IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v129y2024i4d10.1007_s11192-024-04957-w.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Internal factors promoting research collaboration problems: an input-process-output analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Malte Hückstädt

    (German Centre for Higher Education Research and Science Studies)

  • Luca M. Leisten

    (ETH Zürich)

Abstract

Research collaborations are crucial for scientific progress, but their success is often compromised by internal collaboration problems. While previous work is often small-scaled and largely based on case studies and qualitative work, we present a large-scale, quantitative, and representative study to investigate important drivers behind research collaboration problems in various disciplines. Based on an input-process-output framework and with a focus on research clusters, we investigated the occurrence of four crucial research collaboration problems: fairness, commitment, difference, and cohesion problems. Based on a sample of 5.306 researchers, we identified several input and process variables that could reduce collaboration problems in research collaborations including gender heterogeneity, conflict mediation by a cluster’s spokesperson, the synthesis of results, and the collaborative development of common goals. We discuss that these problems are often rooted in the science system itself and provide important guidelines and implications for stakeholders, funding bodies, and involved researchers on how to reduce collaboration problems in research collaborations.

Suggested Citation

  • Malte Hückstädt & Luca M. Leisten, 2024. "Internal factors promoting research collaboration problems: an input-process-output analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(4), pages 2007-2035, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:129:y:2024:i:4:d:10.1007_s11192-024-04957-w
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-024-04957-w
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-024-04957-w
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-024-04957-w?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. Lungeanu, Alina & Huang, Yun & Contractor, Noshir S., 2014. "Understanding the assembly of interdisciplinary teams and its impact on performance," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 59-70.
    2. Shufang Huang & Jin Chen & Liang Mei & Weiqiao Mo, 2019. "The Effect of Heterogeneity and Leadership on Innovation Performance: Evidence from University Research Teams in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-14, August.
    3. Corley, Elizabeth A. & Boardman, P. Craig & Bozeman, Barry, 2006. "Design and the management of multi-institutional research collaborations: Theoretical implications from two case studies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 975-993, September.
    4. 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.
    5. Barry Bozeman & Monica Gaughan & Jan Youtie & Catherine P. Slade & Heather Rimes, 2016. "Research collaboration experiences, good and bad: Dispatches from the front lines," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 43(2), pages 226-244.
    6. Bozeman, Barry & Gaughan, Monica, 2011. "How do men and women differ in research collaborations? An analysis of the collaborative motives and strategies of academic researchers," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(10), pages 1393-1402.
    7. Chompalov, Ivan & Genuth, Joel & Shrum, Wesley, 2002. "The organization of scientific collaborations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 749-767, July.
    8. König, Bettina & Diehl, Katharina & Tscherning, Karen & Helming, Katharina, 2013. "A framework for structuring interdisciplinary research management," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 261-272.
    9. Abramo, Giovanni & D’Angelo, Ciriaco Andrea & Murgia, Gianluca, 2013. "Gender differences in research collaboration," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 7(4), pages 811-822.
    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. D’Ippolito, Beatrice & Rüling, Charles-Clemens, 2019. "Research collaboration in Large Scale Research Infrastructures: Collaboration types and policy implications," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(5), pages 1282-1296.
    2. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D'Angelo & Flavia Costa, 2012. "Identifying interdisciplinarity through the disciplinary classification of coauthors of scientific publications," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 63(11), pages 2206-2222, November.
    3. Barry Bozeman & Monica Gaughan & Jan Youtie & Catherine P. Slade & Heather Rimes, 2016. "Research collaboration experiences, good and bad: Dispatches from the front lines," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 43(2), pages 226-244.
    4. Elizabeth A. Corley & Barry Bozeman & Xuefan Zhang & Chin-Chang Tsai, 2019. "The expanded scientific and technical human capital model: the addition of a cultural dimension," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 681-699, June.
    5. Wang, Jian & Hicks, Diana, 2015. "Scientific teams: Self-assembly, fluidness, and interdependence," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 197-207.
    6. Tanya Araújo & Elsa Fontainha, 2018. "Are scientific memes inherited differently from gendered authorship?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(2), pages 953-972, November.
    7. Hugo Horta & Shihui Feng & João M. Santos, 2022. "Homophily in higher education research: a perspective based on co-authorships," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(1), pages 523-543, January.
    8. Araújo, Tanya & Fontainha, Elsa, 2017. "The specific shapes of gender imbalance in scientific authorships: A network approach," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 88-102.
    9. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo & Flavia Costa, 2019. "A gender analysis of top scientists’ collaboration behavior: evidence from Italy," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 120(2), pages 405-418, August.
    10. Hird, Mackenzie D. & Pfotenhauer, Sebastian M., 2017. "How complex international partnerships shape domestic research clusters: Difference-in-difference network formation and research re-orientation in the MIT Portugal Program," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 557-572.
    11. Youtie, Jan & Li, Yin & Rogers, Juan & Shapira, Philip, 2017. "Institutionalization of international university research ventures," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(9), pages 1692-1705.
    12. Eduardo B Araújo & Nuno A M Araújo & André A Moreira & Hans J Herrmann & José S Andrade Jr., 2017. "Gender differences in scientific collaborations: Women are more egalitarian than men," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(5), pages 1-10, May.
    13. Kjersten Bunker Whittington & Molly M. King & Isabella Cingolani, 2024. "Structure, status, and span: gender differences in co-authorship networks across 16 region-subject pairs (2009–2013)," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(1), pages 147-179, January.
    14. Abdelghani Maddi & Yves Gingras, 2021. "Gender Diversity In Research Teams And Citation Impact In Economics And Management," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(5), pages 1381-1404, December.
    15. Luke Holman & Claire Morandin, 2019. "Researchers collaborate with same-gendered colleagues more often than expected across the life sciences," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(4), pages 1-19, April.
    16. Xiao Han T Zeng & Jordi Duch & Marta Sales-Pardo & João A G Moreira & Filippo Radicchi & Haroldo V Ribeiro & Teresa K Woodruff & Luís A Nunes Amaral, 2016. "Differences in Collaboration Patterns across Discipline, Career Stage, and Gender," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(11), pages 1-19, November.
    17. Joya Misra & Laurel Smith-Doerr & Nilanjana Dasgupta & Gabriela Weaver & Jennifer Normanly, 2017. "Collaboration and Gender Equity among Academic Scientists," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 6(1), pages 1-22, March.
    18. Asadifard, Reza & Tabatabaeian, Seyed Habiboallah & Sofi, Jahanyar Bamdad & Taghva, Mohammad Reza, 2017. "A model for investigating the stability factors in formal science and technology collaborative networks: A case study of Iran," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 139-150.
    19. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo, 2022. "Drivers of academic engagement in public–private research collaboration: an empirical study," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(6), pages 1861-1884, December.
    20. Schuetzenmeister, Falk, 2010. "University Research Management: An Exploratory Literature Review," Institute of European Studies, Working Paper Series qt77p3j2hr, Institute of European Studies, UC Berkeley.

    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:spr:scient:v:129:y:2024:i:4:d:10.1007_s11192-024-04957-w. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.