Collaborative Brokerage, Generative Creativity, and Creative Success

Abstract

Analyzing data on utility patents from 1975 to 2002 in the careers of 35,400 collaborative inventors, this study examines the influence of brokered versus cohesive collaborative social structures on an individual's creativity. We test the hypothesis that brokerage—direct ties to collaborators who themselves do not have direct ties to each other—leads to greater collaborative creativity. We then test interaction hypotheses on the marginal benefits of cohesion, when collaborators have independent ties between themselves that do not include the individual. We identify the moderators of brokerage and argue for contingent benefits, based on the interaction of structure with the attributes, career experiences, and extended networks of individuals and their collaborators. Using a social definition of creative success, we also trace the development of creative ideas from their generation through future use by others. We test the hypothesis that brokered ideas are less likely to be used in future creative efforts. The results illustrate how collaborative brokerage can aid in the generation of an idea but then hamper its diffusion and use by others.

High-growth firms and technological knowledge: do gazelles follow exploration or exploitation strategies?

“…In particular, they allow for a better appreciation of the collective dimension of knowledge dynamics. Knowledge is indeed viewed as the outcome of a combinatorial activity in which intentional and unintentional exchange among innovating agents provides the access to external knowledge inputs (Fleming and et al, 2007). The network dynamics of innovating agents provide the basis for the emergence of new technological knowledge, which is in turn represented as an organic structure, characterized by elementary units and by the connections amongst them.…”

Antecedents and outcomes of breadth and depth of absorptive capacity: An empirical study

“…For example, Granovetter (1973) maintains that weak tie sources are often more important in spreading information or resources because they tend to serve as a bridge between otherwise disconnected social groups. Following that line of thought, Coradi, Heinzen, and Boutellier (2015) points out that as weak tie sources have a low degree of connectivity, they do not provide the deep social support of dense networks; thus such sources provide more opportunities to secure new information and diverse perspectives that can facilitate ideas (Fleming, Mingo, & Chen, 2007). Previous research has also found that weak tie sources transfer and secure codified knowledge efficiently and easily (Hansen, 1999).…”

Does “birds of a feather flock together” matter—Evidence from a longitudinal study on US–China scientific collaboration

“…Knowledge moderation. As noted previously, the positive correlation between collaboration and higher research quality in cross-sectional data suffers from "reverse causality and survivor bias" (Fleming, Mingo, & Chen, 2007). The causal effect requires that the left-side variable, research quality indicator(s) (JIF and CITATIONS), is the result of the right-side variable, international collaboration.…”

“…This situation should also be taken into consideration for such an interdisciplinary field as nanotechnology. This research controls for this factor by adopting the Fraunhofer ISI classification method, which categorizes nanotechnology research into 24 research fields based on subject category codes (Frietsch et al, 2007).…”

“…The findings of numerous studies are robust despite their diverse search strategies (Adams & Wilsdon, 2006;Frietsch, Tang, & Hinze, 2007;Kostoff, 2012;Youtie, Porter, Shapira, Tang, & Benn, 2011;Zhou & Leydesdorff, 2006). Measured by the number of research articles, China is now the world's largest producer of such output (Kostoff, 2012).…”