Being a Catalyst of Innovation: The Role of Knowledge Diversity and Network Closure
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Whereas recent research on organizational innovation suggests that there is an ecology of roles supporting the innovation process, the majority of network research has concentrated on the role of inventors. In this paper, we contribute to research on organizational innovation by studying the social structural conditions conducive to individuals supporting, facilitating, and promoting the innovativeness of their colleagues—a role we refer to as catalysts of innovation. We consider an individual’s network position and the type of knowledge available to her through her network as key enabling conditions. We argue that the unique configuration of having access to diverse knowledge through a closed network enables individuals to act as innovation catalysts. Based on a study of 276 researchers in the research and development division of a large multinational high-tech company, we find strong support for our prediction and demonstrate that catalysts make important contributions to the innovative outputs of other researchers in terms of their colleagues’ patent applications.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it