IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/techno/v102y2021ics0166497221000146.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Motivating individuals to contribute to firms’ non-pecuniary open innovation goals

Author

Listed:
  • Suhada, Thontowi A.
  • Ford, Jerad A.
  • Verreynne, Martie-Louise
  • Indulska, Marta

Abstract

Open innovation (OI) is an important phenomenon in a global marketplace where knowledge is distributed and individual firms no longer have a monopoly on the best talent. As firms increasingly search for innovative external ideas and solutions, an obvious problem is how to source high-quality contributions externally. A more specific problem is how firms motivate in-bound, non-pecuniary contributions for important activities like customer co-creation, where market-based transactions are not appropriate. A proliferation of papers on OI highlights the need for an integrative review about what motivates individuals to contribute ideas for free, and how firms can use this knowledge to achieve their OI goals. This paper presents a review of the disparate studies on the motivation of individuals to participate in open innovation without immediate monetary gain. We identify 11 distinct individual motivational factors, and find that many initially intrinsic motivations are linked to payoffs for contributors that only accrue with time - something we term ‘delayed-pecuniary motivation’. We use our findings to build a framework that illustrates the importance of this temporal view of OI motivations and we suggest interventions to engage contributors for different kinds of innovation problems.

Suggested Citation

  • Suhada, Thontowi A. & Ford, Jerad A. & Verreynne, Martie-Louise & Indulska, Marta, 2021. "Motivating individuals to contribute to firms’ non-pecuniary open innovation goals," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:techno:v:102:y:2021:i:c:s0166497221000146
    DOI: 10.1016/j.technovation.2021.102233
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166497221000146
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.technovation.2021.102233?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Armisen, Albert & Majchrzak, Ann, 2015. "Tapping the innovative business potential of innovation contests," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 58(4), pages 389-399.
    2. Paul Trott & Dap Hartmann, 2009. "Why 'Open Innovation' Is Old Wine In New Bottles," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 13(04), pages 715-736.
    3. Hertel, Guido & Niedner, Sven & Herrmann, Stefanie, 2003. "Motivation of software developers in Open Source projects: an Internet-based survey of contributors to the Linux kernel," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(7), pages 1159-1177, July.
    4. Elena Pellizzoni & Tommaso Buganza & Gabriele Colombo, 2015. "Motivation Orientations In Innovation Contests: Why People Participate," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 19(04), pages 1-26.
    5. Rebecca Pera & Giampaolo Viglia, 2015. "Turning ideas into products: subjective well-being in co-creation," The Service Industries Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(7-8), pages 388-402, May.
    6. Jie Lou & Yulin Fang & Kai H. Lim & Jerry Zeyu Peng, 2013. "Contributing high quantity and quality knowledge to online Q&A communities," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 64(2), pages 356-371, February.
    7. Susan Athey & Glenn Ellison, 2014. "Dynamics of Open Source Movements," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(2), pages 294-316, June.
    8. Henkel, Joachim & Schöberl, Simone & Alexy, Oliver, 2014. "The emergence of openness: How and why firms adopt selective revealing in open innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(5), pages 879-890.
    9. Harhoff, Dietmar & Henkel, Joachim & von Hippel, Eric, 2003. "Profiting from voluntary information spillovers: how users benefit by freely revealing their innovations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(10), pages 1753-1769, December.
    10. Oliver Alexy & Elif Bascavusoglu-Moreau & Ammon J. Salter, 2016. "Toward an aspiration-level theory of open innovation," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 25(2), pages 289-306.
    11. Maya Kavaliova & Farzad Virjee & Natalia Maehle & Ingeborg Astrid Kleppe, 2016. "Crowdsourcing innovation and product development: Gamification as a motivational driver," Cogent Business & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(1), pages 1128132-112, December.
    12. Roland Bénabou & Jean Tirole, 2003. "Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 70(3), pages 489-520.
    13. Dahlander, Linus & Piezunka, Henning, 2014. "Open to suggestions: How organizations elicit suggestions through proactive and reactive attention," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(5), pages 812-827.
    14. Sultana Lubna Alam & John Campbell, 2017. "Temporal Motivations of Volunteers to Participate in Cultural Crowdsourcing Work," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 28(4), pages 744-759, December.
    15. Jeffrey A. Roberts & Il-Horn Hann & Sandra A. Slaughter, 2006. "Understanding the Motivations, Participation, and Performance of Open Source Software Developers: A Longitudinal Study of the Apache Projects," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(7), pages 984-999, July.
    16. Belenzon, Sharon & Schankerman, Mark, 2015. "Motivation and sorting of human capital in open innovation," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 58514, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    17. Bonaccorsi, Andrea & Rossi, Cristina, 2003. "Why Open Source software can succeed," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(7), pages 1243-1258, July.
    18. Editorial, 2020. "Covid-19 and Climate Change," Journal, Review of Agrarian Studies, vol. 10(1), pages 5-6, January-J.
    19. Dahlander, Linus & Gann, David M., 2010. "How open is innovation?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 699-709, July.
    20. Dongryul Lee & Byung Kim, 2013. "Motivations for Open Source Project Participation and Decisions of Software Developers," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 41(1), pages 31-57, January.
    21. Wu He & Feng-Kwei Wang, 2016. "A process-based framework of using social media to support innovation process," Information Technology and Management, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 263-277, September.
    22. Acar, Oguz A., 2019. "Motivations and solution appropriateness in crowdsourcing challenges for innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(8), pages 1-1.
    23. E. Haruvy & A. Prasad & S.P. Sethi, 2003. "Harvesting Altruism in Open-Source Software Development," Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, Springer, vol. 118(2), pages 381-416, August.
    24. Jie Lou & Yulin Fang & Kai H. Lim & Jerry Zeyu Peng, 2013. "Contributing high quantity and quality knowledge to online Q&A communities," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 64(2), pages 356-371, February.
    25. Joon Mo Ahn & Letizia Mortara & Tim Minshall, 2018. "Dynamic capabilities and economic crises: has openness enhanced a firm's performance in an economic downturn?," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 27(1), pages 49-63.
    26. Scott L. Newbert, 2007. "Empirical research on the resource‐based view of the firm: an assessment and suggestions for future research," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(2), pages 121-146, February.
    27. repec:eee:respol:v:48:y:2019:i:8:p:- is not listed on IDEAS
    28. Sonali K. Shah, 2006. "Motivation, Governance, and the Viability of Hybrid Forms in Open Source Software Development," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(7), pages 1000-1014, July.
    29. Martie-Louise Verreynne & Rui Torres de Oliveira & John Steen & Marta Indulska & Jerad A. Ford, 2020. "What motivates ‘free’ revealing? Measuring outbound non-pecuniary openness, innovation types and expectations of future profit growth," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(1), pages 271-301, July.
    30. Sharon Belenzon & Mark Schankerman, 2015. "Motivation and sorting of human capital in open innovation," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(6), pages 795-820, June.
    31. Dahlander, Linus & Magnusson, Mats G., 2005. "Relationships between open source software companies and communities: Observations from Nordic firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 481-493, May.
    32. Schemmann, Brita & Herrmann, Andrea M. & Chappin, Maryse M.H. & Heimeriks, Gaston J., 2016. "Crowdsourcing ideas: Involving ordinary users in the ideation phase of new product development," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(6), pages 1145-1154.
    33. Robert J. David & Shin‐Kap Han, 2004. "A systematic assessment of the empirical support for transaction cost economics," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(1), pages 39-58, January.
    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. Feng, Yuanyue & Yi, Zihui & Yang, Congcong & Chen, Ruoyi & Feng, Ye, 2022. "How do gamification mechanics drive solvers’ Knowledge contribution? A study of collaborative knowledge crowdsourcing," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    2. Hyeon Jo & Youngsok Bang, 2023. "Factors influencing continuance intention of participants in crowdsourcing," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-13, December.
    3. Chandra, Yanto & Shang, Liang & Mair, Johanna, 2021. "Drivers of success in social innovation: Insights into competition in open social innovation contests," Journal of Business Venturing Insights, Elsevier, vol. 16(C).
    4. Abhari, Kaveh & McGuckin, Summer, 2023. "Limiting factors of open innovation organizations: A case of social product development and research agenda," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 119(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. Smirnova, Inna & Reitzig, Markus & Alexy, Oliver, 2022. "What makes the right OSS contributor tick? Treatments to motivate high-skilled developers," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    2. Frank Nagle, 2018. "Learning by Contributing: Gaining Competitive Advantage Through Contribution to Crowdsourced Public Goods," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(4), pages 569-587, August.
    3. Islam, Mazhar & Miller, Jacob & Park, Haemin Dennis, 2017. "But what will it cost me? How do private costs of participation affect open source software projects?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(6), pages 1062-1070.
    4. Martie-Louise Verreynne & Rui Torres de Oliveira & John Steen & Marta Indulska & Jerad A. Ford, 2020. "What motivates ‘free’ revealing? Measuring outbound non-pecuniary openness, innovation types and expectations of future profit growth," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(1), pages 271-301, July.
    5. Erdem Dogukan Yilmaz & Tim Meyer & Milan Miric, 2023. "Preventing Others from Commercializing Your Innovation: Evidence from Creative Commons Licenses," Papers 2309.00536, arXiv.org.
    6. Krishnamurthy, Sandeep & Ou, Shaosong & Tripathi, Arvind K., 2014. "Acceptance of monetary rewards in open source software development," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(4), pages 632-644.
    7. Torres de Oliveira, Rui & Verreynne, Martie-Louise & Steen, John & Indulska, Marta, 2021. "Creating value by giving away: A typology of different innovation revealing strategies," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 137-150.
    8. Rullani, Francesco & Haefliger, Stefan, 2013. "The periphery on stage: The intra-organizational dynamics in online communities of creation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(4), pages 941-953.
    9. Maha Shaikh & Emmanuelle Vaast, 2016. "Folding and Unfolding: Balancing Openness and Transparency in Open Source Communities," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 27(4), pages 813-833, December.
    10. Ghafele, Roya & Gibert, Benjamin, 2012. "Efficiency through openness: the economic value proposition of open source software," MPRA Paper 38088, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Sebastian Spaeth & Georg von Krogh & Fang He, 2015. "Research Note —Perceived Firm Attributes and Intrinsic Motivation in Sponsored Open Source Software Projects," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 26(1), pages 224-237, March.
    12. Johannes Loh & Tobias Kretschmer, 2023. "Online communities on competing platforms: Evidence from game wikis," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(2), pages 441-476, February.
    13. Livio Cricelli & Michele Grimaldi & Silvia Vermicelli, 2022. "Crowdsourcing and open innovation: a systematic literature review, an integrated framework and a research agenda," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 16(5), pages 1269-1310, July.
    14. Chiao, Benjamin & MacVaugh, Jason, 2021. "Open innovation and organizational features: An experimental investigation," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 376-389.
    15. Zaggl, Michael A., 2017. "Manipulation of explicit reputation in innovation and knowledge exchange communities: The example of referencing in science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(5), pages 970-983.
    16. Gastón Llanes, 2019. "Competitive strategy for open and user innovation," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(2), pages 280-297, April.
    17. Adrián Kovács & Bart Looy & Bruno Cassiman, 2015. "Exploring the scope of open innovation: a bibliometric review of a decade of research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(3), pages 951-983, September.
    18. Hurmelinna-Laukkanen, Pia & Yang, Jialei, 2022. "Distinguishing between appropriability and appropriation: A systematic review and a renewed conceptual framing," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    19. Pankaj Setia & Balaji Rajagopalan & Vallabh Sambamurthy & Roger Calantone, 2012. "How Peripheral Developers Contribute to Open-Source Software Development," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 23(1), pages 144-163, March.
    20. M. Markus, 2007. "The governance of free/open source software projects: monolithic, multidimensional, or configurational?," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 11(2), pages 151-163, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Non-pecuniary open innovation; Motivation;

    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:eee:techno:v:102:y:2021:i:c:s0166497221000146. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/01664972 .

    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.