本文選題：跨學科 + 原始性創(chuàng)新�。� 參考：《浙江大學》2016年博士論文

【摘要】：如果說,創(chuàng)新是一條河流,那么原始性創(chuàng)新就是這條河流的源頭。原始性創(chuàng)新,已經(jīng)成為我國能否實現(xiàn)創(chuàng)新型國家建設的關鍵驅(qū)動因素。實踐證明跨學科合作是實現(xiàn)原始性創(chuàng)新的一條重要途徑。在高�？鐚W科團隊合作過程中,通常面臨策略選擇的困境：選擇哪些學科一起合作、怎樣合作,以及與何種組織類型的團隊合作才能提升原始性創(chuàng)新能力,而不是阻礙創(chuàng)新。不同學科、不同組織和不同團隊之間的合作是通過什么途徑影響原始性創(chuàng)新績效的,而外部環(huán)境,如領導風格在合作過程中又是如何調(diào)節(jié)異質(zhì)性對創(chuàng)新績效的作用的。這些都是擺在高校原始性創(chuàng)新過程中既緊迫又棘手的現(xiàn)實問題。本文基于資源基礎觀理論、異質(zhì)性理論和領導力理論等理論基礎,采用驗證性因子分析和泊松回歸分析的統(tǒng)計方法,利用255個團隊的樣本數(shù)據(jù),探究跨學科團隊異質(zhì)性與高�？蒲袌F隊原始性創(chuàng)新績效的關系,也確定了變革型領導如何影響他們之間的關系。在此基礎上,本研究還明確了跨學科合作過程中,涉及合作的研究類型、團隊所在的高校類型以及資助金額與高校原始性績效之間的關系,結論如下：第一,在異質(zhì)性的概念和維度劃分方面。本文定義跨學科團隊異質(zhì)性為：在高校原始性創(chuàng)新過程中,兩個或多個學科的科研團隊進行合作,不同的學科知識重組、不同的成員認知思維運動,兩者之間基于學科邏輯結構和社會認知以及人際關系的相互關系,形成團隊資源稟賦和創(chuàng)新能力上的差異性、多樣性和分布均衡性。本研究將跨學科團隊異質(zhì)性劃分為學科異質(zhì)性、認知異質(zhì)性和組織異質(zhì)性三個維度。第二,本研究將通過原始性創(chuàng)新總績效,以及原始性創(chuàng)新的三個子維度的績效分別實證了其與團隊異質(zhì)性之間的關系,部分假設得到驗證。首先,在原始性創(chuàng)新總績效方面。學科異質(zhì)性、認知異質(zhì)性和組織異質(zhì)性都對高校原始性創(chuàng)新團隊的總績效有顯著促進作用。我們認為：基于資源基礎觀理論和團隊凝聚力理論產(chǎn)生的正向效應比基于社會認知理論和信息加工理論的團隊沖突產(chǎn)生的負向效應影響要大。其中,認知異質(zhì)性對原始性創(chuàng)新總績效的影響最大,其次是學科異質(zhì)性,然后是組織異質(zhì)性。這說明,跨學科之間的合作對創(chuàng)新的促進作用不僅僅來源于顯性知識的異質(zhì)性的影響,更重要的的影響可能來源于隱性的認知異質(zhì)性。其次,在首創(chuàng)性績效方面。組織異質(zhì)性不是很重要的影響因素,而學科異質(zhì)性和認知異質(zhì)性對原始性創(chuàng)新的首創(chuàng)性績效起到顯著的促進作用。因此,在高校原始性創(chuàng)新過程中,促進異質(zhì)性學科之間合作的同時,也需要特別關注團隊成員之間的相互交流、碰撞和融合。再次,在新穎性績效方面。所有的異質(zhì)性維度與原始性創(chuàng)新的新穎性績效之間均不存在顯著性關系。因此,在原始性創(chuàng)新績效評價過程,定性績效維度可以不考慮新穎性績效的維度,評價首創(chuàng)性績效維度即可。最后,在計量型績效方面。學科異質(zhì)性與計量型績效之間不存在正向顯著影響效應,即學科異質(zhì)性對于基礎研究的高水平論文的發(fā)表、國家自然科學獎、諾貝爾獎等國際頂級,以及基礎應用研究和應用研究的發(fā)明專利水平、技術秘密水平和國際科技進步獎等成果指標之間并不存在顯著關系。而認知異質(zhì)性和組織異質(zhì)性對這些可計量的績效的影響顯著。即同一學科的不同組織之間的合作可能是產(chǎn)生較高計量型績效的潛在形式。綜上所述,無論哪個績效維度的測量,認知異質(zhì)性對績效的影響都是最突出的。因此,我們推測,深層次的認知多樣性很可能是創(chuàng)造力激發(fā)的最根本原因。第三,變革型領導風格對異質(zhì)性和原始性創(chuàng)新績效調(diào)節(jié)作用的研究假設得到部分驗證。首先,變革型領導風格負向調(diào)節(jié)學科異質(zhì)性與首創(chuàng)性績效、新穎性績效和計量型績效。即團隊在高變革型領導的帶領下,異質(zhì)性學科團隊之間的合作反而使團隊的首創(chuàng)性績效、新穎性績效和計量型績效都降低。這一結論警示我們,過分強調(diào)變革型領導的作用,可能導致組織中過分強調(diào)智力激勵這個因素,從而不利于組織的穩(wěn)定性,因此,并不一定對創(chuàng)新績效有利。其次,變革型領導正向調(diào)節(jié)認知異質(zhì)性和原始性創(chuàng)新總績效、首創(chuàng)性績效之間的關系,而對新穎性績效和計量型績效不起調(diào)節(jié)作用。也就是說,在高變革型領導風格的情境下,認知異質(zhì)性促進原始性創(chuàng)新總績效和首創(chuàng)性績效。因此,總的來說,變革型領導風格是正向調(diào)節(jié)認知異質(zhì)性和原始性創(chuàng)新績效的,而這個調(diào)節(jié)主要通過首創(chuàng)性績效來起作用,對新穎性和計量型績效貢獻不大。究其原因,可能在于,領導可以減少異質(zhì)性對團隊創(chuàng)造力造成的負面影響,而促進積極的思想、觀點和知識之間的碰撞和交流,激勵團隊成員的創(chuàng)造動機,提升團隊的創(chuàng)造力。再次,變革型領導對組織異質(zhì)性和原始性創(chuàng)新的所有績效維度之間都不存在調(diào)節(jié)作用。說明組織異質(zhì)性對原始性創(chuàng)新績效的影響并不受變革型領導風格的影響。因此,我們認為,在高校原始性創(chuàng)新的跨學科合作中,不需要過分關注領導風格對不同組織之間的合作的影響作用。綜合變革型領導風格對學科異質(zhì)性和原始性創(chuàng)新績效的調(diào)節(jié)作用,以及變革型領導風格對認知異質(zhì)性和原始性創(chuàng)新績效的調(diào)節(jié)作用,我們可以判斷,變革型領導風格在靜態(tài)的學科異質(zhì)性方面是起負向調(diào)節(jié)作用的,而在動態(tài)的個體的認知異質(zhì)性面前起到正向的調(diào)節(jié)作用的。因此,變革型領導風格的發(fā)揮需要更多地作用在科研團體成員身上,而不是花費過多的精力在不同學科合作的具體事務上。因此,跨學科合作必須特別關注變革型領導風格對團隊成員認知的調(diào)節(jié)作用。這是對領導力理論的深化,也是對領導力理論在高校原始性創(chuàng)新過程中的一次很好的應用。變革型領導風格的影響因異質(zhì)性的不同而產(chǎn)生截然不同的調(diào)節(jié)作用。第四,關于研究類型、商校類型和經(jīng)費資助與原始性創(chuàng)新績效關系研究。方差分析結果表明,高校跨學科合作的團隊原始性創(chuàng)新績效不會因團隊所屬高校類型以及研究經(jīng)費投入的多少而產(chǎn)生顯著影響,但是原始性創(chuàng)新績效會因為合作是否發(fā)生在基礎應用研究領域而發(fā)生顯著區(qū)別。因此,在高校跨學科合作過程中,需要特別關注基礎應用研究領域的跨學科合作,即原始性創(chuàng)新的發(fā)生,是具有優(yōu)先級的,處于巴斯德象限的科學研究是最有可能實現(xiàn)重大原始性創(chuàng)新的重要領域。綜上所述,本研究從中國的原始性創(chuàng)新現(xiàn)實背景出發(fā),完成了“團隊異質(zhì)性與原始性創(chuàng)新績效”這一核心主題從實踐到理論再到實踐的研究過程。雖然本研究對理論模型的驗證得到了多樣的結果,但這些結果揭示了異質(zhì)性學科合作團隊的原始性創(chuàng)新的關鍵影響因素和評價維度,并為高校涉及跨學科合作的科研團隊提供管理視角和啟示：在主效應方面,突出了認知異質(zhì)性對原始性創(chuàng)新的重要作用；在績效評價方面,創(chuàng)立了原始性創(chuàng)新績效的全新評價體系；在情境研究方面,拓寬了領導力理論的應用范圍。這些研究結論為我國高校原始性創(chuàng)新過程中的跨學科合作實踐的戰(zhàn)略決策奠定理論基礎,也為實踐提供方向指導。因此,高校跨學科合作團隊的管理需要發(fā)揮異質(zhì)性帶來的優(yōu)勢,避免異質(zhì)性帶來的破壞性影響。
[Abstract]:If innovation is a river, the original innovation is the source of the river. Original innovation has become the key driving factor for our country to realize the construction of an innovative country. Practice has proved that interdisciplinary cooperation is an important way to realize the original innovation. The plight of choice: the choice of which disciplines together, how to cooperate, and what kind of organizational teamwork can improve the original creativity, not the innovation. The cooperation between different disciplines, different organizations and different teams can affect the original innovation performance, and the external environment, such as the leadership style. In the process of cooperation, the role of heterogeneity is to regulate the role of heterogeneity to innovation performance. These are both urgent and difficult practical problems in the process of originality innovation in Colleges and universities. Based on the theory of resource based outlook, heterogeneity theory and leadership theory, this paper adopts the statistics of empirical factor analysis and Poisson regression analysis. Method, using the sample data of 255 teams to explore the relationship between interdisciplinary team heterogeneity and the original innovation performance of university scientific research teams, and also determine how transformational leadership affects their relationship. On this basis, this study also defines the type of research involved in cooperation in interdisciplinary cooperation, and the class of colleges and Universities in which the team is located. The conclusion is as follows: first, in the concept and dimension of heterogeneity, this paper defines the heterogeneity of interdisciplinary team as: in the process of original innovation, two or more disciplines of scientific research teams work together, different discipline knowledge restructures, and different members recognize different members. Cognitive thinking movement, based on the interrelationship of disciplinary logic structure, social cognition and interpersonal relationship, forms the difference, diversity and distribution equilibrium in team resource endowment and innovation ability. This study divides interdisciplinary team heterogeneity into three dimensions of discipline heterogeneity, cognitive heterogeneity and organizational heterogeneity. Second, Through the total performance of original innovation and the performance of the three sub dimensions of original innovation, this study will demonstrate the relationship between the team heterogeneity and the team heterogeneity, and some hypotheses are verified. First, the overall performance of the original innovation. The discipline heterogeneity, the cognitive heterogeneity and the group heterogeneity are all the general innovation teams in Colleges and universities. We believe that the positive effects of the theory of resource based outlook and the theory of team cohesion are greater than the negative effects of the team conflict based on the social cognitive theory and the information processing theory. Among them, the cognitive heterogeneity has the greatest impact on the original innovation performance, followed by the heterogeneity of the discipline. Sex, and then organizational heterogeneity. This shows that interdisciplinary cooperation on innovation not only derives from the influence of the heterogeneity of explicit knowledge, but also the more important influence may come from the implicit cognitive heterogeneity. Secondly, in the initial performance, organizational heterogeneity is not a very important factor, but the heterogeneity of the subject and the subject heterogeneity. Cognitive heterogeneity plays a significant role in the pioneering performance of original innovation. Therefore, in the process of originality innovation in Colleges and universities, it is necessary to pay special attention to the interaction, collision and integration of team members. Again, in the aspect of novelty performance. There is no significant relationship between the novelty performance of sexual innovation. Therefore, in the process of original innovation performance evaluation, the qualitative performance dimension can not consider the dimension of novelty performance and evaluate the initial performance dimension. Finally, there is no significant positive effect between the academic heterogeneity and the econometric performance in the measurement performance. There is no significant relationship between the academic heterogeneity and the publication of high level papers on basic research, the National Natural Science Award, the Nobel prize and other international top levels, and the patent level of the basic application research and application research, the technical secret level and the international scientific and technological progress award. Qualitative performance has a significant impact on these measurable performance. That is, cooperation between different organizations in the same subject may be a potential form of higher measurement performance. In the summary, the effects of cognitive heterogeneity on performance are most prominent, regardless of the measurement of the performance dimension. Therefore, we speculate that the deep cognitive diversity is very good. Third, the research hypothesis that the transformational leadership plays the role of heterogeneity and original innovation performance is partly verified. First, the transformational leadership style negatively regulates the discipline heterogeneity and the initiative performance, the novelty performance and the econometric performance. That is, the team is led by the high transformational leadership. On the other hand, cooperation among heterogeneous teams makes the team's pioneering performance, novelty performance and econometric performance lower. This conclusion warns us that overemphasis on the role of transformational leadership may lead to excessive emphasis on intellectual motivation in the organization, thus detrimental to the stability of the organization, and therefore, not necessarily to innovation. Secondly, the transformational leadership is regulating the relationship between the total performance of cognitive heterogeneity and the original innovation and the initial performance, but it does not regulate the novelty performance and the econometric performance. In other words, in the context of the high transformational leadership, cognitive heterogeneity promotes the total performance and initial performance of original innovation. Generally speaking, the transformational leadership style is positively regulating cognitive heterogeneity and primordial innovation performance, and this regulation plays a role mainly through pioneering performance and contributes little to novelty and econometric performance. The reason may be that leadership can reduce the negative effects of heterogeneity on team creativity and promote the product. The impact and communication between the extreme ideas, views and knowledge stimulate the creative motivation of the team members and enhance the creativity of the team. Thirdly, transformational leadership has no regulatory effect on all the performance dimensions of organizational heterogeneity and original innovation. Therefore, we believe that in the interdisciplinary cooperation of original innovation in universities, we do not need to pay too much attention to the influence of leadership style on cooperation among different organizations. The moderating effect of original innovation performance can be judged that the transformational leadership style plays a negative regulatory role in the static subject heterogeneity, and plays a positive role in the cognitive heterogeneity of the dynamic individual. Therefore, the transformational leadership style plays a more important role in the members of the scientific research group. Instead of spending too much energy on the specific business of different disciplines, interdisciplinary cooperation must pay special attention to the regulatory role of transformational leadership on team members. This is the deepening of leadership theory and a good application of leadership theory in the innovation process of University primordial nature. The influence of guidance style is different from heterogeneity. Fourth, on the relationship between research types, business school types and financial support and original innovation performance. Variance analysis shows that the original innovation performance of the team in interdisciplinary cooperation of colleges and universities is not due to the type of colleges and universities and research funds. How much has a significant impact, but the original innovation performance will have a significant difference in the field of basic application research. Therefore, in the process of interdisciplinary cooperation, it is necessary to pay special attention to the interdisciplinary cooperation in the field of basic application research, that is, the occurrence of original innovation, which has priority and is in bass. The scientific research of German quadrant is the most likely important field to realize major original innovation. To sum up, this research has completed the research process of "team heterogeneity and original innovation performance" from practice to theory to practice from the background of Chinese original innovation reality. The results show a variety of results, but these results reveal the key influencing factors and evaluation dimensions of the original innovation of the heterogeneity subject cooperation team, and provide a management perspective and inspiration for the scientific research team involved in interdisciplinary cooperation in Colleges and Universities: in the main effect, the important role of recognizing heterogeneity to original innovation is highlighted. In terms of performance evaluation, a new evaluation system of original innovation performance has been established, and the application scope of leadership theory is widened in the context study. These conclusions have laid a theoretical foundation for the strategic decision of interdisciplinary cooperation practice in the process of original innovation in Chinese universities and provide direction guidance for practice. The management of interdisciplinary teams needs to bring the advantages of heterogeneity into play and avoid the destructive effects of heterogeneity.
【學位授予單位】：浙江大學
【學位級別】：博士
【學位授予年份】：2016
【分類號】：G647
，

本文編號：1970450