Innovation Systems Research Network (ISRN) 7th
Annual Conference (Graduate Student Session)
Understanding the ISRN conception
of clusters: How metaphors both
reveal & conceal
Prepared by:
Amanda Williams
Doctoral Student
Faculty of Communication and Culture
University of Calgary
The “Cluster Craze”



Today it is nearly impossible to escape the
plethora of studies on clusters.
As the ISRN work illsustrates, Canada has not
been immunune in trying to contribute to this
growing body of work on clusters.
In reflexive spirit of work such as Malmberg &
Maskell (2001) and Martin & Sunley (2003)
this paper is an effort to start think critically
about how clusters are being conceptualized
discursively.
Introduction: My Motivation...



This paper is inspired by an interest in how language in general,
and metaphors in particular, help structure the direction of
academic and policy discourse.
Key research questions: how does the cluster metaphor function
within ISRN documents; how do metaphors help to shape
particular methodological and theoretical approaches to the
study of clusters; and how might metaphorical constructions be
modified to permit different spaces for future research and
avenues of policy development in Canada?
Preliminary effort to try and think about metaphor as a useful
tool for policy making.
Theoretical Considerations:
A Battle Over Definitions
Historical definitions (Aristotle & others)
-Metaphors are ornamental, parasitic, deviant
-This has in the words of Tilley (1999) “done considerable
intellectual damage to the concept”

Versus


Contemporary definitions, which come mostly from cognitive
linguistics (Lakoff & Johnson, 1980)
“Understanding and experiencing one thing in terms of another”
-Source (concrete), target (abstract), mappings
-LOVE (target) AS A JOURNEY (concrete)
-Mappings (travelers as lovers, vehicle as the love relationship,
destination as the purpose of the relationship etc...)
Contemporary Definition
(Continued…)
“Metaphor is not a harmless exercise in
naming. It is one of the principle means
by which we understand our experience
and reason on the basis of this
understanding. To the extent that we
act on our reasoning, metaphor plays a
role in the creation of reality.”
(Lakoff & Johnson, 1987)

Theoretical Considerations:
Why Use Metaphor?
Metaphors have real material consequences in the
social world (ARGUMENT AS WAR versus ARGUMENT
AS DANCE)

Tilley (1999) suggests we use metaphor for three
distinct reasons:
1) Provides a way of giving form to ideas that cannot be
expressed in literal words (tacit to codified knowledge);
2) Allows us to put complex ideas in to fewer words; and,

3) Are a vivid tool to help capture people’s imaginations.
Theoretical Considerations: The
Challenges of Using Metaphor



Always mask some components of the social
world “only partial view never total” (Lakoff &
Johnson, 1980);
Involves directing intentions (Latour, 1999);
and
Can be used, abused, and contested (Tilley,
1999).
Theoretical Considerations: Literature
Review



Interest in metaphor is on the rise.
Studies in archaeology and anthropology,
communications, education, health,
information technology, innovation and
knowledge creation (Nonaka & Takeuchi,
1995), law, management and political
science.
Collectively this work provides a convincing
and engaging account of how metaphors
function to guide both thinking and actions.
Methodology: Guidelines to
Metaphor Analysis


Core steps: identify metaphor; explore
how metaphor works & its implications;
reflect upon why metaphor was used;
and consider some alternatives.
Key question: how do metaphors
function in ISRN texts?
Methodology: Data Selected

Public face of ISRN findings.
Table 1.
ISRN documents selected for analysis
Document Name
Year
#of references to cluster
Initial Project Proposal
nd
93
Introductory Chapter to Clusters Old and New
2003
193
Introductory Chapter to Clusters in a Cold Climate 2004
33
Total: 319
Recognize that data is limited because
it does not look at the specific case
studies.

Research Results:ISRN
Metaphors


The ISRN project uses Porter’s (1998)
definition of a cluster, which is a geographic
concentration “of interconnected companies
and institutions in a particular field” to help
clarify what is meant by the term cluster.
Detailed analysis of the language within the
ISRN documents also indicates that there are
at least four prevalent metaphorical
conceptions of clusters.
Research Results: CLUSTER AS A
PERSON
Table 2.
EXAMPLES OF THE MAPPING OF A CLUSTER AS A PERSON FOUND IN
ISRN TEXTS
PERSON (Source)
CLUSTER (Target)
Traits
Dominant, Bona fide Case, Impostor,
Life Cycle
Born, Grow, Develop, Evolve
Activities
Perform, Innovate
Personality- Has Characteristics
Weak, Strong, Celebrated, Resilient,
Robust, Innovative
Diversity
Local, Regional, talk of the individual
cluster as part of a larger group of
clusters
History
Origins
Parents
Research Institutes and Firms
Source of life- Blood
Source of life- Knowledge Flows

Generally positive;looks at life-cycles;not just
a snapshot in time.
Research Results:CLUSTER AS A
PLANT
Table 3.
EXAMPLES OF THE MAPPING OF A CLUSTER AS A PLANT FOUND IN
ISRN TEXTS
PLANTS (Source)
CLUSTER (Target)
Life cycle
Has a measurable growth rate, viability
Come from seeds
Seeding of a cluster
Have roots
Roots and rooted
Garden
Economy
Gardeners
Policy-makers

Should the focus be on how firms or regions
can replicate the cluster phenomenon? How
useful are best practices?
Research Results:CLUSTER AS A
FORCE
Table 4.
EXAMPLES OF THE MAPPING OF A CLUSTER AS A FORCE FOUND IN
ISRN TEXTS
FORCE (Source)
CLUSTER (Target)
Directionality
Trajectories
Field
Magnetic, Attraction
Power
Boosts the economy

Interesting metaphor because force it still a
relatively abstract source domain.
Research Results: CLUSTER AS AN
ASSOCIATION or AN “ELITE GROUP”
Table 5.
EXAMPLES OF THE MAPPING OF A CLUSTER AS AN ASSOCIATION
FOUND IN ISRN TEXTS
FORCE (Source)
CLUSTER (Target)
Members
Concrete Members- Firms, AnchorFirms, Entrepreneurs, Universities
Abstract Members- Social Capital
Benefits
Shared resources, Technology and
Knowledge sharing
Marketing
Cluster brand and Cluster marketing
Self-contained with Specific spatial boundaries
National, local, IT, bioscience,
industrial, specialized, celebrated,
global, telecommunications, wireless,
etc.

Suggests membership has its advantages; is firm
focused; bounded entity to an imaginary
phenomenon.
Research Results: Interpretations


How might we extend these metaphors: person (how
does life-cycle link to local, regional, national fitness
landscape?); plant (if not replication what
generalizations can be made?); force (what do they
repel as well as attract?); and association (should the
analytic focus be primarily on firms?).
Most metaphors focused on highly positive attributes
but what about the negative components such as
local congestion, environmental pressures, labor cost
inflation, institutional lock-ins, widening income
disparities and over specialization.
Research Results: Interpretations
(Continued…)



Could also consider alternative metaphors to a cluster
(new industrial spaces, regional innovations milieus).
Need to question why we use cluster metaphors at
all; what do we have trouble describing about
clusters in literal language?
In final phase of research dissemination the ISRN is
in an ideal position to think about the utility of this
metaphor;do they limit the scope of the discourse;
and how might these metaphors be redirected?
Concluding Thoughts:
Areas for Future Research




Tool for better understanding knowledge creation
process (Nonaka & Takeuchi’s, 1995, knowledge
spiral) and policy-making.
Understanding how members of the cluster actually
use the cluster metaphor(s) (e.g. entrepreneurs,
universities and firms).
Questioning the development of the academic
discourse itself over time.
Exploring popular discourses on clusters and
innovation.
Questions/feedback



What do you think about this approach?
Is it useful?
Additional thoughts and,or, questions…