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

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

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

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

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

[6]  Laurence Ales,et al.  Optimal Award Scheme in Innovation Tournaments , 2017 .

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[24]  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..

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

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

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

[28]  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 .

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

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

[31]  D. Gentner Structure‐Mapping: A Theoretical Framework for Analogy* , 1983 .

[32]  Elina H. Hwang,et al.  Knowledge Sharing in Online Communities: Learning to Cross Geographic and Hierarchical Boundaries , 2012 .

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

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

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

[36]  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 .

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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