Jack of All, Master of Some: Information Network and Innovation in Crowdsourcing Communities

Many companies obtain new product ideas from their customers through innovation crowdsourcing. This study investigates how simultaneously participating in two crowdsourcing communities hosted by one firm, a customer support community and an innovation crowdsourcing community, affects an individual’s ability to generate novel, popular, and implementable ideas. A customer support crowdsourcing community is where customers help each other develop solutions to their current problems with a company’s products and an innovation crowdsourcing community is where customers propose new product or service ideas directly to a company. We expect that simultaneously participating in these crowdsourcing communities enhances an individual’s new product ideation performance because a customer support community provides information regarding customers’ current needs and problems that can improve the quality of ideas generated. Building on analogical reasoning theory, we hypothesize that an individual’s information network, in terms of its breadth and depth, affects various new product ideation outcomes at an innovation crowdsourcing community. By utilizing a natural language processing technique, we construct each individual’s information network, based on his or her helping activities at a customer support community. Our analysis reveals that generalists, who have provided solutions on broad topic domains at a customer support community, are more likely to create novel ideas than non-generalists. Generalists who possess deep knowledge in at least one topic domain (deep generalists) outperform non-generalists in their ability to generate popular and implementable ideas. Generalists who have only shallow knowledge across diverse domain areas (shallow generalists) do not perform significantly better than non-generalists in their ability to create ideas that are popular and that are later implemented by a company. Thus, the results suggest that the ability of generalists to outperform non-generalists in creating popular and implementable ideas is contingent on whether they also possess deep knowledge.

[1]  Laurence Ales,et al.  Innovation Tournaments with Multiple Contributors , 2016, Production and Operations Management.

[2]  Soo-Haeng Cho,et al.  Incentives in Contests with Heterogeneous Solvers , 2016, Manag. Sci..

[3]  Laurence Ales,et al.  Optimal Award Scheme in Innovation Tournaments , 2017, Oper. Res..

[4]  Christoph Fuchs,et al.  Why and When Consumers Prefer Products of User-Driven Firms: A Social Identification Account , 2015, Manag. Sci..

[5]  Param Vir Singh,et al.  Knowledge Sharing in Online Communities: Learning to Cross Geographic and Hierarchical Boundaries , 2012, Organ. Sci..

[6]  Param Vir Singh,et al.  Crowdsourcing New Product Ideas Under Consumer Learning , 2014, Manag. Sci..

[7]  Wai Fong Boh,et al.  Balancing breadth and depth of expertise for innovation: A 3M story , 2014 .

[8]  Nikolaus Franke,et al.  "Does This Sound Like a Fair Deal?": Antecedents and Consequences of Fairness Expectations in the Individual's Decision to Participate in Firm Innovation , 2013, Organ. Sci..

[9]  M. Tushman,et al.  Open innovation and organizational boundaries: task decomposition, knowledge distribution and the locus of innovation: Integrating Economic and Organization Theory , 2013 .

[10]  Jonathan Cagan,et al.  The Meaning of “Near” and “Far”: The Impact of Structuring Design Databases and the Effect of Distance of Analogy on Design Output , 2012 .

[11]  Lynn Wu,et al.  Social Network Effects on Productivity and Job Security: Evidence from the Adoption of a Social Networking Tool , 2012, Inf. Syst. Res..

[12]  Barry L. Bayus,et al.  Crowdsourcing New Product Ideas over Time: An Analysis of the Dell IdeaStorm Community , 2013, Manag. Sci..

[13]  Gerald C. Kane,et al.  Network Characteristics and the Value of Collaborative User-Generated Content , 2011, Mark. Sci..

[14]  Lada A. Adamic,et al.  Crowdsourcing with All-Pay Auctions: A Field Experiment on Taskcn , 2014, Manag. Sci..

[15]  Param Vir Singh,et al.  A Hidden Markov Model of Developer Learning Dynamics in Open Source Software Projects , 2011, Inf. Syst. Res..

[16]  Sinan Aral,et al.  The Diversity-Bandwidth Trade-off1 , 2011, American Journal of Sociology.

[17]  Karim R. Lakhani,et al.  Marginality and Problem-Solving Effectiveness in Broadcast Search , 2010, Organ. Sci..

[18]  Marshall Van Alstyne,et al.  The Diversity-Bandwidth Tradeoff , 2010 .

[19]  Martin Schreier,et al.  The Value of Crowdsourcing: Can Users Really Compete with Professionals in Generating New Product Ideas? , 2009 .

[20]  J. Alberto Espinosa,et al.  Crossing Spatial and Temporal Boundaries in Globally Distributed Projects: A Relational Model of Coordination Delay , 2009, Inf. Syst. Res..

[21]  Yi Xu,et al.  Innovation Contests, Open Innovation, and Multiagent Problem Solving , 2008, Manag. Sci..

[22]  B. Nijstad,et al.  Relative accessibility of domain knowledge and creativity: The effects of knowledge activation on the quantity and originality of generated ideas , 2007 .

[23]  R. O’Brien,et al.  A Caution Regarding Rules of Thumb for Variance Inflation Factors , 2007 .

[24]  H. Greve,et al.  Superman or the Fantastic Four? Knowledge Combination and Experience in Innovative Teams , 2006 .

[25]  Lars Frederiksen,et al.  Why Do Users Contribute to Firm-Hosted User Communities? The Case of Computer-Controlled Music Instruments , 2006, Organ. Sci..

[26]  Linda Argote,et al.  Individual Experience and Experience Working Together: Predicting Learning Rates from Knowing Who Knows What and Knowing How to Work Together , 2005, Manag. Sci..

[27]  Natalia Levina,et al.  Collaborating on Multi-Party Information Systems Development Projects: A Collective Reflection-in-Action View , 2005, Inf. Syst. Res..

[28]  R. Burt Structural Holes and Good Ideas1 , 2004, American Journal of Sociology.

[29]  Robert G. Fichman,et al.  Going Beyond the Dominant Paradigm for Information Technology Innovation Research: Emerging Concepts and Methods , 2004, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[30]  D. Simonton Creativity in Science: Chance, Logic, Genius, and Zeitgeist , 2004 .

[31]  Mark Steyvers,et al.  Finding scientific topics , 2004, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[32]  Jonathon N. Cummings Work Groups, Structural Diversity, and Knowledge Sharing in a Global Organization , 2004, Manag. Sci..

[33]  Hernan Casakin,et al.  Visual analogy as a cognitive strategy in the design process. Expert versus novice performance , 2004 .

[34]  Michael I. Jordan,et al.  Latent Dirichlet Allocation , 2001, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[35]  D. Dahl,et al.  The Influence and Value of Analogical Thinking during New Product Ideation , 2002 .

[36]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  Bridging Contested Terrain: Linking Incentive-Based and Learning Perspectives on Organizational Evolution , 2003 .

[37]  Lee Fleming,et al.  Special Issue on Design and Development: Recombinant Uncertainty in Technological Search , 2001, Manag. Sci..

[38]  K. Dugosh,et al.  Cognitive stimulation in brainstorming. , 2000, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[39]  G. Ahuja Collaboration Networks, Structural Holes, and Innovation: A Longitudinal Study , 1998 .

[40]  Giovanni Dosi,et al.  The structure of problem-solving knowledge and the structure of organisations , 2000 .

[41]  Claudia Eckert,et al.  Expertise and designer burnout , 1999 .

[42]  Andrew B. Hargadon,et al.  Technology brokering and innovation in a product development firm. , 1997 .

[43]  Kenneth D. Forbus,et al.  Analogy and creativity in the works of Johannes Kepler , 1997 .

[44]  Teresa M. Amabile,et al.  Assessing the Work Environment for Creativity , 1996 .

[45]  James D. Montgomery,et al.  Job Search and Network Composition: Implications of the Strength-Of-Weak-Ties Hypothesis , 1992 .

[46]  L. R. Novick Analogical transfer, problem similarity, and expertise. , 1988, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[47]  Herbert A. Simon,et al.  The Processes of Scientific Discovery: The Strategy of Experimentation , 1988, Cogn. Sci..

[48]  K. Holyoak,et al.  Surface and structural similarity in analogical transfer , 1987, Memory & cognition.

[49]  K. Holyoak,et al.  Schema induction and analogical transfer , 1983, Cognitive Psychology.

[50]  Dedre Gentner,et al.  Structure-Mapping: A Theoretical Framework for Analogy , 1983, Cogn. Sci..

[51]  Mark S. Granovetter T H E S T R E N G T H O F WEAK TIES: A NETWORK THEORY REVISITED , 1983 .

[52]  J. Hausman Specification tests in econometrics , 1978 .

[53]  H. Simon,et al.  Perception in chess , 1973 .

[54]  James R. Freeland,et al.  Structuring Information Flow to Enhance Innovation , 1972 .

[55]  Donald W. Marquaridt Generalized Inverses, Ridge Regression, Biased Linear Estimation, and Nonlinear Estimation , 1970 .

[56]  Herbert A. Simon,et al.  The Sciences of the Artificial , 1970 .

[57]  K. Duncker,et al.  On problem-solving , 1945 .

[58]  Norman R. F. Maier,et al.  Reasoning and learning. , 1931 .

[59]  Thomas M. Smith,et al.  A History of Mechanical Inventions , 1961, Nature.