IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/infome/v19y2025i3s1751157725000392.html

How do intra- and inter-organisational collaboration affect research performance? Evidence from German universities

Author

Listed:
  • Garcia Chavez, Cecilia
  • Gruber, Sonia
  • Schubert, Torben

Abstract

This paper examines how organisational boundaries shape the relationship between collaboration and research performance in universities. Using meso-level co-authorship networks and matched registry data from 83 German universities between 2006 and 2019, this study advances the understanding of how organisational structures condition collaborative knowledge production and its research performance outcomes. By examining the contingency effects of intra- and inter-organisational networks, we offer new insights into the cost-benefit trade-offs of collaboration, highlighting the importance of balancing internal cohesion with external diversity. While intra-organisational networks reinforce strong relational ties that support existing knowledge, they may constrain the formation of novel knowledge combinations. Conversely, inter-organisational networks expand opportunities for new knowledge combinations, but at the cost of weaker ties, which may reduce the depth and stability of knowledge exchange. Our findings highlight the strategic value of integrating intra- and inter-organisational networks to optimise the research impact of universities.

Suggested Citation

  • Garcia Chavez, Cecilia & Gruber, Sonia & Schubert, Torben, 2025. "How do intra- and inter-organisational collaboration affect research performance? Evidence from German universities," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 19(3).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:infome:v:19:y:2025:i:3:s1751157725000392
    DOI: 10.1016/j.joi.2025.101675
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751157725000392
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.joi.2025.101675?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

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Junwan Liu & Xiaoyun Gong & Shuo Xu & Chenchen Huang, 2024. "Understanding the relationship between team diversity and the innovative performance in research teams using decision tree algorithms: evidence from artificial intelligence," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(12), pages 7805-7831, December.
    3. Lingfei Wu & Dashun Wang & James A. Evans, 2019. "Large teams develop and small teams disrupt science and technology," Nature, Nature, vol. 566(7744), pages 378-382, February.
    4. Guan, Jiancheng & Liu, Na, 2016. "Exploitative and exploratory innovations in knowledge network and collaboration network: A patent analysis in the technological field of nano-energy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 97-112.
    5. Wen, Jinyan & Qualls, William J. & Zeng, Deming, 2021. "To explore or exploit: The influence of inter-firm R&D network diversity and structural holes on innovation outcomes," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    6. Guan, Jiancheng & Zhang, Jingjing & Yan, Yan, 2015. "The impact of multilevel networks on innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 545-559.
    7. Jonathon N. Cummings, 2004. "Work Groups, Structural Diversity, and Knowledge Sharing in a Global Organization," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(3), pages 352-364, March.
    8. Nick Marshall, 2003. "Identity and Difference in Complex Projects: Why Boundaries Still Matter in the “Boundaryless” Organization," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Neil Paulsen & Tor Hernes (ed.), Managing Boundaries in Organizations: Multiple Perspectives, chapter 3, pages 55-75, Palgrave Macmillan.
    9. Ludo Waltman & Michael Schreiber, 2013. "On the calculation of percentile-based bibliometric indicators," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 64(2), pages 372-379, February.
    10. van Rijnsoever, Frank J. & Hessels, Laurens K., 2011. "Factors associated with disciplinary and interdisciplinary research collaboration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 463-472, April.
    11. Pauline Mattsson & Carl Johan Sundberg & Patrice Laget, 2011. "Is correspondence reflected in the author position? A bibliometric study of the relation between corresponding author and byline position," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 87(1), pages 99-105, April.
    12. Abbasi, Alireza & Jaafari, Ali, 2013. "Research impact and scholars’ geographical diversity," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 7(3), pages 683-692.
    13. Itay Mayrose & Shiri Freilich, 2015. "The Interplay between Scientific Overlap and Cooperation and the Resulting Gain in Co-Authorship Interactions," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(9), pages 1-10, September.
    14. Fontana, Magda & Iori, Martina & Leone Sciabolazza, Valerio & Souza, Daniel, 2022. "The interdisciplinarity dilemma: Public versus private interests," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(7).
    15. Siluo Yang & Dietmar Wolfram & Feifei Wang, 2017. "The relationship between the author byline and contribution lists: a comparison of three general medical journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 110(3), pages 1273-1296, March.
    16. Wolfgang Glänzel, 2001. "National characteristics in international scientific co-authorship relations," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 51(1), pages 69-115, April.
    17. Chen, Wei & Yan, Yan, 2023. "New components and combinations: The perspective of the internal collaboration networks of scientific teams," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(2).
    18. Liu, Zhifeng & Wang, Chenlin & Yang, Jinqing, 2025. "The effects of scientific collaboration network structures on impact and innovation: A perspective from project teams," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 19(1).
    19. Torger Möller & Marion Schmidt & Stefan Hornbostel, 2016. "Assessing the effects of the German Excellence Initiative with bibliometric methods," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(3), pages 2217-2239, December.
    20. Ludo Waltman & Michael Schreiber, 2013. "On the calculation of percentile‐based bibliometric indicators," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 64(2), pages 372-379, February.
    21. Juan Gorraiz & Ursula Ulrych & Wolfgang Glänzel & Wenceslao Arroyo-Machado & Daniel Torres-Salinas, 2022. "Measuring the excellence contribution at the journal level: an alternative to Garfield’s impact factor," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(12), pages 7229-7251, December.
    22. 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.
    23. Godin, Benoit & Gingras, Yves, 2000. "The place of universities in the system of knowledge production," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 273-278, February.
    24. Lutz Bornmann, 2016. "Is the promotion of research reflected in bibliometric data? A network analysis of highly cited papers on the Clusters of Excellence supported under the Excellence Initiative in Germany," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 107(3), pages 1041-1061, June.
    25. Feng Shi & James Evans, 2023. "Surprising combinations of research contents and contexts are related to impact and emerge with scientific outsiders from distant disciplines," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-13, December.
    26. Mark D Humphries & Kevin Gurney, 2008. "Network ‘Small-World-Ness’: A Quantitative Method for Determining Canonical Network Equivalence," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 3(4), pages 1-10, April.
    27. Na Zhang & Lu Cheng & Chao Sun & Julie Callaert & Bart Looy, 2023. "The role of inter- and intra-organisational networks in innovation: towards requisite variety," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(7), pages 4117-4136, July.
    28. Cummings, Jonathon N. & Kiesler, Sara, 2007. "Coordination costs and project outcomes in multi-university collaborations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(10), pages 1620-1634, December.
    29. Yue Wang & Ning Li & Bin Zhang & Qian Huang & Jian Wu & Yang Wang, 2023. "The effect of structural holes on producing novel and disruptive research in physics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(3), pages 1801-1823, March.
    30. Lee Fleming, 2001. "Recombinant Uncertainty in Technological Search," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 117-132, January.
    31. He, Bing & Ding, Ying & Yan, Erjia, 2012. "Mining patterns of author orders in scientific publications," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 6(3), pages 359-367.
    32. Fan, Lingxu & Guo, Lei & Wang, Xinhua & Xu, Liancheng & Liu, Fangai, 2022. "Does the author’s collaboration mode lead to papers’ different citation impacts? An empirical analysis based on propensity score matching," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(4).
    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. You, Yunhao & Liu, Nian & Yu, Qian, 2026. "Weak ties in scientific cooperation contribute to scientific innovation," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 20(1).

    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. Yue Wang & Ning Li & Bin Zhang & Qian Huang & Jian Wu & Yang Wang, 2023. "The effect of structural holes on producing novel and disruptive research in physics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(3), pages 1801-1823, March.
    2. Chen, Wei & Yan, Yan, 2023. "New components and combinations: The perspective of the internal collaboration networks of scientific teams," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(2).
    3. Xin Liu & Yi Bu & Ming Li & Jiang Li, 2024. "Monodisciplinary collaboration disrupts science more than multidisciplinary collaboration," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 75(1), pages 59-78, 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. Yan Yan & Shanwu Tian & Jingjing Zhang, 2020. "The impact of a paper’s new combinations and new components on its citation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 122(2), pages 895-913, February.
    6. Guan, Jiancheng & Yan, Yan & Zhang, Jing Jing, 2017. "The impact of collaboration and knowledge networks on citations," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 407-422.
    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. Runhui Lin & Biting Li & Yanhong Lu & Yalin Li, 2024. "Degree assortativity in collaboration networks and breakthrough innovation: the moderating role of knowledge networks," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(7), pages 3809-3839, July.
    9. Libo Sheng & Dongqing Lyu & Xuanmin Ruan & Hongquan Shen & Ying Cheng, 2023. "The association between prior knowledge and the disruption of an article," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(8), pages 4731-4751, August.
    10. Baicun Li & Aruhan Bai, 2025. "The influence of grant renewal on research content: evidence from NIH-funded PIs," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 130(5), pages 2617-2638, May.
    11. Wang, Tao & Wang, Jiajie & Shi, Jing & Sun, Jianjun & Kang, Lele, 2025. "Technological recombinant strategy and breakthrough innovation of team: The moderating role of science linkage," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 19(1).
    12. Zhao, Jianyu & Wei, Jiang & Yu, Lean & Xi, Xi, 2022. "Robustness of knowledge networks under targeted attacks: Electric vehicle field of China evidence," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 367-382.
    13. Yining Wang & Qiang Wu & Liangyu Li, 2024. "Examining the influence of women scientists on scientific impact and novelty: insights from top business journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(6), pages 3517-3542, June.
    14. Kaishun Li & Kaiming Li, 2025. "The impact of collaboration networks constructed through common project experience on research output," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 12(1), pages 1-18, December.
    15. Yi Xiang & Pascal Welke & Chengzhi Zhang & Jian Wang, 2026. "Beyond Pairwise Distance: Cognitive Traversal Distance as a Holistic Measure of Scientific Novelty," Papers 2602.06607, arXiv.org.
    16. Jia Zhang & Jian Wang & Jos Winnink & Simcha Jong, 2025. "Turning creative ideas into successful innovations: differential effects of network structure for radical and incremental innovation," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 50(5), pages 2018-2038, October.
    17. Hamdi A. Al-Jamimi & Galal M. BinMakhashen & Lutz Bornmann & Yousif Ahmed Al Wajih, 2023. "Saudi Arabia research: academic insights and trend analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(10), pages 5595-5627, October.
    18. Qu, Guannan & Chen, Jin & Zhang, Ruhao & Wang, Luyao & Yang, Yayu, 2023. "Technological search strategy and breakthrough innovation: An integrated approach based on main-path analysis," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    19. Chang, Le & Zhang, Huiying & Zhang, Chao, 2024. "Should we circumvent knowledge path dependency? The impact of conventional learning and collaboration diversity on knowledge creation," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 18(4).
    20. Zhang, JingJing & Yan, Yan & Guan, JianCheng, 2019. "Recombinant distance, network governance and recombinant innovation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 260-272.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:infome:v:19:y:2025:i:3:s1751157725000392. 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/joi .

    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.