Sociology: Team assembly mechanisms determine collaboration network structure and team performance

Science

Volumn 308, Issue 5722, 2005, Pages 697-702

  Guimerà, Roger ^a   Uzzi, Brian ^b   Spiro, Jarrett ^c   Nunes Amaral, Luís A ^a  

^a Northwestern University   (United States)

^b NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c STANFORD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER SUPPORTED COOPERATIVE WORK; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; MECHANISMS; PARAMETER ESTIMATION; PHASE TRANSITIONS;

COLLABORATION NETWORKS; CREATIVE ENTERPRISES; SCIENTIFIC FIELDS; TEAM ASSEMBLY MECHANISMS;

MULTI AGENT SYSTEMS;

SOCIAL SCIENCE AND HUMANITIES;

ARTICLE; COOPERATION; MODEL; PERFORMANCE; PHASE TRANSITION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; TEAMWORK; ASTRONOMY; BEHAVIOR; CREATIVITY; ECOLOGY; ECONOMICS; HUMAN; LITERATURE; MUSIC; NONBIOLOGICAL MODEL; PUBLISHING; RESEARCH; SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY;

ASTRONOMY; BEHAVIOR; COOPERATIVE BEHAVIOR; CREATIVENESS; DRAMA; ECOLOGY; ECONOMICS; HUMANS; MODELS, ORGANIZATIONAL; MUSIC; PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL; PUBLISHING; RESEARCH;

EID: 17844408432     PISSN: 00368075     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1126/science.1106340     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. M. S. Granovetter, Am. J. Sociol. 78, 1360 (1973).
2. R. Reagans, E. W. Zuckerman, Organ. Sci. 12, 502 (2001).
3. R. Burt, Am. J. Sociol. 110, 349 (2004).
4. B. Uzzi, J. Spiro, Am. J. Sociol., in press.
5. J. R. Larson, C. Christensen, A. S. Abbott, T. M. Franz, J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 71, 315 (1996).
6. A. Edmondson, Adm. Sci. Q. 44, 350 (1999).
7. K. A. Jehn, G. B. Northcraft, M. A. Neale, Adm. Sci. Q. 44, 741 (1999).
8. G. Stasser, D. D. Stewart, G. M. Wittenbaum, J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 31, 244 (1995).
9. J. R. Katzenback, D. K. Smith, The Wisdom of Teams (Harper Business, New York, 1993).
10. J. M. Ziman, Prometheus Bound (Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1994).
11. J. R. Brown, Science 290, 1701 (2000).
12. S. Green, K. Green, Broadway Musicals Show by Show (Hal Leonard, Milwaukee, WI, 1996), ed. 5.
13. R. Simas, The Musicals No One Came to See: A Guide-book to Four Decades of Musical-Comedy Casualties on Broadway, Off-Broadway and in Out-Of-Town Try-Out, 1943-1983 (Garland, New York, 1988).
14. We imposed several requirements on the journals we selected for analysis. First, the main subject category of the journal must be the desired one. For example, we consider only those ecology journals whose subject category is either ecology or ecology and biodiversity and conservation according to the Journal Citation Reports. We disregarded more specialized journals, such as Microbial Biology, whose subject category is more specific We also required that journals contain a sufficiently large number of papers, typically larger than 1000.
15. M. E. J. Newman, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 98, 404 (2001).
16. A.-L. Barabási et al., Physica A 311, 590 (2002).
17. M. E. J. Newman, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 101, 5200 (2004).
18. K. Börner, J. T. Maru, R. L. Goldstone, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 101, 5266 (2004).
19. J. J. Ramasco, S. N. Dorogovtsev, R. Pastor-Satorras, Phys. Rev. E 70, 036106 (2004).
20. This stationary state remains until the mid-1980s, when size drops again precisely at the time when a rash of revivals and revues conceivably simplified production.
21. A.-L. Barabasi, R. Albert, Science 286, 509 (1999).
22. D. J. Watts, S. H. Strogatz, Nature 393, 440 (1998).
23. L. A. N. Amaral, A. Scala, M. Barthélémy, H. E. Stanley, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 97, 11149 (2000).
24. R. Albert, A.-L. Barabási, Rev. Mod. Phys. 74, 47 (2002).
25. M. E. J. Newman, SIAM Rev. 45, 167 (2003).
26. L. A. N. Amaral, J. Ottino, Eur. Phys. J. B 38, 147 (2004).
27. H. Etzkowitz, C. Kemelgor, M. Neuschatz, B. Uzzi, J. Alonzo, Science 266, 51 (1994).
28. D. A. Harrison, K. H. Price, M. P. Bell, Acad. Manage. J. 41, 96 (1998).
29. S. G. Barsade, A. J. Ward, J. D. F. Turner, J. A. Sonnenfeld, Adm. Sci. Q. 46, 174 (2001).
30. The teams and the agents are the nodes in a bipartite network. Technically, agents are connected only to teams and vice versa. However, this bipartite network can be projected onto a network comprising only agents and in which there is an edge (connection) between two nodes (agents) if the agents have been connected to at least one common team.
31. D. J. de Solla Price, Little Science, Big Science... and Beyond (Columbia Univ. Press, New York, 1963).
32. R. K. Merton, The Sociology of Science (Univ. of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1973).
33. D. Stauffer, A. Aharony, Introduction to Percolation Theory (Taylor and Francis, ed. 2, London, 1992).
34. M. Gladwell, The Tipping Point: How Little Things Can Make a Big Difference (Little, Brown, Boston, 2000).
35. R suggest intermediate values of both p and q, that is, a situation for which there is a balance between seasoned incumbents and newcomers with fresh ideas.
36. R of repeat incumbent-incumbent links predicted by the model coincides with the value measured from the data.
37. We thank K. Börner, V. Hatzimanikatis, A. A. Moreira, J. M. Ottino, M. Sales-Pardo, and D. B. Stouffer for numerous suggestions and discussions. R.G. thanks the Fulbright Program and the Spanish Ministry of Education, Culture, and Sports. LANA gratefully acknowledges the support of a Searle Leadership Fund Award and of a NIH/National Institute of General Medical Studies K-25 award.