Abstract
The R&D laboratory organization attempts to shape and is influenced by complex and changing environments. New contexts affect the types of evaluation required. Traditional approaches to the R&D laboratory evaluation are thus to be questioned. The changing competitive contexts of R&D organization suggest four worlds of innovation: (i) technology races, (ii) efficiency in technological systems, (iii) technical parity and (iv) market contests. In the emerging competitive arena, the R&D laboratory is evolving toward a network type of organization linked to many different partners and acting as a semi-autonomous business unit. New roles are expected from these kinds of laboratories. They have to develop core strategic competencies, offer competitive outputs, meet clients specifications, create new technology standards and maintain or increase their leadership positions. Bibliometric analysis need to be used in complement with many other methods.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
A. J. Barbarie, Evaluating federal R&D in Canada, inB. Bozeman, J. Melkers (Eds),Evaluating R&D Impacts: Methods and Practice, Kluwer Academic Pub., 1993, pp. 155–162.
R. W. Schmitt, The strategic measure of R&D,Research-Technology Management, 34, No. 6 (1991) 13–16.
F. Anderson, R. Dalpe, A profile of Canadian coal and petroleum research communities,Scientometrics 25, No. 3 (1992) 447–463.
W. B. Brown, D. Gobeli, Observation on the mesurement of R&D productivity: A case study,IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, EM-39, No. 4 (1992) 325–331.
B. Gold, Charting a course to superior technology evaluation,Sloan Management Review, (Fall 1988) 19–27.
G. S. Souza, E. R. Cruz, T. R. Cruz, The measurement and assessment of quality in agricultural research institutions,Scientometrics, 28, No. 2 (1993) 159–182.
P. H. Rossi, H. E. Freeman,Evaluation: A Systematic Approach, Sage Pub. Newbury Park, 1989.
D. E. Chubin, “Grant Peer Review in Theory and Practice”,Evaluation Review, Special Issue: Research Impact Assessment,R. N. Kostoff (Ed.), Vol. 18, No. 1, Feb. 1994, pp. 20–30.
R. Smith, Problems with peer review and alternative,British Medical Journal, 296(6624) (1988) 774–777.
A. H. Rubenstein, Managing Technology in the Decentralized Firm, Wiley, New York, 1989.
A. S. Bean, Why some R&D organizations are more productive than others,Research-Technology Management, (Jan–Feb. 1995) 15–29.
Z. Griliches, Productivity puzzles and R&D: Another noexplanation,Journal of Economics Perspectives, 2, No. 4 (1988) 9–21.
G. K. Morbey, R. M. Reithner, How R&D affects sales growth, productivity and profitability,Research-Technology Management, 33, No. 3 (1990) 11–14.
B. Nixon et al., Industry and the City: Is R&D the key?,Accountancy, 111, No. 1193 (1993) 102.
W. S. Bush, R. R. Colwell, Communications and scientific productivity in the marine sciences,Research Evaluation, 1, No. 1 (1991) 11–19.
P. J. Jakes, Research evaluation in the US forest service: Opinions of research manager,Research Policy, No. 17 (1988) 283–292.
M. M. Qurashi, Dependence of publication-rate on size of some university groups and department in U.K., and Greece, in comparison with N.C.I., USA,Scientometrics, 27, No. 3 (1993) 19–29.
H. A. Averch, Policy Uses of Evaluation of Research Literature, Office of Technology Assessment (USA), Contractor Report, July 1990.
R. N. Kostoff, “Research Impact Assessment: Where Are We Now?”, Internal Report, Office of Naval Research USA, March 1993.
R. Miller, The influence of primary task on R&D laboratory evaluation: A comparative bibliometric analysis,R&D Management, 22, No. 1 (1992) 3–20.
F. Narin, Technology indicators and corporate planning,Review of Business, 14, No. 3 (Spring 1993) 19–23.
K. Pavitt, “The Technological Competencies of the World's Largest Firms”, Conference 93. II. 18, Hydro-Quebec Chair in Management of Technology, Université du Québec in Montreal, Feb. 1993, 11 p.
A. N. Link, Methods for evaluating the return on R&D investments, in:B. Bozeman, J. Melkers (Eds),Evaluating R&D Impacts: Methods and Practice, Kluwer Academic Publ., 1993, pp. 1–16.
W. L. Robb, Evaluating industrial R&D,Evaluation Review, 18, No. 1 (1994) 89–97.
R. Miller, The new agenda for R&D: Strategy and integration,International Journal of Technology Management, 10, Nos 4/5/6 (1995) 511–524.
E. Helander, Evaluation activities in the Nordic countries,Scientometrics, 34, No. 3 (1995) 391–400.
W. Krull, The Max Planck experience of evaluation,Scientometrics, 34, No. 3 (1995) 441–450.
W. A. Smith, Evaluating research, technology and development in Canadian industry: Meeting the challenges of industrial innovation”,Scientometrics, 34, No. 3 (1995) 527–539.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Miller, R., Manseau, A. Bibliometric indicators and the competitive environment of R&D laboratories. Scientometrics 36, 421–433 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02129603
Received:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02129603