IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0239805.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Institutional environments and breakthroughs in science. Comparison of France, Germany, the United Kingdom, and the United States

Author

Listed:
  • Thomas Heinze
  • Marie von der Heyden
  • David Pithan

Abstract

Scientific and/or technical breakthroughs require the exploration of novel ideas and technologies. Yet, it has not been studied quantitatively how national institutional contexts either facilitate or stifle organizational support for exploration. Available qualitative evidence suggests that institutional contexts that exert weak control over universities and research organizations strengthen their capabilities to achieve scientific breakthroughs, while contexts with strong control constrain them. The paper is based on an analysis of the population of Nobel laureates in Physics, Chemistry and Physiology or Medicine. We examine to what extent existing qualitative findings for the biomedical sciences, which are partly based on Nobel laureates in Physiology or Medicine, can be substantiated both quantitatively and across the three Nobel Prize fields of science. We find that for most of the 20th century and the early 21st century, countries with weak institutional control (United Kingdom, United States) have outperformed those exerting strong control (France, Germany). These results are further corroborated when controlled by population sizes and by GDP per capita. In addition, these results hold not only for the biomedical sciences, but also for Physics and Chemistry. Furthermore, countries with weak institutional control have attracted many future Nobel laureates from countries with strong environments. In this regard, the United States appears to be a particularly attractive setting for conducting innovative research, and thus has been a magnet for young and promising scientists. However, future laureates working in institutional environments exerting weak control are not faster in accomplishing their prize-winning work compared to those laureates working in more restrictive institutional settings.

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas Heinze & Marie von der Heyden & David Pithan, 2020. "Institutional environments and breakthroughs in science. Comparison of France, Germany, the United Kingdom, and the United States," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(9), pages 1-15, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0239805
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0239805
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0239805
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0239805&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0239805?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    2. Zi-Lin He & Poh-Kam Wong, 2004. "Exploration vs. Exploitation: An Empirical Test of the Ambidexterity Hypothesis," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(4), pages 481-494, August.
    3. O'Reilly, Charles A., III & Tushman, Michael L., 2013. "Organizational Ambidexterity: Past, Present and Future," Research Papers 2130, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    4. Sebastian Raisch & Julian Birkinshaw & Gilbert Probst & Michael L. Tushman, 2009. "Organizational Ambidexterity: Balancing Exploitation and Exploration for Sustained Performance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 685-695, August.
    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. M. M. Sulphey, 2019. "Could the Adoption of Organizational Ambidexterity Have Changed the History of Nokia?," South Asian Journal of Business and Management Cases, , vol. 8(2), pages 167-181, August.
    2. Schnellbaecher, Benedikt & Diefenbach, Ulf & Millemann, Jan, 2015. "Putting the Individual in Ambidexterity – Identifying Activities to Achieve Organisational Ambidexterity and Long-Term Survival," Proceedings of the ENTRENOVA - ENTerprise REsearch InNOVAtion Conference (2015), Kotor, Montengero, in: Proceedings of the ENTRENOVA - ENTerprise REsearch InNOVAtion Conference, Kotor, Montengero, 10-11 September 2015, pages 57-63, IRENET - Society for Advancing Innovation and Research in Economy, Zagreb.
    3. Al-Atwi, Amer Ali & Amankwah-Amoah, Joseph & Khan, Zaheer, 2021. "Micro-foundations of organizational design and sustainability: The mediating role of learning ambidexterity," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 30(1).
    4. Barbara Ocicka & Wioletta Mierzejewska & Jakub Brzeziński, 2022. "Creating supply chain resilience during and post-COVID-19 outbreak: the organizational ambidexterity perspective," DECISION: Official Journal of the Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, Springer;Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, vol. 49(1), pages 129-151, March.
    5. Koryak, Oksana & Lockett, Andy & Hayton, James & Nicolaou, Nicos & Mole, Kevin, 2018. "Disentangling the antecedents of ambidexterity: Exploration and exploitation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 413-427.
    6. Andreea N. Kiss & Dirk Libaers & Pamela S. Barr & Tang Wang & Miles A. Zachary, 2020. "CEO cognitive flexibility, information search, and organizational ambidexterity," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(12), pages 2200-2233, December.
    7. José Andrade & Mário Franco & Luis Mendes, 2021. "Technological capacity and organisational ambidexterity: the moderating role of environmental dynamism on Portuguese technological SMEs," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 15(7), pages 2111-2136, October.
    8. Karl Aschenbrücker & Tobias Kretschmer, 2022. "Performance-based incentives and innovative activity in small firms: evidence from German manufacturing," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 11(2), pages 47-64, June.
    9. Katou, Anastasia A. & Budhwar, Pawan S. & Patel, Charmi, 2021. "A trilogy of organizational ambidexterity: Leader’s social intelligence, employee work engagement and environmental changes," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 688-700.
    10. Marina Estrada-Cruz & Noelia Rodriguez-Hernández & Antonio J. Verdú-Jover & Jose Maria Gómez-Gras, 2022. "The effect of competitive intensity on the relationship between strategic entrepreneurship and organizational results," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 1-24, March.
    11. François Constant & Richard Calvi & Thomas Johnsen, 2020. "Managing tensions between exploitative and exploratory innovation through purchasing function ambidexterity Managing tensions between exploitative and exploratory innovation through purchasing functio," Post-Print hal-02891790, HAL.
    12. Shuwaikh, Fatima & Brintte, Souad & Khemiri, Sabrina, 2022. "The impact of dynamic ambidexterity on the performance of organizations: Evidence from corporate venture capital investing in North America," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 200(C), pages 991-1009.
    13. Juan A. Martínez-Román & Javier Gamero & Juan A. Tamayo & María de Loreto Delgado-González, 2025. "Empirical analysis of the technological exploration–exploitation balance and its impact on organizational performance under uncertainty," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 12(1), pages 1-12, December.
    14. Hu, Min & Dou, Junsheng & You, Xialei, 2023. "Is organizational ambidexterity always beneficial to family-managed SMEs? Evidence from China," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    15. Marina Estrada-Cruz & Noelia Rodriguez-Hernández & Antonio J. Verdú-Jover & Jose Maria Gómez-Gras, 0. "The effect of competitive intensity on the relationship between strategic entrepreneurship and organizational results," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-24.
    16. Kammerlander, Nadine & Burger, Dominik & Fust, Alexander & Fueglistaller, Urs, 2015. "Exploration and exploitation in established small and medium-sized enterprises: The effect of CEOs' regulatory focus," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 582-602.
    17. Veider, Viktoria & Matzler, Kurt, 2016. "The ability and willingness of family-controlled firms to arrive at organizational ambidexterity," Journal of Family Business Strategy, Elsevier, vol. 7(2), pages 105-116.
    18. Schnellbächer, Benedikt & Heidenreich, Sven & Wald, Andreas, 2019. "Antecedents and effects of individual ambidexterity – A cross-level investigation of exploration and exploitation activities at the employee level," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 442-454.
    19. Huigang Liang & Nianxin Wang & Yajiong Xue, 2022. "Juggling Information Technology (IT) Exploration and Exploitation: A Proportional Balance View of IT Ambidexterity," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 33(4), pages 1386-1402, December.
    20. Lulu Liu & Fengbin Wang & Xiukun Li, 2019. "Comparing the configured causal antecedents of exploration and exploitation: a fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis," Frontiers of Business Research in China, Springer, vol. 13(1), pages 1-25, December.

    More about this item

    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:plo:pone00:0239805. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.