Skip to main content
Log in

Organizational environment and performance of research groups—A typological analysis

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this paper an attempt is made to construct a typology of research units according to a set of organizational features and relate the resulting classification to a set of performance measures. The organizational features include (i) resources and facilities for research; (ii) Communication and transfer of new ideas; (iii) Planning and organization of research; and (iv) Social psychological environment for research. The performance measure include (i) General R&D effectiveness, which essentially connotes the quality dimension of research performance; (ii) Recognition of the work of the research unit by the scientific community; (iii) User-oriented effectiveness; and (iv) Administrative effectiveness (budget and schedule compliance).

This study is based on the subset of empirical data on 220 research units collected in India for the third round of the UNESCO International Comparative Study on the Organization and Performance of Research Units (ICSOPRU). Twenty three measures of organizational environment, operationalized by multiple indicators, were chosen as discriminant criteria for the construction of the typology, using a classification computer programme SYSTIT (Systeme' de Typologie Iterative). The relationship between typology groupings and performance measures was analyzed through multiple correspondence analysis.

This study brings out that resources and facilities for research are a necessary but not a sufficient condition of performance. The sufficiency condition implies a positive work environment, effective communication within and outside the research group and a conceptually exciting research programme.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. J. P. Aimetti, N. Visart, C. Y. Gainche, The utility of using different typologies of research units to understand their functioning and management,R&D Management, 9 (1979) 193–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. I. H. Small, E. Sweeney, Clustering the Science Citation Index using co-citations I. A comparison of methods,Scientometrics, 7 (1985) 391;I. H. Small, E. Sweeney, E. Greenlee, Clustering the Science Citation Index using co-citations II. Mapping Science,Scientometrics, 8 (1985) 321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. R. J. W. Tijssen, A. F. J. Van Raan, Mapping changes in science and technology. Bibliometric co-occurrence analysis of the R&D literature,Evaluation Review, 18 (1994) 98–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. J. C. Miller, A. V. Roth, A taxonomy of manufacturing strategies,Management Science, 40 (1985) 285–304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. J. T. Mahoney, J. R. Pandian, The resource based view within the conversation of strategic management,Strategic Management Journal, 13 (1992) 363–380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. R. E. Kelley,The Gold-Collar Worker, Addison-Wesley, California, (1985).

    Google Scholar 

  7. H. J. Thamhain, D. C. Wilemon, Building high performing engineering project teams,IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 34 (1987), No3, August, 130–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. D. C. Wilemon, H. J. Thamhain, A model for developing high-performance teams, inProceedings Annual Symposium, Project Management Institute, Houston, TX (1983).

  9. A. Chawla,Multivariate relationship between resource inputs and performance of research units: A socio-organizational study, Doctoral Thesis to be submitted to Agra University (1998).

  10. F. M. Andrews (Ed).Scientific Productivity, Cambridge University Press, New York (1979).

    Google Scholar 

  11. P. S. Nagpaul, Quasi-quantitative measures of research performance: An assessment of construct validity and reliability,Scientometrics, 33 (2) (1995) 169–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. P. S. Nagpaul, Measurement of research performance: conceptual and methodological problems. Paper presented at the workshop on “Science and Technology Indicators for Development”, New Delhi (1985).

  13. A. Chawla,ref. 9.Multivariate relationship between resource inputs and performance of research units: A socio-organizational study, Doctoral Thesis to be submitted to Agra University (1998).

  14. K. Joreskog, D. Sorbom, Lisrel 7.16:Analysis of Linear Structural Relationship by Maximum Likelihood and Least Squares Methods, International Educational Services, Chicago (1989).

    Google Scholar 

  15. J. P. Aimetti, J. Massol.Le programme SYSTIT, GSIe Paris (1976).

    Google Scholar 

  16. M. Jambu,Exploratory and Multivariate Data Analysis, Academic Press, New York (1989).

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. J. Rovan, Visualizing solutions in more than two dimensions, in:M. Greenacre andJ. Blasium (Eds)Correspondence Analysis in the Social Sciences, Academic Press, London, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  18. J. P. Benzecri et. al.,L'analyse des Données, Vol 1,La Taxonomie., Dunod, Paris, (1973).

    MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Chawla, A., Singh, J.P. Organizational environment and performance of research groups—A typological analysis. Scientometrics 43, 373–391 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02457405

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02457405

Keywords

Navigation