Abstract: Highlighting the organizational differences between Little Science and Big Science is to reveal that the construction of Big Science project cannot follow the path of Little Science, because the “Big” or “Small”of Science is not merely a matter of numbers or quantity, but the very differences of Organizational Forms. In an extended model of Transaction Cost Theory, the causes of the different organizational forms between Little Science and Big Science are explained by the Asset Specificity. It is argued that, the Organizational Form of Little Science is mainly defined by the Market Governance Structure and the Organizational Boundary estabished by the mechanism of Spontaneous Responsibility, Decentralized Power and Strong Incentive, within which takes on Simple Dispersed Configuration; While Organizational Form of Big Science is mainly defined by the Bureaucracy Governance Structure and the Organizational Boundary estabished by the mechanism of Allocational Responsibility, Centralized Power and Week Incentive, within which takes on Complex Networked Configuration. Thus, the plan to optimize the University’s Little Science Mode by conducting the Big Science Project is infeasible, new management system and operation mechanism are needed.

摘要： 彰显大科学与小科学的组织差异性旨在于揭示大科学工程建设不能因循小科学的老路，科学的大与小更不是简单的数目字上的多与少，而是组织形态迥然不同。在一个扩展的交易成本理论模型下，小科学与大科学存在不同组织形态的原因，在于资产专用性的属性和程度不同，由此导致小科学主要采用市场治理结构，由自发责任机制、分散化权力机制和强激励利益机制确立组织边界，边界内呈现简单离散构型；大科学主要采用科层治理结构，由配置责任机制、集中式权力机制和弱激励利益机制确立组织边界，边界内呈现复杂网络构型。依托高校建设大科学工程，期望对高校小科学组织模式进行改造升级，进而蜕变成为并缔造大科学组织模式是不可行的，必须在一个全新的基础架构上打造全新的管理体制与运作机制才能实现大科学的建设目标。

关键词: 资产专用性, 治理结构, 组织边界, 责权利机制, 交易成本, 大科学, 小科学, Asset Specificity, Governance Structure, Organizational Boundary, Mechanism of Responsibility,Right & Interest, Transaction Cost, Little Science, Big Science