IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/orisre/v32y2021i4p1214-1235.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Learning to Be Creative: A Mutually Exciting Spatiotemporal Point Process Model for Idea Generation in Open Innovation

Author

Listed:
  • Vipul Aggarwal

    (Michael G. Foster School of Business, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98195)

  • Elina H. Hwang

    (Michael G. Foster School of Business, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98195)

  • Yong Tan

    (Michael G. Foster School of Business, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98195)

Abstract

This study investigates the creative idea generation process in an open innovation platform. The idea generation process is simultaneously influenced by multiple activities: knowledge acquisition from participants’ interactions with each other’s ideas, deliberate practice through persistent participation, and learning through failures. Due to the dynamic interplay across these activities, it is challenging to identify each activity’s influence on creative ideation outcomes using reduced-form regression analysis. To overcome these challenges, we employ a comprehensive empirical framework, the mutually exciting spatiotemporal point process model with unobserved heterogeneity, which endogenizes the occurrences of these activities in continuous time and allows for user-dependent effects. By utilizing the activity stream data of 13,028 participants from 2010 to 2016 in an open innovation platform, we uncovered synergistic effects of these activities on creative outcomes. We find that knowledge acquired through interaction with others (i.e., stimulus ideas) plays a vital role in the creative ideation process, but their effect is more nuanced than what we have known so far. In contrast to the prior belief that distant analogies, stimulus ideas outside of a problem domain, spur creativity, we find that distant analogies lead to failures. Yet, we further find that such failures are indispensable to the creative ideation process because failures motivate idea generators (1) to acquire more knowledge by increasing their future interactions with other participants’ ideas (learning from others), and (2) to persist in generating ideas that lead to improvements in their ability to apply the acquired knowledge and to identify innovation tasks that are relevant to their stock of acquired knowledge (learning by doing). Our results indicate that failures are a stronger driver of the learning activities than successes. Based on our findings, we offer insights on how to cultivate creativity in an open innovation setting.

Suggested Citation

  • Vipul Aggarwal & Elina H. Hwang & Yong Tan, 2021. "Learning to Be Creative: A Mutually Exciting Spatiotemporal Point Process Model for Idea Generation in Open Innovation," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 32(4), pages 1214-1235, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:orisre:v:32:y:2021:i:4:p:1214-1235
    DOI: 10.1287/isre.2021.1020
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/isre.2021.1020
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/isre.2021.1020?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. Eric von Hippel, 1986. "Lead Users: A Source of Novel Product Concepts," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(7), pages 791-805, July.
    2. Emmanuel Bacry & Iacopo Mastromatteo & Jean-Franc{c}ois Muzy, 2015. "Hawkes processes in finance," Papers 1502.04592, arXiv.org, revised May 2015.
    3. Luthje, Christian & Herstatt, Cornelius & von Hippel, Eric, 2005. "User-innovators and "local" information: The case of mountain biking," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 951-965, August.
    4. Param Vir Singh & Yong Tan & Nara Youn, 2011. "A Hidden Markov Model of Developer Learning Dynamics in Open Source Software Projects," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 22(4), pages 790-807, December.
    5. Jakob Gulddahl Rasmussen, 2013. "Bayesian Inference for Hawkes Processes," Methodology and Computing in Applied Probability, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 623-642, September.
    6. M. Jamshidian & R. I. Jennrich, 2000. "Standard errors for EM estimation," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 62(2), pages 257-270.
    7. Yosihiko Ogata, 1998. "Space-Time Point-Process Models for Earthquake Occurrences," Annals of the Institute of Statistical Mathematics, Springer;The Institute of Statistical Mathematics, vol. 50(2), pages 379-402, June.
    8. Laurence Ales & Soo-Haeng Cho & Ersin Körpeoğlu, 2017. "Optimal Award Scheme in Innovation Tournaments," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 65(3), pages 693-702, June.
    9. Peter Halpin & Paul Boeck, 2013. "Modelling Dyadic Interaction with Hawkes Processes," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 78(4), pages 793-814, October.
    10. Sam Ransbotham & Gerald C. Kane & Nicholas H. Lurie, 2012. "Network Characteristics and the Value of Collaborative User-Generated Content," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(3), pages 387-405, May.
    11. Allen, Robert C., 1983. "Collective invention," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 4(1), pages 1-24, March.
    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. K. J. Arrow, 1971. "The Economic Implications of Learning by Doing," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: F. H. Hahn (ed.), Readings in the Theory of Growth, chapter 11, pages 131-149, Palgrave Macmillan.
    14. 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.
    15. Joel West & Karim Lakhani, 2008. "Getting Clear About Communities in Open Innovation," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(2), pages 223-231.
    16. Pamela D. Morrison & John H. Roberts & Eric von Hippel, 2000. "Determinants of User Innovation and Innovation Sharing in a Local Market," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(12), pages 1513-1527, December.
    17. Veen, Alejandro & Schoenberg, Frederic P., 2008. "Estimation of SpaceTime Branching Process Models in Seismology Using an EMType Algorithm," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 103, pages 614-624, June.
    18. Laurence Ales & Soo‐Haeng Cho & Ersin Körpeoğlu, 2021. "Innovation Tournaments with Multiple Contributors," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 30(6), pages 1772-1784, June.
    19. Dahlander, Linus & Piezunka, Henning, 2014. "Open to suggestions: How organizations elicit suggestions through proactive and reactive attention," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(5), pages 812-827.
    20. 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.
    21. Franke, Nikolaus & Shah, Sonali, 2003. "How communities support innovative activities: an exploration of assistance and sharing among end-users," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 157-178, January.
    22. Lizhen Xu & Jason A. Duan & Andrew Whinston, 2014. "Path to Purchase: A Mutually Exciting Point Process Model for Online Advertising and Conversion," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(6), pages 1392-1412, June.
    23. Elina H. Hwang & Param Vir Singh & Linda Argote, 2019. "Jack of All, Master of Some: Information Network and Innovation in Crowdsourcing Communities," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 30(2), pages 389-410, June.
    24. Olivier Toubia & Oded Netzer, 2017. "Idea Generation, Creativity, and Prototypicality," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(1), pages 1-20, January.
    25. 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.
    26. Lee Fleming, 2001. "Recombinant Uncertainty in Technological Search," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 117-132, January.
    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. Milind Dawande & Sameer Mehta & Liying Mu, 2023. "Robin Hood to the Rescue: Sustainable Revenue‐Allocation Schemes for Data Cooperatives," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 32(8), pages 2560-2577, August.

    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. Elina H. Hwang & Param Vir Singh & Linda Argote, 2019. "Jack of All, Master of Some: Information Network and Innovation in Crowdsourcing Communities," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 30(2), pages 389-410, June.
    2. Lettl, Christopher & Rost, Katja & von Wartburg, Iwan, 2009. "Why are some independent inventors 'heroes' and others 'hobbyists'? The moderating role of technological diversity and specialization," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 243-254, March.
    3. Christoph Riedl & Victor P. Seidel, 2018. "Learning from Mixed Signals in Online Innovation Communities," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(6), pages 1010-1032, December.
    4. Carliss Baldwin & Eric von Hippel, 2011. "Modeling a Paradigm Shift: From Producer Innovation to User and Open Collaborative Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(6), pages 1399-1417, December.
    5. Schweisfurth, Tim G., 2017. "Comparing internal and external lead users as sources of innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 238-248.
    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. Zaggl, Michael A., 2017. "Manipulation of explicit reputation in innovation and knowledge exchange communities: The example of referencing in science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(5), pages 970-983.
    8. Maria Roszkowska-Menkes, 2017. "User Innovation: State of the Art and Perspectives for Future Research," Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation, Fundacja Upowszechniająca Wiedzę i Naukę "Cognitione", vol. 13(2), pages 127-154.
    9. Schweisfurth, Tim G. & Raasch, Christina, 2015. "Embedded lead users—The benefits of employing users for corporate innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 168-180.
    10. Pollok, Patrick & Amft, André & Diener, Kathleen & Lüttgens, Dirk & Piller, Frank T., 2021. "Knowledge diversity and team creativity: How hobbyists beat professional designers in creating novel board games," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(8).
    11. Daniela Baglieri & Gianni Lorenzoni, 2014. "Closing the distance between academia and market: experimentation and user entrepreneurial processes," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 39(1), pages 52-74, February.
    12. Francesco Paolo Appio & Antonella Martini & Silvia Massa & Stefania Testa, 2016. "Unveiling the intellectual origins of Social Media-based innovation: insights from a bibliometric approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 108(1), pages 355-388, July.
    13. Konstantin Fursov & Thomas Thurner, 2016. "God Helps Those Who Help Themselves! A Study of User-Innovation in Russia," HSE Working papers WP BRP 59/STI/2016, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    14. Sadowski, Bert M., 2017. "Advanced users and the adoption of high speed broadband: Results of a living lab study in the Netherlands," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 1-14.
    15. Alexander Brem & Volker Bilgram & Adele Gutstein, 2021. "Involving Lead Users in Innovation: A Structured Summary of Research on the Lead User Method," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Alexander Brem (ed.), Emerging Issues and Trends in INNOVATION AND TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT, chapter 2, pages 21-48, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    16. Ruo-Yu Liang & Wei Guo & Ling-Hao Zhang & Lei Wang, 2019. "Investigating Sustained Participation in Open Design Community in China: The Antecedents of User Loyalty," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-19, April.
    17. repec:eee:respol:v:48:y:2019:i:8:p:- is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Markus Ernst & Alexander Brem, 2017. "Social Media for Identifying Lead Users? Insights into Lead Users’ Social Media Habits," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 14(04), pages 1-21, August.
    19. 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.
    20. Claussen, Jörg & Halbinger, Maria A., 2021. "The role of pre-innovation platform activity for diffusion success: Evidence from consumer innovations on a 3D printing platform," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(8).
    21. Hung, Chia-Liang & Chou, Jerome Chih-Lung & Dong, Tse-Ping, 2011. "Innovations and communication through innovative users: An exploratory mechanism of social networking website," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 317-326.

    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:inm:orisre:v:32:y:2021:i:4:p:1214-1235. 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    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.