IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/techno/v64-65y2017ip28-42.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Innovation problems and search for solutions in crowdsourcing platforms – A simulation approach

Author

Listed:
  • Natalicchio, A.
  • Messeni Petruzzelli, A.
  • Garavelli, A.C.

Abstract

Crowdsourcing initiatives are increasingly spreading among organisations aiming at outsourcing the development of solutions to internal innovation problems to external problem solvers. However, while knowledge about crowdsourcing is growing, a complete understanding of the underlying dynamics of these initiatives is still lacking. This study aims at elucidating this topic by investigating the influence exerted by the interplay between the characteristics of innovation problems, individuals developing solutions (problem solvers), and crowdsourcing platforms on the related problem solving performance. Specifically, we use NK fitness landscapes to simulate the search for solutions conducted by problem solvers in several scenarios, depending on the decomposability and accuracy of delineation of the innovation problems, the degree of bounded rationality of the solvers, and the cooperation policies of the crowdsourcing platforms. Our findings contribute to the development of the theory on search for solutions in crowdsourcing initiatives, by revealing the characteristics of problem solvers and the types of platforms that maximise the performance of the problem solving process, as the quality of the best solution provided and the time required to elaborate on it, according to specific innovation problems. Furthermore, our findings promote the formulation of guidelines for organisations using crowdsourcing to solve their innovation problems, and for the crowdsourcing platforms’ managers.

Suggested Citation

  • Natalicchio, A. & Messeni Petruzzelli, A. & Garavelli, A.C., 2017. "Innovation problems and search for solutions in crowdsourcing platforms – A simulation approach," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 64, pages 28-42.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:techno:v:64-65:y:2017:i::p:28-42
    DOI: 10.1016/j.technovation.2017.05.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166497217303449
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.technovation.2017.05.002?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. Jan W. Rivkin & Nicolaj Siggelkow, 2003. "Balancing Search and Stability: Interdependencies Among Elements of Organizational Design," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(3), pages 290-311, March.
    2. Sendil K. Ethiraj & Daniel Levinthal, 2004. "Modularity and Innovation in Complex Systems," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(2), pages 159-173, February.
    3. Felin, Teppo & Zenger, Todd R., 2014. "Closed or open innovation? Problem solving and the governance choice," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(5), pages 914-925.
    4. Christopher L. Tucci & Henry Chesbrough & Frank Piller & Joel West, 2016. "When do firms undertake open, collaborative activities? Introduction to the special section on open innovation and open business models," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 25(2), pages 283-288.
    5. Svenja C. Sommer & Christoph H. Loch, 2004. "Selectionism and Learning in Projects with Complexity and Unforeseeable Uncertainty," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(10), pages 1334-1347, October.
    6. Fleming, Lee & Sorenson, Olav, 2001. "Technology as a complex adaptive system: evidence from patent data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(7), pages 1019-1039, August.
    7. Svenja Sommer & Stylianos Kavadias, 2009. "The Effects of Problem Structure and Team Diversity on Brainstorming Effectiveness," Post-Print hal-00491685, HAL.
    8. Baskaran, Shruthi & Mehta, Khanjan, 2016. "What is innovation anyway? Youth perspectives from resource-constrained environments," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 52, pages 4-17.
    9. Fabrizio, Kira R., 2009. "Absorptive capacity and the search for innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 255-267, March.
    10. Jan W. Rivkin & Nicolaj Siggelkow, 2007. "Patterned Interactions in Complex Systems: Implications for Exploration," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(7), pages 1068-1085, July.
    11. Jeffrey T. Macher, 2006. "Technological Development and the Boundaries of the Firm: A Knowledge-Based Examination in Semiconductor Manufacturing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(6), pages 826-843, June.
    12. Daniel A. Levinthal, 1997. "Adaptation on Rugged Landscapes," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(7), pages 934-950, July.
    13. Ferreras-Méndez, José Luis & Fernández-Mesa, Anabel & Alegre, Joaquín, 2016. "The relationship between knowledge search strategies and absorptive capacity: A deeper look," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 48-61.
    14. 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.
    15. Lee Fleming, 2001. "Recombinant Uncertainty in Technological Search," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 117-132, January.
    16. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    17. Linus Dahlander & Siobhan O'Mahony & David M. Gann, 2016. "One foot in, one foot out: how does individuals' external search breadth affect innovation outcomes?," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(2), pages 280-302, February.
    18. Jack A. Nickerson & Todd R. Zenger, 2004. "A Knowledge-Based Theory of the Firm—The Problem-Solving Perspective," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(6), pages 617-632, December.
    19. Christian Terwiesch & Yi Xu, 2008. "Innovation Contests, Open Innovation, and Multiagent Problem Solving," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(9), pages 1529-1543, September.
    20. Carliss Y. Baldwin & Kim B. Clark, 2000. "Design Rules, Volume 1: The Power of Modularity," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262024667, December.
    21. Lee, Jung & Seo, DongBack, 2016. "Crowdsourcing not all sourced by the crowd: An observation on the behavior of Wikipedia participants," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 55, pages 14-21.
    22. 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.
    23. Lars Bo Jeppesen & Karim R. Lakhani, 2010. "Marginality and Problem-Solving Effectiveness in Broadcast Search," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(5), pages 1016-1033, October.
    24. Stylianos Kavadias & Svenja C. Sommer, 2009. "The Effects of Problem Structure and Team Diversity on Brainstorming Effectiveness," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(12), pages 1899-1913, December.
    25. Lee Fleming, 2002. "Finding the organizational sources of technological breakthroughs: the story of Hewlett-Packard's thermal ink-jet," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 11(5), pages 1059-1084, November.
    26. J. Andrei Villarroel & John E. Taylor & Christopher L. Tucci, 2013. "Innovation and learning performance implications of free revealing and knowledge brokering in competing communities: insights from the Netflix Prize challenge," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 19(1), pages 42-77, March.
    27. Chihmao Hsieh & Jack A. Nickerson & Todd R. Zenger, 2007. "Opportunity Discovery, Problem Solving and a Theory of the Entrepreneurial Firm," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(7), pages 1255-1277, November.
    28. von Hippel, Eric, 1990. "Task partitioning: An innovation process variable," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 19(5), pages 407-418, October.
    29. Lee Fleming & Olav Sorenson, 2004. "Science as a map in technological search," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(8‐9), pages 909-928, August.
    30. Jan W. Rivkin, 2000. "Imitation of Complex Strategies," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(6), pages 824-844, June.
    31. Garcia Martinez, Marian, 2017. "Inspiring crowdsourcing communities to create novel solutions: Competition design and the mediating role of trust," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 296-304.
    32. Marc Gruber & Dietmar Harhoff & Karin Hoisl, 2013. "Knowledge Recombination Across Technological Boundaries: Scientists vs. Engineers," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(4), pages 837-851, April.
    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. 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).
    2. Wadee Alhalabi & Miltiadis Lytras & Nada Aljohani, 2021. "Crowdsourcing Research for Social Insights into Smart Cities Applications and Services," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-27, July.
    3. 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.
    4. 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).
    5. Lin, Han & Zeng, Saixing & Liu, Haijian & Li, Chao, 2020. "Bridging the gaps or fecklessness? A moderated mediating examination of intermediaries’ effects on corporate innovation," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 94.
    6. Yin, Hua-Tang & Wen, Jun & Chang, Chun-Ping, 2022. "Science-technology intermediary and innovation in China: Evidence from State Administration for Market Regulation, 2000–2019," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    7. Elia, Gianluca & Messeni Petruzzelli, Antonio & Urbinati, Andrea, 2020. "Implementing open innovation through virtual brand communities: A case study analysis in the semiconductor industry," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    8. Schenk, Eric & Guittard, Claude & Pénin, Julien, 2019. "Open or proprietary? Choosing the right crowdsourcing platform for innovation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 303-310.
    9. Piazza, Mariangela & Mazzola, Erica & Perrone, Giovanni, 2022. "How can I signal my quality to emerge from the crowd? A study in the crowdsourcing context," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    10. Yun, JinHyo Joseph & Ahn, Heung Ju & Lee, Doo Seok & Park, Kyung Bae & Zhao, Xiaofei, 2022. "Inter-rationality; Modeling of bounded rationality in open innovation dynamics," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    11. Katarzyna Szopik-Depczyńska & Izabela Dembińska & Agnieszka Barczak & Angelika Kędzierska-Szczepaniak & Krzysztof Szczepaniak & Radosław Depczyński & Giuseppe Ioppolo, 2021. "Does Crowdsourcing as Part of User-Driven Innovation Activity Affect Its Results? An Empirical Analysis of R&D Departments in Poland," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-20, September.
    12. Angélica Pigola & Priscila Rezende Costa, 2022. "In search of understanding about knowledge and learning on innovation performance," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(7), pages 3995-4022, July.
    13. Ozcan, Sercan & Suloglu, Metin & Sakar, C. Okan & Chatufale, Sushant, 2021. "Social media mining for ideation: Identification of sustainable solutions and opinions," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    14. Francesco Cappa & Stefano Franco & Federica Rosso, 2022. "Citizens and cities: Leveraging citizen science and big data for sustainable urban development," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(2), pages 648-667, February.
    15. Moghaddam, Ehsan Noorzad & Aliahmadi, Alireza & Bagherzadeh, Mehdi & Markovic, Stefan & Micevski, Milena & Saghafi, Fatemeh, 2023. "Let me choose what I want: The influence of incentive choice flexibility on the quality of crowdsourcing solutions to innovation problems," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    16. Gillier, Thomas & Chaffois, Cédric & Belkhouja, Mustapha & Roth, Yannig & Bayus, Barry L., 2018. "The effects of task instructions in crowdsourcing innovative ideas," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 35-44.
    17. Haim Faridian, Parisa, 2023. "Leading open innovation: The role of strategic entrepreneurial leadership in orchestration of value creation and capture in GitHub open source communities," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    18. 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).
    19. Fu, Shihui & Sun, Yi & Gao, Xue, 2022. "Balancing openness and control to improve the performance of crowdsourcing contests for product innovation: A configurational perspective," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 174(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. Mohsen Jafari Songhori & Madjid Tavana & Takao Terano, 2020. "Product development team formation: effects of organizational- and product-related factors," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 88-122, March.
    2. 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.
    3. Sai Yayavaram & Wei-Ru Chen, 2015. "Changes in firm knowledge couplings and firm innovation performance: The moderating role of technological complexity," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(3), pages 377-396, March.
    4. Laura J. Kornish & Karl T. Ulrich, 2011. "Opportunity Spaces in Innovation: Empirical Analysis of Large Samples of Ideas," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(1), pages 107-128, January.
    5. Gatti, Corrado & Volpe, Loredana & Vagnani, Gianluca, 2015. "Interdependence among productive activities: Implications for exploration and exploitation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 711-722.
    6. Oliver Baumann & Nicolaj Siggelkow, 2013. "Dealing with Complexity: Integrated vs. Chunky Search Processes," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(1), pages 116-132, February.
    7. Vivek Tandon & Puay Khoon Toh, 2022. "Who deviates? Technological opportunities, career concern, and inventor's distant search," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(4), pages 724-757, April.
    8. Madeline K. Kneeland & Melissa A. Schilling & Barak S. Aharonson, 2020. "Exploring Uncharted Territory: Knowledge Search Processes in the Origination of Outlier Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(3), pages 535-557, May.
    9. Stephan Billinger & Nils Stieglitz & Terry R. Schumacher, 2014. "Search on Rugged Landscapes: An Experimental Study," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(1), pages 93-108, February.
    10. Yuchen Zhang & Wei Yang, 2022. "Breakthrough invention and problem complexity: Evidence from a quasi‐experiment," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(12), pages 2510-2544, December.
    11. Felipe A. Csaszar & Daniel A. Levinthal, 2016. "Mental representation and the discovery of new strategies," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(10), pages 2031-2049, October.
    12. Giannoccaro, Ilaria, 2015. "Adaptive supply chains in industrial districts: A complexity science approach focused on learning," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 170(PB), pages 576-589.
    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. Oliver Baumann, 2015. "Models of complex adaptive systems in strategy and organization research," Mind & Society: Cognitive Studies in Economics and Social Sciences, Springer;Fondazione Rosselli, vol. 14(2), pages 169-183, November.
    15. 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.
    16. Juha Uotila, 2018. "Punctuated equilibrium or ambidexterity: dynamics of incremental and radical organizational change over time," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 27(1), pages 131-148.
    17. Friederike Wall, 2016. "Agent-based modeling in managerial science: an illustrative survey and study," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 10(1), pages 135-193, January.
    18. Boudreau, Kevin J. & Lakhani, Karim R., 2015. "“Open” disclosure of innovations, incentives and follow-on reuse: Theory on processes of cumulative innovation and a field experiment in computational biology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 4-19.
    19. Ganco, Martin, 2017. "NK model as a representation of innovative search," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(10), pages 1783-1800.
    20. Karén Hovhannissian & Marco Valente, 2004. "Modeling Directed Local Search Strategies on Technology Landscapes: Depth and Breadth," ROCK Working Papers 028, Department of Computer and Management Sciences, University of Trento, Italy, revised 17 Jun 2008.

    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:64-65:y:2017:i::p:28-42. 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.