Search results

Existing studies on crowdsourcing have focused on analyzing isolated contributions by individual participants and thus collaboration dynamics among them are under-investigated. The value of implementing crowdsourcing in problem solving lies in the aggregation of wisdom from a crowd. This study examines how marginality affects collaboration in crowdsourcing.

With population level data collected from a global crowdsourcing community (openideo.com), this study applied social network analysis and in particular bipartite exponential random graph modeling (ERGM) to examine how individual level marginality variables (measured as the degree of being located at the margin) affect the team formation in collaboration crowdsourcing.

Significant effects of marginality are attributed to collaboration skills, number of projects won, community tenure and geolocation. Marginality effects remain significant after controlling for individual level and team level attributes. However, marginality alone cannot explain collaboration dynamics. Participants with leadership experience or more winning ideas are also more likely to be selected as team members.

The core contribution this research makes is the conceptualization and definition of marginality as a mechanism in influencing collaborative crowdsourcing. This study conceptualizes marginality as a multidimensional concept and empirically examines its effect on team collaboration, connecting the literature on crowdsourcing to online collaboration.

To unravel three strategy-related concepts, frequently confused as one, by introducing the new concept of nonstrategy and proposing a novel threefold classification of strategy, nonstrategy and no strategy.

Building on some key insightful definitions of strategy, the paper infers five essential attributes of strategy. These, in turn, are used to introduce the new concept and classification.

The paper makes clear distinction between the different concepts of strategy, nonstrategy and no strategy that are usually confused in the literature.

The paper calls for a reexamination of what strategy is, how it can be better operationalized, how it should be distinguished from nonstrategy and no strategy and how strategy evolution and drift can be tracked.

The paper clarifies what constitutes strategy, gives practitioners directions on how to strategize and warns against the potential of malpractice that produces nonstrategy.

The introduction of the new concept of nonstrategy and the development of a new classification that distinguishes three concepts that are usually confused as one.

The purpose of this article is to obtain an in-depth insight into the nature and impact of customers´ cocreation experiences in online communities and the effects of customer cocreation on innovation processes.

This study is focused on an online cocreation community created by a market research company on behalf of a company. By means of a case study approach and through in-depth interviews, the authors identify the actual customer experiences and measure (or assess) the degree of involvement of customer creativity and experience in new idea generation.

Cocreation experience can be enhanced through evoking pragmatic, sociability, usability and hedonic experiences and more positive experiences and therefore, outcomes of collaborative innovation in online communities can be achieved. Findings show a classification of each role the community moderator/community manager and peer online community members perform as antecedents of cocreation experience, highlight the value of group feeling/sense of community/sense of belonging and homophily/communality in achieving that, the nature of a supportive online platform and give an overview of positive and negative outcomes of cocreation experience.

This case study provides with valuable insights in the phenomenon of customer cocreation and how to enhance participation of community members in collaborative innovation in online communities through positive experience, which is important for businesses involved in innovation trajectories and product and service improvement efforts.

The purpose of this paper is to satisfy a clear gap in the main field of open innovation research whereabouts a very little scholarship try to analyze the mechanisms of innovative milieu down smart cities environments by applying through innovative projects that seem to support efficiently the entry of private firms and citizens in public collaborations.

The research performed an exploratory and qualitative evaluation based on the case study method built on the evaluation of organizational behavior and urban boosting innovation through smart city initiatives. In doing so, after a literature review in smart city as well in lean methodology fields, the case of Turin Smart City follows.

As acknowledged by international literature, the paper shows how a lean approach enables local government to define and realize smart projects and initiatives in a faster and more effective way. Particularly, the government in one of the main cities in Italy, id est Turin, combines a lean methodology with the job-to-be done approach, according a new concept of smart initiatives involving a startup mentality for the lead users which enables interesting predictions relating the human aspects of open collaborations.

The specificity of this inquiry highlights valuable insights from double-gate smart cities’ innovation, social and urban as well. The research is largely interpretative and exploratory and while this provides a solid scientific foundation for further research, it does not, itself, subject any hypothesis to statistical testing and validation.

Since the city approached the smart city subject in a lean way, it was able to realize some projects in a faster way. Through specific initiatives, the city acquires the ability to involve more and better all its stakeholders such as citizens, companies, and public employees, among others. In this regard, the paper invigorates managerial debates concerning the urban and social aspects of open innovation ecosystems which represent in our minds a superior level of open innovation, testbeds of positive knowledge, and stimulus of knowledge dissemination process around the city.

While the open innovation concept proposed by Henry Chesbrough a decade ago has had some striking successes, the myriad options for engaging external partners can be daunting, so leaders need a guide for getting started that matches the needs of their firm. This paper aims to address this issue.

The paper identifies that innovation processes involve three stages during which the business model elements are conceived and elaborated: idea‐generation, idea‐development, and commercialization. The question for leaders is: “In which of the three stages could your growth efforts benefit from an infusion of external ideas and expertise?”

The open‐innovation approach does not require a company to replace all its current research and development (R&D) efforts. But it does change the primary question leaders should be asking to “How can my company create significantly more value by leveraging external partners to bring many more innovations to market?”

The article shows executives how they can systematically assess an innovation process, understand where new venture business models are weakest, and select the points at which open innovation could add some needed spark.

The article leads executives through two‐step process for introducing a customized open innovation program: step one, assess where your company's innovation process would benefit from external input by using five key questions; and step two, learn how to manage external relationships.

The chapter starts with an observation from a selection of contemporary business situations indicating that B2B sales episodes are frequently quite complicated, multidimensional and long term. At the same time, models and theorizing about sales still tend to be highly inspired by the old seven steps of selling framework.

A grounded theory is reported where a broader view was taken. The study resulted in a conceptual framework where the core process was named “business maneuvering.” Complementary processes were also identified. These are judiciously managed and balanced a little differently each time during the process of doing business. In other words, these other activities are “maneuvered” (i.e., managed with dexterity and skill).

Four complementary processes were extracted. They all represented interrelated categories that describe various selling activities:

• (1)

  business standardization;

• (2)

  business fraternization;

• (3)

  personalization; and

• (4)

  probationary business rationalization.

business standardization;

business fraternization;

personalization; and

probationary business rationalization.

Those processes are described along with their relations and implications for the understanding of sales processes are drawn.

The aim of this paper is to propose a consistent framework that allows the brand manager to detect innovation/growth opportunities and risks.

The paper is based on an extensive theoretical study of innovation and growth approaches combined with analysis of cases (Dell and Red Bull) and many practical examples. The different approaches are compared at three levels: the customer value, the process and customer segment level. It also uses principles of the logical brand management model, proposed in a JPBM (2004) article as a benchmark.

The paper shows that many frameworks still focus too much on the firm's perspective instead of the customer perspective. An approach is proposed in which growth and innovation starts from the customer value. It allows to detect potential opportunities and risks at a very detailed level.

The growth and innovation model proposed may be used in a business‐ to‐consumer and a business‐ to‐business context (as illustrated with the cases and examples).

Continuous adjustment of the customer value, by manipulating importance and satisfaction rates of different brand drivers leads to a continuous redefinition of contextual segments. In an effort to keep current customer segments and to attract new ones a balance must be sought continuously when adjusting the brand drivers. This kind of audit may also be perceived as a risk management approach for brand managers who want to evaluate innovation and growth options.

This paper “integrates” many innovation and growth approaches into “one” consistent approach.

This study seeks to: involve team members in part of the actual design of training for their own team leaders; improve team leader knowledge and skills; and demonstrate the use of skill charting (SC) for learning and performance improvement.

Using focus groups of team members and q‐sort methodology we were able to have team members identify practical performance elements regarding the behavior of their team leaders. Integrating these performance elements into the training design for team leaders and using SC as a training tool, we were able to compare two groups of team leaders: one group (the study group) whose training focused, specifically, on the team‐generated performance elements and another group (the traditional group) whose training was focused on general, team leader performance elements.

In the perceptions of the team members, the S group team leaders, following training, performed more effectively regarding: response time, positive reinforcement, and focus on desired behavior of team members, than did the T group team leaders. Mean scores of ratings of performance were higher for S group team leaders than T group team leaders on all variables save one.

Owing to the nature of SC training, sample sizes could not be large; that is, sample sizes could not exceed 35 participants per each condition. Statistical tests are thus influenced. Other limitations involve the obvious time gap between actual training and the subsequent changes in behavior and performance. The study does offer considerable support to other research that makes use of SC training tools.

The activities undertaken in the study serve to involve team members, recognize their knowledge and skill, and empower them via decision making and personal recognition.

This study points to ways to involve team members directly in performance improvement and learning.

The purpose of this study is to explore the motivational role of feedback information (positive and negative) provided by the firm in the face of participant heterogeneity, in terms of past success experience, under the research setting of crowdsourcing contests.

Taking insights from feedback studies and the dynamics of self-regulation theory, four theoretical hypotheses are proposed. An integrated dataset of 4,880 contest-participant pairs, which is obtained from an online contest platform and a survey, is empirically analyzed.

Empirical analysis shows that both positive feedback and negative feedback are able to stimulate the inner needs of participants. Notably, negative (positive) feedback becomes more (less) effective in intrinsically motivating crowds as they gain more successful experience during contest participation.

This study brings some new knowledge for the intrinsic motivation of crowds by exploring its antecedents, which have been undervalued in extant literature. The motivational role of feedback information is particularly explored.