Kein Folientitel

1
The Challenge of Organizing for Creativity in
Research Stefan KuhlmannDirector, Fraunhofer
Institute for Systems and Innovation Research
(ISI), Karlsruhe, Germany Professor, Utrecht
University, Copernicus Institute, Innovation
Studies Group, The Netherlands The future of
research New players, roles and strategies,Six
Countries Programme Conference,20/21 April 2005,
Rotterdam, The Netherlands
2
What is creativity?
3
Overview

• Frontier research
• The CREA project
• What is creativity?
• Organizing for creativity Hypotheses
• Consequences for research policy

4
Pasteurs Quadrant, according to Donald Stokes
(1997)
5
Frontier Research (HLEG on ERC, 2005)

• The term Frontier Research reflects the fact
  that
• it is at the leading edge in developing new
  knowledge
• it is intrinsically risky, in that it is often
  not yet clear which approach may eventually prove
  most fruitful
• there are no boundaries between disciplines, nor
  between basic and applied research frontier
  research is concerned both with both new
  knowledge about the world and with generating
  potentially useful knowledge at the same time,
  and
• by its very nature, it transcends national
  borders.

6
http//europa.eu.int/comm/research/future/pdf/hleg
_fullreport_frontier_research_april2005.pdf
7
CREA A NEST project

• "Creativity capabilities and the promotion of
  highly innovative research in Europe and the
  United States" (CREA) (2005-06)
  (http//www.cordis.lu/nest)
• Project sponsored by EU FP6 NEST (Anticipation of
  scientific and technological needs)
• Basic assumption Institutional factors have a
  serious impact on creativity in research ?
  Supportive factors?
• Team
• Stefan Kuhlmann Thomas Heinze - Fraunhofer ISI,
  Karlsruhe
• Philip Shapira colleagues Georgia Tech,
  Atlanta
• Jacqueline Senker colleagues SPRU, Brighton

8
CREA Project goals

• Identify creative researchers and research groups
  in two fields
• human genetics
• nano ST
• Study their work environment systematically
• bibliometric profiles
• in-depth interviews
• Understand institutional factors either
  supporting or impeding creativity in research
• e.g. work group environment
• e.g. organisational structure
• Make tentative recommendations for policy
  instruments in and beyond NEST

9
What is creativity?

• "Creativity is the ability to produce work that
  is novel (original, unexpected), high-quality,
  and appropriate (useful, meets task
  constraints)."
• "Creativity (..) is largely something that
  people show in a particular domain."
• "At a societal level, creativity can lead to
  new scientific findings, new movements in art,
  new inventions, and new social programs. The
  economic importance of creativity is clear
  because new products or services create jobs."
• Source Sternberg (2003)

10
What is creativity in research? (1 of 3)

• Incremental or radical steps
• Within or across knowledge domains
• Exploration or exploitation
• Tensions and resistance

11
What is creativity in research? (2 of 3)

• CREA definition
• "Highly creative, current research is conducted
  by individual researchers or groups undertaking
  novel work with major implications or potential".

12
What is creativity in research? (3 of 3)
13
Creativity at the individual level

• Social personality approaches point to
• Knowledge base
• deep domain-relevant knowledge and know-how
• knowledge of heuristics for generating novel
  ideas
• Motivation base
• intrinsic goal-orientation
• need for achievement
• high energy level and self-confidence
• Creativity skill base
• cognitive style that welcomes complexity
• spontaneity
• risk taking
• ability to be selective and persistent, and to
  concentrate effort

14
CREA unit of analysis

• A research group is the smallest independent
  unit undertaking research in a specified problem
  area within a formal organisation. Research
  groups can be departments or sub-units of
  university institutes, non-university institutes,
  industrial research facilities or other
  free-standing types of research organisations.

15
Organizational features conducive to creativity
in research (1 of 3)

• Scientific Diversity
• moderate variety of different disciplines and
  sub-specialties,
• proportion of people with research experience in
  different disciplines and/or paradigms
• Depth
• number of scientists in each area of diversity,
• diversity of talents in each scientific area
  (e.g., genetics Drosophila, neurospora, maize,
  mice)
• Differentiation
• the number of departments and other kinds of
  units,
• delegation of recruitment to department or other
  subunit,
• responsibility for extramural funding at
  departmental or other subunit level

Source Hollingsworth (2000, 2002, 2004)
16
Organizational features conducive to creativity
in research (2 of 3)

• Low Hierarchical and Bureaucratic Coordination
• low standardization of rules/procedures,
• no centralized budgetary controls, no centralized
  decision-making about research programs and about
  number of personnel
• Visionary Leadership
• strategic vision for integrating diverse areas,
• ability to secure funding for these activities,
• ability to conduct recruitment of sufficiently
  diverse personnel so research groups are
  constantly aware of what are significant and
  "doable" problems,
• ability to provide rigorous criticism in a
  nurturing environment

Source Hollingsworth (2000, 2002, 2004)
17
Organizational features conducive to creativity
in research (3 of 3)

• Integration of Multi-disciplinary Perspectives.
  Across specialties
• high frequency and intensity of interaction,
• many publications of papers,
• existence of journal clubs, sharing of meals and
  leisure time activities
• High Quality
• high proportion of scientists in the nations
  most prestigious academy of science,
• high research funding per scientist

Source Hollingsworth (2000, 2002, 2004)
18
Factors impeding creativity in research

• Lack of core funding for research
• Heavy dependency on external project funding
• Limited time for research due to other priorities
• Narrow range of expertise or disciplinary
  perspectives
• Unclear research goals
• Excessive evaluation and accountability pressures
• Bureaucratic research management and
  administration
• Overemphasis on extrinsic motivation e.g.
  financial rewards
• Poor leadership

Source Hemlin, Martin, Allwood (2004)
19
Hypotheses at work group level

• H1 High frequency and intensity of interaction
  within a workgroup fosters creativity on the
  individual level.
• H2 High number of different subfields in a
  workgroup, coupled with several tools of
  intellectual integration, make individual
  researchers more productive and creative.
• H3 High number of external contacts or
  collaborations enhances number of individual
  contributions judged by peers as creative.
• H4 Good leadership is beneficial to creativity
  in work groups.

20
Hypotheses at organisational level (1 of 2)

• H5 Flat structure and small size foster
  knowledge transfer and thus emergence of creative
  ideas.
• H6 Decentralised decision-making supports
  intellectual pluralism, scientific competition
  and thus creative work.
• H7 Clear research goals are beneficial to
  intellectual innovations.
• H8 Lack of core funding impedes creative work.

21
Hypotheses at organisational level (2 of 2)

• H9 Excessive evaluation/ accountability
  pressures impede creative work.
• H10 Scientific reputation and visibility of
  organisation attracts creative individuals.
• H11 Flexible labour markets for researchers and
  job turnover enable knowledge transfer and
  organisational learning.

22
Methodology of CREA

• Bibliometric delineation of two fields
• Nano ST
• Human Genetics
• Preparation of first panel
• Postal questionnaire
• Preparation of second panel
• In-depth case studies
• Policy measures

23
Consequences for research policy (1 of 3)

• External governance
• Combination of public and market governance
• Relevant shares of performance/excellence based
  funding
• Differentiation shares of institutional and
  contract-based funding depending on life cycle of
  scientific / technological development
• Reliable regulatory frame for inter-institutional
  collaboration and ventures
• Facilitation of inter-institutional career
  development
• Open, fluid international labour market, not
  hampered by national legislation

24
Consequences for research policy (2 of 3)

• Internal governance (meso level)
• Open interfaces networking Porous boundaries
  (Rip)
• "Smart mix" of frontier research, development,
  links with academic and other education (see some
  US universities)
• Mobility of staff across heterogeneous
  institutional borders (e.g. university, national
  labs, RTO, industry, ...)
• Internationalisation of research staff
• Relevant shares of performance-based programme
  and project funding, beyond institutional funding

25
Consequences for research policy (3 of 3)

• Cultural orientation
• Clear mission identity (Leitbild) and mission,
  e.g. problem-oriented industrial innovation
  break-through scientific insights but don't
  prevent heterogeneous combinations!
• Profile scientific and technological core
  competencies
• International alliances and mergers Go European
  and beyond!

26
Contact

• stefan.kuhlmann_at_isi.fraunhofer.de
• thomas.heinze_at_isi.fraunhofer.de