Legal form determination for the development of clusters' activities

In this study, the authors have investigated the determination of the most suitable legal form for the development of the cluster management activities. In each particular case the developers of the cluster have to assess the objectives of the cluster, the principal aspects of the mutual partnership, the risks that could be provoked, and in accordance with the derived decisions. The choice of the cluster legal activity form depends on the objectives and on the branch in which the cluster is operating, on the number of the cluster participants, on the type of the activities of the cluster, on the openness or closeness to new members, type of the contributions of the partners and the other factors. The most reliable solution regarding the choice of the model of the functioning and management of the cluster has to be derived as well legal regulation of the legal form of the activity discussed. The advantages and disadvantages of two models of the cluster formation discussed. During experimental evaluation, the significance of criteria was determined and the expert evaluation on legal form for the 245 development of clusters activities was performed. Foundation and management of the clusters are determined firstly by the fact that in one case a new established legal person performs the functions of the cluster coordinator while in another case one of the cluster participants performs the functions and partners legal cooperation determined by Agreement on Partnership. Article analyses the multi-criteria decisions-making to establish the cluster with the certain type of juridical form of legal person or to develop cluster management activities by the Partnership Agreement. The recommendations presented by application of MCDM calculus methods with aspect of percentage.

[1]  Valentinas Podvezko,et al.  Absolute and Relative Evaluation of Socio-Economic Objects Based on Multiple Criteria Decision Making Methods , 2014 .

[2]  Valentinas Podvezko,et al.  The Comparative Analysis of MCDA Methods SAW and COPRAS , 2011 .

[3]  Teresa de Noronha,et al.  A Differentiation Framework for Maritime Clusters: Comparisons across Europe , 2013 .

[4]  J. Černevičiūtė,et al.  Cultural and Creative Industries (CCI) and sustainable development: China’s cultural industries clusters , 2017 .

[5]  M. Zizka,et al.  The effect of clusters on the innovation performance of enterprises: traditional vs new industries , 2018, Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues.

[6]  Valentinas Podvezko,et al.  Evaluation of quality assurance in contractor contracts by multi-attribute decision-making methods , 2017 .

[7]  Ron Martin,et al.  Conceptualizing Cluster Evolution: Beyond the Life Cycle Model? , 2011 .

[8]  Eugenijus Kurilovas,et al.  New MCEQLS fuzzy AHP methodology for evaluating learning repositories: a tool for technological development of economy , 2015 .

[9]  Romualdas Kliukas,et al.  Methodology for Evaluating the Quality of Distance Learning Courses in Consecutive Stages , 2015 .

[10]  T. Saaty,et al.  The Analytic Hierarchy Process , 1985 .

[11]  Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas,et al.  Multi-attribute Assessment of Road Design Solutions by Using the COPRAS Method , 2007 .

[12]  Ching-Lai Hwang,et al.  Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications - A State-of-the-Art Survey , 1981, Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems.

[13]  Eugenijus Kurilovas,et al.  Improved fuzzy AHP methodology for evaluating quality of distance learning courses , 2016 .

[14]  Valentinas Podvezko,et al.  The Recalculation of the Weights of Criteria in MCDM Methods Using the Bayes Approach , 2018, Symmetry.

[15]  Zenonas Turskis,et al.  A New Fuzzy Hybrid Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Approach to Solve Personnel Assessment Problems. Case Study: Director Selection for Estates and Economy Office , 2017 .