| 1. |
- Assmus, Anne, et al.
(författare)
-
How do personal networks affect successful drug development? An analysis of scientists networks in clinical trials
- 2016
-
Ingår i: 16th International Schumpeter Conference, Montreal, Canada, 5th-8th July 2016.
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- The question of how to increase the efficiency and success of clinical research has gained considerable interest in recent years among researchers and managers of pharmaceutical companies, hospitals and healthcare organizations. This is part of a broader debate on the reorganization of the industry’s clinical research activities in order to decrease high attrition rates and foster clinical trial success, given the increasing costs associated with drug development (DiMasi et al., 2016; Munos, 2009; FDA, 2004). Principal investigators (PIs) - i.e., the lead scientists of clinical trials - are expected to have a major influence on key factors for successful clinical research. On the one hand, they bring in expertise in both basic and clinical research (Assmus and Haeussler, 2015); and on the other hand, they are embedded in social networks reflecting the collective nature of innovative and scientific activities (Oettl, 2012). Advocates of sparse network structures emphasize its opportunities for brokerage and for knowledge creation (McFadyen et al., 2009; Fleming et al., 2007; Burt, 2004); while a different stream of literature argues that network closure is more conducive to knowledge creation since it allows for the transfer of complex and sensitive knowledge (Reagans and McEvily, 2003). However, this debate has largely ignored the importance of the actors’ knowledge domains (Kilduff and Brass, 2010). We contribute to the literature by analyzing how the predominant knowledge domains of PIs affect the benefits obtained from by the network structure. More precisely, we analyze how the interplay between PIs’ scientific specialization into different knowledge domains in terms of publications in basic or clinical research journals and the structure of their networks in terms of brokerage and closure affect the outcome of clinical trials.
|
|
| 2. |
- D'Este, Pablo, et al.
(författare)
-
Network Heterogeneity, Scientific Performance and Medical Innovation
- 2016
-
Ingår i: R&D Management Conference 2016. Cambridge 3 - 6 July 2016. From Science to Society: Innovation and Value Creation.. - : University of Sussex, Anniversary Conference held 7-9th September 2016.
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- Research networks have particular social and economic resonance in the field of biomedical research. This study will investigate how biomedical research networks could better facilitate scientific and technological progress. Specifically, we focus on two dimensions of heterogeneity sources in a scientist’ research network and their relationship with scientific performance and medical innovation: heterogeneity of institutions where partners are embedded and heterogeneity of benefits that each network partner grants to the focal scientist. Besides, we explore the effects of translational skills and political skills of focal scientists on their participation in both output types.
|
|
| 3. |
- D'Este, Pablo, et al.
(författare)
-
Reaching scientific and innovation outcomes in biomedicine: The role of network diversity, content and cohesion
- 2016
-
Ingår i: Workshop on Medical Innovation (WOMI) 2016, SPRU, University of Sussex, UK.
-
Konferensbidrag (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Research networks have particular social and economic resonance in the field of biomedical research. This study will investigate how biomedical research networks could better facilitate scientific and technological progress. Specifically, we focus on two dimensions of heterogeneity sources in a scientist’ research network and their relationship with scientific performance and medical innovation: heterogeneity of institutions where partners are embedded and heterogeneity of benefits that each network partner grants to the focal scientist. Besides, we explore the effects of translational skills and political skills of focal scientists on their participation in both output types.
|
|
| 4. |
- Llopis-Corcoles, Oscar, et al.
(författare)
-
Innovation from Science: The role of network content and legitimacy ties
- 2017
-
Ingår i: DRUID17, NYU Stern School of Business, New York, USA, 12-14 June 2017. - Denmark : DRUID.
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- Although the analysis of the socio-economic benefits from publicly funded research has been a topic of extensive research in the last decades (Cohen et al., 2002; Salter and Martin, 2001), the factors that underlie innovation and technological performance from scientific activities remain a subject of open debate. This is becoming a particularly pressing topic in both science policy and innovation management literatures. On the one hand, publicly funded research is becoming increasingly accountable to demonstrate its capacity to contribute both to scientific discoveries and useful applications (EC 2016; Von Schomberg, 2013). More recently, science policies also advocate for the active involvement of stakeholders in the setting of scientific research goals and the assessment of traslational achievements and societal impacts, particularly so in the case of biomedical research (Morgan et al., 2011). On the other hand, the management literature has highlighted the inherent difficulty of reconciling innovation achievements and scientific goals since they often respond to conflicting logics (Gittelman and Kogut, 2003; Dasgupta and David, 1994) - i.e. market versus science logics - and rely upon different cognitive bases (Nightingale, 1998). Drawing on the preceding debates, this study aims to improve our understanding of the micro-level foundations of the relationship between scientific research and development of new applications. We do so by considering a relational approach to scientific research networks through the analysis of the content of network ties (Levin et al., 2015; Walter et al., 2015). This perspective is in contrast to more standard network approaches, which are grounded on structural features of networks and have received much more theoretical and empirical attention in the literature (e.g.: Balkundi et al., 2007; Burt, 2004; Tan et al., 2015). Given the crucial role that scientific collaboration networks play in knowledge creation processes (Adams, 2012; Miguélez and Moreno, 2013), we investigate the extent to which the types of social exchanges in research networks are conducive to the generation of valuable applications from scientific endeavours. More specifically, we examine a particular type of social exchange from network contacts: the specialised advice and guidance that contribute to gain credibility on research-related activities obtained through ties to network partners (Levin and Cross, 2004). Our results thus suggest that the perceived legitimacy afforded through ties within research networks play a critical role in reconciling the conflicting logics of science and innovation. Moreover, we examine two additional factors that may contribute to enhance the capacity of scientific research activities to generate valuable applications and innovations: the past scientific performance of scientists and the direct interactions of scientists with the potential beneficiaries of their research.
|
|
| 5. |
- Llopis-Corcoles, Oscar, et al.
(författare)
-
Reaching scientific and innovation outcomes with beneficiaries and relational network content
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Presentation at conference "Knowledge and Universities: Impact on science, industry and policy", IIE, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden, 11-13 September 2017.
-
Konferensbidrag (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- This study contributes to advance understanding on the micro-level foundations of the relationship between scientific research and innovation. We adopt a relational approach to scientific research networks through the analysis of the content of network ties, in contrast to more standard network approaches which are grounded on structural features of networks. We argue that the perceived legitimacy afforded through ties within research networks play a critical role in reconciling the conflicting logics of science and innovation. The proposed hypotheses are empirically tested in the context of the Spanish biomedical research system, drawing on a large scale survey of biomedical scientists. Our results indicate that the scientists’ acquisition of legitimacy through their research network play a critical role in the context of the translation from scientific research to technological achievements and innovations. Our findings also show that past scientific impact has a reinforcing effect on the relationship between legitimacy acquisition and technological achievements. On the contrary, we find that direct interaction with beneficiaries provides an alternative path to reconcile the conflicting logics of science and market, by compensating for the lack of acquired legitimacy from research network.
|
|
| 6. |
- Rake, Bastian, et al.
(författare)
-
How do networks affect knowledge generation for drug development? A study of investigator networks, knowledge domains and knowledge generation
- 2017
-
Ingår i: The 77th Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management, Atlanta, GA, USA, August 4-8, 2017. - : Academy of Management.
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- This paper builds upon the intense and ongoing debate on whether and under which conditions network structures characterized by closure or structural holes support knowledge generation. In contrast to most of the existing literature we take the interplay between network structure and actor diversity in terms of actors’ knowledge domains into account. Our empirical analysis uses a unique dataset of investigator teams in clinical trials and their publication activities. Our preliminary results do not suggest a clear-cut association between bridging structural holes and trial related publication activities. While network closure within investigator teams may negatively affect publication outcomes, closure acts as an enabling factor for the interpretation and application of diverse knowledge within investigator teams which supports the emergence of trial related publications. These findings have important implications for managers in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industry with respect to the composition of investigators teams as well as for the emerging concept of translation research intended to promote knowledge generation and innovative activities in these industries.
|
|
