IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v43y2014i7p1134-1143.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Positions and rewards: The allocation of resources within a science-based entrepreneurial firm

Author

Listed:
  • Liu, Christopher C.
  • Stuart, Toby

Abstract

We study the link between resource allocation and employee publication in the open science in a quantitative case study of one science-based, entrepreneurial firm. We bridge the literature on incentives with that on authority structures to argue that a positive relationship between rewards and productivity will be strongest for individuals in positions of scientific leadership within the firm. In a novel dataset, we find that prolific publishers receive greater year-end bonuses and are allocated additional direct reports, but this relationship only holds for individuals in scientific leadership roles. These results contribute to our understanding of resource allocation processes and reward structures in science-based firms.

Suggested Citation

  • Liu, Christopher C. & Stuart, Toby, 2014. "Positions and rewards: The allocation of resources within a science-based entrepreneurial firm," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(7), pages 1134-1143.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:43:y:2014:i:7:p:1134-1143
    DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2014.04.013
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733314000754
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.respol.2014.04.013?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. David B. Audretsch & Isabel Grilo & A. Roy Thurik (ed.), 2007. "Handbook of Research on Entrepreneurship Policy," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 3856.
    2. Murray, Fiona, 2004. "The role of academic inventors in entrepreneurial firms: sharing the laboratory life," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 643-659, May.
    3. Cockburn, Iain M & Henderson, Rebecca M, 1998. "Absorptive Capacity, Coauthoring Behavior, and the Organization of Research in Drug Discovery," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(2), pages 157-182, June.
    4. Pierre Azoulay & Waverly Ding & Toby Stuart, 2007. "The Determinants of Faculty Patenting Behavior: Demographics or Opportunities?," NBER Chapters, in: Academic Science and Entrepreneurship: Dual Engines of Growth, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Henry Sauermann & Wesley M. Cohen, 2010. "What Makes Them Tick? Employee Motives and Firm Innovation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(12), pages 2134-2153, December.
    6. Jeffrey L. Furman & Megan MacGarvie, 2007. "Academic Science and the Birth of Industrial Research Laboratories in the U.S. Pharmaceutical Industry," NBER Chapters, in: Academic Science and Entrepreneurship: Dual Engines of Growth, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Henry Sauermann & Paula Stephan, 2013. "Conflicting Logics? A Multidimensional View of Industrial and Academic Science," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(3), pages 889-909, June.
    8. Scott Stern, 2004. "Do Scientists Pay to Be Scientists?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(6), pages 835-853, June.
    9. Partha, Dasgupta & David, Paul A., 1994. "Toward a new economics of science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(5), pages 487-521, September.
    10. Rebecca Henderson & Iain Cockburn, 1994. "Measuring Competence? Exploring Firm Effects in Pharmaceutical Research," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(S1), pages 63-84, December.
    11. Grimaldi, Rosa & Kenney, Martin & Siegel, Donald S. & Wright, Mike, 2011. "30 years after Bayh-Dole: Reassessing academic entrepreneurship," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(8), pages 1045-1057, October.
    12. Julie Wulf, 2007. "Authority, Risk, And Performance Incentives: Evidence From Division Manager Positions Inside Firms," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(1), pages 169-196, March.
    13. Iain M. Cockburn & Rebecca M. Henderson, 1998. "Absorptive Capacity, Coauthoring Behavior, and the Organization of Research in Drug Discovery," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(2), pages 157-182, June.
    14. Lacetera, Nicola & Zirulia, Lorenzo, 2012. "Individual preferences, organization, and competition in a model of R&D incentive provision," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 84(2), pages 550-570.
    15. Gans, Joshua S. & Stern, Scott, 2003. "The product market and the market for "ideas": commercialization strategies for technology entrepreneurs," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 333-350, February.
    16. Azoulay, Pierre & Ding, Waverly & Stuart, Toby, 2007. "The determinants of faculty patenting behavior: Demographics or opportunities?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 63(4), pages 599-623, August.
    17. Roach, Michael & Sauermann, Henry, 2010. "A taste for science? PhD scientists' academic orientation and self-selection into research careers in industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 422-434, April.
    18. Zucker, Lynne G & Darby, Michael R & Brewer, Marilynn B, 1998. "Intellectual Human Capital and the Birth of U.S. Biotechnology Enterprises," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(1), pages 290-306, March.
    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. Weiyi Ng & Toby E. Stuart, 2022. "Acquired employees versus hired employees: Retained or turned over?," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(5), pages 1025-1045, May.
    2. Yin Li & Jan Youtie & Philip Shapira, 2015. "Why do technology firms publish scientific papers? The strategic use of science by small and midsize enterprises in nanotechnology," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(6), pages 1016-1033, December.
    3. Blind, Knut & Filipović, Ellen & Lazina, Luisa K., 2022. "Motives to Publish, to Patent and to Standardize: An Explorative Study Based on Individual Engineers’ Assessments," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    4. Roberto Camerani & Daniele Rotolo & Nicola Grassano, 2018. "Do firms publish? A multi-sectoral analysis," JRC Working Papers on Corporate R&D and Innovation 2018-05, Joint Research Centre.
    5. Markus Simeth & Michele Cincera, 2016. "Corporate Science, Innovation, and Firm Value," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(7), pages 1970-1981, July.
    6. Rotolo, Daniele & Camerani, Roberto & Grassano, Nicola & Martin, Ben R., 2022. "Why do firms publish? A systematic literature review and a conceptual framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(10).
    7. Williams, Christopher & Tesfaye Hailemariam, Atsede & Allard, Gayle, 2022. "Exploring entrepreneurial innovation in Ethiopia," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(10).
    8. Barge-Gil, Andres & D'Este, Pablo & Herrera, Liliana, 2018. "Corporate scientists as the triggers of transitions towards firms' exploration research strategies," MPRA Paper 85415, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Conti, Annamaria & Liu, Christopher C., 2015. "Bringing the lab back in: Personnel composition and scientific output at the MIT Department of Biology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(9), pages 1633-1644.
    10. Peter T. Gianiodis & Matthias Thürer, 2018. "The Impact Of Government Intervention On Technological Regimes: The Sourcing Of Financial Innovation," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 22(03), pages 1-28, April.
    11. Martínez, Catalina & Parlane, Sarah, 2023. "Academic scientists in corporate R&D: A theoretical model," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(5).
    12. Ribeiro, Barbara & Meckin, Robert & Balmer, Andrew & Shapira, Philip, 2023. "The digitalisation paradox of everyday scientific labour: How mundane knowledge work is amplified and diversified in the biosciences," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(1).
    13. Simeth, Markus & Lhuillery, Stephane, 2015. "How do firms develop capabilities for scientific disclosure?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(7), pages 1283-1295.

    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. Henry Sauermann & Michael Roach, 2011. "Not All Scientists pay to be Scientists:," DRUID Working Papers 11-03, DRUID, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Industrial Economics and Strategy/Aalborg University, Department of Business Studies.
    2. Simeth, Markus & Raffo, Julio D., 2013. "What makes companies pursue an Open Science strategy?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(9), pages 1531-1543.
    3. Andrew A. Toole & Dirk Czarnitzki, 2009. "Exploring the Relationship Between Scientist Human Capital and Firm Performance: The Case of Biomedical Academic Entrepreneurs in the SBIR Program," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(1), pages 101-114, January.
    4. Roach, Michael & Sauermann, Henry, 2010. "A taste for science? PhD scientists' academic orientation and self-selection into research careers in industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 422-434, April.
    5. Jong, Simcha & Slavova, Kremena, 2014. "When publications lead to products: The open science conundrum in new product development," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(4), pages 645-654.
    6. Sam Arts & Reinhilde Veugelers, 2020. "Taste for science, academic boundary spanning, and inventive performance of scientists and engineers in industry [Industry or academia, basic or applied? Career choices and earnings trajectories of," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 29(4), pages 917-933.
    7. Sauermann, Henry & Roach, Michael, 2014. "Not all scientists pay to be scientists: PhDs’ preferences for publishing in industrial employment," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 32-47.
    8. Murray, Fiona & Stern, Scott, 2007. "Do formal intellectual property rights hinder the free flow of scientific knowledge?: An empirical test of the anti-commons hypothesis," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 63(4), pages 648-687, August.
    9. Simeth, Markus & Lhuillery, Stephane, 2015. "How do firms develop capabilities for scientific disclosure?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(7), pages 1283-1295.
    10. Conti, Annamaria & Liu, Christopher C., 2015. "Bringing the lab back in: Personnel composition and scientific output at the MIT Department of Biology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(9), pages 1633-1644.
    11. repec:wip:wpaper:6 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Subramanian, Annapoornima M. & Lim, Kwanghui & Soh, Pek-Hooi, 2013. "When birds of a feather don’t flock together: Different scientists and the roles they play in biotech R&D alliances," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 595-612.
    13. Nelson, Andrew J., 2014. "From the ivory tower to the startup garage: Organizational context and commercialization processes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(7), pages 1144-1156.
    14. Bhattacharya, Jay & Packalen, Mikko, 2011. "Opportunities and benefits as determinants of the direction of scientific research," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 603-615, July.
    15. Mudambi, Ram & Swift, Tim, 2009. "Professional guilds, tension and knowledge management," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 736-745, June.
    16. Chai, Sen & Shih, Willy, 2016. "Bridging science and technology through academic–industry partnerships," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 148-158.
    17. Bruneel, Johan & D'Este, Pablo & Salter, Ammon, 2010. "Investigating the factors that diminish the barriers to university-industry collaboration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(7), pages 858-868, September.
    18. Wesley M. Cohen & Henry Sauermann & Paula Stephan, 2020. "Not in the Job Description: The Commercial Activities of Academic Scientists and Engineers," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(9), pages 4108-4117, September.
    19. Elisa Alvarez-Garrido & Gary Dushnitsky, 2016. "Are entrepreneurial venture's innovation rates sensitive to investor complementary assets? Comparing biotech ventures backed by corporate and independent VCs," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(5), pages 819-834, May.
    20. Martínez, Catalina & Parlane, Sarah, 2023. "Academic scientists in corporate R&D: A theoretical model," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(5).
    21. Michaël Bikard, 2018. "Made in Academia: The Effect of Institutional Origin on Inventors’ Attention to Science," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(5), pages 818-836, October.

    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:43:y:2014:i:7:p:1134-1143. 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.