IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v44y2015i4p862-873.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Management of science, serendipity, and research performance: Evidence from a survey of scientists in Japan and the U.S

Author

Listed:
  • Murayama, Kota
  • Nirei, Makoto
  • Shimizu, Hiroshi

Abstract

In science, research teams are increasing in size, which suggests that science is becoming more organisational. This paper aims to empirically investigate the effects of the division of labour in management and science on serendipity, which has been considered one of the great factors in science. Specifically, in examining the survey of scientists conducted in Japan and the U.S., this paper treats the following questions: Does pursuing serendipity really bring about better scientific outcomes? How does the division of labour in science influence serendipity and publication productivity? The empirical results suggest that serendipity actually brings about better research quality on average. It also finds that if the managerial role is played by a leading scientist in the team, this is positively associated with the quality of the paper through allowing researchers to pursue serendipitous findings. In contrast, if the managerial role and leading research role are played by different members, this has a positive association with the number of papers published, as the project size becomes larger. These results indicate there is a trade-off between serendipity and publication productivity in science via who plays the leading role in research and management.

Suggested Citation

  • Murayama, Kota & Nirei, Makoto & Shimizu, Hiroshi, 2015. "Management of science, serendipity, and research performance: Evidence from a survey of scientists in Japan and the U.S," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(4), pages 862-873.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:44:y:2015:i:4:p:862-873
    DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2015.01.018
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733315000207
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.respol.2015.01.018?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. 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.
    2. Ajay Agrawal & Avi Goldfarb, 2008. "Restructuring Research: Communication Costs and the Democratization of University Innovation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(4), pages 1578-1590, September.
    3. Gary S. Becker & Kevin M. Murphy, 1994. "The Division of Labor, Coordination Costs, and Knowledge," NBER Chapters, in: Human Capital: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis with Special Reference to Education, Third Edition, pages 299-322, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Bruce Kogut & Udo Zander, 1992. "Knowledge of the Firm, Combinative Capabilities, and the Replication of Technology," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 3(3), pages 383-397, August.
    5. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    6. Sauer, Raymond D, 1988. "Estimates of the Returns to Quality and Coauthorship in Economic Academia," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 96(4), pages 855-866, August.
    7. 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.
    8. NAGAOKA, Sadao & 長岡, 貞男 & IGAMI, Masatsura & 伊神, 正貫 & WALSH, John P. & IJICHI, Tomohiro & 伊地知, 寛博, 2011. "Knowledge Creation Process in Science: Key Comparative Findings from the Hitotsubashi-NISTEP-Georgia Tech Scientists' Survey in Japan and the US," IIR Working Paper 11-09, Institute of Innovation Research, Hitotsubashi University.
    9. Stephan, Paula E., 2010. "The Economics of Science," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 217-273, Elsevier.
    10. Paula E. Stephan, 2010. "The Economics of Science - Funding for Research," ICER Working Papers 12-2010, ICER - International Centre for Economic Research.
    11. Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), 2010. "Handbook of the Economics of Innovation," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 1, number 1.
    12. Hagedoorn, John, 2002. "Inter-firm R&D partnerships: an overview of major trends and patterns since 1960," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 477-492, May.
    13. Cameron,A. Colin & Trivedi,Pravin K., 2005. "Microeconometrics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521848053.
    14. 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.
    15. Arora, Ashish & Gambardella, Alfonso, 1994. "The changing technology of technological change: general and abstract knowledge and the division of innovative labour," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(5), pages 523-532, September.
    16. Waverly W. Ding & Sharon G. Levin & Paula E. Stephan & Anne E. Winkler, 2010. "The Impact of Information Technology on Academic Scientists' Productivity and Collaboration Patterns," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(9), pages 1439-1461, September.
    17. White, Halbert, 1980. "A Heteroskedasticity-Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimator and a Direct Test for Heteroskedasticity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 48(4), pages 817-838, May.
    18. Partha, Dasgupta & David, Paul A., 1994. "Toward a new economics of science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(5), pages 487-521, September.
    19. Glenn Ellison, 2002. "Evolving Standards for Academic Publishing: A q-r Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 110(5), pages 994-1034, October.
    20. Julian Birkinshaw & Robert Nobel & Jonas Ridderstråle, 2002. "Knowledge as a Contingency Variable: Do the Characteristics of Knowledge Predict Organization Structure?," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(3), pages 274-289, June.
    21. Nagaoka, Sadao & 長岡, 貞男 & Igami, Masatsura & 伊神, 正貫 & Eto, Manabu & 江藤, 学 & Ijichi, Tomohiro & 伊地知, 寛博, 2010. "Knowledge Creation Process in Science : Basic findings from a large‐scale survey of researchers in Japan," IIR Working Paper 10-08, Institute of Innovation Research, Hitotsubashi University.
    22. John Seely Brown & Paul Duguid, 1991. "Organizational Learning and Communities-of-Practice: Toward a Unified View of Working, Learning, and Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 40-57, February.
    23. Jasjit Singh & Lee Fleming, 2010. "Lone Inventors as Sources of Breakthroughs: Myth or Reality?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(1), pages 41-56, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Wang, Jian, 2016. "Knowledge creation in collaboration networks: Effects of tie configuration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 68-80.
    2. Kuniko Matsumoto & Sotaro Shibayama & Byeongwoo Kang & Masatsura Igami, 2021. "Introducing a novelty indicator for scientific research: validating the knowledge-based combinatorial approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(8), pages 6891-6915, August.
    3. Yaqub, Ohid & Coburn, Josie & Moore, Duncan A.Q., 2023. "Knowledge spillovers from HIV research-funding," SocArXiv gcuhn, Center for Open Science.
    4. Ryazanova, Olga & Jaskiene, Jolanta, 2022. "Managing individual research productivity in academic organizations: A review of the evidence and a path forward," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(2).
    5. O'Kane, Conor & Mangematin, Vincent & Zhang, Jing A. & Cunningham, James A., 2020. "How university-based principal investigators shape a hybrid role identity," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    6. Candiani, Juan Antonio & Gilsing, Victor & Mastrogiorgio, Mariano, 2022. "Technological entry in new niches: Diversity, crowding and generalism," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    7. Carter Bloch & Mads P. Sørensen & Mitchell Young, 2020. "Tales of Serendipity in Highly Cited Research: an Explorative Study," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 11(4), pages 1596-1613, December.
    8. James, Steffan & Liu, Zheng & Stephens, Victoria & White, Gareth R.T., 2022. "Innovation in crisis: The role of ‘exaptive relations’ for medical device development in response to COVID-19," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    9. Addis Gedefaw Birhanu & Alfonso Gambardella, 2024. "To commercialize inside or outside of the firm : Behavioral considerations in patent exploitation by family firms," Post-Print hal-04343877, HAL.
    10. , Aisdl, 2019. "Resources of The Serendipity Society," OSF Preprints sb9kp, Center for Open Science.
    11. João M. Santos & Hugo Horta & Huan Li, 2022. "Are the strategic research agendas of researchers in the social sciences determinants of research productivity?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(7), pages 3719-3747, July.

    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. Murayama, Kota & Nirei, Makoto & 楡井, 誠 & Shimizu, Hiroshi & 清水, 洋, 2013. "Management of Science, Serendipity, and Research Performance: Evidence from Scientists' Survey," IIR Working Paper 13-13, Institute of Innovation Research, Hitotsubashi University.
    2. Chris Forman & Nicolas van Zeebroeck, 2012. "From Wires to Partners: How the Internet Has Fostered R&D Collaborations Within Firms," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(8), pages 1549-1568, August.
    3. Annamaria Conti & Christopher C. Liu, 2014. "The (Changing) Knowledge Production Function: Evidence from the MIT Department of Biology for 1970–2000," NBER Chapters, in: The Changing Frontier: Rethinking Science and Innovation Policy, pages 49-74, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Annamaria Conti & Christopher C. Liu, 2014. "The (Changing) Knowledge Production Function: Evidence from the MIT Department of Biology for 1970-2000," NBER Working Papers 20037, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Jung, Hyun Ju & Lee, Jeongsik “Jay”, 2014. "The impacts of science and technology policy interventions on university research: Evidence from the U.S. National Nanotechnology Initiative," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 74-91.
    6. Orsatti, Gianluca & Quatraro, Francesco & Pezzoni, Michele, 2020. "The antecedents of green technologies: The role of team-level recombinant capabilities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(3).
    7. Haeussler, Carolin & Sauermann, Henry, 2020. "Division of labor in collaborative knowledge production: The role of team size and interdisciplinarity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(6).
    8. Winkler, Anne E. & Glänzel, Wolfgang & Levin, Sharon & Stephan, Paula, 2011. "The Diffusion of Information Technology and the Increased Propensity of Teams to Transcend Institutional and National Borders," IZA Discussion Papers 5857, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    9. Fauchart, Emmanuelle & Bacache-Beauvallet, Maya & Bourreau, Marc & Moreau, François, 2022. "Do-It-Yourself or Do-It-Together: How digital technologies affect creating alone or with others?," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    10. Boeker, Warren & Howard, Michael D. & Basu, Sandip & Sahaym, Arvin, 2021. "Interpersonal relationships, digital technologies, and innovation in entrepreneurial ventures," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 495-507.
    11. Forman, Chris & van Zeebroeck, Nicolas, 2019. "Digital technology adoption and knowledge flows within firms: Can the Internet overcome geographic and technological distance?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(8), pages 1-1.
    12. Carillo, Maria Rosaria & Papagni, Erasmo & Sapio, Alessandro, 2013. "Do collaborations enhance the high-quality output of scientific institutions? Evidence from the Italian Research Assessment Exercise," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 25-36.
    13. Jacqueline N. Lane & Ina Ganguli & Patrick Gaule & Eva Guinan & Karim R. Lakhani, 2021. "Engineering serendipity: When does knowledge sharing lead to knowledge production?," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(6), pages 1215-1244, June.
    14. Martin Kalthaus, 2020. "Knowledge recombination along the technology life cycle," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 30(3), pages 643-704, July.
    15. Lissoni, Francesco & Montobbio, Fabio & Zirulia, Lorenzo, 2013. "Inventorship and authorship as attribution rights: An enquiry into the economics of scientific credit," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 49-69.
    16. Anne E Winkler & Sharon G Levin & Paula E Stephan & Wolfgang Gl&aauml;nzel, 2014. "Publishing Trends in Economics across Colleges and Universities, 1991–2007," Eastern Economic Journal, Palgrave Macmillan;Eastern Economic Association, vol. 40(4), pages 560-582, September.
    17. Scellato, Giuseppe & Franzoni, Chiara & Stephan, Paula, 2015. "Migrant scientists and international networks," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 108-120.
    18. Thomas Hellmann & Enrico Perotti, 2011. "The Circulation of Ideas in Firms and Markets," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(10), pages 1813-1826, October.
    19. Alessandra Allocca, 2023. "“No Man is an Island”: An Empirical Study on Team Formation and Performance," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 389, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    20. repec:ner:leuven:urn:hdl:123456789/327130 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Sheer, Lia, 2022. "Sitting on the Fence: Integrating the two worlds of scientific discovery and invention within the firm," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(7).

    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:4:p:862-873. 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.