IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jinfst/v73y2022i3p376-392.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The more, the better? The effect of feedback and user's past successes on idea implementation in open innovation communities

Author

Listed:
  • Qian Liu
  • Zhengfa Yang
  • Xiaofang Cai
  • Qianzhou Du
  • Weiguo Fan

Abstract

Establishing open innovation communities has evolved as an important product innovation and development strategy for companies. Yet, the success of such communities relies on the successful implementation of many user‐submitted ideas. Although extant literature has examined the impact of user experience and idea characteristics on idea implementation, little is known from the information input perspective, for example, feedback. Based on the information overload theory and knowledge content framework, we propose that the amount and types of feedback content have different effects on the likelihood of subsequent idea implementation, and such effects depend on the level of users' success experience. We tested the research model using a panel logistic model with the data of MIUI Forum. The study results revealed that the amount of feedback has an inverted U‐shaped effect on idea implementation, and such effect is moderated by a user's past success. Moreover, the type of feedback content (cost and benefit‐related feedback and functionality‐related feedback) positively affects idea implementation, and a user's past success positively moderated the above effects. Finally, we discuss the theoretical and practical implications, limitations of our research, and suggestions for future research.

Suggested Citation

  • Qian Liu & Zhengfa Yang & Xiaofang Cai & Qianzhou Du & Weiguo Fan, 2022. "The more, the better? The effect of feedback and user's past successes on idea implementation in open innovation communities," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 73(3), pages 376-392, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:jinfst:v:73:y:2022:i:3:p:376-392
    DOI: 10.1002/asi.24555
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24555
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/asi.24555?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rob Cross & Lee Sproull, 2004. "More Than an Answer: Information Relationships for Actionable Knowledge," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(4), pages 446-462, August.
    2. Loo Geok Pee & Shan L. Pan & Mingwei Li & Suling Jia, 2020. "Social informatics of information value cocreation: A case study of xiaomi's online user community," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 71(4), pages 409-422, April.
    3. Joel O. Wooten & Karl T. Ulrich, 2017. "Idea Generation and the Role of Feedback: Evidence from Field Experiments with Innovation Tournaments," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 26(1), pages 80-99, January.
    4. Devon Greyson, 2018. "Information triangulation: A complex and agentic everyday information practice," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 69(7), pages 869-878, July.
    5. Chan, Kimmy Wa & Li, Stella Yiyan & Zhu, John Jianjun, 2018. "Good to Be Novel? Understanding How Idea Feasibility Affects Idea Adoption Decision Making in Crowdsourcing," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 52-68.
    6. Richard F. J. Haans & Constant Pieters & Zi-Lin He, 2016. "Thinking about U: Theorizing and testing U- and inverted U-shaped relationships in strategy research," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(7), pages 1177-1195, July.
    7. Jyoti Mishra & David Allen & Alan Pearman, 2015. "Information seeking, use, and decision making," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 66(4), pages 662-673, April.
    8. Barry L. Bayus, 2013. "Crowdsourcing New Product Ideas over Time: An Analysis of the Dell IdeaStorm Community," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(1), pages 226-244, June.
    9. Chan, Kimmy Wa & Li, Stella Yiyan & Zhu, John Jianjun, 2015. "Fostering Customer Ideation in Crowdsourcing Community: The Role of Peer-to-peer and Peer-to-firm Interactions," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 42-62.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ashraf Labib & Salem Chakhar & Lorraine Hope & John Shimell & Mark Malinowski, 2022. "Analysis of noise and bias errors in intelligence information systems," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 73(12), pages 1755-1775, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kimmy Wa Chan & Stella Yiyan Li & Jian Ni & John JianJun Zhu, 2021. "What Feedback Matters? The Role of Experience in Motivating Crowdsourcing Innovation," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 30(1), pages 103-126, January.
    2. Pollok, Patrick & Lüttgens, Dirk & Piller, Frank T., 2019. "Attracting solutions in crowdsourcing contests: The role of knowledge distance, identity disclosure, and seeker status," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 98-114.
    3. Mourelatos, Evangelos, 2021. "Personality and Ethics on Online Labor Markets: How mood influences ethical perceptions," EconStor Preprints 244735, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    4. Deichmann, Dirk & Gillier, Thomas & Tonellato, Marco, 2021. "Getting on board with new ideas: An analysis of idea commitments on a crowdsourcing platform," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    5. Juncai Jiang & Yu Wang, 2020. "A Theoretical and Empirical Investigation of Feedback in Ideation Contests," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 29(2), pages 481-500, February.
    6. Niek Althuizen & Bo Chen, 2022. "Crowdsourcing Ideas Using Product Prototypes: The Joint Effect of Prototype Enhancement and the Product Design Goal on Idea Novelty," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(4), pages 3008-3025, April.
    7. Liao, Junyun & Chen, Jiawen & Mou, Jian, 2021. "Examining the antecedents of idea contribution in online innovation communities: A perspective of creative self-efficacy," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    8. Lucia-Palacios, Laura & Pérez-López, Raúl, 2021. "Effects of Home Voice Assistants' Autonomy on Instrusiveness and Usefulness: Direct, Indirect, and Moderating Effects of Interactivity," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 41-54.
    9. Piazza, Mariangela & Mazzola, Erica & Perrone, Giovanni, 2022. "How can I signal my quality to emerge from the crowd? A study in the crowdsourcing context," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    10. Hu, Feng & Bijmolt, Tammo H.A. & Huizingh, Eelko K.R.E., 2020. "The impact of innovation contest briefs on the quality of solvers and solutions," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 90.
    11. Cheng, Xi & Gou, Qinglong & Yue, Jinfeng & Zhang, Yan, 2019. "Equilibrium decisions for an innovation crowdsourcing platform," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 241-260.
    12. Yang, Xi & Zhao, Quanwu & Sun, Heshan, 2022. "Seekers’ complaint behavior in crowdsourcing: An uncertainty perspective," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    13. Nirup Menon & Anant Mishra & Shun Ye, 2020. "Beyond Related Experience: Upstream vs. Downstream Experience in Innovation Contest Platforms with Interdependent Problem Domains," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 22(5), pages 1045-1065, September.
    14. Muninger, Marie-Isabelle & Mahr, Dominik & Hammedi, Wafa, 2022. "Social media use: A review of innovation management practices," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 140-156.
    15. Shi, Xiaoxiao & Evans, Richard & Shan, Wei, 2022. "Solver engagement in online crowdsourcing communities: The roles of perceived interactivity, relationship quality and psychological ownership," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    16. Tat Koon Koh & Muller Y. M. Cheung, 2022. "Seeker Exemplars and Quantitative Ideation Outcomes in Crowdsourcing Contests," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 33(1), pages 265-284, March.
    17. Ye, Lisha & Pan, Shan L & Wang, Jingyuan & Wu, Junjie & Dong, Xiaoying, 2021. "Big data analytics for sustainable cities: An information triangulation study of hazardous materials transportation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 381-390.
    18. Chan, Kimmy Wa & Li, Stella Yiyan & Zhu, John Jianjun, 2018. "Good to Be Novel? Understanding How Idea Feasibility Affects Idea Adoption Decision Making in Crowdsourcing," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 52-68.
    19. Pallab Sanyal & Shun Ye, 2024. "An Examination of the Dynamics of Crowdsourcing Contests: Role of Feedback Type," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 35(1), pages 394-413, March.
    20. Zhuojun Gu & Ravi Bapna & Jason Chan & Alok Gupta, 2022. "Measuring the Impact of Crowdsourcing Features on Mobile App User Engagement and Retention: A Randomized Field Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(2), pages 1297-1329, February.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:jinfst:v:73:y:2022:i:3:p:376-392. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.asis.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.