IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v44y2015i3p684-697.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Creativity in scientific teams: Unpacking novelty and impact

Author

Listed:
  • Lee, You-Na
  • Walsh, John P.
  • Wang, Jian

Abstract

The increasing dominance of team science highlights the importance of understanding the effects of team composition on the creativity of research results. In this paper, we analyze the effect of team size, and field and task variety on creativity. Furthermore, we unpack two facets of creativity in science: novelty and impact. We find that increasing team size has an inverted-U shaped relation with novelty. We also find that the size–novelty relationship is largely due to the relation between size and team field or task variety, consistent with the information processing perspective. On the other hand, team size has a continually increasing relation with the likelihood of a high-impact paper. Furthermore, variety does not have a direct effect on impact, net of novelty. This study develops our understanding of team science and highlights the need for a governance approach to scientific work. We also advance the creativity literature by providing an ex ante objective bibliometric measure that distinguishes novelty from impact, and illustrate the distinct team-level drivers of each. We conclude with a discussion of the policy implications of our findings.

Suggested Citation

  • Lee, You-Na & Walsh, John P. & Wang, Jian, 2015. "Creativity in scientific teams: Unpacking novelty and impact," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 684-697.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:44:y:2015:i:3:p:684-697
    DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2014.10.007
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733314001826
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.respol.2014.10.007?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Benjamin F. Jones, 2009. "The Burden of Knowledge and the "Death of the Renaissance Man": Is Innovation Getting Harder?," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 76(1), pages 283-317.
    2. Vincent Larivière & Yves Gingras, 2010. "On the relationship between interdisciplinarity and scientific impact," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 61(1), pages 126-131, January.
    3. Kevyn Yong & Stephen J. Sauer & Elizabeth A. Mannix, 2014. "Conflict and Creativity in Interdisciplinary Teams," Post-Print hal-01025957, HAL.
    4. Vincent Larivière & Yves Gingras, 2010. "On the relationship between interdisciplinarity and scientific impact," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 61(1), pages 126-131, January.
    5. Carayol, Nicolas & Matt, Mireille, 2004. "Does research organization influence academic production?: Laboratory level evidence from a large European university," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(8), pages 1081-1102, October.
    6. Anthony F.J. van Raan, 2006. "Statistical properties of bibliometric indicators: Research group indicator distributions and correlations," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 57(3), pages 408-430, February.
    7. Kim B. Clark & W. Bruce Chew & Takahiro Fujimoto, 1987. "Product Development in the World Auto Industry," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 18(3, Specia), pages 729-782.
    8. J Sylvan Katz, 2000. "Scale-independent indicators and research evaluation," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 27(1), pages 23-36, February.
    9. Li Tang & John P. Walsh, 2010. "Bibliometric fingerprints: name disambiguation based on approximate structure equivalence of cognitive maps," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 84(3), pages 763-784, September.
    10. Nemet, Gregory F. & Johnson, Evan, 2012. "Do important inventions benefit from knowledge originating in other technological domains?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 190-200.
    11. Thomas W. Steele & Jeffrey C. Stier, 2000. "The impact of interdisciplinary research in the environmental sciences: a forestry case study," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 51(5), pages 476-484.
    12. Martin, Ben R. & Irvine, John, 1993. "Assessing basic research : Some partial indicators of scientific progress in radio astronomy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 106-106, April.
    13. Andrew B. Hargadon & Beth A. Bechky, 2006. "When Collections of Creatives Become Creative Collectives: A Field Study of Problem Solving at Work," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(4), pages 484-500, August.
    14. Ismael Rafols & Martin Meyer, 2010. "Diversity and network coherence as indicators of interdisciplinarity: case studies in bionanoscience," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 82(2), pages 263-287, February.
    15. Katz, J. Sylvan & Martin, Ben R., 1997. "What is research collaboration?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 1-18, March.
    16. Jeffrey M Wooldridge, 2010. "Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 2, volume 1, number 0262232588, December.
    17. Jasjit Singh & Lee Fleming, 2010. "Lone Inventors as Sources of Breakthroughs: Myth or Reality?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(1), pages 41-56, January.
    18. Lee Fleming, 2001. "Recombinant Uncertainty in Technological Search," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 117-132, January.
    19. Adams, James D. & Black, Grant C. & Clemmons, J. Roger & Stephan, Paula E., 2005. "Scientific teams and institutional collaborations: Evidence from U.S. universities, 1981-1999," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 259-285, April.
    20. John Hudson, 1996. "Trends in Multi-authored Papers in Economics," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 10(3), pages 153-158, Summer.
    21. Katz, J. Sylvan, 1999. "The self-similar science system1," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(5), pages 501-517, June.
    22. Jasjit Singh, 2005. "Collaborative Networks as Determinants of Knowledge Diffusion Patterns," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(5), pages 756-770, May.
    23. Wang, Jian, 2014. "Unpacking the Matthew effect in citations," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 8(2), pages 329-339.
    24. Heinze, Thomas & Shapira, Philip & Rogers, Juan D. & Senker, Jacqueline M., 2009. "Organizational and institutional influences on creativity in scientific research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 610-623, May.
    25. Dahlin, Kristina B. & Behrens, Dean M., 2005. "When is an invention really radical?: Defining and measuring technological radicalness," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 717-737, June.
    26. Nicolas Carayol & Mireille Matt, 2004. "Does research organization influence academic production ?," Post-Print hal-00279014, HAL.
    27. Dovev Lavie & Israel Drori, 2012. "Collaborating for Knowledge Creation and Application: The Case of Nanotechnology Research Programs," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(3), pages 704-724, June.
    28. Brady T. West & Patricia Berglund & Steven G. Heeringa, 2008. "A closer examination of subpopulation analysis of complex-sample survey data," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 8(4), pages 520-531, December.
    29. Schoenmakers, Wilfred & Duysters, Geert, 2010. "The technological origins of radical inventions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(8), pages 1051-1059, October.
    30. Juan D Rogers, 2010. "Citation analysis of nanotechnology at the field level: implications of R&D evaluation," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 19(4), pages 281-290, October.
    31. Melin, Goran, 2000. "Pragmatism and self-organization: Research collaboration on the individual level," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 31-40, January.
    32. Kristina Dahlin & Deans M. Behrens, 2005. "When is an invention really radical? Defining and measuring technological radicalness," Post-Print hal-00480416, HAL.
    33. Anthony F. J. van Raan, 2006. "Performance‐related differences of bibliometric statistical properties of research groups: Cumulative advantages and hierarchically layered networks," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 57(14), pages 1919-1935, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Wang, Jian, 2016. "Knowledge creation in collaboration networks: Effects of tie configuration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 68-80.
    2. Rafols, Ismael & Leydesdorff, Loet & O’Hare, Alice & Nightingale, Paul & Stirling, Andy, 2012. "How journal rankings can suppress interdisciplinary research: A comparison between Innovation Studies and Business & Management," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(7), pages 1262-1282.
    3. Maaike Verbree & Edwin Horlings & Peter Groenewegen & Inge Weijden & Peter Besselaar, 2015. "Organizational factors influencing scholarly performance: a multivariate study of biomedical research groups," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(1), pages 25-49, January.
    4. Dongqing Lyu & Kaile Gong & Xuanmin Ruan & Ying Cheng & Jiang Li, 2021. "Does research collaboration influence the “disruption” of articles? Evidence from neurosciences," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(1), pages 287-303, January.
    5. Sarah Kaplan & Keyvan Vakili, 2015. "The double-edged sword of recombination in breakthrough innovation," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(10), pages 1435-1457, October.
    6. Luis Antonio Orozco Castro, 2015. "Diversidad y heterogeneidad en redes de colaboración científica. Un estudio de las escuelas de administración de América Latina," Books, Universidad Externado de Colombia, Facultad de Administración de Empresas, edition 1, number 44, April.
    7. Manuel Acosta & Daniel Coronado & Esther Ferrándiz & Manuel Jiménez, 2022. "Effects of knowledge spillovers between competitors on patent quality: what patent citations reveal about a global duopoly," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(5), pages 1451-1487, October.
    8. Shiji Chen & Yanhui Song & Fei Shu & Vincent Larivière, 2022. "Interdisciplinarity and impact: the effects of the citation time window," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(5), pages 2621-2642, May.
    9. Martin Kalthaus, 2020. "Knowledge recombination along the technology life cycle," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 30(3), pages 643-704, July.
    10. Bosetti, Valentina & Cattaneo, Cristina & Verdolini, Elena, 2015. "Migration of skilled workers and innovation: A European Perspective," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(2), pages 311-322.
    11. Neil Gandal & Michal Shur-Ofry & Michael Crystal & Royee Shilony, 2021. "Out of sight: patents that have never been cited," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(4), pages 2903-2929, April.
    12. D’Este, Pablo & Robinson-García, Nicolás, 2023. "Interdisciplinary research and the societal visibility of science: The advantages of spanning multiple and distant scientific fields," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(2).
    13. Walsh, John P. & Lee, You-Na, 2015. "The bureaucratization of science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(8), pages 1584-1600.
    14. Jian Wang & Bart Thijs & Wolfgang Glänzel, 2015. "Interdisciplinarity and Impact: Distinct Effects of Variety, Balance, and Disparity," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(5), pages 1-18, May.
    15. William Arant & Dirk Fornahl & Nils Grashof & Kolja Hesse & Cathrin Söllner, 2019. "University-industry collaborations—The key to radical innovations? [Universität-Industrie-Kooperationen – Der Schlüssel zu radikalen Innovationen?]," Review of Regional Research: Jahrbuch für Regionalwissenschaft, Springer;Gesellschaft für Regionalforschung (GfR), vol. 39(2), pages 119-141, October.
    16. Barry Bozeman & Daniel Fay & Catherine Slade, 2013. "Research collaboration in universities and academic entrepreneurship: the-state-of-the-art," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 38(1), pages 1-67, February.
    17. Nemet, Gregory F., 2012. "Inter-technology knowledge spillovers for energy technologies," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 1259-1270.
    18. Seolmin Yang & So Young Kim, 2023. "Knowledge-integrated research is more disruptive when supported by homogeneous funding sources: a case of US federally funded research in biomedical and life sciences," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(6), pages 3257-3282, June.
    19. Michaël Bikard & Fiona Murray & Joshua S. Gans, 2015. "Exploring Trade-offs in the Organization of Scientific Work: Collaboration and Scientific Reward," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(7), pages 1473-1495, July.
    20. Kathryn Rudie Harrigan & Maria Chiara Guardo & Elona Marku, 2018. "Patent value and the Tobin’s q ratio in media services," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(1), pages 1-19, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:44:y:2015:i:3:p:684-697. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/respol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.