Scientometrics

, Volume 10, Issue 5–6, pp 307–328 | Cite as

A causal model of productivity in a research facility

  • R. SenterJr.
Article

Abstract

The problem addressed concerns the conditions that foster productivity among natural scientists in a large research laboratory. We take several variables identified as important in two major perspectives in the literature on productivity, and use these variables to construct a causal model. Using path analysis, we test the model by employing data from a sample of 295 scientists working at an atomic research facility in West Germany. In general, educational level of the scientists has an important, positive impact on productivity; years of service has a varying and more modest positive effect. Rank of the scientist has an intermediate positive impact on productivity; psychological factors have a negligible effect. Finally, the influence the scientist has on his research endeavors has a modest positive impact on productivity.

Keywords

Natural Scientist Research Laboratory Educational Level Positive Impact Psychological Factor 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes and references

  1. 1.
    A. SMITH,Wealth of Nations, Vol. 1. Homewood, Il., Richard Irwin, 1963, pp. 4–5.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    D. BELL,The End of Ideology, Glencoe, Il., The Free Press, 1960, pp. 226–228.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    N. MOUZELIS,Organisation and Bureaucracy, Chicago, Aldine, 1967, pp. 79–87.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    U. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Indexes of Output per Man-hour for Selected Industries, 1939 and 1947–1963 BLS Report No. 301. Washington, D. C., Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1965.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    D. C. PELZ, Some Social Factors Related to Performance in a Research Organization,Administrative Science Quarterly, 1 (1956) 310–317.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    D. C. PELZ, F. M. AANDREWS, Organizational Atmosphere, Motivation, and Research Contribution,American Behavioral Scientist, 6 (December) (1962) 43–47.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    D. C. PELZ, F. M. ANDREWS, Diversity in Research,International Science and Technology, 31 (1964) 28–36.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    D. C. PELZ, F. M. ANDREWS, Autonomy, Coordination, and Stimulation in Relation to Scientific Achievement,Behavioral Scientist, 11 (1966) 89–97.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    D. C. PELZ, F. M. ANDREWS,Scientists in Organizations, Wiley, New York, 1966.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    F. M. ANDREWS, Scientific Performance as Related to Time Spent on Technical Work, Teaching, or Administration,Administrative Science Quarterly, 9 (1964–65) 182–193.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    F. M. ANDREWS, editor,Scientific Productivity: The Effectiveness of Research Groups in Six Countries, London, Cambridge University Press, 1978.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    M. FRANK FOX, Publication Productivity among Scientists: A Critical Review,Social Studies of Science, 13 (May) (1983) 285–305.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    A. E. BAYER, J. E. DUTTON, Career Age and Research-Professional Activities of Academic Scientists,Journal of Higher Education, 48 (May/June) (1977) 259–282.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    S. COLE, Age and Scientific Performance,American Journal of Sociology, 84 (1979) 958–977.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    D. C. PELZ, F. M. ANDREWS,Scientists in Organizations: Productive Climates for Research and Development, Ann Arbor, Mi., Institute for Social Research, 1976.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    E. HAMMEL, Report of the Task Force on Faculty Renewal, Berkeley, Ca., University of California at Berkeley, Population Research, 1980.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    D. CRANE, Scientists at Major and Minor Universities: A Study of Productivity and Recognition,American Sociological Review 30 (1965) 699–715.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    B. RESKIN, Academic Sponsorship and Scientists Careers,Sociology of Education, 52 (1979) 129–146.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    D. E. CHUBIN, A. L. PORTER, M. BOECKMAN, Career Patterns of Scientists,American Sociological Review, 46 (1981) 488–496.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    H. KLINGEMANN, Wissenschaftliche Leistung Messmethoden und Ausgewahlte Determinanten, Unpublished Diplom essay, Köln, West Germany, University of Köln, 1973.Google Scholar
  21. 25.
    P. D. ALLISON, J. A. STEWART, Productivity Differences Among Scientists: Evidence for Accumulative Advantage,American Sociological Review, 39 (1974) 596–606.Google Scholar
  22. 26.
    P. D. ALLISON, J. S. LONG, T. K. KRAUZE, Cumulative Advantage and Inequality in Science,American Sociological Review, 47 (1982) 615–625.Google Scholar
  23. 27.
    S. BOX, S. COTGROVE, The Productivity of Scientists in Modern Industrial Research Laboratories,Sociology, 2 (1968) 163–72.Google Scholar
  24. 28.
    H. M. VOLLMER, Evaluating Two Aspects of Quality in Research Program Effectiveness, in:The Science of Managing Organized Technology, Vol. II, edited by M. J. CETRON and J. D. GOLDHAR. New York, Gordon and Breach, 1970, 1487–1501.Google Scholar
  25. 30.
    O. D. DUNCAN,Introduction to Structural Equation Models, New York, Academic Press, 1975.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó 1986

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. SenterJr.
    • 1
  1. 1.Central Michigan UniversityMt. Pleasant(USA)

Personalised recommendations