IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormksc/v26y2007i3p342-360.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Adaptive Idea Screening Using Consumers

Author

Listed:
  • Olivier Toubia

    (Columbia Business School, Uris Hall, Room 522, 3022 Broadway, New York, New York 10027-6902)

  • Laurent Florès

    (Laboratoire INSEEC and CRMMETRIX, 700 Plaza Drive, 2nd Floor, Secaucus, New Jersey 07094)

Abstract

Following a successful idea generation exercise, a company might easily be left with hundreds of ideas generated by experts, employees, or consumers. The next step is to screen these ideas and identify those with the highest potential. In this paper we propose a practical approach to involving consumers in idea screening. Although the number of ideas may potentially be very large, it would be unreasonable to ask each consumer to evaluate more than a few ideas. This raises the challenge of efficiently selecting the ideas to be evaluated by each consumer. We describe several idea-screening algorithms that perform this selection adaptively based on the evaluations made by previous consumers. We use simulations to compare and analyze the performance of the algorithms as well as to understand their behavior. The best-performing algorithm focuses on the ideas that are the most likely to have been misclassified (as “top” or “bottom” ideas) based on the previous evaluations, and avoids discarding ideas too fast by adding random perturbations to the misclassification probabilities. We demonstrate the convergent validity of this algorithm using a field experiment, which also confirms the convergence pattern predicted by simulations.

Suggested Citation

  • Olivier Toubia & Laurent Florès, 2007. "Adaptive Idea Screening Using Consumers," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(3), pages 342-360, 05-06.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormksc:v:26:y:2007:i:3:p:342-360
    DOI: 10.1287/mksc.1070.0273
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mksc.1070.0273
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mksc.1070.0273?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. Jacob Goldenberg & Donald R. Lehmann & David Mazursky, 2001. "The Idea Itself and the Circumstances of Its Emergence as Predictors of New Product Success," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 69-84, January.
    2. Danaher, Peter J. & Hardie, Bruce G.S., 2005. "Bacon With Your Eggs? Applications of a New Bivariate Beta-Binomial Distribution," The American Statistician, American Statistical Association, vol. 59, pages 282-286, November.
    3. Valacich, Joseph S. & Dennis, Alan R. & Connolly, Terry, 1994. "Idea Generation in Computer-Based Groups: A New Ending to an Old Story," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 57(3), pages 448-467, March.
    4. Olivier Toubia, 2006. "Idea Generation, Creativity, and Incentives," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(5), pages 411-425, September.
    5. John Hauser & Gerard J. Tellis & Abbie Griffin, 2006. "Research on Innovation: A Review and Agenda for," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(6), pages 687-717, 11-12.
    6. John R. Hauser & Olivier Toubia, 2005. "The Impact of Utility Balance and Endogeneity in Conjoint Analysis," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(3), pages 498-507, August.
    7. Eric von Hippel, 1998. "Economics of Product Development by Users: The Impact of "Sticky" Local Information," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(5), pages 629-644, May.
    8. Dapeng Cui & David Curry, 2005. "Prediction in Marketing Using the Support Vector Machine," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(4), pages 595-615, January.
    9. Theodoros Evgeniou & Constantinos Boussios & Giorgos Zacharia, 2005. "Generalized Robust Conjoint Estimation," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(3), pages 415-429, May.
    10. Eric von Hippel, 1994. ""Sticky Information" and the Locus of Problem Solving: Implications for Innovation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 40(4), pages 429-439, 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. Gary Lilien & Rajdeep Grewal & Douglas Bowman & Min Ding & Abbie Griffin & V. Kumar & Das Narayandas & Renana Peres & Raji Srinivasan & Qiong Wang, 2010. "Calculating, creating, and claiming value in business markets: Status and research agenda," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 21(3), pages 287-299, September.
    2. Slavica Rocheska & Olivera Kostoska & Marjan Angeleski & Gjorgji Mancheski, 2014. "User-Driven Innovation: Towards A New Innovation Paradigm," Economic Review: Journal of Economics and Business, University of Tuzla, Faculty of Economics, vol. 12(1), pages 31-41.
    3. Schweisfurth, Tim & Zaggl, Michael A. & Schöttl, Claus P. & Raasch, Christina, 2017. "Hierarchical similarity biases in idea evaluation: A study in enterprise crowdfunding," Kiel Working Papers 2095, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    4. 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.
    5. Thomas Görzen & Dennis Kundisch, 2019. "When in Doubt Follow the Crowd: How Idea Quality Moderates the Effect of an Anchor on Idea Evaluation," Working Papers Dissertations 57, Paderborn University, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics.
    6. 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.
    7. Dahlander, Linus & Beretta, Michela & Thomas, Arne & Kazemi, Shahab & Fenger, Morten H.J. & Frederiksen, Lars, 2023. "Weeding out or picking winners in open innovation? Factors driving multi-stage crowd selection on LEGO ideas," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(10).
    8. Matthew J Salganik & Karen E C Levy, 2015. "Wiki Surveys: Open and Quantifiable Social Data Collection," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(5), pages 1-17, May.
    9. Peter N. Golder & Rachel Shacham & Debanjan Mitra, 2009. "—Innovations' Origins: When, By Whom, and How Are Radical Innovations Developed?," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(1), pages 166-179, 01-02.
    10. Nikolaus Franke & Peter Keinz & Katharina Klausberger, 2013. "“Does This Sound Like a Fair Deal?”: Antecedents and Consequences of Fairness Expectations in the Individual’s Decision to Participate in Firm Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(5), pages 1495-1516, October.
    11. Martijn G. de Jong & Jan-Benedict E. M. Steenkamp & Bernard P. Veldkamp, 2009. "A Model for the Construction of Country-Specific Yet Internationally Comparable Short-Form Marketing Scales," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(4), pages 674-689, 07-08.
    12. 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.
    13. Paris Chrysos, 2018. "Empathy in the business model: how Facebook and Google Maps manage external problem-solving processes," Working Papers halshs-01897205, HAL.
    14. Olivier Toubia & Oded Netzer, 2017. "Idea Generation, Creativity, and Prototypicality," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(1), pages 1-20, January.
    15. J. Jason Bell & Christian Pescher & Gerard J. Tellis & Johann Füller, 2024. "Can AI Help in Ideation? A Theory-Based Model for Idea Screening in Crowdsourcing Contests," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(1), pages 54-72, January.

    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. 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.
    2. Dongling Huang & Lan Luo, 2016. "Consumer Preference Elicitation of Complex Products Using Fuzzy Support Vector Machine Active Learning," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(3), pages 445-464, May.
    3. Olivier Toubia & John R. Hauser, 2007. "—On Managerially Efficient Experimental Designs," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(6), pages 851-858, 11-12.
    4. Di Stefano, Giada & Gambardella, Alfonso & Verona, Gianmario, 2012. "Technology push and demand pull perspectives in innovation studies: Current findings and future research directions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1283-1295.
    5. Theodoros Evgeniou & Massimiliano Pontil & Olivier Toubia, 2007. "A Convex Optimization Approach to Modeling Consumer Heterogeneity in Conjoint Estimation," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(6), pages 805-818, 11-12.
    6. Lan Luo & P. K. Kannan & Brian T. Ratchford, 2007. "New Product Development Under Channel Acceptance," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(2), pages 149-163, 03-04.
    7. John Hauser & Gerard J. Tellis & Abbie Griffin, 2006. "Research on Innovation: A Review and Agenda for," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(6), pages 687-717, 11-12.
    8. Denis Sauré & Juan Pablo Vielma, 2019. "Ellipsoidal Methods for Adaptive Choice-Based Conjoint Analysis," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 67(2), pages 315-338, March.
    9. Pamela D. Morrison & John H. Roberts & Eric von Hippel, 2000. "Determinants of User Innovation and Innovation Sharing in a Local Market," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(12), pages 1513-1527, December.
    10. Nicolai J. Foss & Keld Laursen & Torben Pedersen, 2011. "Linking Customer Interaction and Innovation: The Mediating Role of New Organizational Practices," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(4), pages 980-999, August.
    11. Schweisfurth, Tim G. & Raasch, Christina, 2015. "Embedded lead users—The benefits of employing users for corporate innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 168-180.
    12. Gaudeul, Alexia, 2008. "Open Source Licensing in Mixed Markets, or Why Open Source Software Does Not Succeed," MPRA Paper 19596, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Oguz Ali Acar, 2018. "Harnessing the creative potential of consumers: money, participation, and creativity in idea crowdsourcing," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 29(2), pages 177-188, June.
    14. Antonelli, Cristiano & Gehringer, Agnieszka, 2015. "Knowledge externalities and demand pull: The European evidence," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 608-631.
    15. Ina Drejer & Anker Lund Vinding, 2005. "Location and collaboration: Manufacturing firms' use of knowledge intensive services in product innovation," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(6), pages 879-898, September.
    16. Cristiano Antonelli & Agnieszka Gehringer, 2015. "The competent demand pull hypothesis: which sectors do play a role?," Economia Politica: Journal of Analytical and Institutional Economics, Springer;Fondazione Edison, vol. 32(1), pages 97-134, April.
    17. Markus Ernst & Alexander Brem, 2017. "Social Media for Identifying Lead Users? Insights into Lead Users’ Social Media Habits," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 14(04), pages 1-21, August.
    18. Kathleen Diener & Dirk Luettgens & Frank Thomas Piller, 2019. "Intermediation For Open Innovation: Comparing Direct Versus Delegated Search Strategies Of Innovation Intermediaries," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 24(04), pages 1-20, June.
    19. 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.
    20. Zaborek Piotr & Mazur Jolanta, 2017. "Exploring Links Between Engaging Customers in Value Co-Creation and Product Innovativeness," International Journal of Management and Economics, Warsaw School of Economics, Collegium of World Economy, vol. 53(3), pages 82-106, September.

    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:inm:ormksc:v:26:y:2007:i:3:p:342-360. 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    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.