IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/fisidp/11.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Characterizing creative scientists in nano S & T: productivity, multidisciplinarity, and network brokerage in a longitudinal perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Heinze, Thomas
  • Bauer, Gerrit

Abstract

While some believe that publication and citation scores are key predictors of breakthroughs in science, others claim that people who work at the intersection of scientific communities are more likely to be familiar with selecting and synthesizing alternatives into novel ideas. This paper contributes to this controversy by presenting a longitudinal comparison of highly creative scientists with equally productive researchers. The sample of creative scientists is identified by combining information on science awards and nominations by international peers covering research accomplishments in the mid-1990s. Results suggest that it is not only the sheer quantity of publications that causes scientists to produce creative pieces of work. Rather, their ability to effectively communicate with otherwise disconnected peers and to address a broader work spectrum also enhances their chances to be widely cited and to develop novel ideas.

Suggested Citation

  • Heinze, Thomas & Bauer, Gerrit, 2006. "Characterizing creative scientists in nano S & T: productivity, multidisciplinarity, and network brokerage in a longitudinal perspective," Discussion Papers "Innovation Systems and Policy Analysis" 11, Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research (ISI).
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:fisidp:11
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/28529/1/537475559.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Thomas Heinze & Philip Shapira & Jacqueline Senker & Stefan Kuhlmann, 2007. "Identifying creative research accomplishments: Methodology and results for nanotechnology and human genetics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 70(1), pages 125-152, January.
    3. Hollingsworth, Joseph Rogers, 2002. "Research organizations and major discoveries in twentieth-century science: A case study of excellence in biomedical research," Discussion Papers, Presidential Department P 02-003, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    4. Angela Hullmann & Martin Meyer, 2003. "Publications and patents in nanotechnology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 58(3), pages 507-527, November.
    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. Heinze, Thomas & Shapira, Philip & Rogers, Juan D. & Senker, Jacqueline M., 2009. "Organizational and institutional influences on creativity in scientific research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 610-623, May.
    2. Liu Li & Chaoying Tang, 2020. "How Does Inter-Organizational Cooperation Impact Organizations’ Scientific Knowledge Generation? Evidence from the Biomass Energy Field," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-18, December.
    3. Su, Hsin-Ning & Moaniba, Igam M., 2017. "Investigating the dynamics of interdisciplinary evolution in technology developments," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 12-23.
    4. Fu-Sheng Tsai & Gayle Baugh & Shih-Chieh Fang & Julia Lin, 2014. "Contingent contingency: Knowledge heterogeneity and new product development performance revisited," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 31(1), pages 149-169, March.
    5. Hao, Bin & Feng, Yanan, 2018. "Leveraging learning forces in asymmetric alliances: Small firms’ perceived power imbalance in driving exploration and exploitation," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 27-39.
    6. Llopis, Oscar & D'Este, Pablo & McKelvey, Maureen & Yegros, Alfredo, 2022. "Navigating multiple logics: Legitimacy and the quest for societal impact in science," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    7. Vandor, Peter & Franke, Nikolaus, 2016. "See Paris and… found a business? The impact of cross-cultural experience on opportunity recognition capabilities," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 388-407.
    8. Gianluca Fabiano & Andrea Marcellusi & Giampiero Favato, 2020. "Public–private contribution to biopharmaceutical discoveries: a bibliometric analysis of biomedical research in UK," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(1), pages 153-168, July.
    9. Angela Hullmann, 2007. "Measuring and assessing the development of nanotechnology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 70(3), pages 739-758, March.
    10. Soda, Giuseppe & Zaheer, Akbar & Sun, Xiaoming & Cui, Wentian, 2021. "Brokerage evolution in innovation contexts: Formal structure, network neighborhoods and knowledge," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(10).
    11. Lei Xu & Ronggui Ding & Lei Wang, 2022. "How to facilitate knowledge diffusion in collaborative innovation projects by adjusting network density and project roles," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(3), pages 1353-1379, March.
    12. Lutter, Mark, 2014. "Creative success and network embeddedness: Explaining critical recognition of film directors in Hollywood, 1900-2010," MPIfG Discussion Paper 14/11, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    13. Lambiotte, R. & Panzarasa, P., 2009. "Communities, knowledge creation, and information diffusion," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 3(3), pages 180-190.
    14. Youtie, Jan & Rogers, Juan & Heinze, Thomas & Shapira, Philip & Tang, Li, 2013. "Career-based influences on scientific recognition in the United States and Europe: Longitudinal evidence from curriculum vitae data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(8), pages 1341-1355.
    15. Swart, Juani & Powell, John, 2012. "An analytical theory of knowledge behaviour in networks," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 223(3), pages 807-817.
    16. Jiancheng Guan & Lanxin Pang, 2018. "Bidirectional relationship between network position and knowledge creation in Scientometrics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(1), pages 201-222, April.
    17. Eisingerich, Andreas B. & Bell, Simon J. & Tracey, Paul, 2010. "How can clusters sustain performance? The role of network strength, network openness, and environmental uncertainty," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 239-253, March.
    18. Anne Domurath & Holger Patzelt, 2016. "Entrepreneurs’ Assessments of Early International Entry: The Role of Foreign Social Ties, Venture Absorptive Capacity, and Generalized Trust in Others," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 40(5), pages 1149-1177, September.
    19. Lee, Cheng-Yu & Wang, Ming-Chao & Huang, Yen-Chih, 2015. "The double-edged sword of technological diversity in R&D alliances: Network position and learning speed as moderators," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 450-461.
    20. André van Stel & Lorraine Uhlaner & Haibo Zhou & Valerie Duplat, 2012. "Disentangling the effects of organizational capabilities, innovation and firm size on SME sales growth," Scales Research Reports H201211, EIM Business and Policy Research.

    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:zbw:fisidp:11. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/isfhgde.html .

    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.