Search results

Companies are discovering the power of crowdsourcing as a source of new ideas for products and services. It is assumed that the personal engagement and the continuous involvement with a company’s products or services over a period of several weeks positively affect participants’ loyalty intentions toward the host companies. The research leads the authors to challenge this assumption. In addition to mere participation in crowdsourcing initiatives, the authors argue that perceptions of fairness will explain changes in customer relationship-related consequences such as loyalty, perceived innovativeness and product interest. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

The authors analyzed a real-life crowdsourcing contest launched by a leading lighting manufacturer and investigated the impact of two fairness dimensions (distributive and procedural) on participants’ future behavioral and attitudinal intentions (n=121). The analysis was performed with SEM.

The results suggest that fairness perceptions are significantly related to evoked product interest, perceived innovativeness and loyalty intentions. The analysis reveals that the influence of the fairness dimensions is asymmetric: while distributive fairness can be considered as a basic factor that must be fulfilled in order to avoid negative behavioral consequences, procedural fairness instead is an excitement factor that causes truly positive behavioral consequences.

The results are particularly relevant for companies launching a crowdsourcing competition under their own brand name, and for broadcasting platforms. For companies with no relations to end-users, these findings may not be as relevant.

Organizers of crowdsourcing contests should be aware that such initiatives can be a double-edged sword. Fair Play is a must to gain the positive effects from crowdsourcing initiatives for both new product development and the customer relationship. For companies lacking the capabilities to manage crowdsourcing initiatives professionally it is advisable to rely on intermediary broadcasting platforms.

The research is the first to investigate systematically the consequences of fairness perceptions in a real-life crowdsourcing idea contest. The authors demonstrate the asymmetric nature of fairness perceptions on three different outcome variables that are important for the customer relationship.

The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of some pressing but under-researched aspects of public leadership. Ten propositions about public leadership are set out and these are intended to be thought-provoking and even controversial in order to stimulate researchers to design research which addresses key theoretical and practical questions about leadership in the public sphere. They will also help practitioners navigate an increasingly complex leadership context.

This invited essay uses ten propositions about public leadership, selected from three sources: the leadership literature, the author’s own research and from collaborative research discussions with academics, policy makers and practitioners.

The first proposition argues for distinguishing public leadership from public service leadership given that the former is about leadership of the public sphere. Other propositions concern context; purpose; conflict and contest at the heart of public leadership; leadership with political astuteness; dual leadership; leadership projections; fostering resilience; leadership, authority and legitimacy; and the challenge to researchers to use research designs which reflect the complexity and dynamism of public leadership.

While this essay is primarily addressed to researchers, there are many ideas and concepts which practising leaders will find insightful and useful in their work.

This essay draws on deep experience in undertaking high-quality academic research about public leadership which draws from and feeds into policy and practice. It utilises organisational psychology, public management and political science to create synergies in order to enhance the understanding of public leadership.

This study aims to explore how online reviews and users’ social network centrality interact to influence idea popularity in open innovation communities (OICs).

This study used Python to obtain data from the LEGO Innovation Community. In total, 285,849 reviews across 4,475 user designs between March 2019 and March 2021 were extracted to test this study’s hypotheses.

The ordinary least square regression analysis results show that review volume, review valence, review variance and review length all positively influence idea popularity. In addition, users’ in-degree centrality positively interacts with review valence, review variance and review length to influence idea popularity, while their out-degree centrality negatively interacts with such effects.

Drawing on the interactive marketing perspective, this study employs a large sample from the LEGO community and examines user design and idea popularity from a community member’s point of view. Moreover, this study is the first to confirm the role of online reviews and user network centrality in influencing idea popularity in OICs from a social network perspective. Furthermore, by integrating social network analysis and persuasion theories, this study confirms the interaction effects of review characteristics and users’ social network centrality on idea popularity.

This study’s results highlight that users should actively interact and share with reviewers their professional product design knowledge and/or the journey of their design to improve the volume of reviews on their user designs. Moreover, users could also draw more attention from other users by actively responding to heterogeneous reviews. In addition, users should be cautious with the number of people they follow and ensure that they improve their in-degree rather than out-degree centrality in their social networks.

This study integrates social network analysis and persuasion theories to explore the effects of online reviews and users’ centrality on idea popularity in OICs, a vital research issue that has been overlooked.

Virtual crowdsourcing initiatives, and in particular crowdsourcing competitions, have become a promising means of harnessing users’ creativity to help corporate innovation. To date, research has tended to focus on the outcome of the competition, i.e. on the creative solution. There is, however, a lack of understanding in such crowdsourcing environments of the creative process itself and the influence of social interaction on the platform during this process. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

The authors conducted a series of qualitative interviews with participants from a major European crowdsourcing platform. The platform acts as an intermediary between companies and firms, and has launched more than 370 idea competitions.

The results suggest that there are not only positive interactions going on between participants. Below the surface, there also appear destructive processes provoked by the fierce competition among the contestants for prizes and a position in the Top Innovator lists. Such destructive behavior includes bullying of successful contestants, excessive use of like-functions among befriended contestants, and mutual donation of prize money among in-group members.

Negative social interaction among contestants of crowdsourcing communities can potentially threaten the platform provider’s business model. Managers of crowdsourcing platforms should engage in the development of strong social norms explicitly disapproving destructive behavior.

This study is the first to investigate in detail the phase of idea generation on crowdsourcing platforms, and the nature and impact of social interactions among contestants.

Technological platforms encourage the exchange of knowledge and creation of new ideas that create new value for participating members who pool and combine their knowledge, facilities, tools and skills, thus contributing to the development of innovative solutions. This paper focuses on hackathon platforms, working as open innovation intermediaries, investigating their role and functions and exploring how they encourage the collaboration and the innovativeness among participants in order to boost their innovative new ideas.

The research method is a qualitative design that includes in-depth interviews of ten stakeholders that play different roles in “Hack for Travel,” the case under analysis. It is a hackathon organized entirely online, as a response to the crisis generated by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

Findings revealed six processes developed by the hackathon platform used to effectively organize the event and facilitate participants to cooperate and share knowledge in order to boost the spread of innovative ideas. Results identify how hackathons should be organized and through which processes they work as innovation platforms.

This is one of the first attempts to study the increasing phenomenon of hackathons, providing theoretical contribution and practical implications about their role in developing innovation.

Ideas related to “the Nordic” are important in the reconstruction of national identities in Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden, and these countries’ modern national narratives are structurally highly similar. At the same time, there are clear differences between the Nordic countries regarding their national images. The purpose of this study is to a examine the relationship between ideas of the Nordic and national images through a qualitative study of brand manifestations on Nordic web portals for foreign visitors.

The two guiding research questions are: How do Nordic branding strategies and national stereotypes impact on nation-branding content toward visitors in the Nordic region? What traces of the Nordic as a supranational concept can be found when the Nordic is translated into concrete national brand manifestations? The analysis focuses on brand manifestations such as brand visions, codes of expression, differentiation, narrative identity and ideologies.

The analysis shows that clichés about the nations prevail in contemporary brand material and that Nordic branding strategies impact on the portals in diffuse and implicit ways. There are, however, some important common denominators, pointing toward a new Nordic brand related to exotic, untouched yet easily accessible nature, with a focus on pure, fresh and clean food with new tastes, in combination with happy and welcoming people.

The results from the study contribute with insight in how ideas of the Nordic on a supranational level transform when used in concrete and practical branding material. Further, this paper proposes a new Nordic branding focus, which contests traditional Nordic ideas.

The purpose of this paper is to develop a theoretical model elaborating on the type of conditions that can inhibit (or at least temporarily hold back) “reactive conformance” in the wake of an increasing reliance on quantitative performance evaluations of academic research and researchers.

A qualitative study of a research group at a Swedish university who was recurrently exposed to quantitative performance evaluations of their research activities.

The empirical findings show how the research group under study exhibited a surprisingly high level of non-compliance and non-conformity in relation to what was deemed important and legitimate by the prevailing performance evaluations. Based on this, we identify four important qualities of pre-existing research/er ideals that seem to make them particularly resilient to an infiltration of an “academic performer ideal,” namely that they are (1) central and since-long established, (2) orthogonal to (i.e. very different from) the academic performer ideal as materialized by the performance measurement system, (3) largely shared within the research group and (4) externally legitimate. The premise is that these qualities form an important basis and motivation for not only criticizing, but also contesting, the academic performer ideal.

Extant research generally finds that the proliferation of quantitatively oriented performance evaluations within academia makes researchers adopt a new type of academic performer ideal which promotes research conformity and superficiality. This study draws upon, and adds to, an emerging literature that has begun to problematize this “reactive conformance-thesis” through identifying four qualities of pre-existing research/er ideals that can inhibit (or at least temporarily hold back) such “reactive research conformance.”

The paper aims to show that materiality in the EU's non-financial reporting directive (NFRD) is an ambiguous concept, that its meaning is contested and that this contest for materiality is a contest for the meaning of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). Thus, the paper shall highlight a new aspect of materiality as a core principle in non-financial reporting.

The paper combines a historical analysis of the EU's CSR policies, an in-depth textual analysis of the EU's 2014 NFRD and associated documents, of non-financial reporting frameworks and exemplary adoptions of the NFRD in national laws.

The paper identifies two conflicting views of materiality in the NFRD. It shows that these “additive” and “cumulative” views correspond to the approaches taken by the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) and International Integrated Reporting Council (IIRC) frameworks and by different national adoptions of the NFRD. The paper concludes that this contest for materiality is a contest for CSR – focusing either on business risks or impacts, shareholders or stakeholders, the business case or the social case for such a responsibility.

The paper is mainly based on an in-depth analysis of the European debate on materiality in non-financial reporting. Some of the paper's descriptive results are thus limited to this particular case. However, the main conceptual findings are backed up by an analysis of internationally established reporting frameworks and scholarly debates on the issue.

The paper reveals the practical implications of the contesting “additive” and “cumulative“ understandings of materiality present in the NFRD. The paper thus further underpins the preference for a “double materiality” perspective in the revision of the NFRD and the EC's 2021 CSRD proposal.

The paper makes an original contribution in its explication of different understandings of materiality in non-financial reporting and how these eventually represent different, competing perspectives on the nature of the NFRD and of CSR.

Firms increasingly rely on both external and internal crowdsourcing to capture ideas more broadly and enhance innovative problem-solving. Especially in internal crowdsourcing, knowledge sharing that contributes to develop or further the understanding of the problem the idea is focused on solving can take place between critical employees, and in that way improve ideas generated by others. This far, most crowdsourcing practices have focused on identifying solutions to proposed problems, whereas much less is known about how crowds can be used to share problem-related knowledge. There is thus an untapped potential in leveraging crowds not just to generate solution-oriented ideas but also to share knowledge to improve ideas and even to reframe problems. This paper aims to explore the effect of problem- and solution-related knowledge sharing in internal crowdsourcing for idea development.

Data on ideas and comments were collected from an idea management system in a Swedish multinational company. The investigation captures the influences of the problem- and solution-related knowledge sharing on ideas based on content analysis and logistic regression analysis.

The results from this study show that sharing knowledge related to solutions in idea development impacts idea acceptance positively, whereas sharing knowledge related to problems in idea development has a negative effect on the likelihood of idea acceptance and these effects of knowledge sharing are moderated by the active author responses.

This research provides managerial implications for firms to deliberately manage knowledge sharing in peer communities in internal crowdsourcing, especially by providing suggestions on problem reframing and solution refining for ideas.

The results contribute to existing theory in terms of extending the view of crowdsourcing in ideation to include how crowds contribute to the development of the problem and the solution during the development of ideas and providing new insights on knowledge sharing in internal crowdsourcing based on problem-solving theory.