JOURNAL BROWSE
Search
Advanced SearchSearch Tips
Assessing Knowledge Structures for Public Research Institutes
facebook(new window)  Pirnt(new window) E-mail(new window) Excel Download
  • Journal title : Journal of Contemporary Eastern Asia
  • Volume 15, Issue 1,  2016, pp.27-40
  • Publisher : World Association for Triple hElix and Future strategy studies
  • DOI : 10.17477/jcea.2016.15.1.027
 Title & Authors
Assessing Knowledge Structures for Public Research Institutes
Yang, Hyeonchae; Jung, Woo-Sung;
  PDF(new window)
 Abstract
This study uses a network approach to investigate the structural characteristics of sub-organizations within public research institutes in order to obtain their implications for organizational structures. We construct a network based on research similarities between sub-organizations because sub-organizations generally build their own research portfolios. We examine how sub-units are organized based on their structural features. The structural features are compared between three public research institutes in different countries: the Korean the Government-funded Research Institutes (GRIs), the Max-Planck-Gesellschaft in Germany, and the National Laboratories (NLs) in the United States. The structural comparison helps to identify organizational characteristics and to differentiate between them. We found little common ground in the research areas between the GRIs because individual sub-organizations have distinct research portfolios. Therefore, the organizational hierarchy of research in the GRIs is less matured than it is in other public research institutes. This study suggests that the GRIs need to establish integrated strategies in order to strengthen the common knowledge base.
 Keywords
 Language
English
 Cited by
1.
Quintuple helix structure of Sino-Korean research collaboration in science, Scientometrics, 2017, 113, 1, 61  crossref(new windwow)
2.
Analysis of technological innovation based on citation information, Quality & Quantity, 2017, 51, 3, 1065  crossref(new windwow)
3.
How do sociodemographic and structural similarities explain viewing pattern similarity by channel type? Insight from a network analytic approach, Quality & Quantity, 2017, 51, 3, 1093  crossref(new windwow)
4.
Uncovering stakeholders in public–private relations on social media: a case study of the 2015 Volkswagen scandal, Quality & Quantity, 2017, 51, 3, 1113  crossref(new windwow)
 References
1.
Albuquerque, E. d. M. e. (2001) Scientific Infrastructure and Catching-Up Process: Notes about a Relationship Illustrated by Science and Technology Statistics. Revista Brasileira de Economia, 55, pp. 545-566 crossref(new window)

2.
Arnold, W. (1988) Science and Technology Development in Taiwan and South Korea. Asian Survey, 28(4), pp. 437-450. crossref(new window)

3.
Bavelas, A. (1948) A Mathematical Model for Group Structures. Human Organization, 7(3), pp. 16-30. crossref(new window)

4.
Borgatti, S. P., Mehra, A., Brass, D. J. and Labianca, G. (2009) Network Analysis in the Social Sciences. Science, 323(5916), pp. 892-895. crossref(new window)

5.
Borner, K., Klavans, R., Patek, M., Zoss, A. M., Biberstine, J. R., Light, R. P., Lariviere, V. and Boyack, K. W. (2012) Design and update of a classification system: the UCSD map of science. PLoS ONE, 7(7), pp. e39464. crossref(new window)

6.
Bozeman, B. (1987) All organizations are public: Bridging public and private organizational theories, Jossey-Bass San Francisco.

7.
Cho, H.-D., Hwang, Y. S., Kim, W. D., Sung, T.-K., Lee, D., Lee, B.-H., Kang, Y. and Lee, K. (2007) The Evolution of Public Research Systems of Major Countries and Policy Recommendations for Korea [Original title and text in Korean]. Research Policy: STEPI.

8.
Colliander, C. and Ahlgren, P. (2012) Experimental comparison of first and second-order similarities in a scientometric context. Scientometrics, 90(2), pp. 675-685. crossref(new window)

9.
Csardi, G. and Nepusz, T. (2006) The igraph software package for complex network research. InterJournal, Complex Systems, 1695(5).

10.
Eck, N. J. v. and Waltman, L. (2009) How to normalize cooccurrence data? An analysis of some well-known similarity measures. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(8), pp. 1635-1651. crossref(new window)

11.
Floricel, S. and Ibanescu, M. (2008) Using R&D portfolio management to deal with dynamic risk. R&D Management, 38(5), pp. 452-467. crossref(new window)

12.
Freeman, L. C. (1977) A Set of Measures of Centrality Based on Betweenness. Sociometry, 40(1), pp. 35. crossref(new window)

13.
Freeman, L. C. (1978) Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification. Social Networks, 1(3), pp. 215-239. crossref(new window)

14.
Freeman, L. C., Roeder, D. and Mulholland, R. R. (1979) Centrality in social networks: II. Experimental results. Social Networks, 2(2), pp. 119-141. crossref(new window)

15.
García, J. A., Rodríguez-Sánchez, R., Fdez-Valdivia, J., Robinson-García, N. and Torres-Salinas, D. (2012) Mapping academic institutions according to their journal publication profile: Spanish universities as a case study. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(11), pp. 2328-2340. crossref(new window)

16.
Guimera, R. and Amaral, L. A. (2005) Cartography of complex networks: modules and universal roles. J Stat Mech, 2005(P02001), pp. nihpa35573.

17.
Guimera, R., Sales-Pardo, M. and Amaral, L. A. (2007) Classes of complex networks defined by role-to-role connectivity profiles. Nat Phys, 3(1), pp. 63-69. crossref(new window)

18.
Hong, H. D. (2011) Search for R&D projects according to expertise in Korean Government-funded Research Institutes [Original title and text in Korean]: MSIP.

19.
Kim, Y.-S. (1995) Technological Development and R&D Policy: The Case of Korea. Human Systems Management, 14(3), pp. 249-258.

20.
Kruskal, J. B. (1956) On the Shortest Spanning Subtree of a Graph and the Traveling Salesman Problem. Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society, 7(1), pp. 48. crossref(new window)

21.
Latora, V. and Marchiori, M. (2001) Efficient behavior of small-world networks. Phys Rev Lett, 87(19), pp. 198701. crossref(new window)

22.
Lee, D. H., Bae, Z.-T. and Lee, J. (1991) Performance and adaptive roles of the government-supported research institute in South Korea. World Development, 19(10), pp. 1421-1440. crossref(new window)

23.
Leydesdorff, L. (2003) The mutual information of university-industry-government relations: An indicator of the Triple Helix dynamics. Scientometrics, 58(2), pp. 445-467. crossref(new window)

24.
Lorrain, F. and White, H. C. (1971) Structural equivalence of individuals in social networks. The Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 1(1), pp. 49-80. crossref(new window)

25.
Lundvall, B. Å . (2007) National Innovation Systems—Analytical Concept and Development Tool. Industry and Innovation, 14(1), pp. 95-119. crossref(new window)

26.
Mazzoleni, R. and Nelson, R. (2005) The roles of research at universities and public labs in economic catch-up. Nova York, Columbia University, Initiative for Policy Dialogue, Working Paper.

27.
Newman, M. and Girvan, M. (2004) Finding and evaluating community structure in networks. Physical Review E, 69(2).

28.
OECD (2011) Public Research Institutions: Mapping Sector Trends. in: OECD Publishing.

29.
Park, H. W. and Leydesdorff, L. (2010) Longitudinal trends in networks of university–industry–government relations in South Korea: The role of programmatic incentives. Research Policy, 39(5), pp. 640-649. crossref(new window)

30.
Prim, R. C. (1957) Shortest Connection Networks And Some Generalizations. Bell System Technical Journal, 36(6), pp. 1389-1401. crossref(new window)

31.
R Core Team (2015) R: A language and environment for statistical computing [Computer program]. Available at www.R-project.org. in,Vienna, Austria: R Foundation Statistical Computing.

32.
Sci2 Team (2009) Science of Science (Sci2) Tool. Indiana University and SciTech Strategies. [Computer program]. Available at http://sci2.cns.iu.edu. in.

33.
Sharif, N. (2006) Emergence and development of the National Innovation Systems concept. Research Policy, 35(5), pp. 745-766. crossref(new window)

34.
Teece, D. J., Pisano, G. and Shuen, A. (1997) Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), pp. 509-533. crossref(new window)

35.
Velden, T., Haque, A.-u. and Lagoze, C. (2010) A new approach to analyzing patterns of collaboration in co-authorship networks: mesoscopic analysis and interpretation. Scientometrics, 85(1), pp. 219-242. crossref(new window)

36.
Vonortas, N. S. (2012) Social networks in R&D program evaluation. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 38(5), pp. 577-606.

37.
Vonortas, N. S. and Okamura, K. (2013) Network structure and robustness: lessons for research programme design. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 22(4), pp. 392-411. crossref(new window)

38.
Wickham, H. (2009) ggplot2: elegant graphics for data analysis, Springer Publishing Company, Incorporated.

39.
Yang, H. and Jung, W.-S. (2014) A strategic management approach for Korean public research institutes based on bibliometric investigation. Quality & Quantity, 49(4), pp. 1437-1464.

40.
Yang, H. and Jung, W. S. (In Press) Structural Efficiency to Manipulate Public Research Institution Networks. Technological Forecasting and Social Change.

41.
Ye, F. Y., Yu, S. S. and Leydesdorff, L. (2013) The Triple Helix of University-Industry-Government Relations at the Country Level and Its Dynamic Evolution Under the Pressures of Globalization. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 64(11), pp. 2317-2325. crossref(new window)

42.
Yim, D. S. (2005) The Evolutionary Responses of Korean Government Research Institutes in a Changing National Innovation System. Science Technology & Society, 10(1), pp. 31-55. crossref(new window)