Exploring Trade-offs in the Organization of Scientific Work: Collaboration and Scientific Reward

References

• Aad G, Abat E, Abdallah J, Abdelalim AA, Abdesselam A, Abdinov O, Abi BAet al. (2008) The ATLAS experiment at the CERN Large Hadron Collider. J. Instrumentation 3(8):1–407.Google Scholar
• Adams JD, Black GC, Clemmons R, Stephan PE (2005) Scientific teams and institutional collaborations: Evidence from U.S. universities, 1981–1999. Res. Policy 34(3):259–285.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Allen TJ (1978) Managing the Flow of Technology (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Amabile TM, Conti R, Coon H, Lazenby J, Herron M (1996) Assessing the work environment for creativity. Acad. Management J. 39(5):1154–1184.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ancona DG, Caldwell DF (1992) Bridging the boundary: External activity and performance in organizational teams. Admin. Sci. Quart. 37(4):634–665.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Beaver DB (2001) Reflections on scientific collaboration (and its study): Past, present, and future. Scientometrics 52(3):365–377.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Beaver DB, Rosen R (1978) Studies in scientific collaboration. Scientometrics 1(1):65–84.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Becker GS, Murphy KM (1992) The division of labor, coordination costs, and knowledge. Quart. J. Econom. 107(4):1137–1160.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Biagioli M (2002) Rights or rewards? Biagioli M, Gallison P, eds. Scientific Authorship: Credit and Intellectual Property in Science: Credit and Intellectual Property in Science (Routledge, New York), 253–279.Google Scholar
• Bordons M, Gomez I, Fernandez MT, Zulueta MA, Mendez A (1996) Local, domestic and international scientific collaboration in biomedical research. Scientometrics 37(2):279–295.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bornmann L, Daniel H-D (2008) What do citation counts measure? A review of studies on citing behavior. J. Documentation 64(1):45–80.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Boudreau K, Brady T, Ganguli I, Gaule P, Guinan E, Hollenberg A, Lakhani K (2014) A field experiment on search costs and the formation of scientific collaborations. Working paper, London Business School, London.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Burt RS (2004) Structural holes and good ideas. Amer. J. Sociol. 110(2):349–399.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cattani G, Ferriani S (2008) A core/periphery perspective on individual creative performance: Social networks and cinematic achievements in the hollywood film industry. Organ. Sci. 19(6):824–844.Link, Google Scholar
• Cawkell AE (1976) Citations, obsolescence, enduring articles, and multiple authorships. J. Documentation 32(1):53–58.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cronin B, Shaw D, La Barre K (2004) Visible, less visible, and invisible work: Patterns of collaboration in 20th century chemistry. J. Amer. Soc. Inform. Sci. Tech. 55(2):160–168.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cummings JN (2004) Work groups, structural diversity, and knowledge sharing in a global organization. Management Sci. 50(3):352–364.Link, Google Scholar
• Cummings JN, Kiesler S (2007) Coordination costs and project outcomes in multi-university collaborations. Res. Policy 36(10):1620–1634.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dasgupta P, David PA (1994) Toward a new economics of science. Res. Policy 23(5):487–521.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Diehl M, Stroebe W (1987) Productivity loss in brainstorming groups: Toward the solution of a riddle. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 53(3):497–509.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ding WW, Levin SG, Stephan PE, Winkler AE (2010) The impact of information technology on academic scientists’ productivity and collaboration patterns. Management Sci. 56(9):1439–1461.Link, Google Scholar
• Dumaine B (1994) The trouble with teams. Fortune (September 5)86–92.Google Scholar
• Dumaine B, Gustke C (1990) Who needs a boss? Fortune (May 7)52–60.Google Scholar
• Edmondson A (1999) Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Admin. Sci. Quart. 44(2):350–383.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Elsevier (2013) Ethics in research and publication: Authorship. Accessed February 27, 2013, http://www.elsevier.com/_data/assets/pdf_file/0003/183351/ETHICS_AUTH01a_updatedURL.pdf.Google Scholar
• Engers M, Gans JS, Grant S, King SP (1999) First-author conditions. J. Political Econom. 107(4):859–883.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fleming L (2007) Breakthroughs and the “long tail” of innovation. MIT Sloan Management Rev. 49(1):69–74.Google Scholar
• Fleming L, Mingo S, Chen D (2007) Collaborative brokerage, generative creativity, and creative success. Admin. Sci. Quart. 52(3):443–475.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Furman J, Stern S (2011) Climbing atop the shoulders of giants: The impact of institutions on cumulative research. Amer. Econom. Rev. 101(5):1933–1963.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gans JS, Murray F (2013a) Credit history: The changing nature of scientific credit. Jaffe A, Jones B, eds. The Changing Frontier: Rethinking Science and Innovation Policy (University of Chicago Press, Chicago).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gans JS, Murray F (2013b) Markets for scientific attribution. Mimeo, University of Toronto, Toronto.Google Scholar
• Gilfillan SC (1935) Inventing the Ship (Follett, Chicago).Google Scholar
• Girotra K, Terwiesch C, Ulrich KT (2010) Idea generation and the quality of the best idea. Management Sci. 56(4):591–605.Link, Google Scholar
• Haeussler C, Sauermann H (2013) “Credit where credit is due? The impact of project contributions and social factors on authorship and inventorship. Res. Policy 42(3):688–703.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Haeussler C, Jiang L, Thursby J, Thursby MC (2014) Specific and general information sharing among competing academic researchers. Res. Policy 43(3):465–475.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hara N, Solomon P, Kim SL, Sonnenwald DH (2003) An emerging view of scientific collaboration: Scientists’ perspectives on collaboration and factors that impact collaboration. J. Amer. Soc. Inform. Sci. Tech. 54(10):952–965.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hargadon A (2003) How Breakthroughs Happen: The Surprising Truth About How Companies Innovate (Harvard Business School Press, Boston).Google Scholar
• Hargadon A (2007) Creativity that works. Zhou J, Shalley CE, eds. Handbook of Organizational Creativity (Taylor & Francis, New York), 323–343.Google Scholar
• Hargadon A, Bechky B (2006) When collections of creatives become creative collectives: A field study of problem solving at work. Organ. Sci. 17(4):484–500.Link, Google Scholar
• Hargadon A, Sutton R (1997) Technology brokering and innovation in a product development firm. Admin. Sci. Quart. 42(4):716–749.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hirsch JE (2005) An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 102(46):16569–16572.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hoerr J (1989) The payoff from teamwork: The gains in quality are substantial—So why isn’t it spreading faster? Business Week (July 10) 56–62.Google Scholar
• Holmstrom B (1982) Moral hazard in teams. Bell J. Econom. 13(2):324–340.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Johansson F (2004) The Medici Effect: Breakthrough Insights at the Intersection of Ideas, Concepts, and Cultures (Harvard Business Press, Boston).Google Scholar
• Jones B (2009) The burden of knowledge and the “death of the renaissance man”: Is innovation getting harder? Rev. Econom. Stud. 76(1):283–317.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jones B, Wuchty S, Uzzi B (2008) Multi-university research teams: Shifting impact, geography, and stratification in science. Science 322(5905):1259.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Katz JS, Martin BR (1997) What is research collaboration? Res. Policy 26(1):1–18.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Katzenbach JR, Smith DK, Bookspan M (1993) The Wisdom of Teams (Harvard Business School Press, Boston).Google Scholar
• Knorr-Cetina K (1999) Epistemic Cultures: How the Sciences Make Knowledge (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Koplowitz R, Schadler T, Brown M, Burnes S (2009) Benchmarking your collaboration strategy. Forrester Res. (November 24), https://www.forrester.com/Benchmarking+Your+Collaboration+Strategy/fulltext/-/E-RES48336.Google Scholar
• Landry R, Amara N (1998) The impact of transaction costs on the institutional structuration of collaborative academic research. Res. Policy 27(9):901–913.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Latour B, Woolgar S (1986) Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).Google Scholar
• Leahey E (2007) Not by productivity alone: How visibility and specialization contribute to academic earnings. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 72(4):533–561.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lee S, Bozeman B (2005) The impact of research collaboration on scientific productivity. Soc. Stud. Sci. 35(5):673–702.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lissoni F, Montobbio F, Zirulia L (2013) Inventorship and authorship as attribution rights: An enquiry into the economics of scientific credit. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. 95:49–69.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Maciejovsky B, Budescu DV, Ariely D (2009) Research note–the researcher as a consumer of scientific publications: How do name-ordering conventions affect inferences about contribution credits? Marketing Sci. 28(3):589–598.Link, Google Scholar
• McAfee RP, McMillan J (1991) Optimal contracts for teams. Internat. Econom. Rev. 32(3):561–577.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Melin G (2000) Pragmatism and self-organization: Research collaboration on the individual level. Res. Policy 29(1):31–40.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Merton RK (1968) The Matthew effect in science the reward and communication systems of science are considered. Science 159(3810):56–63.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Merton RK (1988) The Matthew effect in science, II: Cumulative advantage and the symbolism of intellectual property. ISIS 79(4):606–623.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Newman MEJ (2001) The structure of scientific collaboration networks. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 98(2):404–409.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Obstfeld D (2005) Social networks, the tertius iungens orientation, and involvement in innovation. Admin. Sci. Quart. 50(1):100–130.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Orsburn JD, Moran L (2000) The New Self-Directed Work Teams: Mastering the Challenge (McGraw-Hill, New York).Google Scholar
• Paulus PB (2007) Fostering creativity in groups and teams. Zhou J, Shalley CE, eds. Handbook of Organizational Creativity (Taylor & Francis, New York), 165–188.Google Scholar
• Paulus PB, Nijstad BA (2003) Group Creativity: Innovation Through Collaboration (Oxford University Press, New York).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Perlow LA (1999) The time famine: Toward a sociology of work time. Admin. Sci. Quart. 44(1):57–81.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Porac JF, Wade JB, Fischer HM, Brown J, Kanfer A, Bowker G (2004) Human capital heterogeneity, collaborative relationships, and publication patterns in a multidisciplinary scientific alliance: A comparative case study of two scientific teams. Res. Policy 33(4):661–678.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Price DJ, Beaver DB (1966) Collaboration in an invisible college. Amer. Psych. 21(11):1011–1018.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Reagans R, Argote L, Brooks D (2005) Individual experience and experience working together: Predicting learning rates from knowing who knows what and knowing how to work together. Management Sci. 51(6):869–881.Link, Google Scholar
• Reagans R, Zuckerman EW (2001) Networks, diversity, and productivity: The social capital of corporate R&D teams. Organ. Sci. 12(4):502–517.Link, Google Scholar
• Salganik MJ, Dodds PS, Watts DJ (2006) Experimental study of inequality and unpredictability in an artificial cultural market. Science 311(5762):854–856.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sauermann H, Franzoni C (2015) Crowd science user contribution patterns and their implications. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 112(3):679–684.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Simcoe TS, Waguespack DM (2011) Status, quality, and attention: What’s in a (missing) name? Management Sci. 57(2):274–290.Link, Google Scholar
• Singh J, Fleming L (2010) Lone inventors as sources of breakthroughs: Myth or reality? Management Sci. 56(1):41–56.Link, Google Scholar
• Stein MI (1953) Creativity and culture. J. Psych. 36(2):311–22.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stokols D, Harvey R, Gress J, Fuqua J, Phillips K (2005) In vivo studies of transdisciplinary scientific collaboration lessons learned and implications for active living research. Amer. J. Preventive Medicine 28(2S2):202–213.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Taylor A, Greve HR (2006) Superman or the fantastic four? Knowledge combination and experience in innovative teams. Acad. Management J. 49(4):723–740.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Teodoridis F (2014) Generalists, specialists, and the direction of inventive activity. Working paper, University of Southern California, Los Angeles.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tushman ML, Katz R (1980) External communication and project performance: An investigation into the role of gatekeepers. Management Sci. 26(11):1071–1085.Link, Google Scholar
• Uzzi B, Spiro J (2005) Collaboration and creativity: The small world problem. Amer. J. Sociol. 111(2):447–504.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Valderas JM (2007) Why do team-authored papers get cited more? Science 317(5844):1496–1498.Crossref, Google Scholar
• von Hippel EA (2005) Democratizing Innovation (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Woodman RW, Sawyer JE, Griffin RW (1993) Toward a theory of organizational creativity. Acad. Management Rev. 18(2):293–321.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wray BK (2002) The epistemic significance of collaborative research. Philosophy Sci. 69(1):150–168.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wuchty S, Jones B, Uzzi B (2007) The increasing dominance of teams in production of knowledge. Science 316(5827):1036–1039.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zare RN (1997) Editorial: Knowledge and distributed intelligence. Science 275(5303):1047.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zerhouni E (2003) The NIH Roadmap. Science 302(5642):63–72.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zuckerman B, Srivastava CV (2010) Process evaluation of the large-scale collaborative project awards (Glue Grants) of the National Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIGMS). IDA Document NS D-4051, IDA Science and Technology Policy Institute, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
• Zuckerman H, Merton RK (1972) Age, aging, and age structure in science. Riley MW, Johnson M, Foner A, eds. Aging and Society, Vol. III (Russell Sage Foundation, New York), 292–356.Google Scholar