Md. Abul Kalam Siddike & Youji Kohda

School of Knowledge Science

Japan Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, Japan

siddike@jaist.ac.jp; kohda@jaist.ac.jp

1

Overview Objectives Methodology Overall growth of Service innovation (SI) research Cross-country comparisons (publications; citations) Activity index (AI) Attractive index (AAI) Publication efficiency index (PEI) Productive institution index (PII) Productive author index (PAI) Productive journal index (PJI) Summaries, limitations, future research

Agenda

2

SSME is widely recognized as a key driver for the economic growth.

The study aims to examine the growth and development of researchand productivity in service innovation (SI) bibliometrically.

Overview

3

To identify the growth and make cross-country comparison of SIresearch.

To measure the performance of SI research and development.

To calculate the impact of publications in SI research.

Objectives

4

Inputs Search conducted in Web of Science database on November 05, 2012. 2001-2011 used as time period. “Service innovation” used as a keyword. 7,600 records retrieved. 4,565 journal papers selected for analysis. Top 10 countries were sample for analysis.

Outputs Activity index (AI); Attractive index (AAI); Publication efficiency index

(PEI). Productive institution index (PII); Productive author index (PAI);

Productive journal index (PJI).

Methodology

5

SI research is growing rapidly

4,565 journal papers published during 2001-2011

30,626 citations received by 4,565 papers

6

Cross-country comparison (Publications)

USA shares one thirdof world’s total in SIresearch

In Europe, Englandhas the biggest share

In Asia, Taiwan hasthe biggest share

7

Cross-country comparison (Citations)USA has a predominant impact of SI field

In Europe, England is the top for sharing of SI citations

In Asia, Taiwanreceived thelowest citationsin the world

8

9

Use three indexes

Activity index (AI)

Attractive index (AAI)

Publication efficiency index (PEI)

Develop three indexes

Productive institution index (PII)

Productive author index (PAI)

Productive journal index (PJI)

Indexes for measuring performance,

impact, quality of SI research

Measure performance, impact and quality of SI research

Identify productive institutions, authors, and journals

It is used to characterize the relative research effort of a country.

AI =1 means the country’s research effort to the world average.

AI >1 indicates that the country publishes more than worldaverage.

AI <1 shows that the country’s research effort less than the worldaverage.

Activity index (AI)

10

Result of AIDevoted moreefforts over theworld average

Only USA maintains a stable research effort.

Year USA England GermanyNetherl

ands Spain Canada Aus. Italy Taiwan France

2001 1.35 1.17 0.77 0.71 0.22 0.90 0.53 0.64 0.17 1.40

2002 1.34 0.69 1.17 0.76 0.52 1.15 0.98 1.05 0.36 1.47

2003 1.31 0.90 0.82 1.01 0.59 0.77 1.21 0.86 0.13 0.40

2004 0.93 1.53 0.49 1.21 0.09 0.76 0.78 1.64 0.29 1.19

2005 0.97 1.28 1.04 0.79 0.92 1.21 1.10 0.48 0.93 1.26

2006 1.05 1.12 1.50 1.12 0.24 0.74 0.51 0.71 0.67 0.87

2007 0.98 1.23 0.82 0.95 1.24 1.05 0.99 0.68 0.72 0.66

2008 1.02 0.97 0.89 1.47 1.12 1.10 0.94 1.20 0.88 0.89

2009 1.01 0.80 1.05 0.97 1.12 0.97 1.22 1.04 0.85 0.98

2010 0.90 0.90 0.84 0.90 1.49 1.05 0.91 0.95 1.84 1.04

2011 1.44 1.57 2.13 1.81 2.17 1.75 2.10 2.20 2.63 1.86

Mean 1.12 1.11 1.05 1.06 0.88 1.04 1.03 1.04 0.86 1.09

11

Impact (citation) of publications is more important than publications.

It characterizes a country’s publications reflected by the citations.

AAI =1 means the country’s citation impact to the world average.

AAI >1 indicates that the country’s citation impact more thanworld average.

AAI <1 shows that the country’s citation impact less than theworld average.

Attractive index (AAI)

12

Result of AAI

In general, USA,Germany, Canadaand Australia havemore citation impactthan the worldaverage.

Year USA England GermanyNetherl

andsSpain Canada Aus. Italy Taiwan France

2001 0.99 0.40 1.66 0.0 0.00 3.37 3.62 0.00 0.00 0.94

2002 1.29 0.67 1.28 0.82 0.22 0.35 1.12 0.86 0.30 0.83

2003 1.24 0.84 0.79 0.63 0.00 0.73 0.98 1.36 0.00 1.26

2004 1.29 0.55 0.88 0.45 0.46 1.29 0.57 0.81 0.00 1.24

2005 1.15 0.87 0.74 0.94 0.62 0.96 1.03 0.97 0.34 0.88

2006 1.15 0.83 0.75 0.91 0.48 0.95 1.16 0.85 0.40 0.83

2007 1.13 0.91 0.71 0.73 0.51 1.02 1.07 0.79 0.49 1.09

2008 1.04 1.04 0.92 0.93 0.73 0.84 0.89 1.06 0.72 0.68

2009 0.98 1.06 1.05 1.01 0.81 0.95 0.88 0.89 0.86 0.99

2010 0.94 1.04 1.11 1.02 0.88 1.01 1.10 1.03 1.19 1.03

2011 0.88 1.04 1.10 1.20 1.74 1.06 0.98 1.10 1.59 1.10

Mean 1.10 0.84 1.00 0.79 0.59 1.14 1.22 0.97 0.53 0.99

13

PEI is used to measure the research quality.

It indicates whether the impact of publications in a country in aresearch field is compatible with the research efforts.

PEI =1 means the impact of publications to the world average.

PEI >1 indicates that the impact of publication is more than worldaverage.

PEI <1 shows that the impact of publication is less than worldaverage.

Publication efficiency index (PEI)

14

Result of PEI

All countries display irregularly fluctuant trends

Year USA England GermanyNetherl

andsSpain Canada Aus. Italy Taiwan France

2001 0.21 0.16 0.21 0.19 0.00 0.25 0.38 0.42 0.00 0.18

2002 0.54 0.30 0.27 0.22 0.27 0.40 0.20 0.26 0.00 0.30

2003 0.45 0.49 0.43 0.36 0.40 0.60 0.39 0.41 0.81 1.03

2004 1.13 0.48 1.26 0.64 3.56 1.04 1.21 0.41 0.75 0.57

2005 1.07 0.63 0.57 0.81 0.38 0.71 0.81 1.33 0.29 0.72

2006 1.17 0.94 0.66 0.91 2.62 1.22 1.86 1.54 0.76 0.83

2007 1.36 1.14 1.59 1.35 0.66 1.12 1.09 1.55 0.96 1.85

2008 1.16 1.31 1.43 0.97 0.74 1.05 1.32 0.94 1.01 1.30

2009 1.31 1.91 1.43 1.74 1.74 1.50 1.08 1.38 2.67 1.52

Mean 0.93 0.82 0.87 0.80 1.15 0.88 0.93 0.92 0.80 0.92

15

16

PII indicates the impact of institutions in SI research field.

PII =1 means the impact of institution is average to the researcheffort.

PII >1 indicates that the impact of institution is more than theresearch effort.

PII <1 shows that the impact of institution is less than the researcheffort.

Productive institution Index (PII)

Result of PIISN Name of the institutions PB CI SC WSC PII

1The University of Manchester,

England56 751 166 585 1.05

2 Harvard University, USA 54 866 6 860 1.59

3University of California, Berkeley,

USA50 475 2 473 0.95

4 University of Toronto, Canada 40 237 3 234 0.58

5 Erasmus University, Netherlands 37 289 14 275 0.74

6University of California, Los

Angeles, USA36 451 11 440 1.22

7University of North Carolina,

USA36 263 0 263 0.73

8 University of Washington, USA 35 366 0 366 1.05

9Delft University of Technology,

Netherlands32 153 2 151 0.47

10 University of Illinois, USA 32 427 0 427 1.34

Note: PB-Publications; CI-Citations; SC-Self Citations; WSC-Without Self Citations; PAI-Productive Authors Index

The University of Manchester gains more publications

The impact ofpublications ofHarvardUniversity is themost followed byUniversity ofIllinois, Universityof California

17

18

Productive author index (PAI)

PAI indicates the impact of authors in SI research field.

PAI =1 means the impact of author is average to the research effort.

PAI >1 indicates that the impact of author is more than theresearch effort.

PAI <1 shows that the impact of author is less than the researcheffort.

Result of PAISN Authors Affiliation (Institution) PB CI SC WSC PAI

1 Walker, RMUniversity of Hong Kong,Hong Kong, Peoples R ofChina

12 222 28 194 1.72

2 Kodama, MNihon University, Tokyo,Japan

11 52 6 46 0.44

3 Lee, JUniversity of Cincinnati,USA

11 43 1 42 0.4

4 Miozzo, MUniversity of Manchester,England

9 111 11 100 1.18

5 Aarons. GAUniversity of California,San Diego, USA

9 200 20 180 2.13

6 Gallouj, F.Universite de Lille 1,France

9 59 13 46 0.54

7 Knudsen, HKUniversity of Kentucky,USA

9 96 6 90 1.06

8 Grimshaw, DUniversity of Manchester,England

8 52 3 49 0.65

9 Hartley, JQueensland University ofTechnology, Australia

8 84 6 78 1.04

10 Has-Verdu, FPolytechnic University ofValencia, Spain

8 66 7 59 0.78

PB-Publications; CI-Citations; SC-Self Citations; WSC-Without Self Citations; PAI-Productive Authors Index

Walker, RM is the most prolific author

Aarons, GA is the most

productive authors followed by Walker, RM;

Miozzo,M; Knudsen, HK

19

20

PJI indicates the impact of journals in SI research field.

PJI =1 means the impact of journal is average to the research effort.

PJI >1 indicates that the impact of journal is more than the researcheffort.

PJI <1 shows that the impact of journal is less than the researcheffort.

Productive journal index (PJI)

Result of PJISN Name of the Journals PB CI SC WSC PJI

1 Service Industries Journal 87 474 54 420 0.61

2 Research Policy 67 1610 52 1558 2.93

3 Technovation 64 656 18 638 1.26

4International Journal ofTechnology Management

55 108 1 107 0.24

5Journal of Product InnovationManagement

50 596 22 574 1.45

6 Health Affairs 48 241 6 235 0.62

7Information and CommunicationTechnologies and the KnowledgeEconomy

35 11 0 11 0.04

8 Telecommunications Policy 33 129 7 122 0.46

9Technological Forecasting andSocial Change

31 292 7 285 1.16

10African Journal of BusinessManagement

30 24 6 18 0.075

PB-Publications; CI-Citations; SC-Self Citations; WSC-Without Self Citations; PAI-Productive Authors Index

Research Policy is the most Productive journals in SI research followed by Journal of Product Innovation Management; Technovation

21

USA is the leading country in terms of both world publication andimpact share.

USA, England, Germany, Netherlands, Canada, Australia, Italy, andFrance denoted more efforts than the world average in SI research.

The impact of publications of USA, Netherlands, Canada andAustralia is higher than the world average.

Summaries

22

Rerecords from Web of Science database.

Selection of keyword.

This study considered only top 10 countries in the world.

Limitations

23

Future research can carry out to compare results obtained fromdifferent databases.

Future work can be carried out on how many disciplines and whichdisciplines contribute to the new discipline (service innovation) andthis will be real power of bibliometric study.

Future research

24

Questions or comments, Please

25