IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/tefoso/v128y2018icp67-73.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Motivations, challenges, and opportunities of successful solvers on an innovation intermediary platform

Author

Listed:
  • Hossain, Mokter

Abstract

The study aims is to identify motivations, challenges, and opportunities of successful solvers participating in virtual teams of innovation contests (ICs) organized by an innovation intermediary. Based on 82 interviews of successful solvers, it provides novel insights into ICs. The main motivational factors of successful solvers engaged in problem solving are money, learning, fun, sense of achievement, passion, and networking. Major challenges solvers face include unclear or insufficient problem description, lack of option for communication, language barrier, time zone differences, difficulties in finding suitable team members, framing the results, and difficulties in becoming quick learners and team players. Despite challenges, solvers have many opportunities, such as diversified knowledge, learning culture, developing a different way of thinking, gaining insights from other experts, the ability to work in a diverse environment, options of work after retirement and from distant locations, and a new source of income.

Suggested Citation

  • Hossain, Mokter, 2018. "Motivations, challenges, and opportunities of successful solvers on an innovation intermediary platform," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 67-73.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:128:y:2018:i:c:p:67-73
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2017.10.018
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040162516304401
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.10.018?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. Lee Fleming & David M. Waguespack, 2007. "Brokerage, Boundary Spanning, and Leadership in Open Innovation Communities," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(2), pages 165-180, April.
    2. Jean Tirole & Roland Bénabou, 2006. "Incentives and Prosocial Behavior," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(5), pages 1652-1678, December.
    3. Eric von Hippel & Georg von Krogh, 2016. "CROSSROADS—Identifying Viable “Need–Solution Pairs”: Problem Solving Without Problem Formulation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(1), pages 207-221, February.
    4. Andrea Fosfuri & Marco S. Giarratana, 2010. "Introduction: Trading under the Buttonwood--a foreword to the markets for technology and ideas," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 19(3), pages 767-773, June.
    5. Felin, Teppo & Zenger, Todd R., 2014. "Closed or open innovation? Problem solving and the governance choice," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(5), pages 914-925.
    6. Laura J. Kornish & Karl T. Ulrich, 2011. "Opportunity Spaces in Innovation: Empirical Analysis of Large Samples of Ideas," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(1), pages 107-128, January.
    7. Martinez-Torres, Rocio & Olmedilla, Maria, 2016. "Identification of innovation solvers in open innovation communities using swarm intelligence," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 15-24.
    8. Pablo Casas-Arce & F. Asís Martínez-Jerez, 2009. "Relative Performance Compensation, Contests, and Dynamic Incentives," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(8), pages 1306-1320, August.
    9. Denicolai, Stefano & Ramirez, Matias & Tidd, Joe, 2016. "Overcoming the false dichotomy between internal R&D and external knowledge acquisition: Absorptive capacity dynamics over time," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 57-65.
    10. Karan Girotra & Christian Terwiesch & Karl T. Ulrich, 2010. "Idea Generation and the Quality of the Best Idea," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(4), pages 591-605, April.
    11. Ashish Arora & Alfonso Gambardella, 2010. "Ideas for rent: an overview of markets for technology," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 19(3), pages 775-803, June.
    12. Dan Ariely & Anat Bracha & Stephan Meier, 2009. "Doing Good or Doing Well? Image Motivation and Monetary Incentives in Behaving Prosocially," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(1), pages 544-555, March.
    13. Corey Billington & Rhoda Davidson, 2013. "Leveraging Open Innovation Using Intermediary Networks," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 22(6), pages 1464-1477, November.
    14. Mokter Hossain & K. Islam, 2015. "Ideation through Online Open Innovation Platform: Dell IdeaStorm," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 6(3), pages 611-624, September.
    15. Dingler, Annika & Enkel, Ellen, 2016. "Socialization and innovation: Insights from collaboration across industry boundaries," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 50-60.
    16. Lopez-Vega, Henry & Tell, Fredrik & Vanhaverbeke, Wim, 2016. "Where and how to search? Search paths in open innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 125-136.
    17. Christian Terwiesch & Yi Xu, 2008. "Innovation Contests, Open Innovation, and Multiagent Problem Solving," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(9), pages 1529-1543, September.
    18. A. C. Garavelli & A. Messeni Petruzzelli & A. Natalicchio & W. Vanhaverbeke, 2013. "Benefiting From Markets For Ideas — An Investigation Across Different Typologies," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 17(06), pages 1-37.
    19. 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.
    20. 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.
    21. Olga Kokshagina & Thomas Gillier & Patrick Cogez & Pascal Le Masson & Benoit Weil, 2017. "Using innovation contests to promote the development of generic technologies," Post-Print hal-01357051, HAL.
    22. Wang, Chun-Hsien & Chang, Ching-Hsing & Shen, George C., 2015. "The effect of inbound open innovation on firm performance: Evidence from high-tech industry," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 222-230.
    23. Maria J. Antikainen & Heli K. Vaataja, 2010. "Rewarding in open innovation communities – how to motivate members," International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 11(4), pages 440-456.
    24. Lars Bo Jeppesen & Lars Frederiksen, 2006. "Why Do Users Contribute to Firm-Hosted User Communities? The Case of Computer-Controlled Music Instruments," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(1), pages 45-63, February.
    25. Mary M. Kennedy, 1979. "Generalizing From Single Case Studies," Evaluation Review, , vol. 3(4), pages 661-678, November.
    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. Christofer F. Daiberl & Sascha Julian Oks & Angela Roth & Kathrin M. Möslein & Steven Alter, 2019. "Design principles for establishing a multi-sided open innovation platform: lessons learned from an action research study in the medical technology industry," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 29(4), pages 711-728, December.
    2. Payam Hanafizadeh & Mahdi Barkhordari Firouzabadi & Khuong Minh Vu, 2021. "Insight monetization intermediary platform using recommender systems," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 31(2), pages 269-293, June.
    3. Levänen, Jarkko & Lindeman, Sara & Halme, Minna & Tervo, Matti & Lyytinen, Tatu, 2022. "Bridging divergent institutional logics through intermediation practices: Insights from a developing country context," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    4. Richet, Jean-Loup, 2022. "How cybercriminal communities grow and change: An investigation of ad-fraud communities," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    5. Abhari, Kaveh & McGuckin, Summer, 2023. "Limiting factors of open innovation organizations: A case of social product development and research agenda," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 119(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. 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.
    2. Haeussler, Carolin & Vieth, Sabrina, 2022. "A question worth a million: The expert, the crowd, or myself? An investigation of problem solving," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(3).
    3. Kokshagina, Olga & Le Masson, Pascal & Bories, Florent, 2017. "Fast-connecting search practices: On the role of open innovation intermediary to accelerate the absorptive capacity," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 232-239.
    4. Christoph Riedl & Victor P. Seidel, 2018. "Learning from Mixed Signals in Online Innovation Communities," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(6), pages 1010-1032, December.
    5. Ann Majchrzak & Arvind Malhotra, 2016. "Effect of Knowledge-Sharing Trajectories on Innovative Outcomes in Temporary Online Crowds," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 27(4), pages 685-703, December.
    6. Moghaddam, Ehsan Noorzad & Aliahmadi, Alireza & Bagherzadeh, Mehdi & Markovic, Stefan & Micevski, Milena & Saghafi, Fatemeh, 2023. "Let me choose what I want: The influence of incentive choice flexibility on the quality of crowdsourcing solutions to innovation problems," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    7. Anne-Laure Fayard & Emmanouil Gkeredakis & Natalia Levina, 2016. "Framing Innovation Opportunities While Staying Committed to an Organizational Epistemic Stance," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 27(2), pages 302-323, June.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. repec:wsi:acsxxx:v:21:y:2019:i:08:n:s1363919619500142 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. 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.
    12. Ethan Mollick & Ramana Nanda, 2016. "Wisdom or Madness? Comparing Crowds with Expert Evaluation in Funding the Arts," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(6), pages 1533-1553, June.
    13. repec:eee:respol:v:48:y:2019:i:8:p:- is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Adrián Kovács & Bart Looy & Bruno Cassiman, 2015. "Exploring the scope of open innovation: a bibliometric review of a decade of research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(3), pages 951-983, September.
    15. 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.
    16. Orelj, Ana & Torfason, Magnus Thor, 2022. "They didn't ask: Online innovation communities as a latent dynamic capability," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    17. Lopez-Vega, Henry & Tell, Fredrik & Vanhaverbeke, Wim, 2016. "Where and how to search? Search paths in open innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 125-136.
    18. 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.
    19. 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.
    20. 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).
    21. Kokshagina, Olga & Gillier, Thomas & Cogez, Patrick & Le Masson, Pascal & Weil, Benoit, 2017. "Using innovation contests to promote the development of generic technologies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 152-164.
    22. 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.

    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:tefoso:v:128:y:2018:i:c:p:67-73. 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/00401625 .

    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.