Analysis of Cluster Support Based on the Example of the European Cluster Excellence Initiative

From the point of view of management and quality sciences, the topic of clusters is a new and promising area. Although cluster institutions have been around the world for several decades, the dynamic development of this type of interorganisational linkage occurred in the late 1990s. In Poland, the first comprehensive efforts in this area were not undertaken until after 2004 (Dybala, 2016). Undoubtedly, the impetus for the development of cluster policy in Poland was the entry into the structures of the European Union, and thus access to funding for such projects. In this article, I will adopt the definition of clusters given by Porter (2001), which is as follows: „clusters are a geographic concentrations of interconnected companies, specialized suppliers, service providers, firms in related industries, and associated institutions (universities, standards agencies, trade associations) in a particular field that compete but also cooperate”.

Access to external financial sources comes with a number of requirements and obligations that must be met. At the international level, this includes holding the management quality badge Excel in Cluster Excellence (European Cluster Excellence Initiative [ECEI]) awarded through the certification process European Secretariat for Cluster Analysis (ESCA) (Palmen and Baron, 2016; Kępka and Kacperek, 2017). The ECEI badge is often required in competitions and cluster evaluations (Lublin, 2016; MRiT, 2021). Compliance with ECEI requirements is verified through a certification process that assesses the ‘level of quality of cluster management’. Despite the elaborate assessment tool and a comprehensive action plan to improve the quality of cluster management, participants in the process in question indicate a number of shortcomings, which will be discussed within the framework of this article.

The purpose of the article is to verify the following thesis: the ESCA certification process does not fully reflect the level of development of the cluster. The cognitive goal (CG) is ‘comparison of experience of Polish clusters with European clusters in terms of proper and dynamic development’. The utilitarian goal (UG) is „identification of activities relevant to clusters that were not included in the ESCA certification process”.

The ESCA certification system was analysed first. Then the results of a survey of Polish clusters on the goals that a cluster should achieve/implement on its way to proper and dynamic development were obtained. They were collected during in-depth individual interviews (IDIs) conducted with 12 Polish clusters participating in the ESCA certification process. Subsequently, the data was subjected to the opinion of foreign clusters. They were asked whether they agreed with the statement that the goals indicated by Polish clusters are important for the proper and dynamic development of clusters. If the answer was affirmative, the foreign clusters were to indicate by what actions they achieve the indicated objectives. The results obtained were compared with the ESCA certification range.

The ECEI was established by the European Commission – Directorate General for Enterprise and Industry. In its first years of operation (2009–2012), its goal was to develop methodologies and tools to support cluster organisations to improve their capacity to manage networks and clusters. To achieve this, the project invited 13 partners from nine countries who had experience in the field of cluster management. The work resulted in the creation of a unified set of „cluster management quality” indicators and the development of a quality labelling system for professional cluster management. Receiving the cluster management quality badge is an acknowledgement of the awardee's application of the guidelines developed and a distinction that is recognised and accepted throughout Europe (ECEI, 2019).

ESCA's certification system involves first comparing with other clusters and learning from the best. The elements of „mutual learning” and „mutual comparison” play an important role in the certification system, as highlighted in the recommendations of the European Group for Cluster Policy. In order to achieve wide international recognition, the concepts and methodologies developed are in line with the continuous improvement methodology and the European Foundation for Quality Management (EFQM) (ECEI Process, 2019).

Under the ESCA certification system, one of three management quality badges is awarded. The first (the lowest level) is a bronze badge, followed by a silver badge and a gold badge, which are awarded to clusters that meet all the standards defined in the ECEI's management quality indicators (Table 1).

In order to receive an ECEI bronze badge, the cluster should report its willingness to participate in the process of pursuing excellence in cluster management to the ESCA committee and then allow one of the experts of ESCA to conduct benchmarking tests. Each cluster that earns a bronze badge is analysed based on an interview with the cluster manager conducted by an ESCA benchmarking expert. The interview covers 36 indicators about the cluster, including structure, management, financing, services provided, contacts, cooperation, and cluster achievements and recognition. The results are then presented to the cluster's management in an individual report and include recommendations for further improvement in accordance with the requirements of the cluster's quality mark. According to the assumptions and information communicated by the ESCA, the receipt of a bronze badge by a cluster is not a mark of quality, but an incentive for further participation in the improvement process (ECEI Bronze, 2019).

The silver badge of the ECEI is already a mark of management quality that confirms the successful implementation of the improvement processes that were initiated as a result of the bronze badge benchmark test. Organisations that are able to demonstrate improvement during an audit by an ESCA assessment expert and meet the conditions specified in the assessment will receive a silver badge. The audit consists of four steps (ECEI Silver, 2019) as follows:

Clusters undergo a second benchmarking for the bronze badge level 1.5–2 years after the first benchmarking.

The scope of the implemented audit is presented in Table 1. Detailed descriptions of each category can be found on the organisation's website (ECEI Criteria, 2013).

The ECEI gold badge is awarded to clusters that demonstrate highly advanced management as determined by an audit conducted by an ESCA expert and are committed to further improving their organisational structures and developing procedures to achieve even higher performance. In order to become a recipient of the ‘gold badge of cluster management excellence’, cluster management organisations must meet all the specified ‘levels of excellence’ in the categories indicated in Table 1 (ECEI Gold, 2019). The validity period of each badge is 2 years. After this period, the audit should be resumed.

The research process consisted of the following stages:

conducting an IDI study among Polish clusters on the goals that the cluster should achieve/implement on its way to proper and dynamic development;

The research was carried out by the author between 2019 and 2021. As part of the work, IDIs were conducted with Polish cluster coordinators and a survey was conducted among foreign cluster coordinators. Polish clusters that received the ECEI badge in the last 3 years were invited to participate in the IDI study. Thirteen out of 33 invited clusters (39%) expressed their willingness to participate in the study. All clusters that had an active gold or silver ECEI badge in the last 3 years and clusters that had an active bronze ECEI badge in 2019 were invited to study foreign clusters. A questionnaire was sent to the selected group. The above criteria were met by 271 clusters.

During the implementation of the IDI survey conducted among Polish clusters, representatives of the organisations in question were asked to indicate the goals that the cluster should achieve/execute on its way to proper and dynamic development. The information obtained served as a starting point in a survey targeting foreign clusters. Foreign respondents answered the following question: ‘Do you consider the goals identified in the survey to be important for the development of the cluster?’ (The survey contained 27 goals, and the responses indicated by the clusters are included in Table 2). This question was addressed to representatives of all European clusters participating in the ESCA certification process. The survey was answered by the following:

17 of the 137 clusters with a bronze badge, which translated into a 12% survey return rate;

In the next part of the survey, cluster representatives were asked a question about how they achieved the goals indicated in the survey, or if these goals had not been achieved, how they should be achieved. The results are presented in Table 2. Activities identified by more than one cluster have been highlighted.

Knowledge on what goals should be achieved to ensure proper and dynamic development of clusters and information on activities that help achieve the expected results should be open and generally available. It can be the basis for building knowledge maps that can increase the quality of cluster management. This will streamline the processes of searching for appropriate skills and experiences, thus improving the ability to assess and create the intellectual capital of the organisation (Śliwa, Patalas-Maliszewska, 2016).

A compilation of the audit activities for the gold badge and the criteria, processes and framework for gold badge implementation presented in Table 2 (ECEI Criteria, 2013) identifies which activities were not indicated by the ECEI but were instead mentioned by the clusters surveyed. These included the following:

inclusion of the implementation of commercial projects in the cluster strategy,

Based on the survey and analysis performed, it can be concluded that the scope of the ESCA audit does not cover all relevant activities in the opinion of the clusters. The analysis represents the achievement of CU, which is identification of activities relevant to clusters that were not included in the ESCA certification process. Reid and Giracca (2014) are also of a similar opinion. They point out, inter alia, the problem of the breakdown of cooperation within the cluster after the end of funding, which, after all, was the impetus for taking part in the ESCA certification process. They also highlight the lack of cooperation between the ESCA and the national and regional programmes supporting cluster development. Kergel et al. (2014), on the other hand, note that the certification process was developed in the context of the German cluster programme Kompetenznetze Deutschland, and thus may not be universal.

Considering that the level of ECEI badge awarded in the ESCA certification process is a frequent criterion during the allocation of public funds, it can be concluded about T1 verification that the ESCA certification process does not fully reflect the level of development of the cluster, which hinders the proper distribution of public funds.

The ESCA certification system largely meets the expectations that its creators placed in it. It is also true that it is accepted and recognised throughout Europe and has had an impact on improving the quality of management of more than a thousand clusters around the world (ECEI Denmark, 2017). However, this does not mean that it is an ideal system, as indicated in these considerations. The analyses carried out identified a number of areas that require adjustments to the system itself. Some suggestions are simple to implement, while others are more elaborate and complicated. These recommendations require changes, which the ESCA should review and decide on.

The performed analyses may be the basis for an in-depth research on the issue of cluster development and its access to financing. Work in this area may contribute to an even more accurate identification of the needs of clusters and to indicate to them the directions of development and the goals they should achieve. Clusters are currently perceived as an important trigger for economic growth, innovation, productivity, employment, entrepreneurship, competitiveness, and export (Waatmani, 2018), which fully justifies the research, scientific and application effort devoted to this subject.

A contribution to the current state of the research field is the list of goals to be achieved for the proper and dynamic development of Polish clusters. In addition, weaknesses in the ESCA certification process were identified.

The main limitations of the work are the lack of weighting/prioritisation of individual objectives indicated by Polish clusters in the IDI study, and the regional nature of the results obtained. In addition, there is no division of the indicated objectives due to different types of clusters. However, in the case of the indicated guidelines, research should be carried out that would allow to determine the real impact of their implementation on the improvement of the ESCA certification process and consequently, the improvement of access to cluster financing.