IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/ausman/v44y2019i4p551-570.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The power of crowds: Grand challenges in the Asia-Pacific region

Author

Listed:
  • Cynthia Weiyi Cai

    (Melbourne Study Group Centre, Charles Sturt University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia)

  • Jennifer Gippel

    (The Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia)

  • Yushu Zhu

    (The University of Queensland Business School, St Lucia, QLD, Australia)

  • Abhay Kumar Singh

    (Department of Applied Finance, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, Australia)

Abstract

Technology is enabling organizations across the globe – large and small, for-profit and not-for-profit, governments and scientific groups – to harness the resources, knowledge, talent and creativity of crowds, in their effort to find innovative solutions to vexing problems. As contributors to solving grand challenges, crowds are providing data and funds, generating novel ideas and evaluating and developing concrete solutions. This article proposes a conceptual model for understanding the utility of crowdsourcing in the context of grand challenges. The article further identifies some boundary conditions where crowdsourcing may not be useful and discusses significant barriers to applying crowdsourcing in the Asia-Pacific region. We conclude by recognizing some empirical considerations and avenues for future research. JEL Classification: O31, O35

Suggested Citation

  • Cynthia Weiyi Cai & Jennifer Gippel & Yushu Zhu & Abhay Kumar Singh, 2019. "The power of crowds: Grand challenges in the Asia-Pacific region," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 44(4), pages 551-570, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:ausman:v:44:y:2019:i:4:p:551-570
    DOI: 10.1177/0312896219871979
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0312896219871979
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0312896219871979?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. Ron Bird & Francesco Momenté & Francesco Reggiani, 2012. "The market acceptance of corporate social responsibility: a comparison across six countries/regions," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 37(2), pages 153-168, August.
    2. Eric von Hippel, 1986. "Lead Users: A Source of Novel Product Concepts," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(7), pages 791-805, July.
    3. Jennifer Edgar & Joe Murphy & Michael Keating, 2016. "Comparing Traditional and Crowdsourcing Methods for Pretesting Survey Questions," SAGE Open, , vol. 6(4), pages 21582440166, October.
    4. Karim R. Lakhani & Jill A. Panetta, 2007. "The Principles of Distributed Innovation," Innovations: Technology, Governance, Globalization, MIT Press, vol. 2(3), pages 97-112, July.
    5. Sonja Marjanovic & Caroline Fry & Joanna Chataway, 2012. "Crowdsourcing based business models: In search of evidence for innovation 2.0," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 39(3), pages 318-332, February.
    6. Sunil Venaik & Paul Brewer, 2019. "Looking beyond national differences: Cultural consensus between Confucian and Anglo societies," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 44(3), pages 388-406, August.
    7. Jong-Seo Choi & Young-Min Kwak & Chongwoo Choe, 2010. "Corporate social responsibility and corporate financial performance: Evidence from Korea," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 35(3), pages 291-311, December.
    8. Christian Terwiesch & Yi Xu, 2008. "Innovation Contests, Open Innovation, and Multiagent Problem Solving," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(9), pages 1529-1543, September.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. Van Ha Nguyen & Frank W Agbola & Bobae Choi, 2019. "Does corporate social responsibility reduce information asymmetry? Empirical evidence from Australia," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 44(2), pages 188-211, May.
    12. Fedorenko, Ivan & Berthon, Pierre & Rabinovich, Tamara, 2017. "Crowded identity: Managing crowdsourcing initiatives to maximize value for participants through identity creation," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 155-165.
    13. 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.
    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. Stephen Brammer & Layla Branicki & Martina Linnenluecke & Tom Smith, 2019. "Grand challenges in management research: Attributes, achievements, and advancement," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 44(4), pages 517-533, November.

    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. repec:wsi:acsxxx:v:21:y:2019:i:08:n:s1363919619500142 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. 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.
    3. 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).
    4. 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).
    5. Jiao, Yuanyuan & Wu, Yepeng & Lu, Steven, 2021. "The role of crowdsourcing in product design: The moderating effect of user expertise and network connectivity," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    6. Cappa, Francesco & Oriani, Raffaele & Pinelli, Michele & De Massis, Alfredo, 2019. "When does crowdsourcing benefit firm stock market performance?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(9), pages 1-1.
    7. 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.
    8. Salgado, Stéphane & Hemonnet-Goujot, Aurelie & Henard, David H. & de Barnier, Virginie, 2020. "The dynamics of innovation contest experience: An integrated framework from the customer’s perspective," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 29-43.
    9. 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.
    10. 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).
    11. 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.
    12. 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.
    13. Ethan Mollick & Ramana Nanda, 2016. "Wisdom or Madness? Comparing Crowds with Expert Evaluation in Funding the Arts," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(6), pages 1533-1553, June.
    14. Yuan Jin & Ho Cheung Brian Lee & Sulin Ba & Jan Stallaert, 2021. "Winning by Learning? Effect of Knowledge Sharing in Crowdsourcing Contests," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 32(3), pages 836-859, September.
    15. repec:eee:respol:v:48:y:2019:i:8:p:- is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Llorente-Saguer, Aniol & Sheremeta, Roman & Szech, Nora, 2016. "Designing Contests Between Heterogeneous Contestants: An Experimental Study of Tie-Breaks and Bid-Caps in All-Pay Auctions," MPRA Paper 71202, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    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. 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.
    19. Christoph Riedl & Victor P. Seidel, 2018. "Learning from Mixed Signals in Online Innovation Communities," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(6), pages 1010-1032, December.
    20. 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.
    21. Dominik Mahr & Aric Rindfleisch & Rebecca Slotegraaf, 2015. "Enhancing Crowdsourcing Success: the Role of Creative and Deliberate Problem-Solving Styles," Customer Needs and Solutions, Springer;Institute for Sustainable Innovation and Growth (iSIG), vol. 2(3), pages 209-221, September.
    22. Viktoria Boss & Robin Kleer & Alexander Vossen, 2017. "Walking Parallel Paths Or Taking The Same Road? The Effect Of Collaborative Incentives In Innovation Contests," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 21(03), pages 1-34, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Crowdsourcing; grand challenges; open innovation; lead users;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • O35 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Social Innovation

    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:sae:ausman:v:44:y:2019:i:4:p:551-570. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.agsm.edu.au .

    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.