IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/techno/v90-91y2020is0166497217308933.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The impact of innovation contest briefs on the quality of solvers and solutions

Author

Listed:
  • Hu, Feng
  • Bijmolt, Tammo H.A.
  • Huizingh, Eelko K.R.E.

Abstract

As firms increasingly adopt online contests to improve their innovation projects, research is needed to determine which design factors make a contest successful. We examine the effects of the innovation contest brief, the description of the problem and the requirements for the potential solutions on contest performance. We focus on the length and readability of the brief and test both their effects on contest performance with a dataset containing almost 4000 online contests. Both brief readability and brief length are found to have direct and indirect effects on contest performance, and their indirect effects are determined by the effects on the number of high-skilled and low-skilled solvers that a contest attracts. Furthermore, the combined effects of both brief characteristics are positive, and these effects increase as the brief becomes more readable and longer. Finally, we find that both high-skilled and low-skilled solvers can submit high-quality solutions, but the likelihood of this is significantly higher for high-skilled solvers. This study provides clear evidence that briefs affect contest performance, making them an important element in the design of innovation contests.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:techno:v:90-91:y:2020:i::s0166497217308933
    DOI: 10.1016/j.technovation.2019.102099
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166497217308933
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.technovation.2019.102099?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. Tammy Harris & Joseph M. Hilbe & James W. Hardin, 2014. "Modeling count data with generalized distributions," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 14(3), pages 562-579, September.
    2. Hilbe,Joseph M., 2014. "Modeling Count Data," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107611252, November.
    3. Kevin J. Boudreau & Karim R. Lakhani & Michael Menietti, 2016. "Performance responses to competition across skill levels in rank-order tournaments: field evidence and implications for tournament design," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 47(1), pages 140-165, February.
    4. 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.
    5. Florian Ederer, 2010. "Feedback and Motivation in Dynamic Tournaments," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(3), pages 733-769, September.
    6. Jo Thori Lind & Halvor Mehlum, 2010. "With or Without U? The Appropriate Test for a U‐Shaped Relationship," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 72(1), pages 109-118, February.
    7. Anders Hjalmarsson & Gustaf Juell-Skielse & Paul Johannesson, 2017. "Open Digital Innovation Contest," Progress in IS, in: Open Digital Innovation, chapter 0, pages 11-21, Springer.
    8. Olivier Toubia, 2006. "Idea Generation, Creativity, and Incentives," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(5), pages 411-425, September.
    9. Jordi Blanes i Vidal & Mareike Nossol, 2011. "Tournaments Without Prizes: Evidence from Personnel Records," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(10), pages 1721-1736, October.
    10. Christian Terwiesch & Yi Xu, 2008. "Innovation Contests, Open Innovation, and Multiagent Problem Solving," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(9), pages 1529-1543, September.
    11. Yeon-Koo Che & Ian Gale, 2003. "Optimal Design of Research Contests," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(3), pages 646-671, June.
    12. 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.
    13. 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.
    14. 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.
    15. Richard L. Fullerton & R. Preston McAfee, 1999. "Auctioning Entry into Tournaments," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 107(3), pages 573-605, June.
    16. A. Colin Cameron & Pravin K. Trivedi, 2010. "Microeconometrics Using Stata, Revised Edition," Stata Press books, StataCorp LP, number musr.
    17. Taylor, Curtis R, 1995. "Digging for Golden Carrots: An Analysis of Research Tournaments," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(4), pages 872-890, September.
    18. J. H. Jung & Christoph Schneider & Joseph 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, INFORMS, vol. 56(4), pages 724-742, April.
    19. Anders Hjalmarsson & Gustaf Juell-Skielse & Paul Johannesson, 2017. "Open Digital Innovation," Progress in IS, Springer, number 978-3-319-56339-8, June.
    20. Jesse Bockstedt & Cheryl Druehl & Anant Mishra, 2016. "Heterogeneous Submission Behavior and its Implications for Success in Innovation Contests with Public Submissions," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 25(7), pages 1157-1176, July.
    21. Tracy Xiao Liu & Jiang Yang & Lada A. Adamic & Yan Chen, 2014. "Crowdsourcing with All-Pay Auctions: A Field Experiment on Taskcn," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(8), pages 2020-2037, August.
    22. 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.
    23. Ely Dahan & Haim Mendelson, 2001. "An Extreme-Value Model of Concept Testing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 102-116, January.
    24. Ferreras-Méndez, José Luis & Fernández-Mesa, Anabel & Alegre, Joaquín, 2016. "The relationship between knowledge search strategies and absorptive capacity: A deeper look," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 48-61.
    25. Jeffrey A. Roberts & Il-Horn Hann & Sandra A. Slaughter, 2006. "Understanding the Motivations, Participation, and Performance of Open Source Software Developers: A Longitudinal Study of the Apache Projects," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(7), pages 984-999, July.
    26. 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)

    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. 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).
    2. Pavel Kireyev, 2016. "Markets for Ideas: Prize Structure, Entry Limits, and the Design of Ideation Contests," Harvard Business School Working Papers 16-129, Harvard Business School.
    3. Sulin Ba & Barrie R. Nault, 2017. "Emergent Themes in the Interface Between Economics of Information Systems and Management of Technology," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 26(4), pages 652-666, April.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. Lakshminarayana Nittala & Sanjiv Erat & Vish Krishnan, 2022. "Designing internal innovation contests," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 31(5), pages 1963-1976, May.
    7. Daniel P. Gross, 2020. "Creativity Under Fire: The Effects of Competition on Creative Production," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 102(3), pages 583-599, July.
    8. Segev, Ella, 2020. "Crowdsourcing contests," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 281(2), pages 241-255.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. Daniel P. Gross, 2017. "Performance feedback in competitive product development," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 48(2), pages 438-466, May.
    12. 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).
    13. Jiao, Yuanyuan & Wu, Yepeng & Lu, Steven, 2021. "The role of crowdsourcing in product design: The moderating effect of user expertise and network connectivity," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    14. 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.
    15. Jesse Bockstedt & Cheryl Druehl & Anant Mishra, 2022. "Incentives and Stars: Competition in Innovation Contests with Participant and Submission Visibility," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 31(3), pages 1372-1393, March.
    16. 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.
    17. 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.
    18. repec:eee:respol:v:48:y:2019:i:8:p:- is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Christoph Riedl & Victor P. Seidel, 2018. "Learning from Mixed Signals in Online Innovation Communities," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(6), pages 1010-1032, December.
    20. Viktoria Boss & Robin Kleer & Alexander Vossen, 2017. "Walking Parallel Paths Or Taking The Same Road? The Effect Of Collaborative Incentives In Innovation Contests," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 21(03), pages 1-34, April.
    21. Christoph Riedl & Tom Grad & Christopher Lettl, 2024. "Competition and Collaboration in Crowdsourcing Communities: What happens when peers evaluate each other?," Papers 2404.14141, arXiv.org.

    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:techno:v:90-91:y:2020:i::s0166497217308933. 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.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/01664972 .

    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.