Looking Across and Looking Beyond the Knowledge Frontier: Intellectual Distance, Novelty, and Resource Allocation in Science

Selecting among alternative projects is a core management task in all innovating organizations. In this paper, we focus on the evaluation of frontier scientific research projects. We argue that the “intellectual distance” between the knowledge embodied in research proposals and an evaluator’s own ex...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Management science 2016-10, Vol.62 (10), p.2765-2783
Main Authors: Boudreau, Kevin J., Guinan, Eva C., Lakhani, Karim R., Riedl, Christoph
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Accumulation
Analysis
Bias
bounded rationality
Experts
innovation
intellectual distance
knowledge frontier
Management styles
Noise
novelty
Organizational change
project selection
Proposals
Resource allocation
Scientific method
Technological innovations
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Selecting among alternative projects is a core management task in all innovating organizations. In this paper, we focus on the evaluation of frontier scientific research projects. We argue that the “intellectual distance” between the knowledge embodied in research proposals and an evaluator’s own expertise systematically relates to the evaluations given. To estimate relationships, we designed and executed a grant proposal process at a leading research university in which we randomized the assignment of evaluators and proposals to generate 2,130 evaluator–proposal pairs. We find that evaluators systematically give lower scores to research proposals that are closer to their own areas of expertise and to those that are highly novel. The patterns are consistent with biases associated with boundedly rational evaluation of new ideas. The patterns are inconsistent with intellectual distance simply contributing “noise” or being associated with private interests of evaluators. We discuss implications for policy, managerial intervention, and allocation of resources in the ongoing accumulation of scientific knowledge. This paper was accepted by Lee Fleming, entrepreneurship and innovation .
ISSN:0025-1909
1526-5501
DOI:10.1287/mnsc.2015.2285