Science, Reputation, and Organization

Massagli oversaw the collection and initial analysis of the survey data. Harvey Brooks, Lewis Branscomb, and Michelle Gittleman provided helpful comments. 2 ABSTRAC T The reasons why profit-seeking enterprises undertake to "do" science have captured the attention of sociologists, organizational theorists, and economists. This article argues that scientific research organizations arrange themselves in ways that enable them to attract the best available scientific and technical talent. It thus suggests that the tastes and preference of scientists shape the organization of scientific research organizations. It examines these issues through field research and survey research on a large sample of foreign-affiliated research and development (R&D) laboratories in the United States. The organizational structures and practices adopted by scientific organizations are found to result from three interrelated phenomena: reputation, interaction and imitation. Reputation requires that scientific organizations arrange themselves in ways that attract eminent scientific talent. Interaction requires that organizations adopt structures and practices that facilitate meaningful linkages to other scientific organizations. Imitation entails that scientific organizations seek to emulate and learn from practices associated with other, leading scientific organizations. The organizational structures and practices adopted by the sample organizations are the result of planned, purposeful, and strategic action-a process which is considerably more active than the notion of "fitting into" the environment advanced in the organizational theory literature.