The Effects of Diversity and Network Ties on Innovations

Abstract

This study examines the influence of different types of diversity, both observable and unobservable, on the creation of innovative ideas. Our framework draws upon theory and research on information processing, social categorization, coordination, and homophily to posit the influence of cognitive, gender, and country diversity on innovation. Our longitudinal model is based on a unique dataset of 1,354 researchers who helped create the new scientific field of Oncofertility, by collaborating on 469 publications over a four-year period. We capture the differences among researchers along cognitive, country and gender dimensions, as well as examine how the resulting diversity or homophily influences the formation of collaborative innovation networks. We find that innovation, operationalized as publishing in a new scientific discipline, benefits from both homophily and diversity. Homophily in country of residence and working with prior collaborators help reduce uncertainty in the interactions associated with innovation, while diversity in knowledge enables the recombinant knowledge required for innovation.

Mapping the growing discipline of dissemination and implementation science in health

“…The degree to which network-based interventions could enhance or accelerate the field of D&I depends on many factors, of course, but may offer an effective, evidence-based approach toward accelerated growth, improved productivity and increased impact. Finally, longitudinal studies should explore how the field of D&I evolves, adapts, and advances over time (see, for example, Lungeanu & Contractor [2014] for a longitudinal study mapping the emergence of the oncofertility field)[50]. Investigation into characteristics of highly-productive interdisciplinary teams within the field should yield important insight and practical application as well as contributing to the rich literature on team science[51].…”

Innovative Qualities of Today’s Young Students (As Exemplified by the Siberian Federal University

“…For example, Lungeanu and Contractor (2015) have studied the gender factor in generating innovative ideas; while DiRienzo and Das (2015) have analyzed the role of ethnic and religious diversity in innovation. According to these authors, ethnic diversity weakens innovation, whereas religious diversity makes a positive contribution.…”

Information elaboration and epistemic effects of diversity

“…Demographic diversity refers to diversity in demographic categories, such as gender, nationality, ethnicity, race, or religious affiliation, whereas task-related diversity refers to diversity in characteristics presumed to be more directly relevant to the task in question, such as education, experience, or expertise (Horwitz and Horwitz 2007, p. 990). Similar distinctions are drawn in several ways in the literature, including identity versus cognitive or shallow versus deep (see Hong and Page 2004;Horwitz and Horwitz 2007;Joshi and Roh 2009;Lungeanu and Contractor 2015;Milliken and Martins 1996;Page 2017;Phillips 2017;Smith-Doerr et al 2017;Stahl et al 2010;van Dijk et al 2012). We adopt the demographic versus task-related distinction here, as this appears to be the most commonly used.…”