IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v50y2021i6s0048733321000603.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does greater diversification increase individual productivity? The moderating effect of attention allocation

Author

Listed:
  • Belkhouja, Mustapha
  • Fattoum, Senda
  • Yoon, Hyungseok (David)

Abstract

Despite the consensus on the “double‐edged sword” effect of diversification (of knowledge and collaborators) on individual performance, little is known about the contingencies that affect the relationship between diversification and individual productivity. Drawing on the attention-based view, we theorize the moderating role of attention allocation to advance our understanding of the curvilinear relationship between diversification (of knowledge and collaborators) and individual productivity. Relevant hypotheses are tested using a longitudinal sample of more than 25,000 individual scholars. Our analysis reveals that although a moderate level of knowledge diversification is optimal for research productivity when the level of cognitive attention is low, a high level of knowledge diversification is more beneficial for research productivity when the level of cognitive attention is high. Furthermore, we show that a moderate level of collaborator diversification, coupled with a high level of collaborative attention, is optimal for research productivity. Our study provides important implications for highly skilled and creative individuals.

Suggested Citation

  • Belkhouja, Mustapha & Fattoum, Senda & Yoon, Hyungseok (David), 2021. "Does greater diversification increase individual productivity? The moderating effect of attention allocation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(6).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:50:y:2021:i:6:s0048733321000603
    DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2021.104256
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733321000603
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.respol.2021.104256?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. Benjamin F. Jones, 2009. "The Burden of Knowledge and the "Death of the Renaissance Man": Is Innovation Getting Harder?," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 76(1), pages 283-317.
    2. Huo, Dong & Motohashi, Kazuyuki & Gong, Han, 2019. "Team diversity as dissimilarity and variety in organizational innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(6), pages 1564-1572.
    3. Gonzalez-Brambila, Claudia N. & Veloso, Francisco M. & Krackhardt, David, 2013. "The impact of network embeddedness on research output," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(9), pages 1555-1567.
    4. Crescenzi, Riccardo & Nathan, Max & Rodríguez-Pose, Andrés, 2016. "Do inventors talk to strangers? On proximity and collaborative knowledge creation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 177-194.
    5. Mark Mortensen & Tsedal B. Neeley, 2012. "Reflected Knowledge and Trust in Global Collaboration," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(12), pages 2207-2224, December.
    6. Bart Nooteboom, 2009. "A Cognitive Theory of the Firm," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13348.
    7. Wang, Jian, 2016. "Knowledge creation in collaboration networks: Effects of tie configuration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 68-80.
    8. Bidault, Francis & Hildebrand, Thomas, 2014. "The distribution of partnership returns: Evidence from co-authorships in economics journals," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(6), pages 1002-1013.
    9. Wang, Jian & Veugelers, Reinhilde & Stephan, Paula, 2017. "Bias against novelty in science: A cautionary tale for users of bibliometric indicators," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(8), pages 1416-1436.
    10. Luke Rhee & Paul M. Leonardi, 2018. "Which pathway to good ideas? An attention‐based view of innovation in social networks," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(4), pages 1188-1215, April.
    11. Gonzalez-Brambila, Claudia & Veloso, Francisco M., 2007. "The determinants of research output and impact: A study of Mexican researchers," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(7), pages 1035-1051, September.
    12. Kristina Dahlin & L. Weingart & P. Hinds, 2005. "Team diversity and information use," Post-Print hal-00480406, HAL.
    13. Linus Dahlander & Siobhan O'Mahony & David M. Gann, 2016. "One foot in, one foot out: how does individuals' external search breadth affect innovation outcomes?," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(2), pages 280-302, February.
    14. Raghuram Rajan & Henri Servaes & Luigi Zingales, 2000. "The Cost of Diversity: The Diversification Discount and Inefficient Investment," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 55(1), pages 35-80, February.
    15. Aaron K. Chatterji & Kira R. Fabrizio, 2014. "Using users: When does external knowledge enhance corporate product innovation?," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(10), pages 1427-1445, October.
    16. Simon Rodan & Charles Galunic, 2004. "More than network structure: how knowledge heterogeneity influences managerial performance and innovativeness," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(6), pages 541-562, June.
    17. Åstebro, Thomas & Thompson, Peter, 2011. "Entrepreneurs, Jacks of all trades or Hobos?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(5), pages 637-649, June.
    18. William Ocasio, 2011. "Attention to Attention," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(5), pages 1286-1296, October.
    19. Smith, Simon & Ward, Vicky & House, Allan, 2011. "‘Impact’ in the proposals for the UK's Research Excellence Framework: Shifting the boundaries of academic autonomy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(10), pages 1369-1379.
    20. Hoegl, Martin & Proserpio, Luigi, 2004. "Team member proximity and teamwork in innovative projects," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(8), pages 1153-1165, October.
    21. Henk F. Moed, 2008. "UK Research Assessment Exercises: Informed judgments on research quality or quantity?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 74(1), pages 153-161, January.
    22. Hoekman, Jarno & Frenken, Koen & Tijssen, Robert J.W., 2010. "Research collaboration at a distance: Changing spatial patterns of scientific collaboration within Europe," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(5), pages 662-673, June.
    23. David J. Teece, 2007. "Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(13), pages 1319-1350, December.
    24. 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.
    25. Richard F. J. Haans & Constant Pieters & Zi-Lin He, 2016. "Thinking about U: Theorizing and testing U- and inverted U-shaped relationships in strategy research," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(7), pages 1177-1195, July.
    26. Rebora, Gianfranco & Turri, Matteo, 2013. "The UK and Italian research assessment exercises face to face," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(9), pages 1657-1666.
    27. William Ocasio, 1997. "Towards An Attention‐Based View Of The Firm," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(S1), pages 187-206, July.
    28. John N. Parker & Stefano Allesina & Christopher J. Lortie, 2013. "Characterizing a scientific elite (B): publication and citation patterns of the most highly cited scientists in environmental science and ecology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(2), pages 469-480, February.
    29. Hausman, Jerry & Hall, Bronwyn H & Griliches, Zvi, 1984. "Econometric Models for Count Data with an Application to the Patents-R&D Relationship," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(4), pages 909-938, July.
    30. Belkhouja, Mustapha & Yoon, Hyungseok (David), 2018. "How does openness influence the impact of a scholar’s research? An analysis of business scholars’ citations over their careers," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(10), pages 2037-2047.
    31. Landry, Rejean & Amara, Nabil, 1998. "The impact of transaction costs on the institutional structuration of collaborative academic research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(9), pages 901-913, December.
    32. Jian Wang & Bart Thijs & Wolfgang Glänzel, 2015. "Interdisciplinarity and Impact: Distinct Effects of Variety, Balance, and Disparity," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(5), pages 1-18, May.
    33. Chambers, Christopher P. & Miller, Alan D., 2014. "Scholarly influence," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 571-583.
    34. Chai, Sen & Menon, Anoop, 2019. "Breakthrough recognition: Bias against novelty and competition for attention," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 733-747.
    35. Thed N. Van Leeuwen & Henk F. Moed & Robert J. W. Tijssen & Martijn S. Visser & Anthony F. J. Van Raan, 2001. "Language biases in the coverage of the Science Citation Index and its consequencesfor international comparisons of national research performance," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 51(1), pages 335-346, April.
    36. Giovanni Gavetti, 2005. "Cognition and Hierarchy: Rethinking the Microfoundations of Capabilities’ Development," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(6), pages 599-617, December.
    37. Dovev Lavie & Israel Drori, 2012. "Collaborating for Knowledge Creation and Application: The Case of Nanotechnology Research Programs," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(3), pages 704-724, June.
    38. Ferriani, Simone & Cattani, Gino & Baden-Fuller, Charles, 2009. "The relational antecedents of project-entrepreneurship: Network centrality, team composition and project performance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(10), pages 1545-1558, December.
    39. Chen, Kaihua & Zhang, Yi & Fu, Xiaolan, 2019. "International research collaboration: An emerging domain of innovation studies?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 149-168.
    40. Groot, Tom & Garcia-Valderrama, Teresa, 2006. "Research quality and efficiency: An analysis of assessments and management issues in Dutch economics and business research programs," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(9), pages 1362-1376, November.
    41. Chiara Franzoni & Cristina Rossi-Lamastra, 2017. "Academic tenure, risk-taking and the diversification of scientific research," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(7), pages 691-712, October.
    42. Steinmo, Marianne & Rasmussen, Einar, 2018. "The interplay of cognitive and relational social capital dimensions in university-industry collaboration: Overcoming the experience barrier," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(10), pages 1964-1974.
    43. Wagner, Caroline S. & Leydesdorff, Loet, 2005. "Network structure, self-organization, and the growth of international collaboration in science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(10), pages 1608-1618, December.
    44. Bogers, Marcel & Foss, Nicolai J. & Lyngsie, Jacob, 2018. "The “human side” of open innovation: The role of employee diversity in firm-level openness," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 218-231.
    45. Katz, J. Sylvan & Martin, Ben R., 1997. "What is research collaboration?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 1-18, March.
    46. Rafols, Ismael & Leydesdorff, Loet & O’Hare, Alice & Nightingale, Paul & Stirling, Andy, 2012. "How journal rankings can suppress interdisciplinary research: A comparison between Innovation Studies and Business & Management," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(7), pages 1262-1282.
    47. Laursen, Keld & Salter, Ammon J., 2014. "The paradox of openness: Appropriability, external search and collaboration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(5), pages 867-878.
    48. Melero, Eduardo & Palomeras, Neus, 2015. "The Renaissance Man is not dead! The role of generalists in teams of inventors," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 154-167.
    49. Agrawal, Ajay & McHale, John & Oettl, Alexander, 2017. "How stars matter: Recruiting and peer effects in evolutionary biology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(4), pages 853-867.
    50. Jasjit Singh & Lee Fleming, 2010. "Lone Inventors as Sources of Breakthroughs: Myth or Reality?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(1), pages 41-56, January.
    51. Bercovitz, Janet & Feldman, Maryann, 2011. "The mechanisms of collaboration in inventive teams: Composition, social networks, and geography," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 81-93, February.
    52. Lee Fleming, 2001. "Recombinant Uncertainty in Technological Search," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 117-132, January.
    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. Jingyu Li & Yigang Pan & Yi Yang & Caleb H. Tse, 2022. "Digital platform attention and international sales: An attention-based view," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 53(8), pages 1817-1835, October.

    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. Belkhouja, Mustapha & Yoon, Hyungseok (David), 2018. "How does openness influence the impact of a scholar’s research? An analysis of business scholars’ citations over their careers," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(10), pages 2037-2047.
    2. Krammer, Sorin M.S. & Belkouja, Mustapha & Yoon, David, 2019. "Research performance of teams in Business and Management: The impact of team size, knowledge diversity and international diversity," MPRA Paper 104548, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 06 Jun 2019.
    3. Tu, Jing, 2024. "Openness to international collaboration and tie strength in enhancing knowledge creation," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 18(1).
    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. Jiao, Hao & Wang, Tang & Yang, Jifeng, 2022. "Team structure and invention impact under high knowledge diversity: An empirical examination of computer workstation industry," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    6. Wang, Jian, 2016. "Knowledge creation in collaboration networks: Effects of tie configuration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 68-80.
    7. Ardito, Lorenzo & Messeni Petruzzelli, Antonio, 2017. "Breadth of external knowledge sourcing and product innovation: The moderating role of strategic human resource practices," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 261-272.
    8. Banal-Estañol, Albert & Macho-Stadler, Inés & Pérez-Castrillo, David, 2019. "Evaluation in research funding agencies: Are structurally diverse teams biased against?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(7), pages 1823-1840.
    9. Frank Nagle & Florenta Teodoridis, 2020. "Jack of all trades and master of knowledge: The role of diversification in new distant knowledge integration," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(1), pages 55-85, January.
    10. Chai, Sen & Menon, Anoop, 2019. "Breakthrough recognition: Bias against novelty and competition for attention," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 733-747.
    11. Hoppmann, Joern & Wu, Geng & Johnson, Jillian, 2021. "The impact of demand-pull and technology-push policies on firms’ knowledge search," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    12. Colatat, Phech, 2015. "An organizational perspective to funding science: Collaborator novelty at DARPA," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(4), pages 874-887.
    13. Shiji Chen & Yanhui Song & Fei Shu & Vincent Larivière, 2022. "Interdisciplinarity and impact: the effects of the citation time window," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(5), pages 2621-2642, May.
    14. Brennecke, Julia & Rank, Olaf, 2017. "The firm’s knowledge network and the transfer of advice among corporate inventors—A multilevel network study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(4), pages 768-783.
    15. Keyvan Vakili & Sarah Kaplan, 2021. "Organizing for innovation: A contingency view on innovative team configuration," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(6), pages 1159-1183, June.
    16. Pollok, Patrick & Amft, André & Diener, Kathleen & Lüttgens, Dirk & Piller, Frank T., 2021. "Knowledge diversity and team creativity: How hobbyists beat professional designers in creating novel board games," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(8).
    17. Orsatti, Gianluca & Quatraro, Francesco & Pezzoni, Michele, 2020. "The antecedents of green technologies: The role of team-level recombinant capabilities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(3).
    18. Liu, Meijun & Jaiswal, Ajay & Bu, Yi & Min, Chao & Yang, Sijie & Liu, Zhibo & Acuña, Daniel & Ding, Ying, 2022. "Team formation and team impact: The balance between team freshness and repeat collaboration," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(4).
    19. 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).
    20. Mehmet Ali Koseoglu, 2016. "Mapping the institutional collaboration network of strategic management research: 1980–2014," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(1), pages 203-226, 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:50:y:2021:i:6:s0048733321000603. 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.