World Scientific
  • Search
    Quick Search in Journals
    Access type:
    Quick Search anywhere
    Access type:
    Advanced Search
  • My Cart
  •   
Skip main navigation

Cookies Notification

We use cookies on this site to enhance your user experience. By continuing to browse the site, you consent to the use of our cookies. Learn More
×
No Access

WALKING PARALLEL PATHS OR TAKING THE SAME ROAD? THE EFFECT OF COLLABORATIVE INCENTIVES IN INNOVATION CONTESTS

    https://doi.org/10.1142/S1363919617500244Cited by:7 (Source: Crossref)
    Previous
    Next

    Abstract

    We examine the role of participants’ interactions in innovation contests. In contrast to the dominant view of a competitive organisation of innovation contests, we suggest that, especially for ideation projects, a collaborative setting may be beneficial in terms of the amount of ideation activity and the quality of the generated ideas. Using two experiments, we show the usefulness of a collaborative approach when two particular conditions are met: first, the overall effort must be compensated according to performance criteria in such a way that participants are aware of the impact of their actions. Thus, the reward mechanism has to ensure that all contributors to a specific idea benefit from their involvement. Second, the host has to provide feedback throughout the contest to make it clear for participants what idea(s) to focus on. Our results show that, while the elaboration effort can be increased by introducing a collaborative reward mechanism alone, the best results are achieved when both conditions are met.

    References

    • Ariely, D, U Gneezy, G Loewenstein and N Mazar [2009] Large Stakes and Big Mistakes. Review of Economic Studies, 76 (2), 451–469. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Baer, M, RT Leenders, GR Oldham and AK Vadera [2010] Win or lose the battle for creativity: The power and perils of intergroup competition. Academy of Management Journal, 53 (4), 827–845. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Baer, M, AK Vadera, RT Leenders and GR Oldham [2013] Intergroup Competition as a Double-Edged Sword: How Sex Composition Regulates the Effects of Competition on Group Creativity. Organization Science, 25 (3), 892–908. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Bayus, BL [2013] Crowdsourcing new product ideas over time. Management Science, 59 (1), 226–244. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Beersma, B, JR Hollenbeck, SE Humphrey, H Moon, DE Conlon and DR Ilgen [2003] Cooperation, competition, and team performance: Toward a contingency approach. Academy of Management Journal, 46 (5), 572–590. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Blohm, I, U Bretschneider, JM Leimeister and H Krcmar [2011] Does collaboration among participants lead to better ideas in IT-based idea competitions? An empirical investigation. International Journal of Networking and Virtual Organisations, 9 (29), 106–122. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Bogers, M, A Afuah and B Bastian [2010] Users as innovators: A review, critique, and future research directions. Journal of Management, 36 (4), 857–875. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Boudreau, KJ, N Lacetera and KR Lakhani [2011] Incentives and Problem Uncertainty in Innovation Contests: An Empirical Analysis. Management Science, 57 (5), 843–863. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Boudreau, KJ and KR Lakhani [2009] How to manage outside innovation. MIT Sloan Management Review, 50 (4), 68–77. Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Bullinger, AC, A-K Neyer, M Rass and KM Möslein [2010] Community-Based Innovation Contests: Where Competition Meets Cooperation. Creativity and Innovation Management, 19 (3), 290–303. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Burroughs, JE, DW Dahl, CP Moreau and GJ Gorn [2011] Facilitating and Rewarding Creativity during New Product Development. Journal of Marketing, 75, 53–67. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Bulte, EH, L Lipper, R Stringer and D Zilberman [2008] Payments for ecosystem services and poverty reduction: Concepts, issues, and empirical perspectives. Environment and Development Economics, 13 (3), 245–265. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Cameron, AC and PK Trivedi [1990] Regression-based tests for overdispersion in the Poisson model. Journal of Econometrics, 46 (3), 347–364. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Conti, R, MA Collins and ML Picariello [2001] The impact of competition on intrinsic motivation and creativity: Considering gender, gender segregation and gender role orientation. Personality and Individual Differences, 31 (8), 1273–1289. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Dahan, E and H Mendelson [2001] An extreme-value model of concept testing. Management Science, 47 (1), 102–116. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Dahlander, L and H Piezunka [2014] Open to suggestions: How organizations elicit suggestions through proactive and reactive attention. Research Policy, 43 (5), 812–827. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Dean, DL, JM Hender, TL Rodgers and EL Santanen [2006] Identifying quality, novel, and creative Ideas: Constructs and scales for idea evaluation. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 7 (10), 646–698. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Deci, EL, JP Connell and RM Ryan [1989] Self-determination in a work organization. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74 (4), 580–596. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Deci, EL and RM Ryan [2000] The ‘What’ and ‘Why’ of Goal Pursuits: Human Needs and the Self-Determination of Behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11 (4), 227–268. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Dixit, A [1987] Strategic behavior in contests. The American Economic Review, 77 (5), 891–898. Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Franke, N, C Lettl, S Roiser and P Tuertscher [2013] Does god play dice? Randomness vs. deterministic explanations of idea originality in crowdsourcing. In 35th DRUID Celebration Conference. Google Scholar
    • Frey, BS and F Oberholzer-Gee [1997] The Cost of Price Incentives: An Empirical Analysis of Motivation Crowding-Out. American Economic Review, 87 (4), 746–755. Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Füller, J [2010] Refining Virtual Co-Creation from a Consumer Perspective. California Management Review, 52 (2), 98–123. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Gamble, R, S Sen, B Brummel, F Grove, N Jorgenson, D Baker, D Guernsey, D Hampton and J Hughes [2009] The SEREBRO Project: Fostering Creativity through Collaboration and Rewards. In EDUMas Workshop, part of 8th Int. Conf. on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS, 2009). Google Scholar
    • Gans, JS and S Stern [2003] The product market and the market for “ideas”: Commercialization strategies for technology entrepreneurs. Research Policy, 32 (2), 333–350. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Girotra, K, C Terwiesch and KT Ulrich [2010] Idea generation and the quality of the best idea. Management Science, 56 (4), 591–605. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Gneezy, U and A Rustichini [2000] Pay Enough or Don’t Pay at All. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 115 (3), 791–810. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Harhoff, D, J Henkel and E von Hippel [2003] Profiting from voluntary information spillovers: How users benefit by freely revealing their innovations. Research Policy, 32 (10), 1753–1769. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Hennessey BA and TM Amabile [2010] Creativity. Annual Review of Psychology, 61, 569–598. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Heyman, J and D Ariely [2004] Effort for Payment. A Tale of Two Markets. Psychological Science, 15 (11), 787–793. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Jung, JH, C Schneider and J Valacich [2010] Enhancing the motivational affordance of information systems: The effects of real-time performance feedback and goal setting in group collaboration environments. Management Science 56 (4), 724–742. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Kagel, JH and AE Roth [1995] The Handbook of Experimental Economics. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Kluger, AN and A DeNisi [1996] The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin, 119 (2), 254–284. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Koren, Y [2009] The bellkor solution to the netflix grand prize. Netflix Prize Documentation, 81, 1–10. Available from: http://www.netflixprize.com/assets/GrandPrize2009_BPC_Bellkor.pdf. Google Scholar
    • Kosonen, M, C Gan, H Olander and K Blomqvist [2013] My idea is our idea! Supporting user-driven innovation activities in crowdsourcing communities. International Journal of Innovation Management, 17 (03), 1340010. Link, Google Scholar
    • Kosonen, M, C Gan, M Vanhala and K Blomqvist [2014] User motivation and knowledge sharing in idea crowdsourcing. International Journal of Innovation Management, 18 (05), 1450031. Link, Google Scholar
    • Lakhani, KR and JA Panetta [2007] The principles of distributed innovation. Innovations, 2 (3), 97–112. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Lakhani, KR and E von Hippel [2003] How open source software works: Free user-to-user assistance. Research Policy, 32 (6), 923–943. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Lim, N and H Chen [2014] When Do Group Incentives for Salespeople Work?, Journal of Marketing Research, 51 (3), 320–334. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Marino, AM and J Zabojnik [2004] Internal competition for corporate resources and incentives in teams. RAND Journal of Economics, 35 (4), 710–727. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Paulus, PB and H-C Yang [2000] Idea generation in groups: A basis for creativity in organizations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82 (1), 76–87. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Pellizzoni, E, T Buganza and G Colombo [2015] Motivation orientations in innovation contests: Why people participate. International Journal of Innovation Management, 19 (04), 1550033. Link, Google Scholar
    • Piller, FT and D Walcher [2006] Toolkits for idea competitions: A novel method to integrate users in new product development. R&D Management, 36 (3), 307–318. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Reeve, J and EL Deci [1996] Elements of the competitive situation that affect intrinsic motivation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22 (1), 24–33. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Rynes, SL, B Gerhart and L Parks [2005] Personnel psychology: Performance evaluation and pay for performance. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 571–600. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Sarin, S and V Mahajan [2001] The effect of reward structures on the performance of cross-functional product development teams. Journal of Marketing, 65 (2), 35–53. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Schreier, M [2006] The value increment of mass-customized products: An empirical assessment. Journal of Consumer Behavior, 5 (4), 317–327. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Singh, J and L Fleming [2010] Lone inventors as sources of breakthroughs: Myth or reality?, Management Science, 56 (1), 41–56. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Spreitzer, GM [1995] Psychological empowerment in the workplace: Dimensions, measurement, and validation. Academy of Management Journal, 38 (5), 1442–1465. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Szymanski, S [2003] The economic design of sporting contests. Journal of Economic Literature, 41 (4), 1137–1187. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Terwiesch, C and Y Xu [2008] Innovation contests, open innovation, and multiagent problem solving. Management Science, 54 (9), 1529–1543. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Toubia, O [2006] Idea Generation, Creativity, and Incentives. Marketing Science, 25 (5), 411–425. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Vohs, KD, NL Mead and MR Goode [2006] The psychological consequences of money. Science, 314 (5802), 1154–1156. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • von Hippel, E and G von Krogh [2003] Open source software and the private-collective innovation model: Issues for organization science. Organization Science, 14 (2), 209–223. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • von Hippel, E and G von Krogh [2006] Free revealing and the private-collective model for innovation incentives. R&D Management, 36 (3), 295–306. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Zhang, X and KM Bartol [2010] Linking empowering leadership and employee creativity: The influence of psychological empowerment, intrinsic motivation, and creative process engagement. Academy of Management Journal, 53 (1), 107–128. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
    • Zhu, H, K Djurjagina and J Leker [2014] Innovative behaviour types and their influence on individual crowdsourcing performances. International Journal of Innovation Management, 18 (06), 1440015. Link, Google Scholar