Nobel Prizes Do Recognise Innovation, Study Finds

Every year, the world eagerly awaits the Nobel Prizes, honouring groundbreaking work in various fields. But are these awards truly recognising innovation, or are other factors at play? A recent study by Brian Uzzi and his collaborators has shed light on this question.

The researchers found that prizewinners were indeed more innovative than their peers, but the gap in innovativeness wasn't always evident. Early in their careers, both prizewinners and non-prizewinners showed similar levels of innovation. However, around four to five years before winning a prize, prizewinners began to innovate more.

Uzzi and his team measured innovativeness using three factors: novelty, convergence, and interdisciplinarity. They discovered that prizewinners tended to produce innovative work by combining novel and conventional ideas, striking a balance between originality and tradition. This approach fostered high-impact breakthroughs from 1900 to 2018.

The gap in innovativeness between prizewinners and their peers widened leading up to the prize, peaked around the time of the prize, and persisted afterward. This persistent gap wasn't due to the 'rich getting richer' effect, as there was no difference between high- and low-prestige prizewinners. Instead, prizewinners were less likely to be in an echo chamber of like-minded thinking, which may have boosted the innovativeness of their work.

The study suggests that Nobel Prizes do recognise innovative work, with prizewinners showing increased innovativeness leading up to and after winning the award. However, critics continue to question the influence of reputation, politics, and collective lobbying on these prestigious honours. Further research is needed to fully understand the complex dynamics at play in recognising groundbreaking work.