IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2303.15163.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

How creative versus technical constraints affect individual learning in an online innovation community

Author

Listed:
  • Victor P. Seidel
  • Christoph Riedl

Abstract

Online innovation communities allow for a search for novel solutions within a design space bounded by constraints. Past research has focused on the effect of creative constraints on individual projects, but less is known about how constraints affect learning from repeated design submissions and the effect of the technical constraints that are integral to online platforms. How do creative versus technical constraints affect individual learning in exploring a design space in online communities? We analyzed ten years of data from an online innovation community that crowdsourced 136,989 design submissions from 33,813 individuals. We leveraged data from two types of design contests-creatively constrained and unconstrained-running in parallel on the platform, and we evaluated a natural experiment where a platform change reduced technical constraints. We find that creative constraints lead to high rates of learning only if technical constraints are sufficiently relaxed. Our findings have implications for the management of creative design work and the downstream effects of the technical constraints of the information systems that support online innovation communities.

Suggested Citation

  • Victor P. Seidel & Christoph Riedl, 2023. "How creative versus technical constraints affect individual learning in an online innovation community," Papers 2303.15163, arXiv.org.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2303.15163
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2303.15163
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Violina P. Rindova & Antoaneta P. Petkova, 2007. "When Is a New Thing a Good Thing? Technological Change, Product Form Design, and Perceptions of Value for Product Innovations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(2), pages 217-232, April.
    2. Sanjiv Erat & Stylianos Kavadias, 2008. "Sequential Testing of Product Designs: Implications for Learning," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(5), pages 956-968, May.
    3. Daniel A. Levinthal, 1997. "Adaptation on Rugged Landscapes," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(7), pages 934-950, July.
    4. Victor P. Seidel & Benedikt Langner, 2015. "Using an online community for vehicle design: project variety and motivations to participate," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 24(3), pages 635-653.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. Christoph Riedl & Victor P. Seidel, 2018. "Learning from Mixed Signals in Online Innovation Communities," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(6), pages 1010-1032, December.
    10. Atish P. Sinha & Jerrold H. May, 1996. "Providing Design Assistance: A Case-Based Approach," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 7(3), pages 363-387, September.
    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. Boons, Mark & Stam, Daan, 2019. "Crowdsourcing for innovation: How related and unrelated perspectives interact to increase creative performance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(7), pages 1758-1770.
    2. Christoph Riedl & Victor P. Seidel, 2018. "Learning from Mixed Signals in Online Innovation Communities," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(6), pages 1010-1032, December.
    3. 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.
    4. 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).
    5. Tat Koon Koh & Muller Y. M. Cheung, 2022. "Seeker Exemplars and Quantitative Ideation Outcomes in Crowdsourcing Contests," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 33(1), pages 265-284, March.
    6. Jing Zhang & Wei Guo & Ruoyu Liang & Lei Wang & Zhonglin Fu & Jiang Sun, 2022. "How to Find the Key Participants in Crowdsourcing Design? Identifying Lead Users in the Online Context Using User-Contributed Content and Online Behavior Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-17, February.
    7. repec:wsi:acsxxx:v:21:y:2019:i:08:n:s1363919619500142 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. Quignon, Aurelien, 2023. "Crowd-based feedback and early-stage entrepreneurial performance: Evidence from a digital platform," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(7).
    12. Mahka Moeen & Rajshree Agarwal & Sonali K. Shah, 2020. "Building Industries by Building Knowledge: Uncertainty Reduction over Industry Milestones," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(3), pages 218-244, September.
    13. 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.
    14. repec:eee:respol:v:48:y:2019:i:8:p:- is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Bordunos, A. & Kokoulina, L. & Ermolaeva, L., 2015. "Role of enterprise gamified system in fostering innovation capacity: A field experiment," Working Papers 6420, Graduate School of Management, St. Petersburg State University.
    16. Pollok, Patrick & Amft, André & Diener, Kathleen & Lüttgens, Dirk & Piller, Frank T., 2021. "Knowledge diversity and team creativity: How hobbyists beat professional designers in creating novel board games," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(8).
    17. 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.
    18. Andries, Petra & Clarysse, Bart & Costa, Sergio, 2021. "Technology ventures' engagement of external actors in the search for viable market applications: On the relevance of Technology Broadcasting and Systematic Validation," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 36(6).
    19. Bleda, Mercedes & Querbes, Adrien & Healey, Mark, 2021. "The influence of motivational factors on ongoing product design decisions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 562-569.
    20. Ilse Hellemans & Amanda J. Porter & Damla Diriker, 2022. "Harnessing digitalization for sustainable development: Understanding how interactions on sustainability‐oriented digital platforms manage tensions and paradoxes," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(2), pages 668-683, February.
    21. 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.
    22. Elina H. Hwang & Param Vir Singh & Linda Argote, 2019. "Jack of All, Master of Some: Information Network and Innovation in Crowdsourcing Communities," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 30(2), pages 389-410, June.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:arx:papers:2303.15163. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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.