科技创新团队的知识网络构建与知识测度研究

doi:10.3772/j.issn.1000-0135.2022.09.002

情报学报

2022, Vol. 41

Issue (9): 900-914 DOI: 10.3772/j.issn.1000-0135.2022.09.002

情报理论与方法

本期目录 | 过刊浏览 | 高级检索

科技创新团队的知识网络构建与知识测度研究

石静¹, 孙建军^1,2

1.南京大学信息管理学院，南京 210023
2.南京大学数据智能与交叉创新实验室，南京 210023

Knowledge Network Construction and Knowledge Measurement of the S&T Innovation Team

Shi Jing¹, Sun Jianjun^1,2

1.School of Information Management, Nanjing University, Nanjing 210023
2.Laboratory for Data Intelligence and Cross-Innovation of Nanjing University, Nanjing 210023

摘要
图/表
参考文献
相关文章 (6)

全文: PDF (3757 KB) HTML (1 KB)
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

摘要科技领域交叉融合创新的趋势下，团队合作成为重要的知识生产形式。准确测度团队知识、刻画团队知识结构，是理解团队创新行为机制的基础，对创新团队的管理与发展具有重要意义。本文创新性地结合网络分析方法和知识嵌入视角，对传统的知识测度方法进行改进，使之更适用于科技团队知识测度。首先，使用最大连通子图从全领域合作网络中识别科技创新团队，基于直接关联与间接引用拓展团队成员的个体知识网络，继而集成得到团队加权知识网络。其次，基于网络分析的两大研究视角——位置取向与关系取向，分别构建知识重合度、知识多样性与知识凝聚性三个指标，用于测度团队知识；在指标测度中对以往方法加以改进，将团队知识嵌入全领域知识网络中计算。最后，选择生物医药领域进行实证，对团队知识测度指标及其内涵进行讨论分析。位置取向的知识重合度与知识多样性分别测度共有知识和异质知识，能够反映团队知识的组成成分；关系取向的知识凝聚性则反映团队知识之间的结构一致性和内容连贯性。多数科技创新团队中知识节点的位置分布均衡，但知识之间关系的结构差异较大。知识多样性与创新绩效呈现倒U形关系，是团队创造力尤其是突破性创新能力的重要来源；令人意外的是，知识凝聚性与团队规模正相关，但对创新绩效影响较小。

	服务

	把本文推荐给朋友
	加入我的书架
	加入引用管理器
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	作者相关文章
	石静
	孙建军

关键词 ：创新团队, 知识网络, 知识测度, 合作创新

收稿日期: 2021-10-08

基金资助:国家自然科学基金项目“引文扩散理论及实证研究”（71874077）；江苏省研究生科研创新计划项目“科技创新团队知识多样性及其对创新绩效的影响研究”（KYCX21_0025）。

作者简介: 石静，女，1995年生，博士研究生，研究方向为知识关联、科技创新，E-mail：shijing11@smail.nju.edu.cn；孙建军，男，1962年生，教授，博士生导师，研究方向为网络信息资源管理、大数据分；

引用本文:

石静, 孙建军. 科技创新团队的知识网络构建与知识测度研究[J]. 情报学报, 2022, 41(9): 900-914.
Shi Jing, Sun Jianjun. Knowledge Network Construction and Knowledge Measurement of the S&T Innovation Team. 情报学报, 2022, 41(9): 900-914.

链接本文:

https://qbxb.istic.ac.cn/CN/10.3772/j.issn.1000-0135.2022.09.002 或 https://qbxb.istic.ac.cn/CN/Y2022/V41/I9/900

1 新华社. 习近平出席中央人才工作会议并发表重要讲话[EB/OL]. (2021-09-28) [2021-10-06]. http://www.gov.cn/xinwen/2021-09/28/content_5639868.htm.
2 Wuchty S, Jones B F, Uzzi B. The increasing dominance of teams in production of knowledge[J]. Science, 2007, 316(5827): 1036-1039.
3 Kristinsson K, Candi M, S?mundsson R J. The relationship between founder team diversity and innovation performance: the moderating role of causation logic[J]. Long Range Planning, 2016, 49(4): 464-476.
4 Lewis K. Measuring transactive memory systems in the field: scale development and validation[J]. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2003, 88(4): 587-604.
5 段光, 杨忠. 知识异质性对团队创新的作用机制分析[J]. 管理学报, 2014, 11(1): 86-94.
6 侯楠, 杨皎平, 戴万亮. 团队异质性、外部社会资本对团队成员创新绩效影响的跨层次研究[J]. 管理学报, 2016, 13(2): 212-220.
7 Salas E, Dickinson T L, Converse S A, et al. Toward an understanding of team performance and training[M]// Teams: Their Training and Performance. Praeger, 1992: 3-29.
8 Kozlowski S W J, Bell B S. Work groups and teams in organizations[M]// Handbook of Psychology. John Wiley & Sons, 2003: 333-375.
9 Mathieu J, Maynard M T, Rapp T, et al. Team effectiveness 1997-2007: a review of recent advancements and a glimpse into the future[J]. Journal of Management, 2008, 34(3): 410-476.
10 Milliken F J, Martins L L. Searching for common threads: understanding the multiple effects of diversity in organizational groups[J]. Academy of Management Review, 1996, 21(2): 402-433.
11 Lee J Y, Choi B C, Ghauri P N, et al. Knowledge centralization and international R&D team performance: unpacking the moderating roles of team-specific characteristics[J]. Journal of Business Research, 2021, 128: 627-640.
12 岳增慧, 许海云, 方曙. 基于结构参数的科研合作网络知识扩散建模研究[J]. 情报学报, 2015, 34(5): 471-483.
13 Wildman J L, Thayer A L, Pavlas D, et al. Team knowledge research: emerging trends and critical needs[J]. Human Factors, 2012, 54(1): 84-111.
14 Mohammed S, Klimoski R, Rentsch J R. The measurement of team mental models: we have no shared schema[J]. Organizational Research Methods, 2000, 3(2): 123-165.
15 Rico R, Sánchez-Manzanares M, Gil F, et al. Team implicit coordination processes: a team knowledge-based approach[J]. Academy of Management Review, 2008, 33(1): 163-184.
16 Kellermanns F W, Walter J, Lechner C, et al. The lack of consensus about strategic consensus: advancing theory and research[J]. Journal of Management, 2005, 31(5): 719-737.
17 Cooke N J, Salas E, Cannon-Bowers J A, et al. Measuring team knowledge[J]. Human Factors, 2000, 42(1): 151-173.
18 Cooke N J, Salas E, Kiekel P A, et al. Advances in measuring team cognition[M]// Team Cognition: Understanding the Factors That Drive Process and Performance. American Psychological Association, 2004: 83-106.
19 Cannon-Bowers J A, Salas E. Teamwork competencies: the interaction of team member knowledge, skills, and attitudes[M]// Workforce Readiness: Competencies and Assessments. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1997: 151-174.
20 Quatraro F. Knowledge coherence, variety and economic growth: manufacturing evidence from Italian regions[J]. Research Policy, 2010, 39(10): 1289-1302.
21 邓今朝, 王重鸣. 团队多样性对知识共享的反向作用机制研究[J]. 科学管理研究, 2008, 26(6): 25-27, 53.
22 王颖, 彭灿. 知识异质性与研发团队知识创新绩效——以共享心智模型为中介变量[J]. 情报杂志, 2011, 30(1): 113-116, 58.
23 孙金花, 庄万霞, 胡健. 隐性知识异质性对知识型团队创造力的影响——以知识重构为有调节的中介变量[J]. 科技管理研究, 2020, 40(14): 174-183.
24 Nesta L, Saviotti P P. Coherence of the knowledge base and the firm’s innovative performance: evidence from the US pharmaceutical industry[J]. The Journal of Industrial Economics, 2005, 53(1): 123-142.
25 Moog P, Soost C. Does team diversity really matter? The connection between networks, access to financial resources, and performance in the context of university spin-offs[J]. Small Business Economics, 2022, 58(1): 323-351.
26 Huang H, Parker G, Tan Y L, et al. Altruism or shrewd business? Implications of technology openness on innovations and competition[J]. MIS Quarterly, 2020, 44(3): 1049-1071.
27 Peterson E, Mitchell T R, Tompson L, et al. Collective efficacy and aspects of shared mental models as predictors of performance over time in work groups[J]. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 2000, 3(3): 296-316.
28 沈耕宇, 黄水清, 王东波. 以作者合作共现为源数据的科研团队发掘方法研究[J]. 现代图书情报技术, 2013(1): 57-62.
29 Perianes-Rodríguez A, Olmeda-Gómez C, Moya-Anegón F. Detecting, identifying and visualizing research groups in co-authorship networks[J]. Scientometrics, 2010, 82(2): 307-319.
30 吕璐成, 赵亚娟, 王学昭, 等. 基于关联规则挖掘的研发团队识别方法[J]. 科技管理研究, 2016, 36(17): 148-152, 189.
31 Sternberg R J, Forsythe G B, Hedlund J, et al. Practical intelligence in everyday life[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000: 104-105.
32 Leonard N, Insch G S. Tacit knowledge in academia: a proposed model and measurement scale[J]. The Journal of Psychology, 2005, 139(6): 495-512.
33 Ryan S, O’Connor R V. Development of a team measure for tacit knowledge in software development teams[J]. Journal of Systems and Software, 2009, 82(2): 229-240.
34 Anand G, Ward P T, Tatikonda M V. Role of explicit and tacit knowledge in Six Sigma projects: an empirical examination of differential project success[J]. Journal of Operations Management, 2010, 28(4): 303-315.
35 张存刚, 李明, 陆德梅. 社会网络分析——一种重要的社会学研究方法[J]. 甘肃社会科学, 2004(2): 109-111.
36 Krauss R M, Fussell S R. Mutual knowledge and communicative effectiveness[M]// Intellectual Teamwork: Social and Technological Foundations of Cooperative Work. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1990: 111-145.
37 马费成, 朱婷. 高次信息及其对人类行为的影响[J]. 图书馆论坛, 2010, 30(6): 66-70.
38 曹霞, 付向梅, 杨园芳. 产学研合作创新知识整合影响因素研究[J]. 科技进步与对策, 2012, 29(22): 1-6.
39 Jehn K A, Northcraft G B, Neale M A. Why differences make a difference: a field study of diversity, conflict, and performance in workgroups[J]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1999, 44(4): 741-763.
40 Rodan S, Galunic C. More than network structure: how knowledge heterogeneity influences managerial performance and innovativeness[J]. Strategic Management Journal, 2004, 25(6): 541-562.
41 Horwitz S K, Horwitz I B. The effects of team diversity on team outcomes: a meta-analytic review of team demography[J]. Journal of Management, 2007, 33(6): 987-1015.
42 倪旭东. 知识异质性对团队创新的作用机制研究[J]. 企业经济, 2010, 29(8): 57-63.
43 Stirling A. A general framework for analysing diversity in science, technology and society[J]. Journal of the Royal Society Interface, 2007, 4(15): 707-719.
44 Scherer F M. Using linked patent data and R&D data to measure interindustry technology flows[M]// R&D, Patents, and Productivity. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1984: 417-464.
45 Rafols I, Meyer M. Diversity and network coherence as indicators of interdisciplinarity: case studies in bionanoscience[J]. Scientometrics, 2010, 82(2): 263-287.
46 许海云, 尹春晓, 郭婷, 等. 学科交叉研究综述[J]. 图书情报工作, 2015, 59(5): 119-127.
47 Teece D J, Rumelt R, Dosi G, et al. Understanding corporate coherence: theory and evidence[J]. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 1994, 23(1): 1-30.
48 许治, 陈丽玉, 王思卉. 高校科研团队合作程度影响因素研究[J]. 科研管理, 2015, 36(5): 149-161.
49 Wu L F, Wang D S, Evans J A. Large teams develop and small teams disrupt science and technology[J]. Nature, 2019, 566(7744): 378-382.
50 Ahuja G, Katila R. Technological acquisitions and the innovation performance of acquiring firms: a longitudinal study[J]. Strategic Management Journal, 2001, 22(3): 197-220.
51 Gagliardi L, Marin G, Miriello C. The greener the better? Job creation effects of environmentally-friendly technological change[J]. Industrial and Corporate Change, 2016, 25(5): 779-807.
52 Hagedoorn J, Cloodt M. Measuring innovative performance: is there an advantage in using multiple indicators?[J]. Research Policy, 2003, 32(8): 1365-1379.
53 Awtrey E. The microdynamics of team diversity and collaboration networks[D]. Seattle: University of Washington, 2018: 30-77.