IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/tuhtim/101.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Lead user method vs. innovation contest: An empirical comparison of two open innovation methodologies for identifying social innovation for flood Resilience in Indonesia

Author

Listed:
  • Goeldner, Moritz
  • Kruse, Daniel J.
  • Herstatt, Cornelius

Abstract

Organizations in the humanitarian sector often face problems that are hard to solve owing to their complexity and high hidden solution knowledge. We investigate two problem-solving governance mechanisms in the case of floods in Indonesia. In our study, we compare the costs and benefits of two open innovation tools for identifying social innovation: an innovation contest and the lead user method. An innovation contest is a challenge among participants, who submit potential solutions to a problem that is posted in an open call. In contrast, the lead user method is a structured search process to identify innovators who have already developed solutions for their own needs or those of their peers. While innovation contests have seen significant attention, there is very little evidence that the lead user method is a suitable tool to identify social innovation. In our study, the contest yielded more than twice as much submissions as the lead user method (60 vs. 25). Our analysis reveals that concepts obtained by the lead user method score significantly higher in overall quality as well as regarding use value, feasibility, degree of elaboration, and social impact. The concepts' novelty do not significantly differ between the two groups. We discuss these findings against the background of the humanitarian sector being torn between capacity overload and the need to overcome a one-size-fits-all approach. By transferring two recognized governance forms for innovation identification from the private sector to the humanitarian sector, we introduce a new path towards empowering local innovators to solve humanitarian challenges.

Suggested Citation

  • Goeldner, Moritz & Kruse, Daniel J. & Herstatt, Cornelius, 2017. "Lead user method vs. innovation contest: An empirical comparison of two open innovation methodologies for identifying social innovation for flood Resilience in Indonesia," Working Papers 101, Hamburg University of Technology (TUHH), Institute for Technology and Innovation Management.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:tuhtim:101
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/172256/1/1007199059.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Eric von Hippel, 1986. "Lead Users: A Source of Novel Product Concepts," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(7), pages 791-805, July.
    2. Guangchao Feng, 2014. "Intercoder reliability indices: disuse, misuse, and abuse," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 48(3), pages 1803-1815, May.
    3. Luthje, Christian & Herstatt, Cornelius & von Hippel, Eric, 2005. "User-innovators and "local" information: The case of mountain biking," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 951-965, August.
    4. Dentoni, Domenico & Hospes, Otto & Ross, R. Brent, 2012. "Managing Wicked Problems in Agribusiness: The Role of Multi-Stakeholder Engagements in Value Creation," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 15(B), pages 1-12, December.
    5. Dorado, Silvia & Ventresca, Marc J., 2013. "Crescive entrepreneurship in complex social problems: Institutional conditions for entrepreneurial engagement," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 69-82.
    6. Dushnitsky, Gary & Lenox, Michael J., 2005. "When do incumbents learn from entrepreneurial ventures?: Corporate venture capital and investing firm innovation rates," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 615-639, June.
    7. Lopez-Vega, Henry & Tell, Fredrik & Vanhaverbeke, Wim, 2016. "Where and how to search? Search paths in open innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 125-136.
    8. Alfonso Gambardella & Christina Raasch & Eric von Hippel, 2017. "The User Innovation Paradigm: Impacts on Markets and Welfare," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(5), pages 1450-1468, May.
    9. Aaron K. Chatterji & Kira R. Fabrizio, 2014. "Using users: When does external knowledge enhance corporate product innovation?," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(10), pages 1427-1445, October.
    10. van der Boor, Paul & Oliveira, Pedro & Veloso, Francisco, 2014. "Users as innovators in developing countries: The global sources of innovation and diffusion in mobile banking services," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(9), pages 1594-1607.
    11. Thomas Keil & Markku Maula & Henri Schildt & Shaker A. Zahra, 2008. "The effect of governance modes and relatedness of external business development activities on innovative performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(8), pages 895-907, August.
    12. Cajaiba-Santana, Giovany, 2014. "Social innovation: Moving the field forward. A conceptual framework," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 42-51.
    13. 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.
    14. 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.
    15. 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.
    16. Jens Lehnen & Tobias Sebastian Schmidt & Cornelius Herstatt, 2016. "Bringing agile project management into lead user projects," International Journal of Product Development, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 21(2/3), pages 212-232.
    17. Fabrizio, Kira R., 2009. "Absorptive capacity and the search for innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 255-267, March.
    18. Bercovitz, Janet E.L. & Feldman, Maryann P., 2007. "Fishing upstream: Firm innovation strategy and university research alliances," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(7), pages 930-948, September.
    19. Rebecca Henderson, 1993. "Underinvestment and Incompetence as Responses to Radical Innovation: Evidence from the Photolithographic Alignment Equipment Industry," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 24(2), pages 248-270, Summer.
    20. Hempel, Paul S. & Sue-Chan, Christina, 2010. "Culture and the Assessment of Creativity," Management and Organization Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(3), pages 415-435, November.
    21. Harhoff, Dietmar & Henkel, Joachim & von Hippel, Eric, 2003. "Profiting from voluntary information spillovers: how users benefit by freely revealing their innovations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(10), pages 1753-1769, December.
    22. van der Have, Robert P. & Rubalcaba, Luis, 2016. "Social innovation research: An emerging area of innovation studies?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(9), pages 1923-1935.
    23. Aija Leiponen & Constance E. Helfat, 2010. "Innovation objectives, knowledge sources, and the benefits of breadth," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(2), pages 224-236, February.
    24. Daniel A. Levinthal, 1997. "Adaptation on Rugged Landscapes," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(7), pages 934-950, July.
    25. Lars Bo Jeppesen & Lars Frederiksen, 2006. "Why Do Users Contribute to Firm-Hosted User Communities? The Case of Computer-Controlled Music Instruments," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(1), pages 45-63, February.
    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. Chen, Jin & Su, Yu-Shan & de Jong, Jeroen P.J. & von Hippel, Eric, 2020. "Household sector innovation in China: Impacts of income and motivation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(4).
    2. Pieper, Thorsten & Herstatt, Cornelius, 2018. "User innovation barriers and their impact on user-developed products," Working Papers 106, Hamburg University of Technology (TUHH), Institute for Technology and Innovation Management.
    3. Göldner, Moritz & Herstatt, Cornelius & Canhão, Helena & Oliveira, Pedro, 2019. "User entrepreneurs for social innovation: The case of patients and caregivers as developers of tangible medical devices," Working Papers 108, Hamburg University of Technology (TUHH), Institute for Technology and Innovation Management.

    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. 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.
    2. repec:wsi:acsxxx:v:21:y:2019:i:08:n:s1363919619500142 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Lettl, Christopher & Rost, Katja & von Wartburg, Iwan, 2009. "Why are some independent inventors 'heroes' and others 'hobbyists'? The moderating role of technological diversity and specialization," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 243-254, March.
    4. Zeng, Michael A., 2018. "Foresight by online communities – The case of renewable energies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 27-42.
    5. Martie-Louise Verreynne & Rui Torres de Oliveira & John Steen & Marta Indulska & Jerad A. Ford, 2020. "What motivates ‘free’ revealing? Measuring outbound non-pecuniary openness, innovation types and expectations of future profit growth," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(1), pages 271-301, July.
    6. Frank Nagle & Florenta Teodoridis, 2020. "Jack of all trades and master of knowledge: The role of diversification in new distant knowledge integration," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(1), pages 55-85, January.
    7. 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.
    8. Göldner, Moritz & Herstatt, Cornelius & Canhão, Helena & Oliveira, Pedro, 2019. "User entrepreneurs for social innovation: The case of patients and caregivers as developers of tangible medical devices," Working Papers 108, Hamburg University of Technology (TUHH), Institute for Technology and Innovation Management.
    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. Anavir Shermon & Mahka Moeen, 2022. "Zooming in or zooming out: Entrants' product portfolios in the nascent drone industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(11), pages 2217-2252, November.
    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. Torres de Oliveira, Rui & Verreynne, Martie-Louise & Steen, John & Indulska, Marta, 2021. "Creating value by giving away: A typology of different innovation revealing strategies," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 137-150.
    13. 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).
    14. Jeppesen, Lars Bo, 2021. "Social movements and free innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(6).
    15. Jeppesen, Lars Bo, 2021. "Reprint of: Social movements and free innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(8).
    16. 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.
    17. Aaron K. Chatterji & Kira Fabrizio, 2012. "How Do Product Users Influence Corporate Invention?," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(4), pages 971-987, August.
    18. Vipul Aggarwal & Elina H. Hwang & Yong Tan, 2021. "Learning to Be Creative: A Mutually Exciting Spatiotemporal Point Process Model for Idea Generation in Open Innovation," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 32(4), pages 1214-1235, December.
    19. Claussen, Jörg & Halbinger, Maria A., 2021. "The role of pre-innovation platform activity for diffusion success: Evidence from consumer innovations on a 3D printing platform," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(8).
    20. 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.
    21. Preißner, Stephanie & Raasch, Christina & Schweisfurth, Tim, 2017. "Is necessity the mother of disruption?," Kiel Working Papers 2097, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).

    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:zbw:tuhtim:101. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ittuhde.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.