Economic development networks in Kentucky Appalachia Brandon Ofem, Sara Compion, and Walter Ferrier Session 3.09: Poster Session How do economic development organizations (EDOs) in eastern Kentucky collaborate? How do the strategic and collaborative practices of EDOs impact performance? Research Questions Collaboration Summary Statistics Tie Frequency Empirical Setting EDO Services 0 20 40 60 80 business networking business retention/grow th job creation business recruitm ent referrals business coaching leadership developm ent downtow n revitalization tourism services w orkforce training advocacy/lobbying infrastructure developm ent technical services historic preservation/restoration business incubation financing/lending research productinnovation Forms of Collaboration 0 20 40 60 governm ent contributions m em bership fees com m ercial incom e interestincome ARC special events EDO Funding Sources Results •Organizational age is positively related to performance ratings. •Network strength, measured by the frequency of collaboration, has a stronger effect on performance than network size. •EDOs that encourage higher levels of autonomy receive higher performance ratings. •EDOs with fewer collaborative ties benefit more from acting entrepreneurially. 2014 ASA Conference. March 28, 2:00 pm to 3:15 pm. Visualization of the overall collaboration network. Reveals a rather dense structure. Overall collaboration network with node size determined by eigenvector centrality. Reveals a core-periphery structure. Same as above except node color is determined by whether or not the EDO serves at least one of the eight recently designated promise zone counties: Bell, Harlan, Letcher, Perry, Leslie, Clay, Knox, and part of Whitley County. This network reveals the collaborations between only the EDOS serving the promise zone counties. Collaboration network with tie width determined by the frequency of collaboration. Greater width indicates greater frequency. M ean S.D . Min M ax Performance -0.028 1.629 -4.205 2.972 Peerrating 0 0.883 -1.644 1.727 Self-report 0 0.811 -2.157 1.271 Service area 12.51 19.59 1 54 Service generalism 7.286 4.196 0 17 Funding generalism 1.898 1.248 0 5 A ssetgrowth 0.083 1.102 -2 2 Organizationalage 29.84 19.632 2 91 Organizationalsize 0.99 0.725 0 2 M em bership organization 0.286 0.454 0 1 Network heterogeneity 0.611 0.162 0 0.75 A RC funding 0.173 0.381 0 1 Network strength 275.478 384.458 0 1983 Network size 33.857 48.972 0 337 Entrepreneurial orientation 7.854 6.003 -9 18 Innovativeness 3.041 2.371 -4 6 Proactiveness 2.907 1.985 -2 6 Risk-taking 1.896 2.351 -4 6 Aggressiveness 1.713 2.443 -5 6 Autonom y 6.074 3.517 -5 12 -1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 Low EO High EO Performance Low netw ork size H igh network size Interaction Analysis revealed a statistically significant interaction between an entrepreneurial orientation (EO) and network size. Fewer ties means it’s more important to act entrepreneurially. This table shows the total number of EDOs that offer each type of service. This table shows the total number of EDOs that receive each type of funding. Each of these networks represent a different type of collaboration. Structural differences can be observed.

Poster Print Size: This poster template is set up for A0 international paper size of 1189 mm x 841 mm (46.8” high by 33.1” wide). It can be printed at

Download PPTX Report

Upload
priscila-silcox
View
229
Download
10

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Poster Print Size: This poster template is set up for A0 international paper size of 1189 mm x 841 mm (46.8” high by 33.1” wide). It can be printed at

Economic development networks in Kentucky Appalachia

Brandon Ofem, Sara Compion, and Walter Ferrier

Session 3.09: Poster Session

How do economic development organizations (EDOs) in eastern Kentucky collaborate?

How do the strategic and collaborative practices of EDOs impact performance?

Research Questions Collaboration

Summary Statistics

Tie Frequency

Empirical Setting

EDO Services

020

4060

business networking business retention/growthjob creation business recruitment

referrals business coachingleadership development downtown revitalizationtourism services workforce trainingadvocacy/lobbying infrastructure development

technical services historic preservation/restorationbusiness incubation financing/lendingresearch product innovation

Forms of Collaboration

020

4060

government contributions

membership fees commercial incomeinterest income ARCspecial events

EDO Funding Sources

Results•Organizational age is positively related to performance ratings.

•Network strength, measured by the frequency of collaboration, has a stronger effect on performance than network size.

•EDOs that encourage higher levels of autonomy receive higher performance ratings.

•EDOs with fewer collaborative ties benefit more from acting entrepreneurially.

2014 ASA Conference. March 28, 2:00 pm to 3:15 pm.

Visualization of the overall collaboration network. Reveals a rather dense structure.

Overall collaboration network with node size determined by eigenvector centrality. Reveals a core-periphery structure.

Same as above except node color is determined by whether or not the EDO serves at least one of the eight recently designated promise zone counties: Bell, Harlan, Letcher, Perry, Leslie, Clay, Knox, and part of Whitley County.

This network reveals the collaborations between only the EDOS serving the promise zone counties.

Collaboration network with tie width determined by the frequency of collaboration. Greater width indicates greater frequency.

Mean S.D. Min Max Performance -0.028 1.629 -4.205 2.972 Peer rating 0 0.883 -1.644 1.727 Self-report 0 0.811 -2.157 1.271 Service area 12.51 19.59 1 54 Service generalism 7.286 4.196 0 17 Funding generalism 1.898 1.248 0 5 Asset growth 0.083 1.102 -2 2 Organizational age 29.84 19.632 2 91 Organizational size 0.99 0.725 0 2 Membership organization 0.286 0.454 0 1 Network heterogeneity 0.611 0.162 0 0.75 ARC funding 0.173 0.381 0 1 Network strength 275.478 384.458 0 1983 Network size 33.857 48.972 0 337 Entrepreneurial orientation 7.854 6.003 -9 18 Innovativeness 3.041 2.371 -4 6 Proactiveness 2.907 1.985 -2 6 Risk-taking 1.896 2.351 -4 6 Aggressiveness 1.713 2.443 -5 6 Autonomy 6.074 3.517 -5 12

-1

-0.8

-0.6

-0.4

-0.2

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

Low EO High EO

Performance

Low network size

High network size

Interaction

Analysis revealed a statistically significant interaction between an entrepreneurial orientation (EO) and network size. Fewer ties means it’s more important to act entrepreneurially.

This table shows the total number of EDOs that offer each type of service.

This table shows the total number of EDOs that receive each type of funding.

Each of these networks represent a different type of collaboration. Structural differences can be observed.