IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/popmgt/v29y2020i2p481-500.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Theoretical and Empirical Investigation of Feedback in Ideation Contests

Author

Listed:
  • Juncai Jiang
  • Yu Wang

Abstract

Ideation contests are commonly used across public and private sectors to generate new ideas for solving problems, creating designs, and improving products or processes. In such a contest, a firm or an organization (the seeker) outsources an ideation task online to a distributed population of independent agents (solvers) in the form of an open call. Solvers compete to exert efforts and the one with the best solution wins a bounty. In evaluating solutions, the seeker typically has subjective taste that is unobservable to solvers. In practice, the seeker often provides solvers with feedback, which discloses useful information about her private taste. In this study, we develop a game‐theoretic model of feedback in unblind ideation contests, where solvers’ solutions and the seeker's feedback are publicly visible by all. We show that feedback plays an informative role in mitigating the information asymmetry between the seeker and solvers, thereby inducing solvers to exert more efforts in the contest. We also show that some key contest and solver characteristics (CSC, including contest reward, contest duration, solver expertise, and solver population) have a direct effect on solver effort. Interestingly, by endogenizing the seeker's feedback decision, we find that the optimal feedback volume increases with contest reward, contest duration, solver expertise, but decreases with solver population. Thus, CSC elements also have an indirect effect on solvers’ effort level, with feedback volume mediating this effect. Employing a dataset from Zhubajie.com, a leading online ideation platform in China, we find empirical evidence that is consistent with these theoretical predictions.

Suggested Citation

  • Juncai Jiang & Yu Wang, 2020. "A Theoretical and Empirical Investigation of Feedback in Ideation Contests," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 29(2), pages 481-500, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:popmgt:v:29:y:2020:i:2:p:481-500
    DOI: 10.1111/poms.13127
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/poms.13127
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/poms.13127?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Prpić, John & Shukla, Prashant P. & Kietzmann, Jan H. & McCarthy, Ian P., 2015. "How to work a crowd: Developing crowd capital through crowdsourcing," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 58(1), pages 77-85.
    2. Jesse Bockstedt & Cheryl Druehl & Anant Mishra, 2016. "Heterogeneous Submission Behavior and its Implications for Success in Innovation Contests with Public Submissions," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 25(7), pages 1157-1176, July.
    3. Tracy Xiao Liu & Jiang Yang & Lada A. Adamic & Yan Chen, 2014. "Crowdsourcing with All-Pay Auctions: A Field Experiment on Taskcn," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(8), pages 2020-2037, August.
    4. Slot, J.H., 2013. "Crossing boundaries : Involving external parties in innovation," Other publications TiSEM cfb3d3e3-744d-49c3-a636-c, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    5. Florian Ederer, 2010. "Feedback and Motivation in Dynamic Tournaments," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(3), pages 733-769, September.
    6. Olivier Toubia, 2006. "Idea Generation, Creativity, and Incentives," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(5), pages 411-425, September.
    7. Hema Yoganarasimhan, 2013. "The Value of Reputation in an Online Freelance Marketplace," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(6), pages 860-891, November.
    8. Joel O. Wooten & Karl T. Ulrich, 2017. "Idea Generation and the Role of Feedback: Evidence from Field Experiments with Innovation Tournaments," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 26(1), pages 80-99, January.
    9. Hua Chen & Sung H. Ham & Noah Lim, 2011. "Designing Multiperson Tournaments with Asymmetric Contestants: An Experimental Study," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(5), pages 864-883, May.
    10. Christian Terwiesch & Yi Xu, 2008. "Innovation Contests, Open Innovation, and Multiagent Problem Solving," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(9), pages 1529-1543, September.
    11. Juanjuan Zhang, 2016. "Deadlines in Product Development," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(11), pages 3310-3326, November.
    12. Kevin J. Boudreau & Nicola Lacetera & Karim R. Lakhani, 2011. "Incentives and Problem Uncertainty in Innovation Contests: An Empirical Analysis," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(5), pages 843-863, May.
    13. Aoyagi, Masaki, 2010. "Information feedback in a dynamic tournament," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 242-260, November.
    14. Olivier Toubia & Laurent Florès, 2007. "Adaptive Idea Screening Using Consumers," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(3), pages 342-360, 05-06.
    15. Ajay Kalra & Mengze Shi, 2001. "Designing Optimal Sales Contests: A Theoretical Perspective," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(2), pages 170-193, December.
    16. Barry L. Bayus, 2013. "Crowdsourcing New Product Ideas over Time: An Analysis of the Dell IdeaStorm Community," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(1), pages 226-244, June.
    17. Chan, Kimmy Wa & Li, Stella Yiyan & Zhu, John Jianjun, 2015. "Fostering Customer Ideation in Crowdsourcing Community: The Role of Peer-to-peer and Peer-to-firm Interactions," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 42-62.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Tat Koon Koh & Muller Y. M. Cheung, 2022. "Seeker Exemplars and Quantitative Ideation Outcomes in Crowdsourcing Contests," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 33(1), pages 265-284, March.
    2. Jesse Bockstedt & Cheryl Druehl & Anant Mishra, 2022. "Incentives and Stars: Competition in Innovation Contests with Participant and Submission Visibility," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 31(3), pages 1372-1393, March.
    3. Ren, Jie & Han, Yue & Genc, Yegin & Yeoh, William & Popovič, Aleš, 2021. "The boundary of crowdsourcing in the domain of creativity✰," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 165(C).
    4. Joel O. Wooten, 2022. "Leaps in innovation and the Bannister effect in contests," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 31(6), pages 2646-2663, June.
    5. Ha Ta & Terry L. Esper & Travis Tokar, 2021. "Appealing to the Crowd: Motivation Message Framing and Crowdsourcing Performance in Retail Operations," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 30(9), pages 3192-3212, September.
    6. Hou, Ting & Zhang, Wen, 2021. "Optimal two-stage elimination contests for crowdsourcing," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    7. Lakshminarayana Nittala & Sanjiv Erat & Vish Krishnan, 2022. "Designing internal innovation contests," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 31(5), pages 1963-1976, May.
    8. Miyeon Jung & Daegon Cho & Euncheol Shin, 2021. "Repairing a Cracked Mirror: The Heterogeneous Effect of Personalized Digital Nudges Driven by Misperception," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 30(8), pages 2586-2607, August.
    9. Liao, Junyun & Chen, Jiawen & Mou, Jian, 2021. "Examining the antecedents of idea contribution in online innovation communities: A perspective of creative self-efficacy," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hu, Feng & Bijmolt, Tammo H.A. & Huizingh, Eelko K.R.E., 2020. "The impact of innovation contest briefs on the quality of solvers and solutions," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 90.
    2. Cheng, Xi & Gou, Qinglong & Yue, Jinfeng & Zhang, Yan, 2019. "Equilibrium decisions for an innovation crowdsourcing platform," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 241-260.
    3. Patel, Chirag & Ahmad Husairi, Mariyani & Haon, Christophe & Oberoi, Poonam, 2023. "Monetary rewards and self-selection in design crowdsourcing contests: Managing participation, contribution appropriateness, and winning trade-offs," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    4. Ho Cheung Brian Lee & Sulin Ba & Xinxin Li & Jan Stallaert, 2018. "Salience Bias in Crowdsourcing Contests," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 29(2), pages 401-418, June.
    5. Kimmy Wa Chan & Stella Yiyan Li & Jian Ni & John JianJun Zhu, 2021. "What Feedback Matters? The Role of Experience in Motivating Crowdsourcing Innovation," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 30(1), pages 103-126, January.
    6. Segev, Ella, 2020. "Crowdsourcing contests," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 281(2), pages 241-255.
    7. Swanand J. Deodhar & Samrat Gupta, 2023. "The Impact of Social Reputation Features in Innovation Tournaments: Evidence from a Natural Experiment," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 34(1), pages 178-193, March.
    8. Jesse Bockstedt & Cheryl Druehl & Anant Mishra, 2022. "Incentives and Stars: Competition in Innovation Contests with Participant and Submission Visibility," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 31(3), pages 1372-1393, March.
    9. Emmanuel Dechenaux & Dan Kovenock & Roman Sheremeta, 2015. "A survey of experimental research on contests, all-pay auctions and tournaments," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 18(4), pages 609-669, December.
    10. Pavel Kireyev, 2016. "Markets for Ideas: Prize Structure, Entry Limits, and the Design of Ideation Contests," Harvard Business School Working Papers 16-129, Harvard Business School.
    11. Daniel P. Gross, 2020. "Creativity Under Fire: The Effects of Competition on Creative Production," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 102(3), pages 583-599, July.
    12. repec:wsi:acsxxx:v:21:y:2019:i:08:n:s1363919619500142 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Pollok, Patrick & Lüttgens, Dirk & Piller, Frank T., 2019. "Attracting solutions in crowdsourcing contests: The role of knowledge distance, identity disclosure, and seeker status," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 98-114.
    14. Cédric Gutierrez & Tomasz Obloj & Douglas H. Frank, 2021. "Better to have led and lost than never to have led at all? Lost leadership and effort provision in dynamic tournaments," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(4), pages 774-801, April.
    15. Laura J. Kornish & Jeremy Hutchison‐Krupat, 2017. "Research on Idea Generation and Selection: Implications for Management of Technology," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 26(4), pages 633-651, April.
    16. Shunyuan Zhang & Param Vir Singh & Anindya Ghose, 2019. "A Structural Analysis of the Role of Superstars in Crowdsourcing Contests," Service Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(1), pages 15-33, March.
    17. Yang, Xi & Zhao, Quanwu & Sun, Heshan, 2022. "Seekers’ complaint behavior in crowdsourcing: An uncertainty perspective," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    18. Dargahi, Rambod & Namin, Aidin & Ketron, Seth C. & Saint Clair, Julian K., 2021. "Is self-knowledge the ultimate prize? A quantitative analysis of participation choice in online ideation crowdsourcing contests," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    19. Nirup Menon & Anant Mishra & Shun Ye, 2020. "Beyond Related Experience: Upstream vs. Downstream Experience in Innovation Contest Platforms with Interdependent Problem Domains," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 22(5), pages 1045-1065, September.
    20. Ying-Ju Chen & Tinglong Dai & C. Gizem Korpeoglu & Ersin Körpeoğlu & Ozge Sahin & Christopher S. Tang & Shihong Xiao, 2020. "OM Forum—Innovative Online Platforms: Research Opportunities," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 22(3), pages 430-445, May.
    21. Pei‐Yu Chen & Paul Pavlou & Shinyi Wu & Yang Yang, 2021. "Attracting High‐Quality Contestants to Contest in the Context of Crowdsourcing Contest Platform," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 30(6), pages 1751-1771, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:popmgt:v:29:y:2020:i:2:p:481-500. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1937-5956 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.