Interdisciplinary Journal of Research in Business

Vol. 1, Issue. 10, (pp.86- 94) November, 2011

Outsourcing and the industrial clusters; The core competencies Perspective

Dr Nour-Mohammad Yaghoubi*
Islamic Azad University, Zahedan Branch, Iran

Mohammad moradi
Master of public administration, Zahedan, Iran

Negar Tajmohammadi
Islamic Azad University Zahedan Branch ,Iran, Department Of Industry Engineering , Systems Management and Productivity Email: yaghoobinor@yahoo.com

ABSTRACT Under economic globalization, the success of a country s economy depends largely on the degree to which it participates in global production networks. This prompts countries to accelerate industrial restructuring and upgrading. It should be also noted that organizations can no longer achieve competitive advantage in the process of production or delivery of goods because of the fast changes occurring in the areas of technology and production of goods. Organizations, therefore, should only rely on their core competencies and assign their non-core competencies to other organizations. Co-operation between organizations in order to increase competitive advantage and concentration on organizations core competencies can lead to the formation of industrial clusters, which considerably appeals to industrial and economic analyzers nowadays. This study, which is the outcome of the researchers field work in Khorasan Iran Khodro Company, reiterates the fact that if organizations rely solely on their core competencies in the process of production and delivery of goods, they can finally produce goods which have the competencies of several organizations (industrial clusters) and can compete with each other globally. This study explicates a model upon which organizations can base the formation of a specialized industrial cluster in which all the members have their own core competencies in the process of production. Keywords: Outsourcing, non-core competencies, Small and Medium Sized Enterprises. Industrial cluster INTRODUCTION With increasing competitive pressures and progressing globalization, firms have to reduce their costs and build new opportunities via optimized using of internal and external resources. Internalization forces firms to bind resources to a course of action, which may restrict flexibility and be hard to retreat. Also, internalization may be required to more effectively production. The difficulty of these decisions has worsened in recent years stimulated by raised competitive pressures, the acceleration of technological change, and the distribution of knowledge across various organizations and geographic markets (Mahmoodzadeh and Jalalinia and Nekui Yazdi, 2009), therefore, organizations are to rely on their core competencies and outsource their non-core competencies. Todays economic climate is dominated by inter-firms networks, which have become powerful instruments for building economic capacity for regions to compete in the global market place. Industry clusters are recognized as playing a significant role both in regional economic development and in improvements to quality of life (George, 2006). The increasing competition and globalization of industries, markets, and technologies have raised the demand for outside-in innovation and acquisition of technology through integrated innovation cluster. Companies need to develop cluster competence in order to link their organization to other players in the market to allow interactions beyond organizational boundaries. The formation of clusters of innovation is a useful concept to transform both tangible and intangible knowledge into embodied and disembodied technical change (Chi Sun and Linand Hashing Tzeng 2009). Clusters are defined as selected sets of multiple autonomous organizations, which interact directly or indirectly, based on one or more alliance agreements between them. The aim of clusters is to gain a competitive advantage for the individual rganizations involved and occasionally for the cluster as a whole as well. Cluster competence enables a company to establish and use relationships with other organization (Chi Sun et al, 2009). On the other hands, Clustering of firms is likely to facilitate efficient and effective collaboration and the leveraging of different resources and competences possessed by each firm. As the sum of the components is of greater value

86

Interdisciplinary Journal of Research in Business

Vol. 1, Issue. 10, (pp.86- 94) November, 2011

than each individual company or institution, clusters create synergies. Industrial clusters affect competitiveness in several ways. First, industrial clusters can enhance competitiveness by increasing the productivity of constituent firms. Cluster members are encouraged to specialize in technology, information, and resources and thereby develop unique capabilities that can lead to profitability. As well, the differentiation that evolves within firms in the cluster is likely to increase variety, which has been shown to enhance profitability, learning, and innovation (Hsian Niu, 2010). On the other hand, the traditional industrial system has often focused on promoting science and technological policies. These system models have typically believed in the science push effect in radical industrial process. Compared with traditional hierarchical systems, the cluster between industries and other research institutions can reduce innovation costs, gain complementary resources or knowledge, receive financial funds, and advance competitive positions (Chi Sun et al, 2009). THE RESEARCH METHODOLOGY This study, which is based on a theoretical approach, investigates the proposed indices found among similar studies. Moreover, it makes use of a survey in which 9 managers and 35 authorities of Iran Khodro Company, Khorasan Branch, who hold BA and above, take part. Finally, a model will be proposed. 1. Outsourcing

Rapid changes in the business environment require senior management to adopt strategies that focus on both current success and to invest in those activities that will promote a competitive advantage for future success. One widely recommended technique for improving ones competitive position is outsourcing. Many managers view outsourcing as the only way to keep a business competitive into the twenty-first century (Bolat and Ylmaz, 2009). Outsourcing activities or services to external organizations is not a new phenomenon. Organizations have always had to take decisions about what they make and what they buy (Delmotte, 2008). Outsourcing is made up of two words out and sourcing. Hence, to define outsourcing we must first be clear on the meaning of sourcing. Sourcing refers to the act of transferring work, responsibilities and decision rights to someone else. Outsourcing is the act of transferring the work to an external party. Whether or not to outsource is the decision of whether to make or buy. Organizations are continuously faced with the decision of whether to expend resources to create an asset, resource, product or service internally or to buy it from an external party. If the organization chooses to buy, it is engaging in outsourcing ((John Power and Kevin Clyde Desouza and Carlo Bonifazi, 2006:2). the transferring of an internal business function or functions, plus any associated assets, to an external supplier or service provider who offers a defined service for a specified period of time, at an agreed but probably qualified price (Heywood, 2001:25). Outsourcing is a form of predetermined external provision with another enterprise for the delivery of goods and/or services that could previously have been offered in-house (Rajabzadeh et al, 2008). 1-1. Increasing Cooperation Cooperation has been widely discussed in the literature on customer supplier relationships. It refers to situations in which parties work closely together to achieve mutual goals. According to ANDERSON/NARUS (1990, p. 45) cooperation is defined as similar or complementary coordinated Actions taken by firms in interdependent relationships to achieve mutual outcomes or singular outcomes with expected reciprocation over time. Cooperation is a Pareto improvement process through mutual forbearance and commitment in the allocation and exploitation of resources so that all or at least one of the parties are better off and none is worse off than it would be otherwise(Lou and Liu, Yi and Zhang and Huang, 2010). Cooperation in this study therefore is defined as the joint striving of firms in interdependent relationships towards individual and mutual goals with the desire to achieve benefits which would not be obtainable without the two parties working together. 1-2. increasing the competitive adjective Competitiveness is a much sought after concept among policy practitioners and academic researchers alike. The promises of economic development through competitiveness appeals to everyone, but the exact content is very hard to pinpoint. Two very distinct approaches to observe competitiveness can be identified: the ex-ante and expost measures of competitiveness (Altena and Heijman, 2007). A Porter (1998) point out that competitiveness is achieved in three ways: increasing organization Productivity; driving the direction and pace of innovation; and, stimulating new organizational institutional growth (Porter, 1998). Competitive advantage is a commonly used phrase. As Porter mentions in The Competitive Advantage of Nations (1990), competitive advantage lies at the

87

Interdisciplinary Journal of Research in Business

Vol. 1, Issue. 10, (pp.86- 94) November, 2011

heart of firm performance in competitive markets. However, several decades of vigorous expansion and prosperity have caused many firms to lose sight of competitive advantage in their scramble for growth and pursuit of diversification. Today competitive advantage is crucially important to a firm. A firms competitive advantage can derive from numerous sources, like lower cost, superior services or products. Achieving competitiveness requires companies to perform discrete activities such as processing orders, calling on customers, assembling products and training employees, thus creating a sustained competitive advantage. To most manufacturers, technology is an integral part of their organizational knowledge, and provides distinct capabilities and competitive advantage. To best make use of this resource, companies are extending the application of their knowledge through technology transfer, also pointed out that firms in developing countries with limited R&D resources achieve sustainable competitive advantage through technology transfer(Huang Lin, and Mei Tung, and Tai Huang, 2006). 2. Industrial Clusters and small and medium sized firms

Studies on industrial clustering date back to Alfred Marshalls contribution on localization economies (Principles of Economics, 1920). He identifies three conditions for setting an industrial cluster: the existence of a pool of adequate labor, the existence of specialized suppliers and the possibility of external spill-over (the rapid transfer of know-how and ideas inside the cluster). Walter Isard (1960) expanded this concept using the export-oriented industries and its linkages to other industries in the region. According to him, these strong industrial linkages are indicating the existence of an industrial cluster. Since then, many academics have been discussing on the importance of regional industrial Agglomeration in relation with the major transformations that have been taking place globally in the economic development and structure of nations, cities and regions (George, 2006). According to Ketels (2004), a particular cluster shares four critical characteristics: proximity as they need to share the same common resources and to allow Positive spillovers; linkages their activities need to share a common goal; active interactions between the firms inside the cluster; critical mass only a significant number of participants has a major impact on The companies performance ( Ketels C. 2004). During the last decades, regional concentration and competitiveness of small firms became important topics of discussion on how to develop the competitive ability of small firms, whereby large firms enjoy economies of scale and scope. In order to overcome difficulties resulting from economies of scale, small firms require the benefit arising from the effects of network interaction. Hence, small firms operating under network interaction within industrial clusters would have greater competitive ability, which cannot be attained by the small firms individually (Ozkanli and Akdeve 2009). The literature cluster and industrial district are frequently used interchangeably. However, the term cluster will rather be used for a more extensive perspective with respect to the term industrial districts. Isaksen (2001) explains that every industrial district is a cluster, whilst a cluster is not necessarily an industrial district. Actually, both clusters and industrial districts generate external economies. In this context, the cluster concept relates to the achievement of increased efficiency through extensive external division of labor within the networks of specialized firms (Ozkanli and Akdeve 2009). There is no precise definition for clusters and almost all of the existing definitions are based on the description of clusters. The following definitions are the most acceptable ones among the researchers and practitioners. According to Porter (1998), a cluster is a geographically proximate group of interconnected companies and associated institutions in a particular field linked by commonalities and complementarities ( Moosavi and Noorizadegan , 2009). Clusters are defined as the intersection of territorial and industrial units; sectors and territories are the two central dimensions for the evolution of clusters. More precisely, cluster growth depends on two kinds of interactions: those which are industry-specific (intra-industry interactions) and those which are region-specific (inter-industry interactions). Porter (1998, p 197) defines clusters as geographic concentrations of interconnected companies, suppliers, service providers, firms in related industries, and associated institutions (e.g., universities, standards agencies, and trade associations) in particular fields that compete but also co-operate(Carroll and Reid. N and Smith, 2007, Porter 1998).

88

Interdisciplinary Journal of Research in Business

Vol. 1, Issue. 10, (pp.86- 94) November, 2011

Clusters are a group of industries whose linkages mutually reinforce and enhance their competitive advantage. Clusters are composed of diverse groups, including primary, related secondary, and supporting industries, universities, research centers, training institutions, and government agencies. Regarding the given definitions, an industrial cluster can be defined as a strong and stable network of companies and institutions competing and co-operating with each other, which are linked in a specific value chain. Clusters consist not only of large firms, but have proliferated the opportunities for small and medium sized firms to fill important needs and niches in the cluster. Large firms continue to grow and internationalize, but the preponderance of job creation has been in smaller firms for the last several decades. Increasingly small and medium-size firms compete internationally, not just large ones (Porter, 2007). 2-1. Factors influencing the industrial clusters Whether a nation achieves international success in a particular industry is determined by four broad attributes of that nation which promote or impede the creation of competitive advantage (Porter 1990). These are as follows: (1) Factor conditions: the nations position in factors of production such as skilled labor, infrastructure, physical resources and technologies, necessary to successfully compete in a given industry; (2) Firm strategy, structure and rivalry: the conditions in the nation governing how companies are created, organized and managed as well as the nature of domestic rivalry; (3) Related and supporting industries: the presence or absence in the nation of supplier industries and related industries and institutions (research, education) that are internationally competitive; and (4) Demand conditions: the nature (from a qualitative and/or quantitative point of view) of home demand for the industrys products or services (Gugler and Brunner, 2007). It is worth noting that two other factors have been introduced in the later studies. They are as follows:

Government
Structure

of firm and Rivalry

Factor
conditions

Demand Conditio ns

Related and Supporting Industries

Culture

Figure1: Porter's Diamond, Source: Houghton and Thorburn (2004, p11).

GOVERNMENT SUPPORT The role of government in the Diamond Model of Porter is to act as a catalyst and challenger; it is to encourage or even push companies to raise their aspirations and move to higher levels of competitive performance. Government must encourage companies to raise their performance, to stimulate early demand for advanced products, to focus on specialized factor creation and to stimulate local rivalry by limiting direct cooperation and enforcing anti-trust regulations (Chi Sun et al, 2009). Government has an important role in assembling information about cluster composition, membership, employment, and performance. Such information will allow public policies and public investments to be better

89

Interdisciplinary Journal of Research in Business

Vol. 1, Issue. 10, (pp.86- 94) November, 2011

aligned with business needs, based on the cluster composition in each location. This will make public policy more relevant and effective. Cluster information will also increase the efficiency of private sector investment and foster new business formation to capitalize on cluster presence and capabilities (Porter, 2007). CULTURE Innovation is an outcome of an innovative culture. Clusters with an innovative culture will increase the lifeexpectancy and productivity of the infrastructure and business capital which they host and the productivity and prosperity of their community (Porter, 1998). Hall (1976) argued that cultures vary greatly in the processing of information and patterns of communication (Chi Sun et al, 2009). The Research Analytical Model
The industrial clusters

Increasing Cooperation

SME

Competitive

organizations

SME

Outsourcing the activities which can not be performed with the core competencies of organizations Increasing the collective efficiency and The division of specialized labor

Fig. 2 :( The Conceptual Model)

Industrial development of the country

Since the advent of the industrial revolution, organizations have attempted to achieve a higher competitive advantage in order to increase their profitability and market share. The dominant model of industry at the time of the World War II was a large, integrated organization whose assets consisted of both intangible property and the management, which controlled all its activities by itself. Later on, in 1970s, organizations while competing for domineering over the global market realized that they lack dynamism required for competitiveness, and that they have an inflationary and lax management. On the other hand, businesses were for a long time static and predictable because of the economic globalization, the evolution of the market, the technological changes, the need for satisfying the growing needs of customers, and intense competition. Therefore, the need for responding to the changes of the market and coping with the difficulty of predicting the market and other changes would mean that organizations should rely on their core

SME

Outsourcing the non-core competencies of

Increasing the competitive adjective

SME

Emphasis on the core competencies of organizations

90

Interdisciplinary Journal of Research in Business

Vol. 1, Issue. 10, (pp.86- 94) November, 2011

competencies. This leads to outsourcing some areas which can be improved by other organizations, and to outsourcing the activities which can not be performed with a competitive ability to other capable organizations. Therefore, outsourcing which is an important management concept leads to the concentration on and higher efficiency of the core activities of organizations. Outsourcing the non-core activities of organizations to other organizations and delivery of high-quality goods and services lead to the higher co-operation between organizations. Thus, organizations can increase their competitive advantage in the process of performing their activities and excel their rivals. In a totally competitive market in a specific area and industry, only those organizations can survive which can increase their co-operation with other organizations and maintain and develop their competitive advantage over their rivals in spite of market fluctuations. This results in the formation of ties between organizations and industries and finally in the formation of industrial clusters, which aim to realize the global management in spite of their rivals, and form affiliated companies which can compete with each other globally With the development of new organizational paradigm and globalization, industrial cluster not only is main source of national competition from a state perspective, but also is becoming one of major competitive weapons for individual firm (Li and Xiong and Park and Liu and MA Shihua and Cho, 2009). Porter (1998) points out the rivalry as an explanation for the success of the clusters. Cooperation among firms in clusters has been viewed and deeply studied as a powerful determinant of the competitive advantage of clusters and of the individual firms in such clusters (Boari et al. 2003). Cluster-based economical policies are nowadays considered as an essential component of SME2s development in many countries. Many of the constraints facing SME1s are related to SMEs isolation rather than their limited size. Clustering and closer cooperation among SMEs can, therefore, be a solution. SMEs in a cluster could benefit from the clusters advertisement impact and the possibility of meeting the requirements of large-scale orders through networking. Moreover, cluster members benefit from collective actions such as joint marketing, purchasing, and technology management, training, facilities, testing, etc. which are all factors that lead to achieving economies of scale. Therefore, the key feature of this type of SME grouping is cluster dynamics which lead to SMEs growth. As companies spin-off and compete with each other to expand their production capabilities, technological variation occurs within the cluster. More specialization increases/intensifies the need for cooperation and horizontal integration between partners offers new business opportunities within the cluster. More integration leads to the overall specialization of the cluster and increases its dynamics and competitiveness (Moosavi and Noorizadegan, 2009). In the figure 2, the competitive mechanism leads to the formation of clusters whose member companies are united around the pivot of their core competencies. CORE COMPETENCIES Competencies are factors contributing to high levels of individual performance, and therefore, organizational effectiveness (Armstrong, 1999). The term competencies has multiple definitions that reflect the varied history of the concept. For instance, competency is used in clinical psychology and law to denote legal standards of mental capacity, the ability to care for oneself, or the ability to function in the activities of daily living. In vocational counseling, the term describes the broad areas of knowledge, skills and abilities associated with specific occupations. The current use of the term can be traced back to McClelland (1973) who saw competencies as components of performance associated with important life outcomes and as an alternative to the traditional trait and intelligence approaches to predicting human performance. Competencies used in this way refer to broad psychological or behavioral attributes that are related to successful outcomes, be they on the job or in life in general. Boyatzis (1982, p 21) defined competency as an underlying characteristic of a person which results in superior and/or effective performance in a job. This definition is widely cited in the literature, although a group of 37 unman resource professionals and industrial and organizational psychologists could not agree on a common definition. Competencies, then, have some or all of these characteristics: cluster of knowledge, skills, abilities, motivation, beliefs, values and interests; relate to a major part of the job; associated with effective and/or superior performance; observable and measurable against well-accepted standards; linked to future strategic directions; and Can be improved via training and development (Chan, 2006). Reve (1990) talks in terms of core skills and complementary skills. Only the most special skills, the core skills, must be retained in-house. Reve is of the opinion that a companys skills profile tends to change over time. New
1

. Small and Medium Sized Enterprises.

91

Interdisciplinary Journal of Research in Business

Vol. 1, Issue. 10, (pp.86- 94) November, 2011

industries possess a high proportion of core skills. Over time, a company progresses along the experience curve and more and Moe parts of its production can be handled within strategic alliances or on the market. The strategic core must be continuously redefined (Branders and Lilliecreutz, and Brege1997). Prahalad and Hamel (1990) contend that core competencies are the collective learning in the organizations, especially how to coordinate Diverse production skills and integrate multiple streams of technologies. They argue that core competence is communication, involvement, and a deep commitment to working across organizational boundaries. However, as firms move away from vertical integration, industrial restructuring has given rise to outsourcing of activities (Gupta and Woodside, Arch and Dubelaar and Bradmore , 2009). The concept of core competence has been developed to support more efficient identification and utilization of an organization's strength. The assumption is that core competencies change more slowly over time than products and markets, and are cumulative. In fact core competencies combine three elements: In the eyes of the customers their characteristics must be relevant. They differentiate between the company and its competitors. To gain competitive advantage, resources and know how for the product must be unique over time. It must be possible to protect it against imitation by competitors over time. So a competitive advantage must be sustainable. Only if these resources are usable for multiple purposes, they are core competencies and should remain within a company and should not be outsourced (Ulli, 2000). In comparison to the core competencies, every organization has in place non-core competencies, also called auxiliary, peripheral, support or operational capabilities. These capabilities help keep the business afloat by aiding the completion of daily operations. For example, most organizations have competencies in the areas of accounting or financial management. Without these, the organization would not be able to conduct its daily operations. Non-core competencies differ from core competencies in two important respects. First, they do not help differentiate the organization from the others in the marketplace. Second, they do not directly impact the organizations products and services. The financial management competency of an organization will directly impact how an organization spends its cash reserves and handles its other financial assets, which may, in turn, affect the future of the organization and through this the products and service offerings. In comparison, a supply chain management competency, if it is a core competency as with Dell Computers, will directly affect the delivery of products and services (John Power et al 2006, 43). Clusters also gain in importance as firms migrate from vertically integrated structures, in which they perform most activities internally, to structures involving the outsourcing of many activities and functions to outside entities. Outsourcing includes not only traditional parts production, support services, and the like, but also contract manufacturing, managing IT systems, training, and even research and development. Outsourcing takes place not only to other firms but to non-business entities such as technical schools, university research institutions, and industry association programs. Finally, globalization has made clusters more, not less, important. Falling barriers to trade and investment have exposed more and more locations to competition, allowing strong clusters to grow stronger while ineffective locations lose position. Globalization neutralizes many sources of competitive advantage that can be sourced or accessed by any firm from a distance, such as cheap labor, raw materials, or generic technology. Paradoxically, then, this means that the advantages of clusters are more important in global competition, not less so. As firms depend more on outside firms, support services, and local institutions, it becomes more important to locate within a strong cluster to access benefits that are difficult for outsiders to tap (Porter, 2007). CONCLUSIONS To illustrate this fact, as was discussed earlier in this paper, organizations can no longer focus on all their processes of production and delivery of goods because of the ever-intensifying competitiveness in the global scene, but instead they should focus only on the processes for which they have core competencies (and for which have competitive advantage over their rivals), and outsource other processes for which they do not have any competitive advantage to suppliers who have competencies. Finally, to conclude, we can consider the advantages of clustering as follows: Collective efficiency (creating synergy), Opportunities to access market information more expeditiously, Ability to obtain specialized inputs and technical support more easily and cost effectively,

92

Interdisciplinary Journal of Research in Business

Vol. 1, Issue. 10, (pp.86- 94) November, 2011

Ability to participate in consortiums to fulfill large orders, Ability to leverage market development and promotional expenses, Group shipments to minimize transportation costs, Easier and Less Costly Recruitment of Workers: Clusters create a pool of workers with desired skills and training, Better Understanding of Suppliers and Consumers: Frequent interactions support efficiencies, exchange of ideas and problem solving services, Better Motivation for Continuous Improvement. REFERENCES 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. Altena, Pytrik and Heijman, Wim (2007) WORKING PAPER MANSHOLT GRADUATE SCHOOL IN SEARCH OF CLUSTERS Mansholt Graduate School of Social Sciences DISCUSSION PAPER No. 38. Anderson, J., & Narus, J. (1990). A model of distributor firm and manufacturer firm working partnerships. Journal of Marketing, 54(1), 4258. Armstrong, M. (1999), A Handbook of Human Resource Management Practice, Kogan Page, London. Boari, C., Odorici, V., Zamarian, M. (2003). Clusters and rivalry: does localization really matter? Scandinavian Journal of Management, 19, 467489. Bolat, Tamer and Ylmaz, O zgu r (2009) The relationship between outsourcing and Organizational performance is it myth or reality for the hotel sector? International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management Vol. 21 No. 1pp. 7-23. Branders, Henrik and Lilliecreutz, Johan and Brege, Staffan (1997) Outsourcing---- Success or ailure? Findings from five case studiesEurupean Journal of purchasing & Supply Management, Vol. 3, No, 2, pp. 63-75. Carroll, M. C and Reid.N and Smith,B.W, (2007), Location quotients versus spatial autocorrelation in identifying potential cluster regions, Springer-Verlag. Ann Reg Sci , 42:449463 Chan, Donna C. (2006) Core competencies and performance management in Canadian public libraries, Library Management Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 144-153. Chi Sun, Chia and Lin, Grace T.R. and Hshiung Tzeng, Gwo (2009) The evaluation of cluster policy by fuzzy MCDM: Empirical evidence from HsinChu Science Park Institute of Technology Management, National Chiao Tung University, No. 1001, Ta-Hsuch Road, HsinChu 300, Taiwan. Delmotte, Jeroenand Luc Sels (2008) HR outsourcing: threat or opportunity? Personnel Review Vol. 37 No. 5, pp. 543-563. George Marian, Isbasoiu (2006) Industrial Clusters and Regional Development. The Case of Timisoara and Montebelluna University of UrbinoCarlo Bo Online at http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/5037/ MPRA Paper No. 5037, posted 07. November 2007 / 04:24. Gugler, Philippe and Brunner, Serge (2007), FDI effects on national competitiveness: a cluster approach, International Atlantic Economic Society, Int Adv Econ Res, 13:268284. Gupta, Samir and Woodside, Arch and Dubelaar, Chris and Bradmore,Don( 2009) Diffusing knowledgebased core competencies for leveraging innovation strategies: Modelling outsourcing to knowledge process organizations (KPOs) in pharmaceutical networks Industrial Marketing Management Available online 21 January. Heywood, J. Brian (2001) the outsourcing dilemma the search for competitiveness ", first published in Great Britain in. Hsien Niu, Keui (2010) Industrial cluster involvement and organizational adaptation an empirical study in international industrial clusters Competitiveness Review: An International Business Journal Vol. 20 No. 5, pp. 395-406. Houghton,John and Thorburn,Lyndal (2004),The Victorian Electronics Industry Cluster, Centre for Strategic Economic Studies (Victoria University). Huang Lin, Chin and Mei Tung, Chiu and Tai Huang, Chih (2006) Elucidating the industrial cluster effect from a system dynamics perspective Technovation 26 , 473482. John Power, Mark and Kevin Clyde Desouza and Carlo Bonifazi(2006) The outsourcing handbook : how to implement a successful outsourcing process London and Philadelphia,published in Great Britain and the United States. Ketels C. (2004): European Clusters, Structural Change in Europe 3, Innovative City and Business Regbarth, Hagbarth Publications Li, Jizi and Xiong ,Naixue and Park , Jong Hyuk and Liu ,Chunling and MA Shihua and Cho, SungEon (2009), Intelligent model design of cluster supply chain with horizontal cooperation, Springer Science+ Business Media.

14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20.

93

Interdisciplinary Journal of Research in Business

Vol. 1, Issue. 10, (pp.86- 94) November, 2011

21. Luo, Yadong and Liu, Yi and Zhang, Leinan and Huang, Ying (2010) A taxonomy of control mechanisms and effects on channel cooperation in China J. of the Acad. Mark. Sci. 22. Mahmoodzadeh, E. and Jalalinia, Sh. and Nekui Yazdi, F. (2009) A business process outsourcing framework based on business process management and knowledge management Business Process Management Journal Vol. 15 No. 6, pp. 845-864. 23. Moosavi, S.V. And Noorizadegan, M, (2009) Export Clusters,. Contributions to Management Science. DOI 10.1007/978-3-7908-2156-7 8, _c Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg. 24. Ozkanli, Ozlem and Akdeve, Erdal (2009), Innovation Ability of Small Firms in Turkish Industrial Clusters: Ankara-Ivedik Industrial Region Case, Innovation Policies, Business Creation and Economic Development, International Studies in Entrepreneurship 21, DOI 10.1007/978-0-387-79976-6 10. Springer Science+Business Media. 25. Porter M (1998) on competition. Harvard Business School Press, Boston. 26. Porter, E.(2007), Clusters and Economic Policy: Aligning Public Policy with the New Economics of Competition, ISC White Paper, Rev. 10/27/09, Harvard Business School. 27. Porter, M.E., 1998. Clusters and the new economics of competition. Harvard Business Review 76 (6), 77 90. 28. Rajabzadeh,Ali and Anvary Rostamy,Ali Asghar ,( 2008) Designing a generic model for outsourcing process in public sector: evidence of Iran",Management Decision , Vol. 46 No. 4, pp. 521-538. 29. Ulli Arnold (2000) New dimensions of outsourcing: a combination of transaction cost economics and the core competencies concept European Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management 6, 23-29.

94