IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ijrema/v30y2013i2p160-167.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

User-generated versus designer-generated products: A performance assessment at Muji

Author

Listed:
  • Nishikawa, Hidehiko
  • Schreier, Martin
  • Ogawa, Susumu

Abstract

In recent years, more and more consumer goods firms have started to tap into the creative potential of their user communities to fuel their new product development pipelines. Although many have hailed this paradigm shift as a highly promising development for firms, hardly any research has systematically compared the actual market performance of user-generated products with designer-generated ones. We fill this void by presenting a unique data set gathered from the Japanese consumer goods brand Muji, which has drawn on both sources of ideas in parallel in recent years. We demonstrate that user-generated products, which are found to generally contain higher novelty, outperformed their designer-generated counterparts on key market performance metrics. Specifically, in the first year after introduction, sales revenues from user-generated products were three times higher and gross margins were four times greater than those of designer-generated products. These effects also increased over time: after three years, the aggregate sales revenues of user-generated products were, on average, 1.25billion yen (approximately 16million dollars) higher, or five times greater, than the sales of designer-generated products. The corresponding average margin was an impressive 619million yen (approximately 8million dollars) higher, or six times greater, than the margin for designer-generated products. Finally, user-generated products were more likely to survive the three-year observation period than designer-generated products (i.e., were still on the market three years after introduction). These findings clearly favor the paradigm shift identified in marketing research and appeal to managers considering the integration of user ideas into the process of new product development. We discuss our study's limitations and identify important avenues for future research.

Suggested Citation

  • Nishikawa, Hidehiko & Schreier, Martin & Ogawa, Susumu, 2013. "User-generated versus designer-generated products: A performance assessment at Muji," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 160-167.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ijrema:v:30:y:2013:i:2:p:160-167
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ijresmar.2012.09.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167811612000730
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2012.09.002?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. 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.
    2. Jasjit Singh & Lee Fleming, 2010. "Lone Inventors as Sources of Breakthroughs: Myth or Reality?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(1), pages 41-56, January.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. Gary L. Lilien & Pamela D. Morrison & Kathleen Searls & Mary Sonnack & Eric von Hippel, 2002. "Performance Assessment of the Lead User Idea-Generation Process for New Product Development," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(8), pages 1042-1059, August.
    6. Schulze, Anja & Hoegl, Martin, 2008. "Organizational knowledge creation and the generation of new product ideas: A behavioral approach," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(10), pages 1742-1750, December.
    7. Olivier Toubia & Laurent Florès, 2007. "Adaptive Idea Screening Using Consumers," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(3), pages 342-360, 05-06.
    8. C. Page Moreau & Kelly B. Herd, 2010. "To Each His Own? How Comparisons with Others Influence Consumers' Evaluations of Their Self-Designed Products," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 36(5), pages 806-819, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Franzoni, Chiara & Sauermann, Henry, 2014. "Crowd science: The organization of scientific research in open collaborative projects," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 1-20.
    2. Nikolaus Franke & Marion K. Poetz & Martin Schreier, 2014. "Integrating Problem Solvers from Analogous Markets in New Product Ideation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(4), pages 1063-1081, April.
    3. 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.
    4. Philipp B. Cornelius & Bilal Gokpinar, 2020. "The Role of Customer Investor Involvement in Crowdfunding Success," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(1), pages 452-472, January.
    5. 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.
    6. Yan Huang & Param Vir Singh & Kannan Srinivasan, 2014. "Crowdsourcing New Product Ideas Under Consumer Learning," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(9), pages 2138-2159, September.
    7. Ruo-Yu Liang & Wei Guo & Ling-Hao Zhang & Lei Wang, 2019. "Investigating Sustained Participation in Open Design Community in China: The Antecedents of User Loyalty," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-19, April.
    8. repec:eee:respol:v:48:y:2019:i:8:p:- is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Piller, Frank & Vossen, Alexander & Ihl, Christoph, 2012. "From Social Media to Social Product Development: The Impact of Social Media on Co-Creation of Innovation," Die Unternehmung - Swiss Journal of Business Research and Practice, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG, vol. 66(1), pages 7-27.
    10. Ann Majchrzak & Arvind Malhotra, 2016. "Effect of Knowledge-Sharing Trajectories on Innovative Outcomes in Temporary Online Crowds," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 27(4), pages 685-703, December.
    11. Hasan, Sharique & Koning, Rembrand, 2019. "Conversations and idea generation: Evidence from a field experiment," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(9), pages 1-1.
    12. Linus Dahlander & Lars Frederiksen, 2012. "The Core and Cosmopolitans: A Relational View of Innovation in User Communities," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(4), pages 988-1007, August.
    13. Francesco Paolo Appio & Antonella Martini & Silvia Massa & Stefania Testa, 2016. "Unveiling the intellectual origins of Social Media-based innovation: insights from a bibliometric approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 108(1), pages 355-388, July.
    14. Jonathan Bendor & Scott E. Page, 2019. "Optimal team composition for tool‐based problem solving," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(4), pages 734-764, November.
    15. Carliss Baldwin & Eric von Hippel, 2011. "Modeling a Paradigm Shift: From Producer Innovation to User and Open Collaborative Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(6), pages 1399-1417, December.
    16. Peter Keinz, 2015. "Auf den Schultern von … Vielen! Crowdsourcing als neue Methode in der Neuproduktentwicklung," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 67(1), pages 35-69, February.
    17. 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.
    18. Mario Schaarschmidt & Dirk Homscheid & Thomas Kilian, 2019. "Application Developer Engagement In Open Software Platforms: An Empirical Study Of Apple Ios And Google Android Developers," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 23(04), pages 1-33, May.
    19. Hossain, Mokter, 2018. "Motivations, challenges, and opportunities of successful solvers on an innovation intermediary platform," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 67-73.
    20. repec:wsi:acsxxx:v:21:y:2019:i:08:n:s1363919619500142 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Llorente-Saguer, Aniol & Sheremeta, Roman M. & Szech, Nora, 2023. "Designing contests between heterogeneous contestants: An experimental study of tie-breaks and bid-caps in all-pay auctions," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    22. Raffaele Conti & Alfonso Gambardella & Myriam Mariani, 2014. "Learning to Be Edison: Inventors, Organizations, and Breakthrough Inventions," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(3), pages 833-849, June.

    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:ijrema:v:30:y:2013:i:2:p:160-167. 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: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/international-journal-of-research-in-marketing/ .

    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.