Fall 2009 Schedule
Mondays – 11:30-1 pm (E52-598)
Date |
Speaker (Affiliation) |
Title and Abstract |
Sep. 14th |
Michael
Cusumano (MIT Sloan and Engineering) |
Enduring Ideas in Strategy and Innovation |
Sep. 21st |
Steve
Kahl ( |
CONCEPT,
COHERENCE, AND COHESION (with JoAnne Yates) Abstract: This paper explores why actors may develop different
interpretations of a new concept. It leverages work from cognitive science to
define this interpretive process in terms of creating coherence: fitting the
new concept into the existing conceptual schema. We argue that variation in
conceptualization results in part from cognitively cohering the concept in
different ways. We appeal to the social structure of the group to explain
this variance. Cohesive groups favor establishing similarities between the
new concept and something familiar in the existing schema. Diffuse groups
lack a clear, agreed-upon schema to hook a new concept into, and therefore
favor making sense of the new concept without directly integrating it into
the schema. We illustrate the relationship between social cohesion and
cognitive practices by analyzing the different conceptualizations of the
computer during its introduction in the insurance industry from 1940-1960. |
Oct. 19th |
Toby
Stuart (HBS) |
Abstract: In innovative industries, private sector firms
increasingly are participants in open communities of science or technology.
As part of the norms of exchange and engagement in such communities, firms often
publicly disclose what would otherwise remain private discoveries. In a
quantitative case study of one firm in the biopharmaceutical sector, we
explore the consequences of scientific publication—an instance of public
disclosure—for a core set of activities within the firm. Specifically, we
link publications to human resource practices, finding in researcher-level,
fixed effects regressions that bonuses are tied to publications. Second, using a unique electronic mail
dataset, we show that researchers within the firm who author publications are
much better connected to external (to the firm) members of the open
scientific community. This result directly links publishing to current
understandings of firms’ absorptive capacity. Third, in an unanticipated finding,
our analysis raises the possibility that the firm’s most prolific publisher
begin to migrate to the periphery of the intra-firm social network, which may
occur because their strong external relationships induce them to reorient
their focus to a community of scientists beyond the firm’s boundary. |
Oct. 26th |
Minyuan
Zhao ( |
The Macro Practices of R&D Management and
the Micro Behaviors of Scientists Abstract: A better understanding of decision making under
uncertainty has led to the wide diffusion of firm-level practices such as
sequential investments and portfolio diversification to manage R&D
projects. While the impact of these choices on firm R&D productivity has
been extensively examined, their effect on micro-behaviors of scientists has
been understudied. We argue that midway project termination, a consequence of
sequential investments and portfolio diversification, creates a sorting
process among R&D scientists and results in a separation between
scientists that disagree with the termination decision and those that do not.
The likelihood of disagreement is systematically higher in projects that are
characterized by higher uncertainty and for scientists that are more
productive and talented. Using longitudinal scientist level data on
pharmaceutical discovery, we find consistent evidence that scientists
pursuing more novel projects at the frontier of science, and scientists
with higher quality, productivity, and diversity in their research, are
more likely to leave incumbent firms to pursue their ideas elsewhere. This
finding underlines a reverse lemons problem in the market for R&D
scientists. We discuss the theoretical implications for management of R&D
scientists and their effect on firm-level productivity. |
Nov 16th |
Benjamin Jones (Kellogg, visiting Sloan) |
The
Knowledge Trap: Human Capital and Development Reconsidered Abstract: This paper presents a model where human capital differences, rather than residual productivity differences, can explain several central phenomena in the world economy. In the model, workers choose both the duration and content of their training. A "knowledge trap" occurs where skilled workers avoid narrow, deep training and thus fail, collectively, to embody frontier knowledge. Standard human capital accounting is shown to underestimate the resulting skill differences between rich and poor nations. The theory may explain price, wage and income differences across countries, and suggests novel interpretations of immigrant outcomes, poverty traps, and the brain drain, among other applications. |
Nov 30th |
Raghu
Iyengar (Wharton) |
tbd |
Dec 7th |
Erica Fuchs
(Carnegie Mellon) |
tbd |
Seminar Organizers: Pierre Azoulay, Michaël Bikard, Phil Anderson
Sign up here for seminar announcement email list
Click here for details on Speakers in Fall 2008, Spring 2008, 2007, 2006 and 2005
Questions, Comments & Suggestions email us at : iandeseminar-www at mit dot edu