Regions and Fh·ms 477

O'Kelly, M. E. I986b. Activity levcls at hub facilitics
in internct:ing ncrworks. Geograpbicnl Aualysis
18:343-56.
O'Kelly, M. E. 1987. A quadrntic intcgcr program
for the location of internct:ing hub facilitics. Elira-
pean J()lmtal of Operational Research 32:393-404.
O'Kelly, M. E. 1992. 1 Iub facility location with fixed
cosrs. Paptrr in &gionnl Science 71:293- 306.
Shaw, S-L. 1993. 1Iub structures of major US pas-
senger airlines. Joumal of Tra11sport Geograpby
1:47-58.
JAY LEE is Assistant Professor in the Deparonent
of Geography at Kent Statc University, Kent, OH
44242-000 l. His rcsearch intercstS include spatial
anal}'lt"ÎS and d1eories as applied to geographie infor-
mation systems.
LIGANG CHEN is a graduate student in the De-
paronent of Mathen1atics and Computer Sciences at
Kent State University, Kent, OH 44242. His mas-
ter's thesis focuscs on the graphie user interface
applicable in GIS.
SHlH-LUNG SI lAW is Associate Professor in the
Oepartment of Geography, Florida Atlantic Univer-
sity, Boca Raton, FL 33431. His research intercsts
include air transportation, trnvel demand models,
and transportation applications of GIS.

Studying Regions by Studying Firms*

Ann Markuseo
&tgen Univet>ity
This paper presents a method for inferring regional economie structure and prospectS from key informant
interviews. lt describes assomptions which must be made and steps ro be raken in moving from individuals to
establishment, finn, and industry aggrcgacions. A technique is offered for mapping core rclacionships among finns
and other regional and extemal actors. and for aggregating ftrm-centcred maps into industrial and regional maps.
The mnpping technique COin be expanded to inc:orporate historiciry and dynamic change. Key Words: regions,
firms, industrial rcstructuri.ng, geognphy of enterprise.

T he connection between priva te sector firm

behavior and regional growth and devel-
opment has becn a central and fruitful avenue
of inquiry for regional planners, economists,
and geographers for severa! decades. A nu rn ber
of distinct approaches have been rried. By ex-
tending the neoclassicaJ theo.ry of the finn w
the spatial dimension, economjsrs and regional
scientisrs from the L920s onward initiated a
rich body of deductive work on location theory
and descriptive work on regional input-output
structures (Losch 1954; ChristaUer 1966; Isard
195 6, 1960). A more inductive effort, Unked to
the New York and Pittsburgh team studies of
the lare 1950s, yielded important work on ag-
glomeration economies (Chinitz 1960; Vernon
1960). By the lare 1970s, scholars working
from a rnulridisciplinary and dissident tradirion
studied regions as a function of globaUzing
industries (Massey and Meegan 1978;
Bluestone and Harrison 1982; Markusen
J985). More recent! y, the focus has shifted
from industries ro finus, incorporating earlier
work on the geography of enterprise (MeNee
1960; Krumme L969) and enriched by the
business scboolliterarure on corporate strategy
and structure (Chandler 1962; Scott 1991). In
the J980s, imerest in JocaJ business cultures
and informa] cooperative networks among
finns added yet another body of iosight:, in-

"This paper was prcscntcd at (be anou.ol meetings of rhc Amenan Collcg12tc Schools of Planning, Phil•dclph.., PA, Octoher 30. 1993. My
thanb t0 Cand•a: llowes, Mtchod Odc:n, Sam Ock Park, Jon•than f"eldman, C.theriru: !lill, Mia Cray, El~"SC Golob, and Molwmd Ruavi
for m.<igh!$ frorn our jo1nt ~·ork on this toptc, ond 10 l~rica Schoenb<rser and Annal.ce Soxeni•n for <"OmmtntS on an ..rlter draft. Thonb
•Iso ore CJC]lrcssed to 11•11 Ucycrs ilrld Paul Sonuntrs fUr sharing thetr insighta on the Seonle «:On<uny, 10 Andrew l~mlnn fur hdp wlth
dit... and to the dl)l.CDS of finns int<rvlewed in the course of the srndy. Th" work bas b<cn fw,ded by the Nouonnl Science Foundotion, Pl"l>-
gnm m Gc:ogrophy •nd Rcgton:~l Science, SES-921J61l. The author"s vicws do not ncœssarily rt:Ooct thosc of the Foundouon.

Professional Coognpher, 46{4) 1994. pages '177-!90 C Copynght 199'1 by 1\ssooooon of Amcrican Ceognphers.
lniu.al submission, j onuary 199+, revised sublntSSlOn, April 1994; fin•! acccp=œ, /villy 1994.
Published by Blackwell Publishers. 138 Main Street, Cambridge, MA 02142. and 108 Cowley Road, Orford, OX4 IJF, \JK.
4 78 1'olumc -16, .\'mn/Jcr .f, .\'ot't"'llbn· 199-1
fonncd hy work on the "Tlmd lraly" (Pion~
and Sahel 19H-I-; Coodm:111 ami Bamford 19H9,
Saxcni:1n 1!)<JO, 11>94).
Dnzcn~ of fast'lllattn)! h) pmhcscs, some of
them wdl spcllcd nut. mher' not ~o wdl
craftcd, arc cmhedded in thts litcrawre. \'igor-
ous dcb:ttcs h:1vc cmcrgcd on causality :md
rcgtonal char:tctaization~. For Instance. thcrl'
i:. the clash ovcr 11 hcthcr or not :1 new form of
mdu!>tnal Mructurc, .. llcx.lhlc ~pcctal izallon,''
has supplantcd Fordist temlcncies towanl
global ma:.\ production (Scott l 98H; Crt!rtlcr
19H8; Sahel 19lN; Amin and Rohins 1990;
Love ring 1990, Il}() 1). t\nother dispure con-
ccrns w hether cuopcratHlll and "fu ur l)(lunda
rie:.'' among finm stgnificaml} amehorate de
qrucrively competiti,·c hehavinr in new high
tech distrit:t:. like '-.ilicon \ 'alle) (S:txenian
1990, 1991 a, 1991 h; Florub and 1\.cmlC}
t9<JO).
,\1ethodologicall), e,·idencc w te~t the\c
ncwcr theories ha' corne incre:1singly from
qualitative data, cspccially from mtcn iews of
firms and mher indu!>triJI :md region:1l actors
such as tradc associations, busincs:. senin-
providcrs, labor unions, and economie dcvcl-
opment offirt;1ls-\\ hat ,\1asse} and ,\ lc.:cgan
( 19H5) cali inten..,Ivc as oppmcd to extensin·
rescarch. This males sense hecaus<: a kc} foeus
in recent thcory ~~ the dcgret: 10 which finns
Mc "emheddcd" in !oral economies, through
rclationsh1p~ with compc.:titors, cu~tnmcrs,
suppliers, region~! busincs~ orgalllzarions, :llld
public seetor forums (Cranovcttcr 19H5: 1hr-
rison 1992; Best 1990). Dara on such connec-
rion~ arc impoS!>ible 10 lind in secondai')
sources and dtffirult to cvokc even in surveys.
lmerviews :1re useful for probing finn strat-
cgy and dynamics as behll' ioral phenomcna tn
geographie rcstructuring (Schocnhcrger 1991 ).
i\lthough many advocares nf the imerviC\\
technique strcs' tts inductive and exploratof)
narurc, 1 would like to suggcst that inten·icw
dam can, when properl) gcncr:ned and col-
lated, he used 10 test h}11(>thcscs. •\t a mmi
mwn, tnten• I~.,,. lindin[r.> c:m suggest eithcr
c:onst:ll!>U!> (for or ag-.ùnst) or l.lck of it on h) -
pmhesi~.:ed causal C~>nnccrions. ln thi!> sense, a
carefu lly dcsignt:d set or interview!> w cither
s:l!nple or do J census or key lirrns is quitc
differenr from a case stmh (Yin 19M4).
StUtlems commg to th~ new regional pi:Jn-
nmg and econormc gcography hterarurc arc
oftcn conh1scd hy intcn·tew-supported :lrpi-
mcnts hot h hcc:nt~c caus;tl hypl)thc~cs ;u·c not
:t lway~ clear and heca usc il oftcn appcar' to
them that rescarchcr~ cu1 ali roo c;Jsil} tind
someone m quotc to support their posu..ion. ln
asscrting di:unctrically opposcd bcha' iors in
~11Icon \'alle} firm~--cnopcr:nion 'crsu!> cu t-
l hroat compctition-Snxcnian ( 1990) and
Florida nnd 1-..cnne) (l CJ<)Q) cite dozcns of
'inurccs, somctimcs evcn the ':une finns. Thi\
ma~ rcllect the fact that the~· < Ire asking 'flffer-
ent quc~tion., ;1nd/or rhat the re~pective rc-
search methodologies :1re nm weil devclopcd.
ln mm ing from interviews with mdividuallinn
reprcsentau,·cs to infcrem:cs ahom regional
'itrttcrurc and dvnamics, thc rc~carcher makcs
a numhcr or' assumpnnns about rcpre-
sent::tnvcnc" and gencralitahth t). lndi1 idual
mformanrs, for instance, an: often assumed to
rt:preSCilt the finn\ point of \'IC\\, whcn 1her
lllJ) be but une \OJCC wnhin 11. l:stablishmcnts
are sunilarh· oftcn conflated wiù1 firms, and
fim1s wllh t'ndustnes.
Ln thts papcr, 1 oudinc the stcp' which must
hc taken to infcr regional consclluences from
ke> mfimn.lnt inœrviews rcgarding limt he-
havior and str<Hcgy. First, severa! le,·els of
:maly-.ts ;1re diStinguished- kcy mformants, es-
tablishmems, linn!., inclustrics, and regions.
lmplicit thcorctic;tl as:.umpliun' made in mcw-
mg among lc,·els arc highlightcd, and c:hoiccs
in resc;u-ch desib'll, givcn rc,ourœ consu·amts,
are explorcd. Second, a technique for mapping
key tirm rd.monship' wid1 où1er ker regional
and cxtt:rnnl acwrs ts o!Tercd, one which
'>tre~se' the unportance of nonlocal as weil as
loca l cmheddcdncs~. Third, a procedure for
aggregaun g tirm maps into mdustry and rc-
!-donal map~ l'> outlincd. Finally, the problem
of histont tt} i~ explored- hn" to encomp:JS!>
the p :1q '" \\cil ;J~ the futurc in rcsearch mcth-
od., probmg bchavtor and ~tructu re at a si ngle
pomt in ume, and hm~ Ù1c mapping technique
might he c:.:panded to incurporate Ù1e tempo-
ral dimcn.,inn. Throughout, 1 dlusrrlltc Ù1c
'>teps in the mcthod with reference m work of
nunc and other' on Silicon \ 'allt:v (Saxentan
1990, 1991 a), Se:mlc (Gnloh and Gr;l\' 1993;
Beycr~ and •\!vi ne 1985), and central New J cr-
~cy (Fineherg ct al. 1993 ). 1 have made a de-
libera te arrempt to prcsem the analysis in ù1e
-.:em.1cuhlr rather than 111 rhc more raretied
pro~e of the ;J<.:ademy, following Bed.cr\

(1986) plea for straightforward language and in
the hopes that economie development practi-
tioners as well as academies will find the paper
accessible.
Moving from Region to Firm
Scholars originally began to investigate indi-
viduaJ firrns as observation points for studying
both the geography of enterprise and industry
spatial patterns. MeNee (1958, 1960),
Krumme (1969), and more recently Schoen-
berger ( 1985) developed and applied the geog-
raphy of enterprise, albeit with an emphasis on
the interregional Jocational caJculus of firms
rather than their impact on particular regions.
More recently, linus' geographie strategies
have been hypothesized ro shape the character
and vigor of regional economies hosting them.
Charting key firm strategy and connections
offers the researcher a way to transcend the
problems inherent in the high leve! of aggre-
gation and statics of industry input-output
analysis. Yet to characterize regional economie
structu.re in a large metropoUtan area with
hundreds of finns, sorne of wb.ich have multi-
ple establishments ranging from the enormous
(1 0,000 plus employees) to the tiny (fewer than
10 employees), the researcher must be able to
move among the levels of analysis-from re-
gion to industry to firm-if inferences are to
be drawn.
Moving from Region to lndustry
Regional performance is often inferred as a
function of the behavior and dynarnics of cer-
t:Ün key firms or industries. But often the first
stcp of specifying industrial structure is not
explicitly takeo in localiry or regional studies
tl1at are firm centered. As a result, other piv-
ota] industries whose prospects are key to the
region can be left out-a problem of structural
misspecification. Studying industrial structure
with secondary data can gua rd against concen-
tra ting too much on faddisb industries and
ignoring other large, perhaps more problem-
atic, ones. In studying producer services in the
Seattle area, Beyers and Alvine (1985) used
input-output data to complement their inter-
views with firms.
The success of Silicon VaiJey, for instance,
has been credited to the flexibiliry of and net-
working among smaller firrns in the electronics
Regions and Finns 479
industry (Saxenian 1990, 1991 a, 1991 b, 1994).
Consider the industrial structure of the Silicon
Valley as revealed in degrees of speciaUzation
(measured by location quotients) and employ-
ment size (Table 1). The table confirrns thar
the electronics industry, especia lly when link:ed
to tl1e computer industry, as Saxenian does in
her work, is indeed the largest component of
the Silicon VaiJey economy. However, not aU
of Silicon Valley's growth can be accounted for
by this complex. Table 1 shows that the aero-
space industry is also an enormous employer
with a large location quotient. On average,
about $4 billion a year in military and space
prime contracts are awarded to Silicon Va!Jey
firms, much of it to the complex surrounding
Lockheed's Missile and Space division, a facil-
iry which employs over 20,000 (Markusen et
al. 1991). Clearly this industrial segment,
which benefited from the 1980s Reagan
buildup, has contributed to the dynamism of
Silicon Valley.
The Seattle case is also instructive. In pre-
paring for field work on Seattle, we were en-
couraged by local economie development spe-
cialists to concentrate on the aircraft, com-
puter software, and biotechnology industries.
But on checking industrial structure for the
a rea, we were struck by the signilicance of the
port complex, from its fishing industry to ship-
yards to water/rail transportation services (Ta-
ble 1). The future of this complex is central to
Seattle's economy, espec:ially since the aero-
space industry is facing significaot sbrinkage.
Despite the interest in software and biotech,
both industries werc relatively small in size
compared with the pon-related complex. Had
we nor done a data check on the size and
export-orientation of industries, we might have
overstudied the b.igher-tech i.ndustries and
missed the economie development potentiaJ of
the ports. Although there are problems in rep-
resenting regional industrial structure with
SIC code data (Kraushaar and Feldman 1989),
this exercise cao serve as an important check
on the more impressionistic conceptions of re-
gional specialization. In central New Jersey,
for instance, a quick check of sectoral srrucru.re
confirros the significance of the pharmaceuticaJ
industry to the region (Table 1).
The implicit hypothesis here is that the dy-
narnics of a region can be explained by the
performance of its leading export-oriented
480 Volume 46, Number -1, Novem/Jer ! 99-1

Table 1 Location Quotients, Establtshments, and Esumated Employment for Selected 3-dtgtt lndus-
trtes Seartle !WA!. Santa Clara County iCA!. and Mtddlesex and Somerset Counues INJJ. 1990
SIC lndustry Est ablishments [rnploymon t Location Ouot1ent
Seante. Washington
90 F!sh1ng. llUnt•ng, and trapp!llQ 186 2621 2203
639 1(1surance carners. net: 6 1517 lf>S?
377 A<Ctrafl aM parts 86 7<~ml9 9b6
390 Othe, m1scellaneous lnanufactllltng 32 10AO 7 50
376 Gu1ded IT11SS•Ies. space veh•cles. pacts 5 19165 685
70, Room•ng and boardlng nouses 16 /93 648
250 M1sc furnuure and mn ures 18 421 4 32
80 F<Hestry 54 9?8 479
M? Deop sea domest1c trans of frc1g~t 8 b44 397
316Luggage 6 521 3%
M 1 Dooo sea fore1un tr•ns of fre,qht 9 178 390
449 Wetel transportdhOn serv1ces 131 1384 346

Middlese< Couoty, New Jersey

284 Soap. ciE!ilners. and toile! goods ?6 70A3 17li6
?99 Mise pctroleum and cœl product s 6 454 1054
283 Drugs 70 5033 84tl
341 Metal cans and sh•PP•ng containers 10 1073 756
30? Rubbet and plastics foot wea1 1 193 570
358 Refngeratron and setVlce machmery 3 3148 ~26
386 Photographie eqwpment and suppl•es 6 1116 d !:,5
267 Mise converted paper ptoducts ·u 3.143 4 55
280 lndusw al organ•c chem1cals 15 1430 3 50
399 Admlmstrauve and auxrhary 83 13176 331
289 M1sce!!aneous cherntca1prociucTs 26 853 307

Somerset Caunty New Jersey

283 Drugs 14 6406 2646
384 Med!cal1nstruments and supohes 8 2446 an
386 Photographrc equ1pmen1 and supplies 3 880 808
284 Soap. cl•'aners. and to•let goods Il 1186 7 79
28b P,l!nts ~no dllled products 5 370 525
396 Costump tewelry and noti ons 1 163 4 01
399 Admmtstrabve and aux1hary 35 6399 396
282 Plastics. matepals, and symhettcs 6 '>'19 327

Sani a Clara County, Cahforn••

357 Computer and off•ce Elqurpment 207 !>0155 1980
376 Gurded m•ss<les, space vehlcles. oarts 4 31113 1806
367 Eloctron•c comDOnents and accesso11es ·138 63938 1446
379 Mtscellaocous !fansrxlf!atlon pqutprneot 5 33A5 858
366 Commun•catlons equ.pment 85 15!J.IJ 773
382 Measunng and controllmg dev1ces 1!10 15838 688
369 M•sc eleclrtcal equ1pment and supplies 83 9230 6 2J
737 Computer and data processtng servtces 829 22784 406
610 Mise nondeposuory IOSI!tutlo•JS 17 445 393
506 Electncal goods 643 11906 357
390 O tner m•scellaneous manulactu11ng 25 290 346
504 Profess1o'1a! and commerc1a! equtpment 539 19180 339
381 Search and nav•gauon eqwpment 34 81171 .J33

Snurrt: CoUnl) Bu"nL'S' Patterns, /JS (t)'!llprltd by rJndrrJI b-scnnan, Rcgtnnal Rrsrrm!J fiLrllfrlt<, Um z•.,·nf)• uf , <Y( r·rrgnna.
199:1. Arr smm-r w11h lowuon quorrmts 111 excrss of" UJ 11re mduded. Ser IJS<'1711tlll mu/ Sm·nsrm (1987) Jo•· tJ dutumon tif tbr rlatn.

fim1s, a v1cw ch1ting back ro sta ple5 and eco-
nomie base theory ("riebout 1962). The ern-
ph<lsis on industrial structure has been inher-
ited from regional science appmaches, which
use input-ouqlUt data to charac.:tcrize territorial
complexes (Lsa rd 1\160). lt has becn trans-
formed by the industrial restrucruring school
(Massey and Meeg-an 1978; Massey 19H4;
Bluestone and llarrison 1982) which a~~erts
thar the economie performance of re!:,rions can
he explaineu by Ù1e restmcruring of certain key
industries. This approach compctcs wiù1 the
"business climate" approach to geographie
growth differentiais, which explains develop-
ment ns a function of spa tia l cost competitive-
ness. Tt has gained considerable currency. In
d1e United States, for inst;UJCC, nwny st.ates
and ciLies have deme smdies ~ml bu.ilt eco-
nomie c..lcvclopment strategies around key in-
dustries-steel, machin.ing, printi.ng, and pub-

lishing in Chicago; banking, finance, and the
ans in New York City; autos in Michiga.n;
polymers in Akron; aerospace in Los Angeles.
Moving from lndustry to Firm and
Establishment
Once a key industry or industries are chosen,
the researcher faces the second task of identi-
fying which 6nns to interview. For this pur-
pose, industrial directories can be used, prefer-
ably muJtiple sources, cross-referenced with
local business and trade association lists. In a
region of any complexity with one or more
industries of significant size, the researcher
con fronts dozens if not hundreds of candidate
firms. Furthermore, sorne firms may have
more than one local establishment, wh ile sorne
local establishments may belong to parent
firms outside the region. Central New Jersey,
for example, bas dozens of pharmaceutical
finns locally headquartered, sorne among the
largest in the world, each with dozens of sepa-
rate establishments within the region. It hosts
a number of significant establishments thar are
headquartered in Europe. The region also bas
dozens of smaller firms which supply the big
pharmaceutical companies or are spin-offs, op-
era ting in specialized market ruches. ln addi-
tion, the researcher may wish to interview local
economie development experts, industry histo-
rians, trade association representatives, and
university researchers and officiais whose in-
sights into the industry in the region may offer
important evidence or con nter-evidence for
hypothesis testing. · staff) and plant managers, research lab direc-
Resource constrainrs make the selection of
fi rms, establishments, and key informants criti-
cal to the success of the research. ln our expe-
rience, a single interview of under rwo hours
requires an additionallO hours to initiate, pre-
pare for, transcribe, analyze, and write up. A
researcher devoting as mnch as 15 hours per
week to interviewing can accomplish only
about 30 interviews in the course of nine
months. A study of a region with rwo such
people available wouJd permit a total of only
60 interviews and their analysis. A key task is
ro maximize the quality of infotmation gath-
ered within these resource constrainrs.
The choice of interviewees sta.rtS firsr, then,
with the allocation of rime between large and
smaU 6rms, and among the former, arnong
Regioru and FimiS 481
establishments within the firm. In the case of
the New Jersey pharmaceutical industry, for
instance, we nùght choose to research thor-
oughly four large finns, assuming an average
of six to eight interviews per finn to cover
multiple establishments and informants. An-
other 12 interviews might be allocated to
smaller firms .in. the region. That would leave
between 16 and 24 interviews to be devoted to
observers external to the iodustry.
The selection of firms can be handled in a
random faslùon, but this can result in Jess than
optimal information. Leading firms in an in-
dustry are often few i.n number and are far
from peas in a pod. Each is apt to have a
unique history, somewhat specialized product
!ines, and a different multinational nexus of
operations. Preliminary research into these as-
pects of each finn, including the perusal of
secondary sources (company lùstories, annual
reports, schola.rly studies of the industry, trade
press) and infonual surveying of industry lead-
ers, can help to identify which of the large
firms are most significant for the region and
wouJd be of greatest interest. If this latter
course is chosen, the researcher bas an obliga-
tion to acknowledge this process and defend
his/her choices in resulting papers and presen-
tations.
The imerviewing of ioformants from multi-
ple establishments within multiplant firms is
essential. Frequenrly in large organizations
there are di.fferences of opinion and ourlook
between "corporate" people (i.e., headquaners
tors, etc. Tensions develop over location and
rationalization decisions that wouJd close sorne
plants in one locale and open new operations
in others. These are often linked to strong
differences in opinion about what is good
strategy for the firm in the longer mn. An
initial di fficulty for the researcher is to deter-
mine who are the key players in a multiestab-
lishment firm from the point of view of the
research questions being asked. Techniques for
handling this problem are sinular to those de-
scribed in the next section.
Moving from Firm and Establishment to
lnformants
A funher step in research design is the iden-
tification and pursuit of appropriate infonn-
482 Volume 46, Number 4. Novem/Jer /99-J.
ants within fin11s. The art a nd science of fim1
intc1viewing hm; bcen reflectcd on in rwo ex-
cellent recent pa pers by Schoenbcrger (l 991)
and flealy and Rawlinson ( 1993). The intenr
he re is nor to repe;u th cir many good poims,
but to supplement them with ;J numher nf
additional observations.
Many a well-imended research project has
heen beached for Jack of sophis tication , whcrc
an interviewer emis up closeted wiù1 a recenrly
hired public relations direcror who possesscs
no knowledge of the hisrory of ù1c finn and is
keyed in onlv to tbose iS!>ues on which the firm
cu~rcnùy t-a ~ec; abom projccting a certain im-
age. This is not such ;J problem wiù1 a small
finn whcre an owner or top manager wea rs
many hat~. But for large finns with thous:mds
of employees and hundrcds of speciali z.cd man-
agers, it can be a nig h tmare. Regional econo-
mist<; and econo mie geographers :1re nften
relatively ignorant about the intemal stntcrure
of large corporauons and tlo no t possess even
a minimal m ental map of who makes wh;H
decisions and why. i\ careful reading of the
industrial organizal.Îon literarure on the struc-
tme of rhe finn (Chandler 1962) will hc lp he re,
as will a ù1orough grounding in the sm1crure.
conduct, and performance of the particular in-
dustry in question.
Thi~ portion of the exercisc is d ependem
upon Ùle types of research questions being
as ked. for instance, questions on the locatio nal
rendencies of finns would appropria tel y be ad-
Jressed ro bo Ùl srrarcgit: pbnncr; and facilitie~
managers in a h1rge corpo ration. Q uestions
about n etworking v.~rh local suppliers arc ber-
ter directed to vice presidents for procuremem
or materials management. Questions about la-
bur supply are more appropriate fo r personnel
tlircctors and, in the case o f higb 1ech or rc-
sea rch -i nte n ~i vc industrie~, rec;ca rch din:ctnrs.
Often the fir~t encounrer with a finn is dc-
sign ed to determine who insitle the firm is hest
posirioned tn answer cach type of question. ln
recent work rescarching industrial di~tri c t :Jt-
tributes of cen ain regions, wc have found it
necessary to interview severa! diffe rent types of
man;Jgers to sausfactorily covcr o ur r t!!;e:wch
agenda.
\'ice presidem~ for mv..:swr relations are
often a good place to start. Their job is to
con\ ince potential im·cstor~ of Ùl e viabi lity of
Ù1e linn '~ s tr~ue gy. They oftcn have <l weil-de-
velopcd overview of the strategy of the li nn,
even if Ù1cy arc not particularly tuncd inro
geographica l or phmning i!.~ues . They ca n also
give the researcher a ~ense of who has been
with the tirm fnr ;1 long rime and who might
be able w answcr question~ they cannot.
1n our experience, occupational tille does
not n ecessari ly ~ignify the most intcrcsting or
rel evant person in a tinn. For instance, al-
rhough puhlic relations direcrors are usually to
he avoided, wc once contacrcd a IIewlcn-
Packarcl vice president for public relations who
had origi nally come to the region as plant
manager of the relocatcd op eration ~omc 20
years before. Ile not only g<IVC tilt an excellent
ovcrvie\1 of the linn hut open cd Ùle duors for
us to the appropri:n e pcrson in vi nually cvery
mher company in town. Converscly, a top cor-
ponlle executive mar have heen broughr in
rccendy simply to preside ovcr a major cnst-
t1Jtting operation or to restructure ù1c firm
fi nancially. .1Ie/.,he ma~· provide 'ery lirrle in-
s1gh t imo finn anTibutes and operations which
are central to its geographie configuration and
regional COIWUIUllClll.
.\lultiple sourcing, as much as possible, is
cssemi:~ l in large fi nn in•cstigations. Currcnt
oc,:u panrs of particular positions may l>e ne\1-
comcr~. or they may be on thcir wa) ou t and
have axes to grind , or they may be incompe-
œnt. Ont: approach wc h;we frequenùr uscd is
to tind rctired people who have playctl key
rolcs, asking them botl1 abour Ù1c: hisrory of
th e finn/estahlishmem and their asscssmcnt of
ÏL<; currcnt perfonnanœ (ma ny con tinu e to
h old cq uity in Ù1 e~e companies and ha,·e inf()r-
mal connections ' ' ith exi\ri ng management).
-\nother is to find dis~idents who h;we heen
lircd or lcft, often for b eing on mc losing sitle
of ~trategy disagrecments. Anoù1er is w fintl a
dcputy or .1 ·' cnmpemor" in a not her est~h­
li ~hmcnt or office 11 iùün the s<lmc finn who
might cast somew h:n different lig ht on <1 par-
l.Îcular suhjcct. ln tervicwing ker labor union
lea ders or lo ng tcnn employees is anoù1er ex-
cellent wav w cro~c;- c h eck vcracitv.
Sources. cxtcrnal tn the finn aJ:e abo useful
111 identifying kc:y fi rm playc:rs. Tmcle 1mlustry
executives are oftcn infom1ally willing to ghe
an assessmcnr of who among finns and estab-
lishment~ i~ doing a hcttcr 01~ worse job. Finan-
ci.JI analrsts love w dc:prec:Jte u r praise cen:1i n
management<;, and ~ome arc pJrucularly sp e-

cialized in key regional industries. Venture
capital firms thar are regionally based may be
close watchers of local finns, especially those
they have underwritten.
Interviewing multiple sources in this fushion
often generates conflicting data. This con-
fronts the researcher wid1 the difficulr task of
having ro arbitrate among contesring views.
Sometimes, one source will j:,rive a plausible
explanation for why the responses of another
mighr be Jess than candid or erroneous. Sorne-
times, a third or fourth party's interpretation
can be sought for collaboration of one view or
another. Remaining differences in response
have ro be tabulated in some form and duly
noted in analysis.
In large finns, interprerive mistakes can be
made by talking to only one type of infonnant
or onJy to informants within the finns' man-
agement (IIeaJey and Rawlinson 1993). For
instance, Florida and Kenney's ( 1992) work on
]apanese transplants in the United States,
which offers a sanguine view of transplants'
contributions to regional economies, has been
contested by Howes (1993). She notes thar
they reüed almost enrirely on interviews with
finn managers, and not with unions, suppLiers,
or competiror firms. In a broader investi1,ration,
she finds little development of supplier net-
works around the new Japanese rransplants.
The use of the responses of individua.l in-
formants as data points in an empirical test of
certain spatial or policy propositions is a vaüd
endeavor. But it must be done carefuily, with
assumptions about representativeness spelled
out. In the chains of moves described here, we
are demonstrating how interviews with indi-
viduals in finns are assumed to be accurate
sources of information on the bebavior of es-
tablishments and of firms, and how these in
turn are assumed tO represent major tenden-
c.ies in the industries ro which they belong.
A Visual Technique for Mapping
Firms onto Regions
A key feature of the recent debate is wbether
firms have needs and loyalties which keep
them anchored in the region (Markusen 1987;
Cox and Mair 1988). Central to the affirmative
answer to this question is the notion thar finns
are embedded in local relationships-\vith
competitors and suppliers in particular. These
Regions and Fù?ns 483
rel.ationships can be simply ones of ann's
lengtb exchange, as in traditional agglomera-
tion models, or finns may have "fuzzy bounda-
ries" where they share information, personnel,
and equipment across their borders and engage
in trusting rather than adversarial relation-
ships. ln work on industrial districts, fuzzy
boundaries are hypothesized as chiefly charac-
terizing local rather than nonlocal relation-
ships (Saxenian 1994). But firms and estab-
lishments are also embedded in relationships
externat to the region-with customers, corn-
petitors, and suppliers. And ar !east in theory,
these externat reJationships may be "fuzzy" as
weil (Storper and Harrison 1991 ).
In our work on industrial districts, we have
developed an interviewing instrument thar ar-
tempts tO map these relationships of finns omo
regional and extra-regional space. For map-
ping purposes, firms can be thought of as op-
erating along t:wo dirnensions---11long the
chain of production, where they purchase in-
purs upsrream and sell downstream, and
among an array of competitors where they
compete witb other similar firms and cooper-
are with them in trade associations and other
business organizations. Each finn's operations
witbin and without the region can be mapped
by placiJ1g it in the middle of a diagram, sur-
rounded by two sets of borders, an inner one
for relationships within. the region and an
outer one for relatiooships outside the region
(Fig. 1). In our technique, the chain of produc-
tion is presented horizontally, from left to
right, and connections among competitors
from tOp to bottom, \vith individual finns ar-
rayed to the "north" and trade associations to
the "south." Suppüers in this schema are an
inclusive set, encompassing aU of the Factors of
production which may enter into a cost func-
tion- labor (managerjal, research, rechnical,
blue collar); materials, machinery and technol-
ogy suppliers; finance and busi_ness service sup-
pliers; other local fi.xed capital (real estate,
utilities); supplier associations (e.g., chambers
of commerce, economie development corpora-
tions); and state and local governments (as su p-
püers of services and regulation). This rnap-
ping enables one to see in a nutshell which of
the firm's relationships are internai and which
extemaJ to d1e district.
Strong cooperation between the finn in
question and any other finn/group is demon-
484 Volume -16, Nmnber -1, Novembe7" 1994

Competitors
Suppllers Customers
Outsode the region
Labor
lnside the region
Resources, Materials

Machinery, Technology
FIRMA
Finance

Local Fixed Capital

Government

Supplier Associations

Trade Associations
Figure 1: Firm mappmg onto local and nonlocal space

strated by placi11g thal "neighbor" in boiJ.
1l1esc arc relationships srrcssed a~ importam
and cxrraordinary by lirm interviewees. They
reprcsent case~ where finn boundaries are
fuzzy, and/or trust and cooperation dominate
the relationship. Thcse rcl:nionships m3y nor
be with other finns pcr se, but with business
organizations or govenmtental or nonprofir in-
stitutions. They may also be externat to the
immediate region.
The rclational matri.x can be illustrated by
recounring the case of Kidsmart Corporation,
a small computer software finn in Seattle spc-
cializing in cducational softv.·are (Fig. 2). (The
name of the finn and one or rwo details have
been suppressed at the request of the CE.O.)
lts sales are curremly $9 million a year, and it
employs 90 people in one faci lity in suburban
Scanie. Tts product is sold w a n~ttion:-~1 nnd
international market, Ù1e latter absorhing L9%
of its output-local market~ arc nm sig11illcant.
Kidsmarr's compcLitors arc multinational cor-
porations, mostly American, bast:d omside the
region. Other Seattle area software companies,
including the mammoth Microsoft, are only of
marginal importance 10 Kidsmart. chiefly as
shapcrs of the local labor market. Kidsmart
participatCl. in and bencfits from the arca
V/ashington Software Association, which ir
finds useful chiefly as a source of infomtation
on local suppliers, cspecially in finance, ac-
counting, lt:gal services, and other busines~
~c rvices .
On the supply sidt.:, Kidsman has tmported
most of its R & D and techni.cal staff. It does
disLribuce software products from orhcr soft -
ware companies, both large and small, but they
are nor in the region, and ù1is is not a big part
of iLS business. Local venn1re capital has been
very important to the company\ survival and
growth, a11d here a fuzzy bow1Jary is ddinitclr
detecrable. The local Charnher of Commerce
has a Iso hccn important bccausc of irs activities
in dcsigni ng a variety of recruirmenr strate~:,rics
thar finns likc Kidsman can use Îll recruiting
young profe~sionals . Kiùsmart purchase:. print-
ing, puhlishiJ1g, disk duplication, and packag-
ing services bod1 locally and from outsidc the
rt:gmn.
One dcsirahle feature of the mapping exer-
cisc is d1e discipline it imposes on Ù1e rc-
searchcr by creating empry spaces which have
to be lilled. A rescarcher inrcrested in local
nctworking, ror inst~nce, will be prompreJ to
ask about non local networking, even if ir is not
the m~jor focu~. Once ali the relevant rt:lation-
sh i p~ are mllpped, d1ey are les~ likely LO be
ovcrlooked in an interpretation of di~t.rict
structure and dynamit:s.
Ovt:rall, Lhts mapping was uscful in tcsting
cornpcting hypod1eses about the Seattle soft-
ware industry-in detcmtining whether d1is
 Regions and Fitwzs 485

ompet1tors
national and International: Broderbund, Disney, Sierra On-Une,
The Leamlng Company, Electronic Arts, Davidson & Associates
Suppllers
few local competitors
top R&D people
. Kidsmart Corp 1
pceoenc<~holps national:
r.crultmanl ! b. 1970s. UrWerslty-relale l computer stores
managers
to the region
8llpply a lew diogrunlled
omployaea
l l
spi-dl
: r. late 198Cis ln i:lJ'p.Jt ; local
software dlstrubutors
school systems

software developers
have helped
lmpcove local
! byOO!I~ ~ cuatomeno
negligible
81 %

tochnlcal eckJcation id. oould be sold to firm ;

i wtth !J88l9f marl<etilg :
international:
artists
~=· 1 œpadty l 19%
Roenoke vwnture :s. new R&O firm coutlHormj
cepltal l from tq> rn<niQ8IT16I1 l
computers otn.r local v.nture caplt41 : :

Ch•m ber of Commerc:oo l .••••••••.••••••••••••••••.•. .• l

banks

Washington Software Association

Software Publishlng Asccociatlon

Trade Associations
b: born r: ownershlp reslruduring d: clivestiture s: splnoWs

Figure 2 : Software firm mapped onto local and nonlocal space.

firm was participating in an Iralian-type "in-
dustrial district" with substanrial infonnal net-
working and oust or simply benefiring from
looser, agglomerarive economies. We con-
cluded that except for the relarionship betwee.n
the firm and its venture capital investor, it
enjoys no close networking relarionships
\VÏthin the region. On the supply si.de and
among software firms, tradirional agglomera-
rion factors do operate. T hough Kidsmart
ra rely hires directly from either Boeing or Mi-
crosoft, both \vith large software operations,
their presence has helped Kidsmart convince
recruits from other regions to relocate to Se-
attle. Kidsmart has also benefited from Boe-
ing's efforts to improve the quatity of technicaJ
educa.rion in the area.
lntroducing Historicity and
Dynamics into Firm Mapping
The objects of study, whether fi nns or regions,
are in reality a constantly moving target
(Schoenberger 1991 , 188). One problem \vitl1
an interviewing approach to studying regions
is that it tends to generate data which are
temporally bound. It is generally only feasible
to conduct interviews this intensively once.
The process will generate a good cross-sec-
tional view of finns and other agents' relarion-
ships at any one point in rime, but \vill not
produce longitudinal data. It is difficult, then,
to determine if hypotheses not bome out at the
current period of rime were nonetheless nue
in a previous period. lt is also difficult ta pre-
dict future trends, especially if finn informants
offer conflicting prognoses of their own and
future tendencies.
A number of fea.tures in the research design
may help to introduce more historicity into the
interview effort. First, it is conceivable that
infonnants could be reinrerviewed at intervals,
say five to 10 years. The creation of panel data
of this sort is often doue in other fields in the
social sciences. Second, finns can be asked to
reconsouct data points in the past. They can
be asked what their sales, supply, competitive,
and collaborarive relarionships were five, 10
and 20 years ago, and how these sbaped their
locational ca.lculus. Often, archiva! data exists
to enable this backcasting effort. Third, former
employees can be found who may be able to
help reconstruct a longitudinal profile of fi.rm
48 6 Volume -16• .Yum/tcr -1. \'m:embcr 1';)9-1
~trtiCUifC and <ICtiOm. ln .1 ()l'CVIClll~ effort, h)
intervie\o\ inf! ret irecs, we were ahk 10 docu-
ment key Lo~ \n gt:le~ Jrt::l a1rcnft facilit)
'>iungs back t hrough tiH: decade., (\ htrk'l.l~en ct
al. 1119 1).
P:trticubrly nnport:lnt to probe 111 thi., re-
gard arc th rée t:\ ents: ( 1} .111 C\ogcnous-to-the-
industry change in the cconorn~· nf the reg-ion
111 question, whtch Jffcct., lh l'O~ts and abilit)
to do husine~; (2) structur;1l ch:llll!t:S 111 the
mdu~try wh1ch might ha\c altercd . locauonal
pattern~; and (.~}change' 111 finn managemem
'>tructure nr strate!,'} th:H represem :1 disconu
nui[)• with the pa~t. Each nf thc.,c enncemr;Hcs
on a probrrcssi\Cl> narrowcr rnng~· of cxpcn-
cnœ. For type 1. \1 e 1mght npcn w sec sinll-
lar rcsponscs from tirms 111 ali kt:) mdu~mcs 111
the region; 111 type 2, rhe chan!-:es \lnu[J aA'en
only tha t particular industr) (hut wouiJ dn sn
111 ali rcg10n,); and in type 3, only the ~inn or
cst;lbl ishmcnt would be affectee!.
To demon~tr;ttc ho'' this more J\'ll:llllll
'IC\\ of the finn might alter the "m:1p'; dr:twn
Ill the temporal!) elrt'lllll'iCI'Ihcd IIHCIYIC\\, let
us rerurn 10 the 1-Jdsman c;l~t:. l·or Kid~mart,
a key turning poim in its hisWI') was a major
changcovcr of management "hich cn:tblcd n
tn sun;,·e .md gnm ùu-ough rctinancing ar-
r:mgcmems and the imroducuon of ne'' prot.l-
nct line~. Kid ~man 11:1~ fnundcd Ill 1970 to
puhli~h cduc~tion~l materials dc11~ lopcd :1r rhc
nc~rhy University of \ \'ash1ngron. IL~ prou uns
wc re confincd to ~pccial cducat ion prim prod-
Ut:L~. :md it cndurcd thrcc nc.tr hanl..mprcics
during iL~ firsr 1'Ï years. \fter 1hc fim1 ,,·cnt
public in 198(•, di'!,.'T\IIllhl 'hJrcholder" Œlbl
in :1 111:111agemcm cunsultmn, \\ho ~ul>sequcml)
bouglu out the finn ht:!"iclf. She matie two
major changes c:-.panding the prnduCl linc to
cncompass Ù1e cntire earl} ch duhooJ m:1rket,
nm just spct:i;tl education •. md mm ing tlllo
computer software. Shc w ;t~ :1hlc to raisc \Cil -
lUre capital to do so.
This management rumovcr 1s kc) to undcr-
standing hoth the finn\ lo)Jh~ w Seatdc, :1s
weil as its spcn:1 l connecllons w certam group'
111 the Seattle economy. The nt:\\ CEO h:l<l
heen a Seattle ban ker ;md th en management
corbultant. Shc br()ught "1th hcr strong linb
LO the Chamhcr of Commerce :1nd fi>rged ne\\
oncs with the \\'ashington Software ;\.ssooa-
oon. \lthough shc antÏCIIXItcs sclling out hcr
product linc to a h1rger rct:nlcr :Il snmc pomt,
shc '>cc~ hcrsl.lf Jnd her top man:tgcmcnt tc;llll,
;Ill ~trongl) t:ommincd to thl' Sc.ntle arc;l, us·
ing the procccds w ~wn mhcr ne'' Seault:
husincs,<·s. \ lost of hcr man<lgemcnt t<.:am ;ll'l'
wom<.:n in thl'lr -W-., fonncrl; staïf pcopk 111
l:trg~: corpoc1t1on~ :mJ Jn<:hon:d to the rcg10n
h 1r fam1l} rc;l\on-..
For largcr corporJtHms, t:OI11111llltll:lll ln the
rcg10n 1s not ah~:1ys so cas~ to d1scern. ln .1
numbcr of 1ntcrncws wnh Bocing personnel.
past and present, as weil :h Bocmg 1\atchcr'>,
dramaticalh t:ontr:Hhcwl'\ trJienones \lere
<;uggcstcd l~lr rhl' compan} \ futllrl' in rhc re
gion. Top corpor.llc m;magcr-. crnphasizcd nvo
trends tlMt the\ hdien:d wnuld conslram thc1r
!fi'O\\ th in the ~cgion. FiN, llliN nf thcir '>ales
grrm th for l'Oilllnerc1al cr;lft 1s ;thrn:ld, and
~ustomers ;Ire ;tggfl·ssin•l} dcmandmg offscb
111 rcrurn for ordcr.. Funhcnnorc, modnn
technologies (espet:lall) virtual rcaliry comput
ing tcchntqucs) pennit rhc design. cngineenng,
~nd productum of;urcrafr :1" .ttc:un effort ma
sp;lct:. The) ~:omcmled rh;ll '' 1th1n :1 decade
Bocmg- cclUid dc'>lgn 111 Scanie. engmccr 111
\\'rd11ra, hudd proiOt)lJ<.:' 111 Furopc. produec
rn China, .1ncl test in Russia . This 1~ J ''type 2"
C\'ellt-a change in mdust~ srrunure 'ia glo-
h:11it:nion .
Sccontl, Uoemg has been lo.:admg an Jrtack
on the n'ilng t:m~ of domg husines~ 111 SenuJc,
a rcg10n whlt'h grl'\\' more ra pHily t han most
mht:r ciucs of ils s11.c in tlw 11JHOs and '' h~.:r~·
land çc,_ts, hoostcd Jlso hv suff Cil\ lronmcmal
rcgubtion. arc ;tpproachl;l!{ those of Los \n-
gclcs JnJ San 1- mnnsco. fh1~ 1 ~ an e'(ample of
·' ul)pe 1,, e\'Clll. Boein!:{' " Jl<lrtiCUiarl~ in-
('Cil~cd m·er the dc,·elopmcnt:d fees and com-
minnents extrancd from them for the ne'' ïo""
plam in the Cil) of 1\ enm. The~ daim thq
''ill ne, cr budd J E1t:1ht~ 111 hu~mcss-un­
fncndly ~caille :l~;pm . h " tliffin1lr to tell
\\ hcther this is '' pn,turc, enl·our;JgcJ by othcr
h1rgc finn!> likc ,\1icrosoft, dcsigned w lo\\t:r
thl: l'«ht of dotng husmcss, or whcther 1t is :1
real thrc;lt. \ Ltm oh~en•.:rs do not hdic\ c th at
Boe mg, "1th ns. trcmendou~ œnter of gra' Il)
111 Scanie .md ns 11<.:\\ cmph:his on design-fi•r-
cnginet:ring. tlexihiiHy. :1nd lc:1n production
ted111iqu.:s, 1\0uld evcr huild <1 new production
faci lin elst:\\ he re.
Prc.d1cunn of the fi.nurc 1~ complic;JtCJ alsn
hy rhc fan th:H m;m:Jgcmem Sl}'lt:~ arc con-
tcs~e:d ,Il Boc1ng and prouahl) \\ill rem am so

in the future. To date, most of the top man-
agement is inbred, and at least one observer, a
major newspaper editor who had recently ar-
rived from D etroit, stated with concern that
Boeing was beginning to look more and more
üke GM. Boeing faces momentous decisions in
both its declining defense market and its inter-
nationally embattled commercial market. Tf
management were to turn over in the furure,
it rnight pursue a substa.ntia.lly different course,
with considerable consequences for the Seattle
economy. Such a "type 3" event is perhaps the
hardest to predict, a fact wh.ich reinforces the
need to build multiple sourcing into the re-
sean:h design.
Aggregating Fîrm Maps into
Industries, Regions
Once interviews have been conducted, firm
maps can be aggregated iuto regional depic-
tions of key industries and t.heir interconnec-
tions (Borello 1994). An exa mple fo r the soft-
ware industry in a city like Seattle might look
as follows (Fig. 3). (Unlike the case of
Kidsmart, this is a hypo thetical example, al-
d10ugh infonn ed by our Seattle interviews
Competitors
Software Flrms F...H
Software Firms J ... z
Suppllers
Computer Ann A
Publlsher C --- -- - -
Publlsher 0 - - - - ---
Venture Cap~allst C
Trade Associations
Figure 3 : Multi-firm mapping onro local and nonlocal space.
Regions and Firms 487
with a number of finns.) Here, solid ünes rep-
resent strong relationslùps of cooperation and
collaboration, while dotted ones show simple
exchange relationsh:ips. One ve1y large finn, A,
is ernbedded in interfinn connections both
within and outside of the region. It cooperates
with and buys ali the output of local software
firm B and of local software developers (mdi-
viduals) A through F, and cooperates with
competirors F tl1rough H outside of the re-
gion. lt also buys the output of software devel-
opers G through J, without, however, cooper-
a ting with them, just as it buys the output of
dozens of smaller linus and developers outside
of the region. This Large firm also colla borates
with computer finn A, located in another re-
gion, in the design of computers and operating
systems, and its software is sold with the sys-
tem.
The other software finns wirbin the region
have no collaborative Links with each other,
nor with customers outside of the region, ex-
cept for furn D wlùch is collaborating with
computer finn B in anot.her region, and fim1
E which is working with local school districts
to design software. One is a captive supplier of
software fim1 A (B), but none of the others
Customers
Computer Ann A
Software Arm B
' ' ',
........~... ... ...
--- , - - - ~ • .;- - - - - - '; Software Dlstrlbutors
:~-- ... -~...
'
:--'
'
---~~~ Syst;~ '',
'
A. ..D
' ·Software Retailers B...Z
- - --....,-,:-- - .:-,~~ School Systems E·ZZZ
-- -- '
'
' ' :, Federal Govemment
National Software Association
48 8 Volume -16, Nam lm· .f, No·vember 199-1
cooperate with their competitors, ahhough
two arc dceply involved with the regional soft-
ware association. A number of supplier links
are important to them, parocularly local 'en-
ture capital connct-tions for fim1s C and D and
the Cham ber of Commerce for Fim1s D and
E. The latter finn also has a strong cooperati,•e
link with venture capitalisr C outside the re-
gion. \Veaker links cxist between software
finns and publishers, both mside and outside
of the region.
1f each horizontal li ne i~ weighted br d1e
proportion of sales or transaCLions moving
across it, finn imerdepcndcnce for sales and
supplies within and outsidc of the region can
be approximated. Depcndmg upon how quan-
titative and reliable the responses of fim1 and
es1.:1hlishmenr infomlaJlt.'>, a fatrly good cmap-
shor of the degree of nel:\\orking t:an be ob-
tained. Embeddedness within the region can
he comp:.1red to embeddedness with finns and
organizations outside of it. Furthem10re, sum-
marizing across firms <md distinguishing be-
rween collaborative :.1nd cxchange relations
may enable the researcher tO draw inferences
about the exrenr to which this ke} mdu!>tr)' in
the region is characterized by rraùitionally hy-
pothesizcd agglomerative factor:> versus ù1ose
associ:ned with industrial districts. For !Il-
stance, the densiry and ùirecoon of connec-
Lion!> in Figure 3 suggest that the fim1 with Ùle
most linkages-fi1111 1\- has more strongly
cmheddeù, o r cooperative, rclationships with
other firms and orgamzatiun~ than do the
s mallcr fim1s. However. ÙIC majority of thcse
rdationships are exrra-rcgtonal. \\'ithin the re-
gion, it coopcrates most hea'vily with mdc-
pendent software developers, mamly indiV1du-
al~ working on their own, and with anothcr
"captive" software firm. Smaller tirms have
fewer cooperative relanon~hip~. but tho~e rhat
they do have tend to be within the region,
parùcularly wiù1 vemure capnal, business, ami
cradc organizaùons. Even sma llcr firms, how-
t:ver, have some cooperative or strong ries "ith
group~ outsidc the region (linns C:, D, and E).
Such a slil.lcmre would nOL support the dichot-
omy in non loca 1 ver;u, local oriclllnion hy-
pothesizcd for large mullieswblishment fim1!>
versu~ smaller, single location finns presentcd
in L:1suen (1973) and rc-e.xamincd in light of
more recent theories of corporaœ organization
by I.::nlinger (1992), although tt \IOuld fit into
the more penl1lsstve taxonomr suggested 111
Storper :md Ham son ( 1991 ).
Jn similar fashion, map~ of relationships
:unong a st:rics of key industries may be over-
laid to produce a visual mappmg of agglomcra-
tivc and collaborative relation~hips within the
regional cconomy. This exercise mirrors the
suggestion of MeNee ( 1960, 205) more than
30 ycars ago thar if many corporatc case stud-
ies werc to be clone, they could be aggregated
to undcrstand the economtc geography of !>pc-
ci fic areas such as the North 1\mcrican manu-
facturing belt or the Chtcago indusrrial region.
O n paper, such an exercise bccomes visually
t.hough not conccptually difficult. Fo r instance,
Fihrure 3 could be modified to include rclauon-
shtp'- hetween !>Uppliers, like local venture
capital fim1s and publishers, ro software fim1s
F to Z o11wtlr the region.
1n some regions, the connections between
two or more key indu~tries mar be mimmal.
For cases such as rhese, maps specifie to each
indusuy group may suffice. ln Seatùe. for m -
stance, thcre are at least live disunctive indus-
uy groups--natural resourcc proccssing
(fishing, forest producrs); pon-related aCU\'lty;
the aircraft indusrrv; the software induscrv; a11d
the infant biotech industry. Although. each
hcncfits from agfl:lomcr:ltion factors conrrib-
utcd hy the others, no very srrong links were
detcctcd across d1e scctors (Golob and Gmy
1993 ). Regions with grea ter or lesser depend-
cncc ltpon one or a fcw key industries can he
contrastcd using portfolio theories of regional
de\•elopment (Conroy 1975).
Conclusion
\ \'e have presentecl a discussion of interview-
ing techniques and a synthesis of the rcsults
wirhmn heing cxplicit ~holll thc contcnr of the
interviews and the hypothcses cxplorcd.
Clearly, Ù1e nature of the mten•icws and the
maps themselves will he driven by the parùcu-
lar ca usal rebtionships bcmg hypothesizcd
ahouc privacc sccmr contribution~ to regional
growrh. 1n rwo companion pa pers, wc arc cx-
ploring :tlternative hypothcscs about rhc em-
beddcùncss of finns '' ithin an<.l ùutside d1t:ir
regions and Ùlt: rcsulting pro~pcct.~ for contin-
ucd gr0\1Ù1 and developmem of hosl regions,
.md de\doping a t}1>ology of indusrrial dis-
trieL~ '~hich differenuatc bemcen those "ith

primarily intemaJ and externaJ orientations
(Park and Marlrusen 1992; Marl'USen 1994).
The purpose of this paper has been to pre-
sent a less opaque and more rigorous research
framewo~k for srudying regions by srudying
firms. Tt ts hoped chat greater attention to the
appropriate selection of informants and ro the
careful drawing of inferences in moving from
one levet of inquiry (the individual in the finn)
to others (the indusrry in the region) will
strengthen the contribution to be made from
this type of research. The potential for both
the generation of new insights (Inductive) and
the testing of hypotheses (deductive) in this
type of qualitative field research is consider-
able. •
Literature Cited
Amin, A., and K. Robins. 1990. The re-emergence
of regional economies? The myducal geography
of Hexible accumulation. Envinmmrot and Plan-
nmg D, Sociny and Spacr 8:7-34.
Becker, II. 1986. Writingfur the Social Sdrnces. Chi-
cago: University of Chicago Press.
Best, M. 1990. The rw Cumpnition: Institutions of
lndusrria/ Rmmctm-Tng. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press.
Beyers, W., nnd M . Alvine. 1985. Export services in
post-indusoial society. Papen ofthe &gionnl Stimu
A11oâotion 57:33-46.
Blucstonc, B., and B. Harrison. 1982. Tbe Deindus-
trialization of Armrica. New York: Basic Books.
Borrclo, J. 1994. From Craft to Flexibility: Linkages
and lt1dumial GIIVfrnallet Syrtems in tht Drotlop-
rnmt ofa Capitai-GOIJds l11dumy in Mmdoza, Argrn-
tmn, 1985- 1990. Buenos Aires: Centro de Esru-
cLos Urbanos y Regionales.
Chandler, A. 1962. Strattgy and StniCtllrt: Chapten
i11 tbe llistory of lndumial Enterprist. Cambridge:
!-.UT Press.
Chiniu., B. 1960. ConcrastS in agglomeration: ew
York and Pirnburgh. Amtricnn &momie kocia-
tiull, Papen a11d Prtxetdmgr 50:279~9.
Christ2ller, W. 1966. Cmtral Places i11 Southtnl Ger-
many. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Conroy, M. E. 1975. &g10nal Economie Grtrwth: Di-
vmifontioll and Control. New York: Praeger.
~x, K., and':: Mair. 1988. Locality and community
m the polmcs of local econonlic developmcnt.
Amwls of the Association of American Geogmpbe11
78:307-25.
Ettlinger, N . 1992. Modes of corporare organiz.ation
and the geography o f devclopment. Paper; in Re-
giollal Scirou 71 (2): J07-26.
Regio11s n11d Firms 489
Fineberg, D., R. W. Gilmorc,). Kranu., M . Lianes,
R. Miller, U. Mann, and B. Schmitt. 1993. The
Biopharmaceutical lndustry in New J ersey: Pre-
scriptions for Regional EcononlÏc Oevelopment.
Report ro the PrinccLOn!Rutgers Research Corri-
dor, Oepartmcnt of Urban Planning and Policy
Dcvclopment, Rutgers University.
Florida, R., and M. Kenney. 1990. Silicon Valley and
Route 128 won't save us. Calif11r11Î11 Managmumt
Rnuno 33:68-88.
Florida, R., and M. Kenney. 1992. Japanese trans-
plants, production organization and regional de-
vclopmcnt. Juuma/ of tbt rlmtrican Plmmi11g A.s:ro-
ciation 58:2 1-38.
Genler, M . 1988. The limitS to flexibility: Corn-
meniS on the post-Fordist vision of production
and its geography. Tra11sactions of tht hiStinm of
British Geographen 13:419-3 2.
Gol.ob, E., and M. GrJy. 1993. Beyond Boeing: The
dJVersification of industrial sectors in the Seattle
region. Papcr prcsented at the annualmeetings of
the American Collcgiare Schools of Planning,
Philadelphia, PA.
Goodman E., and J. Barn ford, cds. 1989. Sma/1 Firms
and lndu.rtrial Districts in lt11/y. London: Rouùedge.
Granovener, M. 1985. Econonlic action and social
structure: The problcm of cmbeddedness. Amtri-
coJI Journal ofSoâolagy 91:48 1-5 10.
Harrison, B. 1992. lndustrial districts: Old wine in
new botties? &gionnl Studies 26:469-83.
Healey, M., and M. Rawlinson. 1993. lnterviewing
busmess owners and managers: A review of mcth-
ods and rcchniques. Geoforum 2~:339-55.
Howcs, C. 1993. Constructing comparative disad-
vamage: Lessons from the U. S. auto industry. In
Tmding lndusnits, Trading Regions, cd. H . Nopo-
ncn, J. Graham and A. Marl..'"USen, 45-91. New
York: Cuilford Press.
Isard, W. 1956. Location a/Id Space-tconomy. Cam-
bridge: MIT Press.
Isard, W. 1960. Alnhods of &girmal A1111/ysis. Cam-
bridge: MIT Press.
Isserman, A., and O. Sorenson. 1987. County em-
ploymem: A description of federal data sources
and the construction of a multi-source data base.
Papcr prescnted at the annual meeting of the
Association of Amencan Geogrnphers, Portland,
OR.
Kraushaar, R., :md M. Feldrnan. 1989. lndustrial
restrucruring and the limitS of indust:ry datn: Ex-
amples from eastern New York. &gio11al Swdies
23:49-62.
Krumme, G. 1969. Toward a gcography of enter-
prise. &ollomic Geography 45:30-40.
Lasuen, J. R. 1973. Urbanisation and development:
The temporal interaction between geographica.l
and sectoral clusters. Urban Swdit.r 10: 163~8.
490 1'o!tmu: -16, ,\ '11mbcr -1•.\'ovt:mbt•r JIJ<)-1
l.u-.·h. \. 11154. Fhr h(II/IJ11/Ifl a/ l .oitlf/1111. ~cw 1Ll-
\1:0: '.tic Uni,er;itl Prco,,
Lon:nnl.!. J. 1990. Fo'nh,nt\ unknmm ~ucce.,snr: \
unm•;,.,;t on Scou\ li~c'<JI'I of fln1hlc ;lccumul.l-
111111 and the re-emerg:cnt·c·of rcg:ional ccon•m•ic,.
'"'''~'~'"'m"''' )oum11l ~f' 11rb,m and Rt·gw""' J<,·_r,•,,r.-b
1+ l'i9-"+.
l.mcnng. J 11NI. Thcommg: po,t- Fordism: \\'h)
nmlln!!cnc~ mattèro, {,1 h111hcr rco,pnn'c 10 Scon).
lult7'1ttii/Qtlfll.7mmttll 11/1 rbt/11 tl ml R,•gtomtl R,•_<ftll'fb
1':.'! 111:1-.HJ 1.
,\l.trku,cn, \. 111:-l'i. Prujit Cydcs, Olt!!,UfHJh•, and Rr
wo"'" /),7.•dup1111'1/1 Lunhndg:c: \l iT Pres'>.
\ l.lrkuwn, •\. 1!IH-. Nt'l{lflll.l. lht• B.-ollu/11/0 1111d P~ltu._.­
a( r..,.,.,,,,,,_Totowa, NJ. Rm1 nw1 :md \ llcnhdd.
,\l:trkuo,cn. A. 199+. Stick} pl..t·c, 111 ~l1ppc1]' 'pace·
The pui!Lical ecnnnmy nî fa,t grmnng n:giom.
l':lpcr prcwntctl .11 the IIJroltl Inne' Ccmcnal)
Lontcrcncc on the '>pan:1l C:tm.,omunn of J'co-
nomlt' \cu1 irr, Tnromo, ( ..mada.
'\lJrkuwn, A., P. ll all. <;, Dmnd,, :nul S. Campbell
111'1 1 '/!J,· RIS~ oftbr Gu11/odt '\Jc11 \nrk. 0\lunl
llrnvcr'll} Pre".
\ Lt"c~. D. 1984. Sp111111/ /)mmm• ~( /.a/)()1': Stl(llt/
\'trurturr.~ mu/ till' (;,·ngmpl~l' u( l'rotfu,·tirm. l"e11
\'or~: \ h:dmcn.
\la,-.cl. D., JnJ R. :\lccg-;111, cd, l'JH'i. /)ohtm: 1111d
\lnbod· Conmming Su~tll!•; m luJu.rtrwl Gcogrwpbv
Lrm.lun: \ \cthuen.
\Ll"e~. 1>., ;md R. \lccgan !•rH. lmlu, t nal re'>truc-
tunng: lt!r'>U' the ti oc~ l rlotm Srmlw 15:2-l IH!.
\ k:-.:cc, R. 19SH. FwK·uun;t l gcugr.1phy uf the lirm,
"nh an llh•,rrati"c ca'e ~tudy from the pctrnlt:lllll
rnrlu~try. E:o11om1r (;,·ogntpb! H: .l2 1 l"
\ ki" cc, R. 1960. l'o wud :1 more human•>tic Cl'O-
nm~rit' !,'CII!:(Tn(lhy- The ( rcngr:tphy of Fnterpri,e.
Tipl,·<bnfi t•oor F.t·o/1(111/J'dw m Stlfllll G,•ov;mjtr
'i 1 201 ()'i
Park, S. 0., and \ . \1arklhCII. JIJI/4. Gem:ralitlll!(
new indu;tri>ll dt>tntL'' \ thcorctu:al agenda and
:111 apphc:~uon from J mm \ \ 'cstcm ccunomy. 1-.n
<'lf'rllllm·m mul Plflmllll.lf.. . 1. fon ht·omHlg.
PJI)re, \11., and C. Sabd. J'J!H. /be· St•(QIId lmlm1n111
Dro.•ttlt" Po,·rtbtl/111'"-filr l)ra.<fi<'I'IIY. Nc11 \ ork: Ba-.ic-
Bonk~.
~abd , <.. 1'ltl9. Flt:~•hlc >pcLja(I/Jtwn ami the re-
emergence nf reg10n:tl cconmnJC~. ln Rn•rrmt_g
ln.!mf7·11·.<' IJ...-Imr, cd. P. 1llr'1 .md J Zc•rlm. 1-
~o. '\'c" York: St. \\.trun\ l're,~.
~a\cman. \. 1990. RegiUnJI ncrwurk. a ml the re.. ur-
gcnt·e of Stl rcon Valle~ . Cultjimlltl \ltma(!;t•mrnt Rr·
•·u~J' 31 :H!J-1 12.
S;t\cntJn. \ . 199!a. The uri!-'llb Jnd tknanuc' oi
production nctwnrb rn \ilimn \.til~\-. Rr_,...,,,...b
i>olli'l' 20:42:1 .1~.
S,t\Cl\Ï;111, \ . 1'/ll l h. Silu.:nn \\dl,·\ ;mÙ Ruut<: 12!l
11 orù " 1w u... Rt·spon'c tn Ric.harrl Florid;t and
,\ Llnrn Kcnncy. Cth)Î1!711tl \ltlllll!!,t'lll<'llf Rl1'11'll'
1l·llli-42.
s.• xcman. \ . 11N+. Rrgimur/ lth-tiiiiii,QI Culwrc tl/Id
Comprt/111111 111 Sth.-un 1itllrv m11l Rom,· 12.\'. Cam-
lmd~,:c· l lan-a rd L' ni,·cr,lt) Pre"·
'ichm·nhcrgcr, E. 1'1!!5 l·orcrgn mJnufacruring 111·
l'cMmcnt rn the L nitcd StJtcs: <.mnpcuuvc 'tr.Jtc·
g•c' .md mtcmauon;tl lot:;rtinn. 1-:.-vuannc G,·o.v;m·
pb!· (1( :241 'it)
Sd10.:nhcrgcr, E. 1')') 1. l'he t·orpor.nc rntcn-ic11 ,1s
.1 rcscarch llll:thud in croumn~t gcograph). Tbr
f>rof(·.uimltll Gt'll(!l'tl{'ba -1+ 1HO H9.
'>w11: \. ,1. I'IHH. 1-lc\lhlc pr•){ltll'!l<ln 'Y'tt:lll' and
rC!-'lon;tl tlcvdnpmenl 1he mc of nc11 mùustrial
'(UCC 111 \1onh \ mcnca ami \ \"c,tcm 1· uroJW.
1111<.7711/ftOIIIII )mmttllo/ L·,./l,m .md RrgtOIIttf l?J.·.<Miïb
12: 1-l 86.
St.:oll. B. 191) 1. l·.t·nnomrc ''ratcg\ Jnd et·nnomrt
pol~<:y. l';tpcr prcscntcd .11 1'1~.: \\ urld Hank.
\\ ';t,!ung:ton, DC.
Stnrpcr, \ 1., .md B. l lam,nn 11JCII Flcxihiltt}'• lucr-
ardl\ and rcgwrul dnclnpmcnt: The ch;mgtn!(
'lrtll'llln: of industn:tl producuon ')''tem~ .tnù
thcrr lunns ni guvcmanc:c in the 1990s. R,·"·,m b
l'tdu; .?O.~o- -+12
lrcho~L. C. 1962. Tbc Cmlm/111111)' Eronlli/IIC Bm,•
\tuc!)-. ' Cil Ynrk. Cc11111111llcl fu~ Fctmumlt' Dc-
lclopment.
V<·mnn, R. 1960 . .\/1'11·opoltJ / CJ,I'f l11 lmcrprewuon
of tlw Fimlmgs of tbc .Vr"':' l'ork \TI'Impolttlltl R,•gillll
Smd)' C~mbriJ!('c: JI,• nard L rmcr...rt) Pre''·
\ 111, R. 1'!IH (.n.re Sw.l!' Rnt•ard•: Dmg11 mu! \Jt•tb-
ud,. \ pphcu Suc.al Rc.,car~h \lctht>tl~ Sene' 'i.
Bncrl~ 1lills, C·\. !),1gc.
\ I\'N ,\ L\R I-:.l:SEN " Dircctnr of lhc l'roJcCt on
Rc~rtoll;ll and l ndusmal l• çonolllll'' .11 RuLgers L ni
vcr...nv. '\'c11 Brun~11id., N I OH<i!H, 11hcrc '>he •• 3lso
St.tLc 'ur New Jcr...c)· Profc~">r of Urban Plmnin~
;Jnd l'olrcy IJc••clnpment lier currcm rcsc:1rch ln
1:11'c' un d1c 'uccl"" :md f:ulurc nf cnrwer...wn from
cul tl 1\;tr 111 cornrnercMI Jclll Il'\ in rmhrarl'-rcl.n.:d
mdu,t rics and commumlll". an;l t:omp:tr~tin.• \tUd)
ut rJJmlly brrowmg t:ltlc' m,lapan, 1-:nrc.J, Bratil, .md
rhc lnu cd States.
Copyright© 2002 EBSCO Publishing
Copyright of Professional Geographer is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied
or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission.
However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.