What is the mission of innovation?-Lexical structure, sentiment analysis, and cosine similarity of mission statements of research-knowledge intensive institutions.

Mission statements (henceforth: missions) are strategic planning communication tools used by all types of organizations worldwide. Missions communicate an organization's purpose, values, standards, and strategy. Research on missions has been prolific over the past 30 years, nevertheless several empirical gaps remain, such as single sector or country studies and restricted mission samples. In this article, we identify similarities and differences in the content of missions from government, private, higher education, and health research-knowledge intensive institutions in a sample of 1,900+ institutions from 89 countries through the deployment of sentiment analysis, readability, and lexical diversity; semantic networks; and a similarity computation between document corpus. We found that missions of research-knowledge intensive institutions are challenging to read texts with lower lexical diversity that favors positive rather than negative words. In stark contrast to this, the non-profit sector is consonant in multiple dimensions in its use of Corporate Social Responsibility jargon. The lexical appearance of 'research' in the missions varies according to mission sectorial context, and each sector has a cluster-specific focus. Utilizing the mission as a strategic planning tool in higher-income regions might serve to explain corpora similarities shared by sectors and continents. Furthermore, our open-access dataset on missions worldwide can be used as a source for further replication, triangulation, or crowdsourcing-data studies. Also, practitioners could use our open-access dataset and insights to facilitate strategic planning activities in organizations from multiple sectors.

Winners and runners-up alike?-a comparison between awardees and special mention recipients of the most reputable science award in Colombia via a composite citation indicator.

The research agenda on global academic elites (e.g., those awarded the Nobel Prize) has overlooked academic awards and elites from developing countries and the public symbolic recognition of scientific elites by research awards. In this study, we examine the bibliometric features of individual researcher profiles of those participants who received a special mention in Colombia's most prestigious prize in the sciences: the Alejandro Ángel Escobar Prize (AAEP). First, we chart the citation per article trend of Colombia's most prolific researchers before and after receiving the special mention and the AAEP. We then compare the special mention group with those awarded the AAEP, using a composite citation indicator of six scientific impact and productivity indices to estimate (1) bulk impact (number of citations and h index) and (2) authorship order adjusted impact (Schreiber hm index; total citations for articles of which the scientist is the single author; total citations for articles of which the scientist is the single or first author; and total citations for articles of which the scientist is the single, first, or last author). Results show that there is no overall halo effect in citation per article after receiving the special mention or the AAEP. Such recognition comes after an academically productive career marked by multiple citations per article peaks. There is no clear-cut division between the composite citation indicator of those awarded a special mention and those awarded the AAEP. Findings place the profile of local authors in an adjusted and inclusive framework that takes full cognisance of the scientific elites in developing countries.

The Colombian scientific elite-Science mapping and a comparison with Nobel Prize laureates using a composite citation indicator.

A well-established agenda on the research output, impact, and structure of global scientific elites such as Nobel Prize laureates has generated interest in the scientific elites from developing countries. However, this topic has not been investigated in detail. This study, first, deploys science mapping techniques to provide a comprehensive analysis of the output, impact, and structure of the Colombian scientific elite, i.e., researchers awarded with the Alejandro Ángel Escobar Foundation National Prize 1990-2020, known locally as the Colombian Nobel. Second, we conducted a productivity and impact comparison between the Colombian scientific elite and Nobel Prize laureates in science and economics by means of a stratified random sample 1990-2020 via the composite citation indicator proposed by Ioannidis et al. Findings showed that the Colombian scientific elite has a broader agenda than indexing titles in internationally renowned bibliographic databases. The Colombian scientific elite also showed positive growth, which is an inverse trend compared with the sample of Nobel laureate productivity. There were no noticeable changes in productivity/impact before and after receiving the Alejandro Ángel Escobar Foundation National Prize. Institutional collaboration within the Colombian scientific elite displayed the highest betweenness (brokerage) role of world/local top-tier universities. However, only two Colombian scientific elite members published an article with two Nobel Prize laureates. Most of the research profiles reflected the national output priorities, but were found to diverge from the national focus in respect of strategic research capacities. The interleaving of the Colombian scientific elite and Nobel Prize laureates-particularly between the 3rd and 2nd quartiles-enabled a more nuanced analysis of the local impact in the global scientific landscape. Our findings also contrast with previous findings on the lower research impact of authors from Latin America, despite their involvement as contributors to reputable journals, and also shed light on the research performance-impact standards and agenda between the global North and South and provide an in-context assessment of outstanding local research.

Innovation for sustainability in the Global South: bibliometric findings from management & business and STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) fields in developing countries.

Research on innovation and sustainability is prolific but fragmented. This study integrates the research on innovation in management and business and STEM fields for sustainability in a unified framework for the case of developing countries (i.e., the Global South). It presents and discusses the output, impact, and structure of such research based on a sample of 14,000 + articles and conference proceedings extracted from the bibliographic database Scopus. The findings reveal research output inflections after global announcements such as UN-Earth Summits. The study also reveals the indisputable leadership of China in overall output and research agenda-setting. Nonetheless, countries such as India, Mexico, and Nigeria are either more efficient or impactful. GS research published in highly reputable journals is still scarce but increasing modestly. Central topic clusters (e.g., knowledge management) remain peripheral to the global Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) research landscape. Finally, academic-corporate collaboration is in its infancy and limited to particular economic sectors: energy, pharmaceuticals, and high-tech.