Evidence for a creative dilemma posed by repeated collaborations
Hiroyasu Inoue

TL;DR
This study quantitatively confirms a creative dilemma in repeated collaborations, showing that while experience benefits teams, over-repetition can lead to decline, and proposes strategies to mitigate degeneration.
Contribution
It provides the first quantitative validation of the creative dilemma in repeated collaborations using patent data from Japan and the US.
Findings
Longer collaboration correlates with higher patent impact.
Impact of consecutive patents decreases after a major invention.
New teams have higher expected impact than past successful teams.
Abstract
We focused on how repeat collaborations in projects for inventions affect performance. Repeat collaborations have two contradictory aspects. A positive aspect is team development or experience, and a negative aspect is team degeneration or decline. Since both contradicting phenomena are observed, inventors have a dilemma as to whether they should keep collaborating in a team or not. The dilemma has not previously been quantitatively analyzed. We provide quantitative and extensive analyses of the dilemma in creative projects by using patent data from Japan and the United States. We confirm three predictions to quantitatively validate the existence of the dilemma. The first prediction is that the greater the patent a team achieves, the longer the team will work together. The second prediction is that the impact of consecutive patents decreases after a team makes a remarkable invention,…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
