Glossary entry (derived from question below)
English term or phrase:
newcomers vs. people who had never collaborated before
English answer:
outsiders vs insiders
English term
21 books translated
Native in: Russian 
Works in: English to Russian, Russian to English, Spanish to Russian, and 1 more.
newcomers vs. people who had never collaborated before
The study showed that the days of the solitary genius or lone inventor—think Newton or Einstein—are over. Creative and sci-entific work has migrated to teams and, more recently, to large, distributed teams like the hundreds of scientists that worked on the human genome project.
But being part of a team wasn’t enough for high impact, as measured by article and patent citations. The really great ideas were much more likely to come from cross-institutional col-laborations rather than from teams from the same university, lab, or research center. Not only that, but the most successful teams mixed things up. They avoided the trap of always working with the same people, and successful groups ***brought to the team both newcomers and people who had never collaborated before***.
I fail to understand the difference (in this context) between newcomers and people who had never collaborated before. What does this part of the sentence imply?
Does it mean people who are simply new to the team and people who have never collaborated with anyone before (lone wolves, so to speak)?
Thank you.
Thank you.
| Belated reference |
Alison MacG
|
Jul 19, 2016 08:41: Yasutomo Kanazawa Created KOG entry
Non-PRO (1): Charlesp
When entering new questions, KudoZ askers are given an opportunity* to classify the difficulty of their questions as 'easy' or 'pro'. If you feel a question marked 'easy' should actually be marked 'pro', and if you have earned more than 20 KudoZ points, you can click the "Vote PRO" button to recommend that change.
How to tell the difference between "easy" and "pro" questions:
An easy question is one that any bilingual person would be able to answer correctly. (Or in the case of monolingual questions, an easy question is one that any native speaker of the language would be able to answer correctly.)
A pro question is anything else... in other words, any question that requires knowledge or skills that are specialized (even slightly).
Another way to think of the difficulty levels is this: an easy question is one that deals with everyday conversation. A pro question is anything else.
When deciding between easy and pro, err on the side of pro. Most questions will be pro.
* Note: non-member askers are not given the option of entering 'pro' questions; the only way for their questions to be classified as 'pro' is for a ProZ.com member or members to re-classify it.
Responses
Japan
Scientia est potentia
Native in: Japanese 
Works in: English to Japanese, German to Japanese, Italian to Japanese, and 3 more.
outsiders vs insiders
people who had never collaborated before= scientists who have been in other science teams but have never worked with them before, including lone wolves like you say
newcomers = beginners
this is how I see it in the given context
Retired as of Jan 2019!
Native in: English
Works in: German to English, French to English
fresh blood / first-time collaborators
never collaborated before = people who previously worked alone, now participating in teams
| agree |
Peter Simon
: My idea is, newcomers are new to the team, not necessarily to the field, but basically I agree
1 hr
|
| agree |
Charlesp
4 hrs
|
| agree |
Lingua 5B
5 hrs
|
novices or professionals who've worked alone before
Reference comments
United Kingdom
Patents and related material specialist
Native in: English (Variants: Scottish, UK, British)
Works in: German to English, French to English, Swedish to English, and 4 more.
Belated reference
newcomers = people new to the field, not yet known in the field, fresh blood
people who had never collaborated before = experienced people who had never collaborated with each other before
True Teamwork
What they found was that the most successful teams did two things right. First, they attracted a mixture of experienced people and those who were newcomers to whichever field they were in. That's not surprising--the need for fresh blood has long been recognized as an important ingredient in success. The second criterion, though, was far less obvious. What successful teams had in common was at least a few experienced members who had never collaborated with each other. "People have a tendency to want to work with their friends--people they've worked with before," says Luis Amaral, a physicist at Northwestern and a coauthor. "That's exactly the wrong thing to do."
http://europe.newsweek.com/true-teamwork-119127
| Thank you, Alison. |
Something went wrong...