact that these kinds of initiatives are crucial for their
competitiveness and their development. At the same time, they know the importance of inter-
firm collaboration, as it allows for overcoming problems associated with their small size and
with the huge use of resources and time required to start the above-mentioned initiatives.
According to respondents, none of the NCs in which companies are currently involved are the
result of past matching meetings. Nevertheless, businesses are confident and believe that such
meetings may actually help them to meet other businesses and enter into some NCs (Fig. 5).
58% of the respondents are absolutely convinced. Only 11% of respondents think the
opposite.
Fig. 5 – Usefulness of matching meetings to facilitate the implementation of network contracts
According to some "pessimists" the matching meetings are often too generic. To be truly
effective they should involve enterprises belonging to the same industry, that share similar
needs and experiences. Others believe that hardly a matching meeting could hardly lead to the
conclusion of a NC, because "a network contract is based on mutual knowledge and trust, and
16
at this meeting we have just met" or because "it’s difficult to meet people with an open mind
and seriously willing to collaborate".
However, several entrepreneurs are "confident." They have a variety of reasons to judge the
matching meetings useful. Some of them point out that in Italy the great number of small-
sized enterprises means that there is a particular incentive to collaborate and to sign a NC. In
fact the latter would allow to overcome constraints connected with small size and to
implement projects otherwise inaccessible, due to the great amount of energy and resources
necessary to implement them. Others point out that "to do network it’s necessary to meet, talk,
expand" and observe that "often not networking is the consequence of the mutual lack of
knowledge". In fact it is "through sharing and dialogue that you understand how to interface
and how to develop partnerships and network contracts". From this point of view, therefore,
matching meetings are important opportunities to expand businesses’ network of connections
and the latter is a necessary precondition for the conclusion of NCs.
The role of BAs is crucial for the success of the meetings, since "within an association it’s
easier to discuss and exchange experiences". Finally, the emphasis is on the seriousness of
participants’ intentions: "in my opinion if there are people who really share a goal the result
is guaranteed. But if you attend just to understand others’ strategies, then no". "Common
goals and desire to work together to grow" thus seem, according to respondents, essential
elements for a successful matching meeting. From this point of view, belonging to the same
association can certainly help to promote the reliability and effectiveness of the meeting.
5. Conclusions, Implications and Further research From a theoretical point of view, this study firstly contributes to fill a gap in knowledge about
NCs. Previous research in fact have not focused on the presence and role of institutional
actors in this form of inter-firm collaboration. In particular, the paper emphasizes the role of
BAs in the development of territorial competitiveness and supporting the socio-economic
regional and interregional Italian contexts where SMEs are widespread.
From a practical point of view, this study also contributes to a better understanding of this
new legislative tool aimed at supporting SMEs competitiveness and growth, by providing
political and managerial implications.
The analysis is based on the content of written contracts of a selected group of NCs (those
which entail at least one BA) between the 678 existing in Italy and on the responses to an
exploratory questionnaire, used to catch entrepreneurs and managers’ beliefs about the role of
BAs in promoting collaboration among enterprises. Only 20 (3%) Italian network contracts
are characterised by the presence of at least one association, representing a structured group of
manufacturing and/or service companies, with national relevance. The 75% of these are
institutional networks, composed by local BAs, often belonging to the same national
confederation, with the aim of creating synergies and reduce costs, balancing advantages and
disadvantages of decentralization. The remaining 25% are business NCS, composed mainly
by for profit enterprises, where the single BA participating plays the role of facilitator or
service provider for the benefit of single network’s members. With reference to strategic
objectives set out in these contracts by BAs together with their partners, these are mainly
devoted to increase internal efficiency, sell business services to members/non members and
share certain activities of common interest (e.g. exchange of information, training,
internationalisation services, access to public funds, knowledge management). Thus, they
represent a public example of how making cooperative agreements working and they also can
have possible role as network incubators and facilitators of diffusion of this model of
collaboration at strategic level.
Regarding questionnaire’s responses it is possible to observe a fairly positive opinion towards
the role played by BAs in encouraging collaboration between enterprises and the usefulness of
17
MMs (not very common and not very well known by respondents). BA’s contribution is
primarily associated to their capability in promoting profitable cooperations in marketing and
commercial projects (particularly finding customers and suppliers) and innovation/R&D
projects. Generally, little more than a third of respondents have a very positive opinion about
the ability of their BA to effectively meet businesses’ needs to inter-firm collaboration.
About the knowledge of NC, more than 40% of respondents don’t know and have never heard
of this type of contract. Only 7,5% are companies already involved in one or more NCs. The
interest of respondents and the willingness to enter into NCs in the future are high, especially
in order to develop internationalisation, innovation and marketing policies, but the
commitment of BAs to encourage the adoption of NCs by firms is not judged entirely
sufficient to spread the knowledge of this legal instrument and to promote its use.
These results provide, in details, a set of practical implications for the Italian government and
its local organisations, which through the direct involvement of different actors (i.e. Chamber
of Commerce, BAs, consortia) can stimulate firms to take a coordinated approach in
achieving common objectives without losing their independence (i.e., to innovate or
strengthen their internationalisation), contribute to the sustainable development (in terms of
social development and diffusion of structural capital) and facilitate dialogue across different
regions.
The implications of the study also relate to the fact that traditional BAs’ objective of fostering
entrepreneurship and economic development of companies (associated or not) can then
become a widespread cultural value in the society (in the institutional context), and that the
idea of cooperating (conceiving collaboration as a means to foster the socio-economic
development) become a cultural value in the specific economic context.
BAs may promote collaboration between firms, in particular facilitating the training of NCs
directly by acting as members of a NC or indirectly by promoting collaboration through
various tools and initiatives (like MMs).
With regard to the direct involvement of BA in the NC, the analysis of the NCs reveals,
however, that the objective of fostering collaboration and networking among firms not
formally appear between the objectives pursued at the time of signing contracts. Despite this,
however, it is believed that BAs can still contribute to foster the development of an open mind
to the collaboration between the member companies and, more generally, between companies
operating in the same geographical area. This is achieved through both "good example"
represented by the association involved in a NC and positive effects on the territory, in terms
of knowledge management, dissemination of information, creation of meetings, etc.
With regard to the effects produced by the second type of interventions (indirect type), our
survey revealed that firms have high expectations for this kind of meeting and expect help
from BAs. Not always, however, firms’ expectations were fulfilled and their judgment
towards actual results still seems rather lukewarm.
We are aware that this exploratory study has several limitations. On the one hand, these are
connected to the fact that the our current research can be deepened addressing attention to the
different roles played by different institutional actors (entrepreneurial associations, consortia,
cooperative, foundations) whose nature can be both public and private. On the other hand,
further research could be developed in order to explore the influence of institutional actors on
the governance mechanisms of the network contracts. Moreover, it is useful to monitor these
results in the long term, and to make international comparison NCs are relatively “young”
legislative tools, diffused only in the Italian context. Finally, a qualitative analysis of “best
practices” should be performed to understand which are the key variables that have generated
positive outcomes (objectives and goals) through the presence of institutional actors. Both of
these trajectories may be pursued in future research projects.
18
References
Acs, Z.J., Desai, S. & Hessels, J. (2008), Entrepreneurship, economic development and
institutions, Small Business Economics, 31:219–234. DOI 10.1007/s11187-008-9135-9.
Aidis, R., Estrin, S. & Mickiewicz, T. (2007), Institutions and Entrepreneurship Development
in Russia: A Comparative Perspective, CSESCE, Economics Working Paper, 79, August: 1-
30.
Aldrich, H., Rosen, B. & Woodward, W. (1987), The impact of social networks on business
founding and profit. Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research. Wellesley, MA: Babson College.
Amin, A. & Thrift, N. (1994), Globalization, institutions and regional development in
Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Aureli, S., Ciambotti, M. & Del Baldo, M. (2011), Inter-organisational networks as a strategic
response to current economic challenges. The Italian experience of the “network contract”:
analysis of networks formation, goals and governance” Rent XXV Proceedings, Research in
Entrepreneurship and Small Business, Bodo, Norway, 16-18 November.
Aureli, S. & Del Baldo, M. (2012), Networks’ Contribution to Small-Sized Firms’
Internationalization, International Journal of Economic Behavior, 2: 47-66.
BarNir, A. & Smith, K.A. (2002), Interfirm Alliances in the Small Business: The Role of
Social Networks. Journal of Small Business Management, 40: 219-232.
Baumol, W. (1990), Entrepreneurship: Productive, Unproductive and Destructive, The
Journal of Political Economy, 98(5): 893-921.
Baumol, W. (1993), Entrepreneurship, Management and the Structure of Payoffs. London:
The MIT Press.
Becattini, G. (1989), Modelli locali di sviluppo. Bologna: Il Mulino.
Becattini, G. (1990), The Marshallian industrial districts as a socio-economic notion, in: F.
Pyke, G. Becattini & W. Sengenberger, Industrial Districts and inter-firm cooperation in
Italy. Geneve: International Institute for Labour Statistic: 37-51.
Birley, S. (1985), The Role of Networks in the Entrepreneurial Process, Journal of Business
Venturing, 1(1). 107-117.
Burt, R.S. (2000), The Network Structure of Social Capital, Research in Organisational
Behaviour, 22: 345-423.
Butera, F. & Alberti, F. (2013), Il governo delle reti inter-organizzative per la competitività.
Milano: Fondazione Irso, Istituto Ricerca intervento Sistemi Organizzativi.
Brusco, S. (1982), ‘The Emilian model: productive decentralization and social integration,
Cambridge Journal of Economics, 6: 167-84.
Brusco, S. (1986), ‘Small firms and industrial districts: the experience of Italy’, in Keeble, D.
& Weaver, E. (eds), New Firms and Regional Development in Europe. London: Croom
Helm.
Cafaggi, F. (2010), Il nuovo contratto di rete: ‘Learning by doing?’, I Contratti, 18(12): 1143-
1154.
Cafaggi, F. (2011), Contractual Networks, Inter-firm cooperation and Economic growth.
Chentelham: Elgar.
Cafaggi, F., Iamiceli, P. & Mosco, G.D. (eds) (2012a). Contratti di rete : un’analisi
comparativa: I contratti di rete stipulati nel 2010-2011: le prime evidenze. Roma: Fondazione
Bruno Visentini- UnionCamere, giugno.
Cafaggi, F., Iamiceli, P. & Mosco G.D. (eds) (2012b), Il contratto di rete per la crescita delle
imprese. Milano: Giuffrè.
Cappellin, R. (2003), ‘Territorial knowledge management: towards a metrics of the cognitive
dimension of agglomeration economies, International Journal of Technology Management,
26(2-4): 303-25.
19
Carnazza, P. (2008), Gruppi di imprese e sistemi di relazione in rete, Quaderno n. 150, Aprile:
1-16 Roma: DPTEA, LUISS.
Cedrola, E., Cantù, C. & Gavinelli, L. (2011) Networks, Territory and Firm Development.
The Perspective of Italian Family Firms, paper presented at the Euram Conference 2011,
Tallin, 1-4 June.
Colombo, G., Dubini, P. (eds) (1988), I servizi per la creazione di nuove imprese, Milano:
Giuffrè.
Coviello, N.E. (2006), The Network Dynamics of international New Ventures, Journal of
International Business Studies, 37(5): 713-731.
Cuffaro, V. (2010). Contratti di impresa e contratti tra imprese, Il Corriere del Merito, Anno
6, Le Rassegne, n. 1: 5-8.
DiMaggio, P.J. & Powell, W.W. (1983), The iron cage revisited: institutional isomorphism
and collective rationality in organisational field, American Sociology Review, 48: 147-160.
Doh, J.P. & Teegen, H. (2002), Nongovernmental organisations as institutional actors in
international business: theory and implications, Journal of International Business and
Economy, 3(1): 69-86.
Ellis, P. (2000), Social Ties and Foreign Market Entry. Journal of International Business
Studies, 31(3), 443-469.
Feldman, M.P. (2001), The entrepreneurial event revisited: firm formation in a regional
context, Industrial and Corporate Change, 10(4): 861-891, doi: 10.1093/icc/10.4.861.
Ferrero, G. (ed) (2001).,Distretti, network, rapporti interaziendali. Genova: Aspi/Ins-Edit.
Glaister K.W. & Buckley P.J. (1996), Strategic Motives for International Alliance Formation,
Journal of Management Studies, 33(3): 301-332.
Golden, A. P. & Dollinger, M. (1993), Cooperative Alliances and Competitive Strategies in
Small Manufacturing Firms. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 17(4): 43-53.
Grabher, G. (1993), The embedded firm: on the socioeconomics of industrial networks.
London: Routledge.
Grant, R.M. (1991), The Resource-Based Theory of Competitive Advantage: Implication for
Strategy Formulation, California Management Review, 33(3): 114-135.
Håkansson, H. & Snehota, I. (1995) Developing relationships in business networks. Boston,
MA: Thompson Press.
Hara, G., & Kanai, T. (1994), Entrepreneurial Networks Across Oceans to Promote
International Strategic Alliance for Small Businesses, Journal of Business Venturing, 9(6):
489-507.
Haug, M. & Sommer, L. (2008), The influence of attitudes and experience on the owner-
manager’s intentions toward cooperation, International Business & Economic Research
Journal, 7(9): 57-72.
Hills, G.E., Lumpkin, G.T. & Singh, R.P. (1997), Opportunity Recognition: Perceptions and
Behaviours of Entrepreneurs. Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research. Wellesley, MA:
BabsonCollege.
Hodgson, G.M. (2006), What are institutions?, Journal of Economic Issues, 40(1): 1-25.
Hwang, H., & Powell., W.W. (2005), Institutions and Entrepreneurship, in Alvarez, S.,
Agrawal, R. & Sorenson, O. (eds), Handbook of Entrepreneurship Research:
Interdisciplinary Perspectives. New York: Springer: 201-232.
Iamiceli, P. (2009), Le reti di imprese e i contratti di rete. Torino: Giappichelli.
Johanson, J. & Mattsson, L.G. (1988), Internationalization in Industrial System: A Network
Approach, in Hood, N. & Vahlne, J.E. (eds), Strategies in Global Competition. London:
Croom Helm: 287-314.
Johanisson, B. (2000), Networking and entrepreneurial growth. in Sexton, D.L. & Lawrence,
H. (eds), The Blackwell Handbook of Entrepreneurship. Oxford: Blackwell: 368-386.
20
Kontinen, T. & Arto Ojala, A. (2011). International Opportunity Recognition among Small
and Medium-Sized Family Firms, Journal of Small Business Management, 49(3): 490-514.
Lerro, A. & Schiuma, G. (2009), Knowledge-based dynamics of regional development: the
case of Basilicata region, Journal of Knowledge Management, 13(5): 287-300.
Lorenzoni G. (1992), (ed), Accordi, reti e vantaggio competitivo. Milano: Etas.
Marr, B. & Schiuma, G. (2001), Measuring and managing intellectual capital and knowledge
assets in new economy organisations, in Bourne, M. (ed), Handbook of Performance
Measurement. London: Gee Publishing, C4B/i.
Morgan, K. (1995), The learning region, institutions, innovation and regional renewal, Papers
in Planning Research, n. 157, Department of City and Regional Planning. Cardiff: University
of Wales.
Moulaert, F. & Sekia, F. (2003), Territorial innovation models: a critical survey, Regional
Studies, 37 (3): 289-302.
Niccolini, F. (2008), Responsabilità sociale e competenze organizzative distintive. Pisa:
Edizioni ETS.
North, D. (1990), Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
North, D. (2005), Understanding the Process of Economic Change. Princeton: Princeton
University Press.
Oliva, S. (ed) (2006), Aggregazioni tra imprese: opportunità e prospettive, Quaderni FNE
Collana Osservatori, n. 39, settembre. Treviso: Fondazione Nord-Est, UNINT-Unindustria
Treviso per le Integrazioni 1-26.
Owen-Smith, J. & Powell, W. W. (2008), Networks and Institutions, Chapter 25, in
Greenwood, R, Oliver, C., Suddaby, R. & Sahlin-Andersson, K. (eds), The Sage Handbook of
Organizational Institutionalism. New York: Sage: 594-621. Perry, M. (2007), A new look at industry associations as effective enterprise networks.
Institute for Small Business & Entrepreneurship, 7-9 November: Glasgow, Scotland).
Piore, M. & Sabel, C. (1984), The Second Industrial Divide. New York: Basic Books.
Pisano, G.P. &and Shih, W.C. (2009), Restoring American Competitiveness, Harvard
Business Review, July-August: 78-84.
Powell, W.W., Koput, K. & Smith-Doerr, L. (1996), Interorganizational collaboration and the
locus of innovation: Newtorks of learning in Biotechnology, Administrative Science
Quarterly, 41(1): 116-45.
Pratt, A.C. (1997), The emerging shape and form of innovation networks and institutions, in
Simmie, J., Innovation, networks and learning regions?, London, UK: J. Kingsely Publishers:
124-136. available at: http://eprints.lce.ac.uk/21441
Rapporto Unicredit (2011). Le aggregazioni di rete: modello vincente per lo sviluppo e la
sostenibilità. Rapporto Unicredit sulle piccole imprese e analisi comparata tra piccole e medie
imprese manifatturiere. VIII ed. 2011-2012.
Schiuma, G. & Lerro, A. (2008), Knowledge-based capital in building regional innovation
capacity, Journal Of Knowledge Management, 12(5): 121-136.
Schiuma, G. Lerro, A. & Carlucci, D. (2005), An inter-firm perspective on Intellectual
Capital, in Marr., B. (ed.), Perspectives in Intellectual. Boston, MA: Elsevier Butterworth-
Heinemann: 155-69.
Scott, W.R., Reuf, M., Mendel, P.J. & Caronna, C. (2000), Institutional change and health
care organizations. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Singh, R. P. (2000), Entrepreneurial Opportunity Recognition through Social Networks. New
York: Garland Publishing.
Solaro, F. (2013), Il contratto di rete: un’opportunità per le imprese artigiane, I Quaderni di
ricerca sull’Artigianato: 131-144, available at: www.quaderniartigianato.com/.../2013/.../05_
21
Il-contratto-di-rete-Solaro.
Storper, M. (1997), The Regional World: Territorial Development in a Global Economy. New
York, NY: Guilford Press.
Unioncamere-Istituto Tagliacarne (2007), Le piccole e medie imprese nell’economia italiana,
Rapporto 2007. Milano: F.Angeli.
Unioncamere (2013), I contratti di rete. Rassegna dei principali risultati quantitativi,
elaborazione dati Infocamere 29 dicembre 2012, Report Marzo. Roma: Unioncamere.
Welch, L.S. (1992), The Use of Alliances by Small Firms in Achieving Internationalization.
Scandinavian International Business Review, 1(2), 21-37.
Williamson, O.E. (1991), Comparative Economic Organization. The Analysis of Discrete
Structural Alternatives. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36(2): 269-296.
Wolfram Cox, J. & Hassard, J. (2005), Triangulation in organizational research: A re-
presentation. Organization, 12(1): 109-133. DOI: 10.1177/1350508405048579
Wright, M., Westhead, P. & Ucbasaran, D. (2007), Internationalization of Small and Medium-
Sized Enterprises (SMEs) and International Entrepreneurship: A Critique and Policy
Implications. Regional Studies, 41(7): 1013-1030.
Zahra, S.A., Korri, J.S. & Yu, J.F. (2005), Cognition and International Entrepreneurship:
Implications for Research on International Opportunity Recognition and Exploitation.
International Business Review, 14(2): 129-146.
22
Appendix 1 – General characteristics of network contracts involving business associations
Date Network
name N. of
nodes Geographical
location N. of business associations
Nodes' main activity/sector
lug-11 Insieme si può 3 one region, one province
all nodes, but linked to three different confederations
advisory services and assistance to businesses
ott-11 Rete formazione from 2 to actual 4
one region, four provinces
all nodes, all belonging to the same confederation
advisory services, training
nov-11 Rete in progress 3 one region, 3 provinces
all nodes, all belonging to the same confederation
advisory services, training
feb-12 Highlander 6 two regions, two provinces
1 mechanical, electronic sector and technical equipments
feb-12 Rete servizi Lombardia
from 13 to actual 10
one region, 5 provinces
all nodes, all belonging to the same confederation
advisory services, training
mar-12
Rete Mare Nostrum
6 four regions, 5 provinces
all nodes, all belonging to the same confederation
advisory and administrative services, counselling, training, marketing
giu-12 Rete Exon Centauri
8 mainly one region, three provinces
1 construction, energy, waste handling
giu-12 Rete fidi nord est 2 one region, one province
all nodes, belonging to two different confederations
financial organizations specialized in favouring access to credit and offering credit guarantees
lug-12 Rete Apulia logistic&service
10 mainly one region, three provinces
1 Trade, transport, mechanic
lug-12 Rete Sinertec from 7 to actual 6
one region, one province
1 mechanical, energy, production and management of industrial plants and one financial organization
lug-12 Rete Confidi Emilia Romagna
6 one region, 5 provinces
all nodes, all belonging to the same confederation
financial organizations specialized in favouring access to credit and offering credit guarantees
ott-12 Rete Cooperative Brescia Est
8 one region, one province
2 business services, training, marketing and financial services
ott-12 Rete sistema CNA Roma
5 one region, one province
all nodes, all belonging to the same confederation
fiscal, administrative and other business services
ott-12 Ercole 3 one region, one province
all nodes, all belonging to the same confederation
advisory services, training
nov-12 Rete Liguria Servizi imprese
4 one region, all four provinces of the region
all nodes, all belonging to the same confederation
business services, training, marketing services
nov-12 Italian SME network
3 three regions, three provinces
all nodes, all belonging to the same confederation
advisory services and assistance to businesses
nov-12 Rete formazione in Molise e Abruzzo
5 two regions, 5 provinces
all nodes, all belonging to the same confederation
advisory services, assistance to businesses, training&administrative services
dic-12 Rete Biella-Prato 2 two regions, two provinces
all nodes, all belonging to the same confederation
advisory services, training
gen-13 Rete servizi innovativi Ionico-Adriatica
4 three regions, four provinces
all nodes, all belonging to the same confederation
advisory services, training
mar-13
Rete industria toscana
from 3 to actual 10
all provinces of the same region
all nodes, all belonging to the same confederation
business service, training, counselling
23
Network name
Network's strategic objectives Network's program
Insieme si può commercial expansion by providing more qualified services to members; reduce costs and increase internal efficiency
provide assistance to enterprises willing to develop collaborative projects; marketing activities, seminars and training devoted to promote collaborative business behaviour; promote collaborations with universities; access to funds
Rete formazione commercial expansion in the field of training; access to public funds; share information and best practices; realize common services
n.a.
Rete in progress commercial expansion through the development of new services
n.a.
Highlander commercial expansion; common activities of R&D n.a.
Rete servizi Lombardia
commercial expansion; training for internal staff; internal efficiency by centralization of services
n.a.
Rete Mare Nostrum
develop the nautical sector and the yatch industry n.a.
Rete Exon Centauri
increase product and process quality definition of internal rules; common marketing activities (e.g. promotion, one common advertising agency, registration of a common brand); appointment of a single certification body; participation to common training programs
Rete fidi nord est commercial expansion in the filed of finance counselling and provision of credit guarantees; increase internal efficiency; improve risk management; access to funds
development of new services increase bargain power in relationships with banks improve relationships with local public bodies
Rete Apulia logistic&service
information exchange; exchange of industrial, commercial and technological services
definition of internal rules; common marketing activities (i.e. promotion, one common advertising agency, registration of a common brand); appointment of a single certification body; participation to common training programs
Rete Sinertec commercial expansion (search for new markets, develop new products and services); increase quality through common activities of R&D; increase access to credit
development of common projects; common marketing activities
Rete Confidi Emilia Romagna
commercial expansion in the filed of finance counseling and provision of credit guarantees; increase internal efficiency; improve risk management; increase bargain power with banks; organize training for internal staff
n.a.
Rete Brescia Est increase internal efficiency; share information n.a.
Rete sistema CNA Roma
commercial expansion (sharing of clients to increase market penetration); increase the quality of services offered; reduce costs and increase internal efficiency (improve logistics, control processes, share IT services, cash handling); increase access to funds
common marketing activities; joint management of administrative and accounting services, logistics and purchasing; development of new services and products
Ercole commercial expansion in the field of training common marketing activities like promotion, sharing a commercial representative
Rete Liguria Servizi imprese
commercial expansion (increase the number of business associations' members, sell services to non members); develop new services and realize common activities; reduce costs and increase internal efficiency (also creating a common purchasing group)
definition of internal rules; sharing resources, contacts and experiences; participating to common projects regarding training, finance, realization of new services and joint purchase
Italian SME network
commercial expansion in terms of supporting SMEs in entering new markets in Africa and Middle East (favouring logistic activities, supporting SMEs in finding finance, providing training in international business) and helping SMEs develop common projects
definition of internal rules; sharing resources, contacts and experience; provision of common and new services to SMEs
Rete per la formazione in Molise e Abruzzo
commercial expansion (turnover increase through the provision of new services); increase knowledge of internal staff; develop new projects regarding local enteprises capable to attract public funds
definition of internal rules; share resources, organise internal training to increase personnel's know how; common marketing activities and lobbying toward local entities; search for public tenders and public funds; participation to the creation of consortia
Rete Biella-Prato commercial expansion; internal efficiency creation of shared administrative services, common IT services; promotion of a new product named "Fondo più"
Rete servizi innovativi Ionico-Adriatica
commercial expansion in terms of new and better services to members; develop common projects to better support SMEs; organize seminars and training; favour aggregations and creation of consortia and network contracts among businesses
organise common activities and provide services devoted to support forms of aggregations among businesses; improve internal competencies also through the activation of training project with universities
Rete industria toscana
develop better services (with higher quality and less costly) for local enterprises); map knowledge and capabilities of each node to identify best practices; develop new services by creating stable forms of cooperation among nodes
common purchase; common document storage centre; creation of a common brand and common marketing activities; provision of training and organization of seminars; development of new projects