IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v68y2022i6p4135-4150.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Role of Participation in Innovation Contests

Author

Listed:
  • Konstantinos I. Stouras

    (Michael Smurfit School of Business, University College Dublin, Dublin A94 XF34, Ireland)

  • Jeremy Hutchison-Krupat

    (Judge Business School, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 1AG, United Kingdom)

  • Raul O. Chao

    (Darden School of Business, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia 22903)

Abstract

Many firms use external contests to obtain solutions to their innovation challenges. A central managerial concern is how to screen the population for only the most capable people when the capability of the population is not known. If the manager sets the bar too high, then the contest could fail, leaving the firm to suffer the consequences. Alternatively, if the bar is set too low, then too many people enter, which leads to increased competition, a lack of effort, and diminished performance, again leaving the firm to suffer the consequences. We study a situation in which the number of solvers in a population is known but the ability of each individual is not. At best, the firm can deduce the probability that any number of solvers would enter and the probability that any solver who enters would possess a specific ability. We derive the optimal contest design to maximize the performance of the best submission while accounting for the possibility that the contest receives an insufficient number of entries, resulting in an unproductive contest. Our results provide an alternative rationale for why many contests offer multiple awards: firms want to avoid an unproductive contest and the negative consequences associated with it. We also consider alternative levers available to the firm when facing uncertain participation. These include the establishment of performance thresholds and the decision to expand the potential solver population.

Suggested Citation

  • Konstantinos I. Stouras & Jeremy Hutchison-Krupat & Raul O. Chao, 2022. "The Role of Participation in Innovation Contests," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(6), pages 4135-4150, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:68:y:2022:i:6:p:4135-4150
    DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.2021.4111
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2021.4111
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mnsc.2021.4111?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. Benny Moldovanu & Aner Sela, 2008. "The Optimal Allocation of Prizes in Contests," Springer Books, in: Roger D. Congleton & Arye L. Hillman & Kai A. Konrad (ed.), 40 Years of Research on Rent Seeking 1, pages 615-631, Springer.
    2. Jeremy Hutchison-Krupat & Raul O. Chao, 2014. "Tolerance for Failure and Incentives for Collaborative Innovation," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 23(8), pages 1265-1285, August.
    3. Jeremy Hutchison-Krupat & Stylianos Kavadias, 2015. "Strategic Resource Allocation: Top-Down, Bottom-Up, and the Value of Strategic Buckets," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(2), pages 391-412, February.
    4. 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.
    5. Yeon-Koo Che & Ian Gale, 2003. "Optimal Design of Research Contests," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(3), pages 646-671, June.
    6. Kevin B. Hendricks & Vinod R. Singhal, 1997. "Does Implementing an Effective TQM Program Actually Improve Operating Performance? Empirical Evidence from Firms That Have Won Quality Awards," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(9), pages 1258-1274, September.
    7. Roger B. Myerson, 1981. "Optimal Auction Design," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 6(1), pages 58-73, February.
    8. Chawla, Shuchi & Hartline, Jason D. & Sivan, Balasubramanian, 2019. "Optimal crowdsourcing contests," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 80-96.
    9. Ajay Kalra & Mengze Shi, 2001. "Designing Optimal Sales Contests: A Theoretical Perspective," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(2), pages 170-193, December.
    10. Dana Sisak, 2009. "Multiple‐Prize Contests – The Optimal Allocation Of Prizes," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(1), pages 82-114, February.
    11. Jürgen Mihm & Jochen Schlapp, 2019. "Sourcing Innovation: On Feedback in Contests," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(2), pages 559-576, February.
    12. Christian Terwiesch & Yi Xu, 2008. "Innovation Contests, Open Innovation, and Multiagent Problem Solving," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(9), pages 1529-1543, September.
    13. 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.
    14. Sanjiv Erat, 2017. "Making The Best Idea Better: The Role of Idea Pool Structure," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 26(10), pages 1946-1959, October.
    15. Pavel Kireyev, 2020. "Markets for ideas: prize structure, entry limits, and the design of ideation contests," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 51(2), pages 563-588, 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. Tekic, Anja & Alfonzo Pacheco, Diana Vilma, 2024. "Contest design and solvers' engagement behaviour in crowdsourcing: The neo-configurational perspective," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    2. He, Haonan & Chen, Wenze & Zhou, Qi, 2023. "Subsidy allocation strategies for power industry’s clean transition under Bayesian Nash equilibrium," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 182(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. 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.
    2. Xu Tian & Gongbing Bi, 2022. "Multiplicative output form and its applications to problems in the homogenous innovation contest model," OR Spectrum: Quantitative Approaches in Management, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research e.V., vol. 44(3), pages 709-732, September.
    3. 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.
    4. Kaplan, Todd R. & Zamir, Shmuel, 2015. "Advances in Auctions," Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications,, Elsevier.
    5. Laurence Ales & Soo-Haeng Cho & Ersin Körpeoğlu, 2017. "Optimal Award Scheme in Innovation Tournaments," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 65(3), pages 693-702, June.
    6. Ming Hu & Lu Wang, 2021. "Joint vs. Separate Crowdsourcing Contests," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(5), pages 2711-2728, May.
    7. E. Feess & Gerd Muehlheusser & M. Walzl, 2008. "Unfair contests," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 93(3), pages 267-291, April.
      • Feess, E. & Muehlheusser, G. & Walzl, M., 2004. "Unfair contests," Research Memorandum 048, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
    8. Ersin K�rpeoglu & C. Gizem Korpeoglu & Isa Hafalir, 2020. "Parallel Innovation Contests," Working Paper Series 2020/06, Economics Discipline Group, UTS Business School, University of Technology, Sydney.
    9. Yizhaq Minchuk & Aner Sela, 2021. "Subsidy and Taxation in All-Pay Auctions under Incomplete," Working Papers 2104, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Department of Economics.
    10. Fu, Qiang & Lu, Jingfeng & Lu, Yuanzhu, 2012. "Incentivizing R&D: Prize or subsidies?," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 67-79.
    11. Christian Terwiesch & Yi Xu, 2008. "Innovation Contests, Open Innovation, and Multiagent Problem Solving," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(9), pages 1529-1543, September.
    12. Chawla, Shuchi & Hartline, Jason D. & Sivan, Balasubramanian, 2019. "Optimal crowdsourcing contests," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 80-96.
    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. 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.
    15. Jürgen Mihm & Jochen Schlapp, 2019. "Sourcing Innovation: On Feedback in Contests," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(2), pages 559-576, February.
    16. Alexander Matros, 2006. "Elimination Tournaments where Players Have Fixed Resources," Working Paper 205, Department of Economics, University of Pittsburgh, revised Jan 2006.
    17. Minchuk, Yizhaq & Sela, Aner, 2023. "Subsidy and taxation in all-pay auctions under incomplete information," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 99-114.
    18. Xiaotie Deng & Yotam Gafni & Ron Lavi & Tao Lin & Hongyi Ling, 2021. "From Monopoly to Competition: Optimal Contests Prevail," Papers 2107.13363, arXiv.org.
    19. Deng, Shanglyu & Fu, Qiang & Wu, Zenan & Zhu, Yuxuan, 2024. "Contests with sequential entry and incomplete information," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 19(2), May.
    20. Newell, Richard G. & Wilson, Nathan E., 2005. "Technology Prizes for Climate Change Mitigation," Discussion Papers 10698, Resources for the Future.

    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:ormnsc:v:68:y:2022:i:6:p:4135-4150. 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.