IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jbrese/v96y2019icp14-25.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Recruiting valuable participants in online IDEA generation: The role of brief instructions

Author

Listed:
  • Steils, Nadia
  • Hanine, Salwa

Abstract

Recruiting qualified participants becomes challenging in crowdsourcing initiatives that seek to attract a diverse crowd based upon an open call for participation online. Brief instructions often constitute the first contact point between the company and potential contributors. This research investigates how the design of brief instructions intervenes in the recruitment of people with highly creative profiles. The results from a survey and an experimental research indicate a triple-interaction effect between individuals' level of creativity and the design of instructions (number of instructions and provision of an expected example). These findings may encourage crowdsourcing organizers to provide sufficient instructions to attract people with highly creative profiles, especially when using prospective briefs. Moreover, while constraining briefs reduces the intention to participate for individuals who are reward-oriented, greater instructional constraints do not reduce the intention to participate and emotional engagement for intrinsically motivated contributors. The study results contribute to the marketing literature by understanding the underlying psychological role of brief instructions.

Suggested Citation

  • Steils, Nadia & Hanine, Salwa, 2019. "Recruiting valuable participants in online IDEA generation: The role of brief instructions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 14-25.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jbrese:v:96:y:2019:i:c:p:14-25
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.10.038
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0148296318305198
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.10.038?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cédric Chaffois & Thomas Gillier & Mustapha Belkhouja & Yannig Roth, 2015. "How task instructions impact the creativity of designers and ordinary participants in online idea generation," Grenoble Ecole de Management (Post-Print) halshs-01273087, HAL.
    2. Lars Janzik & Christina Raasch, 2011. "Online Communities In Mature Markets: Why Join, Why Innovate, Why Share?," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(04), pages 797-836.
    3. Yannig Roth & Daren C. Brabham & Jean-François Lemoine, 2015. "Recruiting Individuals to a Crowdsourcing Community: Applying Motivational Categories to an Ad Copy Test," Springer Books, in: Fernando J. Garrigos-Simon & Ignacio Gil-Pechuán & Sofia Estelles-Miguel (ed.), Advances in Crowdsourcing, edition 127, chapter 0, pages 15-31, Springer.
    4. Jean-Fabrice Lebraty & Katia Lobre, 2010. "Créer de la valeur par le crowdsourcing : la dyade Innovation-Authenticité," Post-Print halshs-00545780, HAL.
    5. Lynch, John G, Jr, 1982. "On the External Validity of Experiments in Consumer Research," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 9(3), pages 225-239, December.
    6. Cédric Chaffois & Thomas Gillier & Mustapha Belkhouja & Yannig Roth, 2015. "How task instructions impact the creativity of designers and ordinary participants in online idea generation," Post-Print halshs-01273087, HAL.
    7. Louise Muhdi & Roman Boutellier, 2011. "Motivational Factors Affecting Participation And Contribution Of Members In Two Different Swiss Innovation Communities," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(03), pages 543-562.
    8. G. M.P. Swann, 2009. "The Economics of Innovation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13211.
    9. Nikolaus Franke & Marion K. Poetz & Martin Schreier, 2014. "Integrating Problem Solvers from Analogous Markets in New Product Ideation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(4), pages 1063-1081, April.
    10. Garcia Martinez, Marian, 2015. "Solver engagement in knowledge sharing in crowdsourcing communities: Exploring the link to creativity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(8), pages 1419-1430.
    11. C. Page Moreau & Darren W. Dahl, 2005. "Designing the Solution: The Impact of Constraints on Consumers' Creativity," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 32(1), pages 13-22, June.
    12. Anne-Laure Sellier & Darren W. Dahl, 2011. "Focus! Creative Success Is Enjoyed Through Restricted Choice," Post-Print hal-00668631, HAL.
    13. Hangzi Zhu & Katharina Djurjagina & Jens Leker, 2014. "Innovative Behaviour Types And Their Influence On Individual Crowdsourcing Performances," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 18(06), pages 1-18.
    14. repec:wly:soecon:v:80:3:y:2014:p:586-613 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Lang, Mark & Bharadwaj, Neeraj & Di Benedetto, C. Anthony, 2016. "How crowdsourcing improves prediction of market-oriented outcomes," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(10), pages 4168-4176.
    16. Christian Terwiesch & Yi Xu, 2008. "Innovation Contests, Open Innovation, and Multiagent Problem Solving," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(9), pages 1529-1543, September.
    17. Kevin J. Boudreau & Nicola Lacetera & Karim R. Lakhani, 2011. "Incentives and Problem Uncertainty in Innovation Contests: An Empirical Analysis," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(5), pages 843-863, May.
    18. Lars Bo Jeppesen & Karim R. Lakhani, 2010. "Marginality and Problem-Solving Effectiveness in Broadcast Search," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(5), pages 1016-1033, October.
    19. Hanine Salwa & Nadia Steils, 2016. "Creative contests: knowledge generation and underlying learning dynamics for idea generation," Post-Print halshs-01427155, HAL.
    20. Roger J. Volkema, 1983. "Problem Formulation in Planning and Design," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(6), pages 639-652, June.
    21. Palacios, Miguel & Martinez-Corral, Alberto & Nisar, Arsalan & Grijalvo, Mercedes, 2016. "Crowdsourcing and organizational forms: Emerging trends and research implications," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(5), pages 1834-1839.
    22. 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.
    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. Ren, Jie & Han, Yue & Genc, Yegin & Yeoh, William & Popovič, Aleš, 2021. "The boundary of crowdsourcing in the domain of creativity✰," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 165(C).
    2. Schweitzer, Fiona & Mai, Robert, 2021. "The double-edged sword of intricate idea enactment in product development," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 392-402.
    3. Xu, Hui & Wu, Yang & Hamari, Juho, 2022. "What determines the successfulness of a crowdsourcing campaign: A study on the relationships between indicators of trustworthiness, popularity, and success," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 484-495.
    4. 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).
    5. Salgado, Stéphane & Hemonnet-Goujot, Aurelie & Henard, David H. & de Barnier, Virginie, 2020. "The dynamics of innovation contest experience: An integrated framework from the customer’s perspective," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 29-43.
    6. 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).
    7. Fu, Shihui & Sun, Yi & Gao, Xue, 2022. "Balancing openness and control to improve the performance of crowdsourcing contests for product innovation: A configurational perspective," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).

    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. Gillier, Thomas & Chaffois, Cédric & Belkhouja, Mustapha & Roth, Yannig & Bayus, Barry L., 2018. "The effects of task instructions in crowdsourcing innovative ideas," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 35-44.
    2. repec:eee:respol:v:48:y:2019:i:8:p:- is not listed on IDEAS
    3. 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.
    4. Patel, Chirag & Ahmad Husairi, Mariyani & Haon, Christophe & Oberoi, Poonam, 2023. "Monetary rewards and self-selection in design crowdsourcing contests: Managing participation, contribution appropriateness, and winning trade-offs," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    5. Cappa, Francesco & Oriani, Raffaele & Pinelli, Michele & De Massis, Alfredo, 2019. "When does crowdsourcing benefit firm stock market performance?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(9), pages 1-1.
    6. Schemmann, Brita & Herrmann, Andrea M. & Chappin, Maryse M.H. & Heimeriks, Gaston J., 2016. "Crowdsourcing ideas: Involving ordinary users in the ideation phase of new product development," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(6), pages 1145-1154.
    7. repec:wsi:acsxxx:v:21:y:2019:i:08:n:s1363919619500142 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. 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.
    9. Claire Heeryung Kim & Kelly B. Herd & H. Shanker Krishnan, 2023. "The creative touch: the influence of haptics on creativity," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 34(1), pages 113-124, March.
    10. Yan Huang & Param Vir Singh & Kannan Srinivasan, 2014. "Crowdsourcing New Product Ideas Under Consumer Learning," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(9), pages 2138-2159, September.
    11. Yuan Jin & Ho Cheung Brian Lee & Sulin Ba & Jan Stallaert, 2021. "Winning by Learning? Effect of Knowledge Sharing in Crowdsourcing Contests," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 32(3), pages 836-859, September.
    12. Laura J. Kornish & Jeremy Hutchison‐Krupat, 2017. "Research on Idea Generation and Selection: Implications for Management of Technology," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 26(4), pages 633-651, April.
    13. Dominik Mahr & Aric Rindfleisch & Rebecca Slotegraaf, 2015. "Enhancing Crowdsourcing Success: the Role of Creative and Deliberate Problem-Solving Styles," Customer Needs and Solutions, Springer;Institute for Sustainable Innovation and Growth (iSIG), vol. 2(3), pages 209-221, September.
    14. Natalicchio, A. & Messeni Petruzzelli, A. & Garavelli, A.C., 2017. "Innovation problems and search for solutions in crowdsourcing platforms – A simulation approach," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 64, pages 28-42.
    15. Dargahi, Rambod & Namin, Aidin & Ketron, Seth C. & Saint Clair, Julian K., 2021. "Is self-knowledge the ultimate prize? A quantitative analysis of participation choice in online ideation crowdsourcing contests," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    16. Nikolaus Franke & Marion K. Poetz & Martin Schreier, 2014. "Integrating Problem Solvers from Analogous Markets in New Product Ideation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(4), pages 1063-1081, April.
    17. 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.
    18. Tat Koon Koh, 2019. "Adopting Seekers’ Solution Exemplars in Crowdsourcing Ideation Contests: Antecedents and Consequences," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 30(2), pages 486-506, June.
    19. Ho Cheung Brian Lee & Sulin Ba & Xinxin Li & Jan Stallaert, 2018. "Salience Bias in Crowdsourcing Contests," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 29(2), pages 401-418, June.
    20. Swanand J. Deodhar & Samrat Gupta, 2023. "The Impact of Social Reputation Features in Innovation Tournaments: Evidence from a Natural Experiment," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 34(1), pages 178-193, March.
    21. Peter Keinz, 2015. "Auf den Schultern von … Vielen! Crowdsourcing als neue Methode in der Neuproduktentwicklung," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 67(1), pages 35-69, February.
    22. Livio Cricelli & Michele Grimaldi & Silvia Vermicelli, 2022. "Crowdsourcing and open innovation: a systematic literature review, an integrated framework and a research agenda," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 16(5), pages 1269-1310, July.

    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:eee:jbrese:v:96:y:2019:i:c:p:14-25. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jbusres .

    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.