Veranstaltungen

Max-Planck-Institut für Innovation und Wettbewerb, München, Raum 313

I use newly-collected, georeferenced network panel data to study how an exogenous increase in the efficiency of exchanging knowledge affected follow-on innovation. Specifically, I examine how the introduction of inexpensive, distance-independent postage via the British Penny Postage Act of 1839 influenced the formation of links within a network of prominent British scientists. Link formation is citation-based and hence indicative of cumulative innovation. I use two-period extensions of the network formation model proposed by Graham (2017, ECMA) to identify the impact of the reform. I can distinguish between a postage reduction effect and a quality improvement effect. The model allows me to control for fixed effects for the citing and cited scientists and to take into account the existence of previous links, the efficiency of transportation, and the proximity of scientists' research areas. The model is estimated with Graham's (2017) tetrad logit estimator. (This project is work in progress.)

Ansprechpartner: Michael Rose

Max-Planck-Institut für Innovation und Wettbewerb, München, Raum 313

Promotions are an important component of a worker’s wage. Yet, traditional theories about the factors driving career progressions typically focus on worker-level characteristics like human capital acquisition, on learning, or on broad market-level factors like labor supply and demand. We study coworker-career spillovers that arise in firms with limited promotion opportunities. We exploit a 2011 Italian pension reform that tightened eligibility criteria for the public pension. We use administrative data on Italian private-sector and leverage cross-firm variation to isolate the effect of retirement delays among soon-to-retire workers on the promotions of their colleagues. We find evidence of career spillovers, and the patterns of these spillovers are consistent with the idea that older workers block the careers of their younger colleagues in firms with limited opportunities. Delays in retirement lead to a decrease in younger workers’ wage growth. Promotions from blue to white-collar positions fall in response to retirement delays among white-collar workers, whereas there is no effect of such delays among blue-collars. The effects are largest in firms with shrinking employment in the years leading up to the policy and negligible among fast-growing firms. We derive in a model the key features necessary to explain our results (with Giulia Bovini, Jin Li, Mateo Paradisi, and Michael Powell).

Ansprechpartner: Dr. Rainer Widmann

Max-Planck-Institut für Innovation und Wettbewerb, München, Raum 313

We show that the historical rollout of public libraries increased the innovation output of recipient towns. Between 1886 and 1919, Andrew Carnegie donated $34.5 million (approximately $1 billion in 2019 dollars) to fund the construction of more than 1,500 public libraries across the United States. Drawing on a new data set based on original historical records, we identify cities that qualified to receive a library grant, applied for the program, received preliminary construction approval, but ultimately rejected Carnegie’s offer. Using the rejecting cities as a control group, we estimate the effects of Carnegie library formation on patenting activity. We provide evidence that the trends in the patenting activity in the two groups are indistinguishable before the construction of the libraries and then diverge. Cities that received grants experienced both short- and long-run gains in patenting activity.

Ansprechpartner: Dr. Rainer Widmann

Max-Planck-Institut für Innovation und Wettbewerb, München, Raum 313

A central tenet of research in the Carnegie School tradition is that organizations learn from performance feedback. Yet an organizational learning-by-doing perspective can overlook the intra-organizational process of information aggregation whereby individuals' beliefs aggregate to an organizational decision. In organizations, individuals receive feedback not on their own choices, but on the choice made by the organization. We call this “learning-by-participating” in organizational decision-making. We examine the implications of learning-by-participating for the efficacy of alternative decision-making structures (e.g., voting, random delegation). Using a computational model, we find that the efficacy of alternative decision-making structures is shaped by learning-by-participating—e.g., structures that are superior in the absence of individual learning may be inferior in situations where individuals learn-by-participating. Learning-by-participating, which occurs at the intersection of individual learning and organizational information aggregation, exposes a key dimension of heterogeneity among decision-making structures not yet considered in prior literature. In particular, whereas some structures generate higher performance primarily through information aggregation, others do so by improving the accuracy of individuals' beliefs. This occurs because learning-by-participating creates substantial heterogeneity across decision-making structures with respect to organizations' ability to: (a) eliminate individuals' false positive beliefs on poor alternatives, (b) generate a more refined understanding of higher value alternatives, and (c) enable the inclusion of individuals in the decision-making process. Our articulation of learning-by-participating has important implications, and identifies critical boundary conditions, for the wisdom-of-crowds when applied to organizations, and speaks to literatures on the myopia of learning and the value of belief diversity in organizational decision-making.

Ansprechpartner: Fabian Gaessler

Max-Planck-Institut für Innovation und Wettbewerb, München, Raum 313

Coming up with creative ideas is easier when striving for positive outcomes and improvement (approach motivation) rather than striving to avoid negative outcomes and failure (avoidance motivation). Yet, creative ideas and solutions are often particularly needed in the face of potential threats and crises. I will present some recent studies in which we tested potential interventions aimed at reducing the negative effects of avoidance motivation on creativity. Specifically, I will discuss the effects of task structure, mindfulness meditation, and planning.

Ansprechpartner: Dr. Marina Chugunova

Max-Planck-Institut für Innovation und Wettbewerb, München Raum 313

We document persistent gender disparities in economics. The fraction of women in economics has grown significantly over the last forty years but the difference in research output between men and women remains large. There are significant differences in the co-authorship networks of men and women: women have fewer collaborators, collaborate more often with the same co-authors, and a higher fraction of their co-authors are co-authors of each other. Both men and women exhibit homophily in their co-authorship relations. Finally, women collaborate with more senior co-authors. Similar output and collaboration patterns obtain in sociology.

Ansprechpartner: Michael Rose, Ph.D.

Max-Planck-Institut für Innovation und Wettbewerb, Raum E10

Moderation: Benedikt Hammerschmid (MPI)

Max-Planck-Institut für Innovation und Wettbewerb, München, Raum 313

Public support for industry, either financial or in-kind, is predicated on the existence of unpaid and unrequited benefits flowing from one organisation to another. It follows that public support should be most generous where the outflows of these benefits are greatest. R&D activity is considered one notable source of these external benefits. There is now as strong and consistent body of evidence across the world that shows that firms, which interact or locate near R&D-active firms, receive considerable benefits. However, there is no reason why the magnitude of these benefits should be the same from all industries. Despite the quantity of studies, there has been scant evidence to indicate which sectors and what type of R&D produce the most benefits. This paper takes a step towards addressing this omission with the ultimate goal being the design of more targeted industry policies.

Ansprechpartner: Fabian Gaessler

Max-Planck-Insitut für Innovation und Wettbewerb, Raum E10

The bloxberg infrastructure is a permissioned blockchain network driven by Proof of Authority consensus (only selected nodes process transactions) and established by a consortium of leading research organizations worldwide. The bloxberg Consortium aims to fosters collaboration among the global scientific community, empowering researchers with robust, autonomous services that transcend institutional boundaries. For example, researchers can leverage bloxberg to create a transparent footprint of their work, without revealing its content. Starting with a research data certification system, the bloxberg infrastructure is destined to be extended and enhanced with tools and myriad decentralized applications (dAPPs) as research needs grow and shift. Furthermore, with consented transactions on the bloxberg infrastructure, research claims need not be limited to one institution alone, but can be confirmed by the whole trusted network. One vision is that the network itself may replace traditional scientific infrastructure such as closed-access publishing of research results. 
 

Ansprechpartner: Felix Pöge

Max-Planck-Institut für Innovation und Wettbewerb, München, Raum 313

We measure the value of connections with editorial boards by identifying the causal effect of board membership on publication success using membership rotation in a sample of over 100 economics journals over the period 1990-2011. We decompose the total effect on publication success in a direct effect on joining board members' publications and an indirect effect on the publications of various types of authors connected to joining members.
We find large effects, both at the aggregate, journal--department level and the individual board member-connected author level. Although the bulk of these effects are direct, indirect effects are large. More editorial power, captured by the member's role in the submission process, and long service on the editorial board lead to substantially larger increases. The effect is absent for Europe-based connected authors, equally strong for either gender and is stronger in generalist than in field journals.
We analyze various mechanisms. We find no evidence for publication success-enhancing information flowing from the journal to authors and little evidence of favoritism. The evidence is consistent with editors searching for papers in their networks and connections with members acting as signals.

Ansprechpartner: Michael Rose, Ph.D.