2024年5月16日发(作者：电脑蓝屏怎么用u盘重装系统)

英文文献资料

（一）

Clusters and the New Economics of Competition

Michael E. Porter

（Harvard university）

Why Clusters Are Critical to Competition

Modern competition depends on productivity, not on access to inputs or the scale of

individual tivity rests on how companies compete,not on the particular fields

they compete ies can be highly productive in any industry– shoes, agriculture, or

semiconductors – if they employ sophisticated methods, use advanced technology,and offer unique

products and services. All industries can employ advanced technology; all industries can be

knowledge intensive.

The sophistication with which companies compete in a particular location, however, is

strongly influenced by the quality of the local business environment.1 Companies cannot employ

advanced logistical techniques, for example, without a high quality transportation infrastructure.

Nor can companies effectively compete on sophisticated service without well-educated employees.

Businesses cannot operate efficiently under onerous regulatory red tape or under a court system

that fails to resolve disputes quickly and fairly. Some aspects of the business environment, such as

the legal system, for example, or corporate tax rates, affect all industries. In advanced economies,

however, the more decisive aspects of the business environment are often cluster specific; these

constitute some of the most important microeconomic foundations for competition.

Clusters affect competition in three broad ways:first, by increasing the productivity of

companies based in the area; second, by driving the direction and pace of innovation, which

underpins future productivity growth; and third, by stimulating the formation of new businesses,

which expands and strengthens the cluster itself. A cluster allows each member to benefit as if it

had greater scale or as if it had joined with others formally – without requiring it to sacrifice its

flexibility.

Clusters and Productivity. Being part of a cluster allows companies to operate more productively

in sourcing inputs; accessing information, technology,and needed institutions; coordinating with

related companies; and measuring and motivating improvement.

Better Access to Employees and Suppliers. Companies in vibrant clusters can tap into an

existing pool of specialized and experienced employees, thereby lowering their search and

transaction costs in recruiting. Because a cluster signals opportunity and reduces the risk of

relocation for employees, it can also be easier to attract talented people from other locations, a

decisive advantage in some industries.

A well-developed cluster also provides an efficient means of obtaining other important

a cluster offers a deep and specialized supplier base. Sourcing locally instead of from

distant suppliers lowers transaction costs. It minimizes the need for inventory, eliminates

importing costs and delays, and – because local reputation is important – lowers the risk that

suppliers will overprice or renege on commitments. Proximity improves communications and

makes it easier for suppliers to provide ancillary or support services such as installation and

debugging. Other things being equal, then, local outsourcing is a better solution than distant

outsourcing, especially for advanced and specialized inputs involving embedded technology,

information, and service content.

Formal alliances with distant suppliers can mitigate some of the disadvantages of distant

outsourcing. But all formal alliances involve their own complex bargaining and governance

problems and can inhibit a company’s flexibility. The close, informal relationships possible among

companies in a cluster are often a superior Arrangement.

In many cases, clusters are also a better alternative to vertical ed with

in-house units, outside specialists are often more cost effective and responsive, not only in

component production but also in services such as training. Although extensive vertical integration

may have once been the norm, a fast-changing environment can render vertical integration

inefficient, ineffective, and inflexible.

Even when some inputs are best sourced from a distance, clusters offer advantages. Suppliers

trying to penetrate a large, concentrated market will price more aggressively, knowing that as they

do so they can realize efficiencies in marketing and in service.

Working against a cluster’s advantages in assembling resources is the possibility that

competition will render them more expensive and scarce. But companies do have the alternative of

outsourcing many inputs from other locations, which tends to limit potential cost penalties. More

important, clusters increase not only the demand for specialized inputs but also their supply.

Access to Specialized Information. Extensive market, technical, and competitive information

accumulates within a cluster, and members have preferred access to it. In addition, personal

relationships and community ties foster trust and facilitate the flow of information. These

conditions make information more transferable.

Complementarities. A host of linkages among cluster members results in a whole greater than

the sum of its parts. In a typical tourism cluster, for example, the quality of a visitor’s experience

depends not only on the appeal of the primary attraction but also on the quality and efficiency of

complementary businesses such as hotels, restaurants, shopping outlets, and transportation

facilities. Because members of the cluster are mutually dependent, good performance by one can

boost the success of the others.

Complementarities come in many forms. The most obvious is when products complement one

another in meeting customers’ needs, as the tourism example illustrates. Another form is the

coordination of activities across companies to optimize their collective productivity. In wood

products, for instance, the efficiency of sawmills depends on a reliable supply of high-quality

timber and the ability to put all the timber to use – in furniture (highest quality), pallets and boxes

(lower quality), or wood chips (lowest quality). In the early 1990s, Portuguese sawmills suffered

from poor timber quality because local landowners did not invest in timber management. Hence

most timber was processed for use in pallets and boxes, a lower-value use that limited the price

paid to landowners. Substantial improvement in productivity was possible, but only if several

parts of the cluster changed simultaneously.

Logging operations, for example, had to modify cutting and sorting procedures, while

sawmills had to develop the capacity to process wood in more sophisticated ways. Coordination to

develop standard wood classifications and measures was an important enabling step.

Geographically dispersed companies are less likely to recognize and capture such linkages.

Other complementarities arise in marketing. A cluster frequently enhances the reputation of a

location in a particular field, making it more likely that buyers will turn to a vendor based there.

Italy’s strong reputation for fashion and design, for example, benefits companies involved in

leather goods, footwear, apparel, and accessories. Beyond reputation, cluster members often profit

from a variety of joint marketing mechanisms, such as company referrals, trade fairs, trade

magazines, and marketing delegations.

Finally, complementarities can make buying from a cluster more attractive for customers.

Visiting buyers can see many vendors in a single trip. They also may perceive their buying risk to

be lower because one location provides alternative suppliers. That allows them to multisource or

to switch vendors if the need arises. Hong Kong thrives as a source of fashion apparel in part for

this reason.

Access to Institutions and Public Goods. Investments made by government or other public

institutions– such as public spending for specialized infrastructure or educational programs – can

enhance a company’s productivity. The ability to recruit employees trained at local programs, for

example, lowers the cost of internal training. Other quasi-public goods, such as the cluster’s

information and technology pools and its reputation, arise as natural by-products of competition.

It is not just governments that create public goods that enhance productivity in the private

sector. Investments by companies – in training programs, infrastructure, quality centers, testing

laboratories, and so on – also contribute to increased productivity. Such private investments are

often made collectively because cluster participants recognize the potential for collective benefits.

Better Motivation and Measurement. Local rivalry is highly motivating. Peer pressure

amplifies competitive pressure within a cluster,even among noncompeting or indirectly competing

companies. Pride and the desire to look good in the local community spur executives to attempt to

outdo one another.

Clusters also often make it easier to measure and compare performances because local rivals

share general circumstances – for example, labor costs and local market access – and they perform

similar activities. Companies within clusters typically have intimate knowledge of their suppliers’

costs. Managers are able to compare costs and employees’ performance with other local

companies. Additionally, financial institutions can accumulate knowledge about the cluster that

can be used to monitor performance.

Clusters and Innovation. In addition to enhancing productivity, clusters play a vital role in a

company’s ongoing ability to innovate. Some of the same characteristics that enhance current

productivity have an even more dramatic effect on innovation and productivity growth.

Because sophisticated buyers are often part of a cluster, companies inside clusters usually

have a better window on the market than isolated competitors do. Computer companies based in

Silicon Valley and Austin, Texas, for example, plug into customer needs and trends with a speed

difficult to match by companies located elsewhere. The ongoing relationships with other entities

within the cluster also help companies to learn early about evolving technology, component and

machinery availability, service and marketing concepts, and so on. Such learning is facilitated by

the ease of making site visits and frequent face-to-face contact.

Clusters do more than make opportunities for innovation more visible. They also provide the

capacity and the flexibility to act rapidly. A company within a cluster often can source what it

needs to implement innovations more quickly. Local suppliers and partners can and do get closely

involved in the innovation process, thus ensuring a better match with customers’ requirements.

Companies within a cluster can experiment at lower cost and can delay large commitments

until they are more assured that a given innovation will pan out. In contrast, a company relying on

distant suppliers faces greater challenges in every activity it coordinates with other organizations –

in contracting, for example, or securing delivery or obtaining associated technical and service

support. Innovation can be even harder in vertically integrated companies, especially in those that

face difficult trade-offs if the innovation erodes the value of in-house assets or if current products

or processes must be maintained while new ones are developed.

Reinforcing the other advantages for innovation is the sheer pressure – competitive pressure,

peer pressure, constant comparison – that occurs in a cluster. Executives vie with one another to

set their companies apart. For all these reasons, clusters can remain centers of innovation for

decades.

Clusters and New Business Formation.

It is not surprising, then, that many new companies grow up within an existing cluster rather

than at isolated locations. New suppliers, for example, proliferate within a cluster because a

concentrated customer base lowers their risks and makes it easier for them to spot market

opportunities. Moreover, because developed clusters comprise related industries that normally

draw on common or very similar inputs, suppliers enjoy expanded opportunities.

Clusters are conducive to new business formation for a variety of reasons. Individuals

working within a cluster can more easily perceive gaps in products or services around which they

can build businesses. Beyond that, barriers to entry are lower than elsewhere. Needed assets, skills,

inputs, and staff are often readily available at the cluster location, waiting to be assembled into a

new enterprise.

Local financial institutions and investors, already familiar with the cluster, may require a

lower risk premium on capital. In addition, the cluster often presents a significant local market,

and an entrepreneur may benefit from established relationships. All of these factors reduce the

perceived risks of entry – and of exit, should the enterprise fail.

The formation of new businesses within a cluster is part of a positive feedback loop. An

expanded cluster amplifies all the benefits I have described – it increases the collective pool of

competitive resources, which benefits all the cluster’s members. The net result is that companies

in the cluster advance relative to rivals at other locations.

英文文献中文翻译

（二）

来源：哈佛商业评论Vol.76第6期 1998年

作者：迈克·E. 波特

出版时间：1998

簇群与新竞争经济学

(美）迈克·E. 波特

为什么簇群对竞争至关重要?

现代竞争取决于生产力, 而非取决于投入或单个企业的规模。生产力取决于公司如何竞

争, 而非它们在何领域竞争。如果公司运用熟练的方法和先进的技术, 提供独特的产品和服

务,那任何产业，鞋业、农业或半导体产业都能产生较高的生产力。所有产业都能够运用先

进的技术;所有产业都能成为知识密集型产业。

然而, 公司在某一特定的地理位置进行竞争的复杂程度受当地商业环境质量的影响极

大。例如,如果缺乏高质量的交通运输基础设施,公司就无法使用先进的后勤技术。同样,如

果没有受过良好教育的雇员, 公司也无法在成熟的服务业中进行有效的竞争。企业无法在繁

杂的管制性红头文件或一个不能迅速、公平地解决争端的法院体系下进行有效的竞争。商业

环境的某些方面, 例如法律制度或公司税率, 也会影响所有产业。在发达的国家中, 商业环

境中起决定性作用的方面通常是簇群所特有的,这为竞争打下了最重要的微观经济基础。

簇群通过三种方式影响竞争:首先,通过增强以该领域为立足点的公司的生产力来施加

影响; 其次,通过推动创新的方向和步伐,为未来生产力的增长奠定坚实的基础; 再次,通过

鼓励新企业的形成,扩大并增强簇群本身来影响竞争。每个簇群总能使其每个成员受益,仿佛

它拥有更大的规模或已与其他簇群正式地联合在一起——而并不要求它牺牲自身的灵活性。

簇群与生产力 成为簇群的一部分将使得公司在寻求投入、获得信息技术及所要的制度、

协调相关公司和促进改善等方面运作起来更加有效。

获取雇员和供应商的更好途径。在有活力的簇群内公司可以利用现有的各种专业化、有

经验的雇员, 从而降低他们在招聘过程中的搜索成本和交易成本。因为每一个大簇群意味着

有更多的机会,减少重新安置雇员的风险。它还易于从其他地区吸引人才,从某些产业中攫取

起决定性作用的优势。

一个发展状况良好的簇群为获取其它重要的投入要素提供了一条有效的途径。它提供了

一个深层次、专业化的供应商基地。就地取材而不是从遥远的供应商那里获取资源,可以降

低交易成本。这有助于把存货需求降低到最小程度, 同时也有助于减少进口成本以及避免生

产延误。而且本地声誉可以起到重要作用,它有助于降低供应商抬高价格或违约的风险。地

理位置的相近性有利于改善通讯联络、有利于供应商提供辅助性服务, 诸如安装、排除故障

之类的服务。然而, 如果其他条件相同, 就地取材比从远处取材更为方便快捷, 尤其是对于

那些涉及内在信息、技术和服务满意度等先进性、专业化的投入要素来说更是如此。

与外地供应商正式结盟,可以缓解从外地获取资源的许多劣势。但是,所有正式的联盟都

将涉及他们各自复杂的议价问题和管理问题,从而限制了公司的灵活性和机动性。所以,簇群

内部各公司之间亲密而又非正式的关系通常是较优的选择。

在许多案例中,簇群是取代垂直一体化的更好选择。与内设单位相比,外部的专家在部件

生产和诸如培训等服务方面, 通常更具有成本效益和责任心。虽然广泛的垂直一体化曾经是

我们的追求目标,但是,瞬息万变的外部环境可能使垂直一体化缺乏效率、效能和灵活性。

即使某些投入要素最好从远地获取, 簇群也仍然可以提供某些优势。那些致力于渗入一

个广阔而又集中的市场的供应商们, 将会使其定价更具竞争性, 因为他们知道, 他们的这

一做法能够实现营销和服务的高效率。

如果资源配置违背簇群优势,竞争就可能导致配置代价更高和资源的短缺。但是,公司也

可以从其他地区外购能减少成本损失的各种生产要素。更重要的是, 簇群不仅增加了对专门

化投入要素的需求,而且还他们的供给。

获取专业化信息的途径。簇群内广泛积累了市场、技术和竞争的信息,簇群成员优先获

取了这些信息。另外,个人关系和社会联结能培育信任,促进信息的传递。所有上述条件都有

利于信息的传播。

互补性。一个簇群的成员之间广泛联结而产生的总体力量大于其各部分之和。以一个典

型的旅游簇群为例。观光旅游者的旅游质量不仅取决于景观引人入胜的程度, 还有赖于互补

性商业活动, 如旅馆、餐馆、商店和交通设施的质量和效率。因为簇群内各个成员是相互依

赖的,某个成员的优质服务将促进其他成员的成功。

互补性表现形式众多。正如上述旅游簇群说明的那样, 最为明显的一种形式是许多产品

在满足顾客的需求方面相互补充。另外一种表现形式是, 公司之间的相互协调可以使他们的

集体生产能力得到进一步完善。以木制产品为例, 锯木厂的效率有赖于高质量木料的供应以

及所有木材得到充分利用的能力。在20 世纪90 年代初期,葡萄牙锯木厂因木材质量差而遭

受巨大损失。这是由于当地土地所有者没有投资于木材管理所致。从而,大多数木材被加工

成货盘和木箱, 这种低价值的使用限制了供给的价格。大量改进生产力是有可能的, 但前提

条件是, 簇群内的其他一些成员应同时改变经营方式。例如, 伐木厂必须改变砍伐和分类程

序, 并以更复杂的方式发展其加工木材的能力。共同协作以发展标准化的木材分类法和测量

法是一个非常重要而又切实可行的环节。然而,在地理位置上处于分散的公司,极少认识到这

种联结的重要性,也极少能利用这种联结的好处。

其他互补性形式可能会出现于市场营销中。每个簇群总是在持续不断地提高其在某个地

区特定领域的声誉。这一行为使得买者转向卖者聚居地的可能性更大。例如,意大利在服装

与设计方面享有良好的声誉, 这些声誉使那些涉及皮毛商品、鞋类、衣服饰品等方面的生产

公司受益匪浅。除声誉外, 簇群成员还经常能从大量的营销机制中获益, 例如, 公司分派贸

易展览会、贸易杂志、营销代表团等。

最后,互补性使客户倾向于购买簇群的东西。在单一的旅行中,观光旅游者可以看到很多

卖主(即提供旅游服务的公司) , 他们同样会察觉到购买风险降低了。这是因为一个地区内

有众多的供应商可供他们选择, 所以, 当需求上升时, 他们就有可能从多种渠道寻求要素

投入或转而寻求其他卖主。香港作为服饰业的基地而繁荣昌盛起来,就部分地归功于这一原

因。

获取机构和公共物品的途径。政府和其他公共机构的投资，例如专业化基础设施或教育

项目方面的公共费用支出能够提高公司的劳动生产率。例如,公司招募那些在接受本地区项

目培训的雇员,可以降低公司内部培训的成本。其他准公共物品,例如簇群信息技术库和声誉

将作为竞争的天然副产品而出现。

不仅仅是政府创造提高民间部门生产力的公共物品。公司如在培训项目、基础设施、质

量中心、实验室等方面投资, 也将对生产率的提高做出贡献。不过, 诸如此类的民间投资通

常是由集体进行的。因为簇群成员认识到了这种集体合作利益的潜在可能性。

更好的动力和衡量。当地的竞争更具动力。在簇群内部, 甚至在非竞争或非直接竞争的

公司之间,共同的压力将增强竞争性的压力,自豪感以及想在本社区良好发展的目标使公司

决策者们试图一个一个击败竞争对手。

簇群通常可以使衡量和比较公司业绩更为便捷。因为当地竞争对手是在相同的环境——

例如劳动力成本和当地市场渠道一样———下经营的,同时他们还从事相似的经营活动。簇

群内部各公司都一般非常熟悉其供货商的生产成本。管理者们在成本和雇员的表现方面与其

他地区的公司进行比较。另外,金融机构可以积累簇群的相关知识,以监督其经营业绩。

簇群与创新 除提高劳动生产率之外, 簇群在持续提高公司创新能力方面同样也发挥

着关键性作用。有些增加现时生产力的相同特征对创新和生产力增长起着更为显著的影响。

因为老练理性的商品购买者通常也是簇群的一部分,所以簇群内的公司与独立的公司相

比,能更好的了解市场状况。例如总部设在硅谷、奥斯汀、得克萨斯的计算机公司总是努力

地探求客户的消费需求和倾向, 这是其他公司无法比拟的。在簇群内, 与其他实体保持持续

的关系, 还有助于公司更早地了解到演进中的技术、零部件和机械的可用性,服务和营销概

念等。现场参观的便利和频繁的面对面联系,使上述学习变得更为容易。

簇群做的更多的是为创新提供可见度更高的机会。同时它还具有迅速反应的能力和灵活

性。簇群内的公司经常能够寻找到他们所需要的要素,以促进创新更快地实现。当地供应商

和合作伙伴能够并且确实紧密的参与创新过程,进一步确保与客户需求保持一致。

簇群内的公司能够以较低的成本进行实验,推迟大额商业协议的履行,除非他们能确定

既定的创新将如期执行。相比之下, 一个依赖于远地供货商的公司在其与其他组织进行协作

的每一项活动中———例如签订合同、确保交货、获得有关技术和服务支持等, 都将面临极

大的挑战。对于垂直一体化的公司来说,创新将变得更为艰难。

如果创新贬低了内部资产的价值, 或者当有新产品研发出来而又必须维护当前的产品

或程序时,他们将面临交易的困难。加强创新的其他优势是发生在簇群内部的一种绝对性压

力,有竞争性压力、同等条件下的压力、持续不断的比照压力。决策者们相互竞争的目的就

是为了突出自己。簇群之所以持续几十年成为创新的中心正是由于以上这些原因所致。

簇群和新业务的形成 许多新公司能够在既存的簇群内而不是在孤立的地区成长起来并

不奇怪。例如, 新的供应商能够在一个簇群内扩大规模是因为一个客户集中的基地可以减少

风险,使这更容易抓住市场机会。由于一个发展完善的簇群包括一些相关产业,这些相关产业

通常能吸引相同或极其相似的要素投入,这样,供应商享受着扩张的机会。

簇群有利于新商机形成可用很多原因来说明。簇群内各个成员相互合作,更容易使他们

感知到构成经营业务的产品或服务方面的差异。除此之外, 与其他地方相比, 这里的进入障

碍更低。在有簇群的地区经常很容易得到所需要的资本、技术、投入和员工,把这些组合起

来就可以组成一个新的企业。

那些已经和簇群很熟悉的当地金融机构和投资者在资本方面要求有一个较低的风险损

失率。而且,簇群经常代表着一个显著的地方市场已经形成。企业家能从已经建立的诸多关

系中受益。所有这些因素都降低了可以察觉到的、使企业不能退出的进入风险。

簇群内新业务的形成是积极的反馈圈的一部分, 一个扩展的簇群增强了所有上述利益。

它可以提高竞争性资源的共享性,这将使簇群内所有成员受益。最终的结果是,簇群内公司增

进了和其他地区竞争对手的关系。