«

»

Apr 30

Great Companies

In contrast, as it clarifies COR (1999): The functional relations that if develop inside of nets of specific companies (chain of economic value, strategical company-net, alliances, groups, etc.) define situated contexts of action are of a strict territorial dimension. (COR, 1999:168). Although the geographic aspect (proximity between the companies) either essential dosfatores so that an one company ' ' cluster' ' it gets ' ' advantages competitivas' ' , this does not want to say that the firms structuralized in form of ' ' redes' ' (dispersed in different regions) they cannot get the same advantages. In the truth, ' ' nets of firmas' ' , exactly that they do not belong to one same locality, still they can get collective efficiency, therefore what they lose in ' ' economies externas' ' (due to distance separates that them), they earn in ' ' action conjuntas' ' , had to the biggest degree of cooperation ties that them. Of this form, in the European industrial districts (of years 70 and 80), many firms if tied and participated of spontaneous form of the productive chain (team of producers), even so remained exerting its functions as independent units. Other companies, however, created stronger bonds through commercial contracts, and, even so were equally independent, already they do not possuam as much freedom in the production of its good, therefore in this in case that the specification of the product (quality, price, etc.) would have to obey what it was stipulated in contract. Finally, diverse groups of company-net were formed, also, completely tied (under the form of franchising, cooperatives, trusts, etc.), independently to belong or not to one same region, or, more necessarily, independently to belong or not to cluster. As constataramSENGENBERG and PIKE (1999: 113): It has given that they point that, in relation has fifteen years behind, the great companies has on average, more plants, however little scale. .