View More View Less
  • 1 Department of Management Science, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, Yuseong Gu, Taejeon, Republic of Korea dhlnexys@kaist.ac.kr
  • | 2 Management Strategy Team, Korea Research Institute of Chemical Technology, Yuseong Gu, Taejeon, Republic of Korea hchull@gmail.com
  • | 3 Future Strategy Team, Daegu Digital Industry Promotion Agency, Nam Gu, Daegu, Republic of Korea mirr@dip.or.kr
Restricted access

Abstract

This study examines the impact of collaborating patterns on the R&D performance of public research institutions (PRIs) in Korea's science and engineering fields. For the construction of R&D collaborating networks based on the co-authorship data of 127 institutions in Scopus, this paper proposes four types of collaborations by categorizing network analyses into two dimensions: structural positions (density, efficiency, and betweeness centrality) and the relational characteristics of individual nodes (eigenvector and closeness centralities). To explore the research performance by collaboration type, we employ a data envelopment analysis window analysis of a panel of 23 PRIs over a 10-year period. Comparing the R&D productivities of each group, we find that the PRIs of higher productivity adhere to a cohesive networking strategy, retaining intensive relations with their existing partners. The empirical results suggest that excessively cohesive alliances might end up in ‘lock-in’ relations, hindering the exploitation of new opportunities for innovation. These findings are implicit in relation to the Korean Government's R&D policies on collaborating strategies to produce sustained research results with the advent of the convergence research era.

  • Adler, N, Raveh, A 2008 Presenting DEA graphically. Omega 36 5 715729 .

  • Ahuja, G 2000 Collaboration networks, structural holes, and innovation: A longitudinal study. Administrative Science Quarterly 45 3 425455 .

  • Allen, TJ 1970 Communication networks in R & D laboratories. R&D Management 1 1 1421 .

  • Banker, R, Charnes, A, Cooper, W 1984 Some models for estimating technical and scale inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis. Management Science 30 9 10781092 .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Banwet, D, Deshmukh, S 2008 Evaluating performance of national R&D organizations using integrated DEA-AHP technique. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management 57 5 370388 .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Barabasi, AL, Jeong, H, Neda, Z, Ravasz, E, Schubert, A, Vicsek, T 2002 Evolution of the social network of scientific collaborations. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications 311 3–4 590614 .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Bozeman, B, Corley, E 2004 Scientists’ collaboration strategies: Implications for scientific and technical human capital. Research Policy 33 4 599616 .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Brown, M, Svenson, R 1998 Measuring RD productivity. Research-Technology Management 41 6 3035.

  • Burt, RS 1992 Structural holes Harvard University Press Cambridge, MA.

  • Charnes, A, Cooper, WW, Rhodes, E 1978 Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. European Journal of Operational Research 2 6 429444 .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Choi, Y 2003 Evolution of science and technology policy in Korea 3 Science and Technology Policy Institute Korea.

  • Coccia, M 2004 New models for measuring the R&D performance and identifying the productivity of public research institutes. R&D Management 34:267280 .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Coccia, M 2005 A scientometric model for the assessment of scientific research performance within public institutes. Scientometrics 65 3 307321 .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Cooper, WW, Seiford, LM, Tone, K 2007 Data envelopment analysis: A comprehensive text with models, applications, references and DEA-solver software Springer New York.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Cooper, W. W., Seiford, L. M., & Zhu, J. (2011). Data envelopment analysis: History, models, and interpretations. In Handbook on data envelopment analysis (Vol. 164, pp. 139). International series in operations research & management science. US: Springer.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Defazio, D, Lockett, A, Wright, M 2009 Funding incentives, collaborative dynamics and scientific productivity: Evidence from the EU framework program. Research Policy 38 2 293305 .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Esposti, R, Pierani, P 2003 Building the knowledge stock: Lags, depreciation, and uncertainty in R&D investment and link with productivity growth. Journal of Productivity Analysis 19 1 3358 .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Etzkowitz, H, Leydesdorff, L 2000 The dynamics of innovation: From national systems and “Mode 2” to a Triple Helix of university–industry–government relations. Research Policy 29 2 109123 .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Geisler, E 1995 An integrated cost-performance model of research and development evaluation. Omega 23 3 281294 .

  • Griliches, Z 1990 Patent statistics as economic indicators: A survey. Journal of Economic Literature 28 4 16611707.

  • Hashimoto, A, Haneda, S 2008 Measuring the change in R&D efficiency of the Japanese pharmaceutical industry. Research Policy 37 10 18291836 .

  • He, Z-L, Geng, X-S, Campbell-Hunt, C 2009 Research collaboration and research output: A longitudinal study of 65 biomedical scientists in a New Zealand university. Research Policy 38 2 306317 .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Jiménez-Sáez, F, Zabala-Iturriagagoitia, JM, Zofío, JL, Castro-Martínez, E 2011 Evaluating research efficiency within national R&D programmes. Research Policy 40 2 230241 .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Kastelle, T, Steen, J 2010 Are small world networks always good for innovation?. Innovation: Management, Policy & Practice 12 1 7587 .

  • Katz, JS, Martin, BR 1997 What is research collaboration?. Research Policy 26 1 118 .

  • Kerssens-van Drongelen, I, Bilderbeek, J 1999 R&D performance measurement: More than choosing a set of metrics. R&D Management 29:1 .

  • Kerssens-van Drongelen, I P de Weerd-Nederhof 2010 The use of performance measurement tools for balancing short- and long-term NPD performances. International Journal of Innovation Management 2:54.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Kogut, B 2000 The network as knowledge: Generative rules and the emergence of structure. Strategic Management Journal 21 3 405425 .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Koka, BR, Prescott, JE 2008 Designing alliance networks: The influence of network position, environmental change, and strategy on firm performance. Strategic Management Journal 29 6 639661 .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Lee, H, Park, Y, Choi, H 2009 Comparative evaluation of performance of national R&D programs with heterogeneous objectives: A DEA approach. European Journal of Operational Research 196 3 847855 .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Liberman, S., & Olmedo, R. L. (2008). Scientist's semantic meaning of the concept of coauthorship. In Fourth international conference on webometrics, informetrics and scientometrics and ninth COLLNET meeting, Berlin.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • MOST (2009). Korean science and technology fact book 2009. Ministry of Science and Technology.

  • Mote, J 2005 R&D ecology: Using 2-mode network analysis to explore complexity in R&D environments. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management 22 1–2 93111 .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Mote, JE, Jordan, G, Hage, J, Whitestone, Y 2007 New directions in the use of network analysis in research and product development evaluation. Research Evaluation 16 3 191203 .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Newman, M. E. (2001). The structure of scientific collaboration networks. Research support, non-U.S. Government research support, U.S. Government, non-P.H.S. Proceedings of the National Academic of Science USA, 98 (2), 404409. doi: .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Newman, M. E. (2004). Coauthorship networks and patterns of scientific collaboration. Research support, non-U.S. Government research support, U.S. Government, non-P.H.S. Proceedings of the National Academic of Science USA, 101 (Suppl 1), 52005205. doi: .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Padula, G 2008 Enhancing the innovation performance of firms by balancing cohesiveness and bridging ties. Long Range Planning 41 4 395419 .

  • Park, HW, Hong, HD, Leydesdorff, L 2005 A comparison of the knowledge-based innovation systems in the economies of South Korea and the Netherlands using triple helix indicators. Scientometrics 65 1 327 .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 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. Research Policy 33 4 661678 .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Reagans, R., & Zuckerman, E. W. (2001). Networks, diversity, and productivity: The social capital of corporate R&D teams. Organization Science, 12 (4), 502517.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Rigby, J, Edler, J 2005 Peering inside research networks: Some observations on the effect of the intensity of collaboration on the variability of research quality. Research Policy 34 6 784794 .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Schilling, M, Phelps, C 2007 Interfirm collaboration networks: The impact of large-scale network structure on firm innovation. Management Science 53 7 11131126 .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Sena, V 2004 Total factor productivity and the spillover hypothesis: Some new evidence. International Journal of Production Economics 92 1 3142 .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Sueyoshi, T. (1992). Measuring technical, allocative and overall efficiencies using a DEA algorithm. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 43 (2), 141155.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Tangen, S 2004 Performance measurement: From philosophy to practice. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management 53:726737 .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Tsekouras, K, Pantzios, C, Karagiannis, G 2004 Malmquist productivity index estimation with zero-value variables: The case of Greek prefectural training councils. International Journal of Production Economics 89 1 95106 .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • T Van der Valk Gijsbers, G 2010 The use of social network analysis in innovation studies: Mapping actors and technologies. Innovation: Management, Policy & Practice 12 1 517 .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

Manuscript submission: http://www.editorialmanager.com/scim/

  • Impact Factor (2019): 2.867
  • Scimago Journal Rank (2019): 1.210
  • SJR Hirsch-Index (2019): 106
  • SJR Quartile Score (2019): Q1 Computer Science Apllications
  • SJR Quartile Score (2019): Q1 Library and Information Sciences
  • SJR Quartile Score (2019): Q1 Social Sciences (miscellaneous)
  • Impact Factor (2018): 2.770
  • Scimago Journal Rank (2018): 1.113
  • SJR Hirsch-Index (2018): 95
  • SJR Quartile Score (2018): Q1 Library and Information Sciences
  • SJR Quartile Score (2018): Q1 Social Sciences (miscellaneous)

For subscription options, please visit the website of Springer

Scientometrics
Language English
Size B5
Year of
Foundation
1978
Volumes
per Year
4
Issues
per Year
12
Founder Akadémiai Kiadó
Founder's
Address
H-1117 Budapest, Hungary 1516 Budapest, PO Box 245.
Publisher Akadémiai Kiadó
Springer Nature Switzerland AG
Publisher's
Address
H-1117 Budapest, Hungary 1516 Budapest, PO Box 245.
CH-6330 Cham, Switzerland Gewerbestrasse 11.
Responsible
Publisher
Chief Executive Officer, Akadémiai Kiadó
ISSN 0138-9130 (Print)
ISSN 1588-2861 (Online)