ISSN:0033-6807    

DOI:10.1111/j.1467-9310.1988.tb00604.x

出版商:Blackwell Publishing Ltd    

年代:1988

数据来源: WILEY

摘要:

AbstractThe authors have explored further the effect of the tenure of an R&D group (that is, the length of time in which it has existed) on its performance. Several studies have shown that groups tend to reach a peak of productivity after a few years and decline thereafter. However, it seems that not all teams so decline and the aim of the authors' study reported in this paper was to see what could be learned from those groups that continued to be successful.They therefore studied a sample of 181 teams comprising 2000 subjects drawn from a wide variety of R&D organizations. Their objectives were first to pick out those teams that remained effective and second, to discover the secret of their success. Group performances were assessed subjectively by senior members of each organization. Group tenures were measured by calculating the average time each individual member had spent in the group. Further information was obtained from questionnaires completed by participants.Analysis of the results led to the surprising conclusion that there was no evidence whatever for the previously reported curvilinear relationship between performance and tenure. Nevertheless, some long‐tenured teams per‐formed much better than others and better than newly‐formed teams, for which the authors have sought an explanation.From information deduced from the questionnaires they conclude that the crucial factor is the extent to which the functional manager (department head) as distinct from the project manager nurtures individual researchers, especially in ensuring that they keep abreast of progress in relevant areas of expertise. The role of the project manager on the other hand is to maintain connection between the team and institutional objec

ISSN:0033-6807    

DOI:10.1111/j.1467-9310.1988.tb00605.x

出版商:Blackwell Publishing Ltd    

年代:1988

数据来源: WILEY

摘要:

AbstractTo test a model of creative behaviour in teams, twenty five problem‐solving groups were assembled from a Business School graduate programme, trained in creative problem‐solving techniques and given a realistic product development task. Self‐assessment ratings were collected for factors perceived as influencing performance. Three experienced trainers rated the ideas produced. Four major factors were identified from the self‐assessed statements, each mentioned as positive and negative influences. The study provides a foundation for developing diagnostic tools for assessing creative performance in problem‐solving teams, and gives pointers to factors which are important for improving pe

ISSN:0033-6807    

DOI:10.1111/j.1467-9310.1988.tb00606.x

出版商:Blackwell Publishing Ltd    

年代:1988

数据来源: WILEY

摘要:

AbstractThe paper contains a report of a test of Cooper's NewProd model for predicting success and failure of product development projects. Based on Canadian data, the model has been shown to make predictions which are 84% correct. Having reservations on the reliability and validity of the model on theoretical grounds, we set out to test it using data collected in the Netherlands.Following Cooper's methodology, we selected 19 projects, which had already been marketed and of which 9 were clearcut successes and 10 clearcut failures. We also studied 9 additional projects, which had not yet been commercialised, as the basis for a futurea prioritest. The projects were given a product score according to Cooper's criteria, and predictions compared with the actual experience. Eightyfour percent were correctly classified, as in Cooper's work. From a practical point of view however the variance was too large to allow the predictions from NewProd to be used with confidence to predict outcomes unless they are clearcut.We believe that the drawback of the methodology is that the product score is a simple combination of the various factors involved. No allowance is made for the possibility that one factor alone might be responsible for failure. We have therefore introduced the concept of a threshold value for each factor. A project for which any factor falls below this value will be deemed a failure. Based on a very limited sample of 19 cases an improvement of reliability was made to 95% of 18 out of 19 products correctly classified. The NewProd concept so modified is being applied to the sample of 9 as yet uncompleted projects, and its predictions will eventually be compared with actual outcomes.

ISSN:0033-6807    

DOI:10.1111/j.1467-9310.1988.tb00607.x

出版商:Blackwell Publishing Ltd    

年代:1988

数据来源: WILEY

摘要:

AbstractThis article discusses the peer review system in the context of countries with small scientific communities. It is argued that the traditional peer review system is inadequate and probably dangerous for such countries. The reasoning is that in scientifically small countries personal relations and politics dominate the scene and objective impartial evaluation is not possible. The novel peer review systems adopted in the Netherlands and in South Africa are outlined and suggestions for improvements are made.SUMMARY AND SUGGESTIONS FOR IMPROVEMENTThe thrust of this article is the argument that the traditional peer‐review system is inadequate and probably dangerous for scientifically small countries. Although there is no hard empirical evidence to support the thesis that the peer‐review system is functioning better in scientifically large countries,a priorireasoning and circumstantial evidence indicate that the system is inefffective in countries with small scientific communities. The reasoning is that in small countries personal relations and politics dominate the scene and objective, impartial evaluation is not possible. As a result science policy can be misguided and societal loss can occur as valuable research effort is spent on ineffective peer‐evaluations.A variety of measures can be used to compensate for the ineffectiveness of the peer‐review system. The prime goal, however, is not only to increase the effectiveness of the system, but also to minimize societal costs due to misallocation of resources.The first step towards improvement of the system is to monitor it. Referees' reports and advice can be kept in files and properly analysed periodically. In this way biases concerning researchers, institutes, scientific subjects and approaches can be identified and appropriately remedied. Refereeing the referees could elimate intentional biases and improve the quality control system by anticipation. Referees knowing that their reports would be checked would take care to prepare proper evaluations.Increasing the number of referees is another way to increase reliability. Scientists from other disciplines can and should be incorporated in the evaluation juries. This way relevance of research and cross‐fertilisation of ideas can be incorporated in the system, partly ‘disinterested’ referees will be included in the juries (i.e. referees and applicants would not compete for the same research funds) and the lack of scientists in scientifically small countries will be alleviated. Care should be taken, however, not to over‐burden the system with unnecessary evaluation effort. In requiring researchers with demonstrated ability to go through the process of making formal applications for funding every year, valuable research time is wasted in preparing and evaluating proposals which, after all, will go through due to the status of the applicant. Attempting to regulate the expansion or contraction of the forest and not of the trees may provide a better solution. Evaluating researchers and disciplines instead of individual projects and funding them accordingly may save valuable research time and increase research productivity and effectiveness.Finally, one of the most promising areas for improvement in the decision making process is the incorporation of quantitative techniques in the tool‐kit of evaluation criteria. Publication and citation analyses can reveal the past performance (which is the only indicator of success for future research) of individuals and research groups. In a sense, bibliometric anaiysis can be seen as an expansion in time and panel size of the conventional peer reviews. Instead of asking a limited number of referees about a scientist's work, we count the citations that the particular scientist received by the whole scientific community and over an extended time period. Provided that care is taken to exclude self‐citations, negative citations, compare the same with the same, citation analysis can identify the pecking order in the scientific community. As bibliometric measures correlate well with non‐bibliometric measures (Table 2) the use of such criteria can ameliorate personal biases, improve objective evaluations and reduce time spent on evaluation

ISSN:0033-6807    

DOI:10.1111/j.1467-9310.1988.tb00608.x

出版商:Blackwell Publishing Ltd    

年代:1988

数据来源: WILEY

摘要:

AbstractIn this paper a framework of university‐industry interactions is discussed. The presence or absence of academic entrepreneurial behaviour is considered as a basic variable in distinguishing a host of transfer mechanisms. As a hypothesis it is stated that university‐industry interactions are hampered by three types of barriers: cultural, institutional and operational.This framework is then applied to the Belgian university system. The relative importance of different groups of transfer mechanisms is described. Particular attention is given to the barriers occurring during licensing arrangements and entrepreneurial ventures. A mix of cultural, institutional and operational barriers helps to explain why licensing arrangements and entrepreneurial ventures occur at present less frequently then the assistance mechani

ISSN:0033-6807    

DOI:10.1111/j.1467-9310.1988.tb00609.x

出版商:Blackwell Publishing Ltd    

年代:1988

数据来源: WILEY

ISSN:0033-6807    

DOI:10.1111/j.1467-9310.1988.tb00610.x

出版商:Blackwell Publishing Ltd    

年代:1988

数据来源: WILEY