IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/custns/v2y2015i3p209-221.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Enhancing Crowdsourcing Success: the Role of Creative and Deliberate Problem-Solving Styles

Author

Listed:
  • Dominik Mahr
  • Aric Rindfleisch
  • Rebecca Slotegraaf

Abstract

A growing number of firms are using crowdsourcing platforms to actively solicit the skills of external entities to help them solve innovation-related problems. Despite its increasing popularity, crowdsourcing has produced mixed success, because few external experts provide helpful solutions. The current research examines this issue by exploring why some external solvers are more successful than others. Grounded in dual-processing theory, this study combines survey and archival data to assess the impact of creative versus deliberate problem-solving styles on solving success. The results indicate that both styles can be effective, but their relative success depends on the amount of time a solver invests in a solution and his or her degree of contextual familiarity with the problem. Specifically, creative (deliberate) styles are more effective under conditions of high (low) contextual familiarity and shorter (longer) time investments. When solvers employ both styles, overall problem-solving success declines. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:custns:v:2:y:2015:i:3:p:209-221
    DOI: 10.1007/s40547-015-0038-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s40547-015-0038-z
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40547-015-0038-z?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. Goldenberg,Jacob & Mazursky,David, 2002. "Creativity in Product Innovation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521002493, October.
    2. Thomas P. Novak & Donna L. Hoffman, 2009. "The Fit of Thinking Style and Situation: New Measures of Situation-Specific Experiential and Rational Cognition," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 36(1), pages 56-72, June.
    3. David J. Teece, 2003. "Expert talent and the design of (professional services) firms," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 12(4), pages 895-916, August.
    4. Christian Terwiesch & Yi Xu, 2008. "Innovation Contests, Open Innovation, and Multiagent Problem Solving," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(9), pages 1529-1543, September.
    5. 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.
    6. Maurizio Zollo & Sidney G. Winter, 2002. "Deliberate Learning and the Evolution of Dynamic Capabilities," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(3), pages 339-351, June.
    7. 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.
    8. Armstrong, J. Scott & Overton, Terry S., 1977. "Estimating Nonresponse Bias in Mail Surveys," MPRA Paper 81694, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Gautam Ahuja & Riitta Katila, 2001. "Technological acquisitions and the innovation performance of acquiring firms: a longitudinal study," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(3), pages 197-220, March.
    10. Goldenberg,Jacob & Mazursky,David, 2002. "Creativity in Product Innovation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521800891, October.
    11. Heckman, James, 2013. "Sample selection bias as a specification error," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 31(3), pages 129-137.
    12. Garen, John, 1984. "The Returns to Schooling: A Selectivity Bias Approach with a Continuous Choice Variable," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(5), pages 1199-1218, September.
    13. William H. Greene, 1994. "Accounting for Excess Zeros and Sample Selection in Poisson and Negative Binomial Regression Models," Working Papers 94-10, New York University, Leonard N. Stern School of Business, Department of Economics.
    14. Hirschman, Elizabeth C, 1980. "Innovativeness, Novelty Seeking, and Consumer Creativity," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 7(3), pages 283-295, December.
    15. Robin Hogarth, 2002. "Deciding analytically or trusting your intuition? The advantadges and disadvantadges of analytic and intuitive thought," Economics Working Papers 654, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    16. Wang, Rui & Saboo, Alok R. & Grewal, Rajdeep, 2015. "A managerial capital perspective on chief marketing officer succession," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 164-178.
    17. Christopher W. Allinson & John Hayes, 1996. "The Cognitive Style Index: A Measure of Intuition‐Analysis For Organizational Research," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(1), pages 119-135, January.
    18. Glenn Hoetker, 2007. "The use of logit and probit models in strategic management research: Critical issues," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(4), pages 331-343, April.
    19. 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.
    20. 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.
    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. Yiwei Gong, 0. "Estimating participants for knowledge-intensive tasks in a network of crowdsourcing marketplaces," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-19.
    2. 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.
    3. Yiwei Gong, 2017. "Estimating participants for knowledge-intensive tasks in a network of crowdsourcing marketplaces," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 301-319, April.
    4. Keng Yang, 2019. "Research on Factors Affecting Solvers’ Participation Time in Online Crowdsourcing Contests," Future Internet, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-13, August.
    5. Dong Kunxiang & Sun Yan & Xie Zongxiao & Zhen Jie, 2020. "How to Bid Success in Crowdsourcing Contest? ― Evidence from the Translation Tasks of Tripadvisor," Journal of Systems Science and Information, De Gruyter, vol. 8(2), pages 170-184, April.
    6. Tekic, Anja & Alfonzo Pacheco, Diana Vilma, 2024. "Contest design and solvers' engagement behaviour in crowdsourcing: The neo-configurational perspective," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    7. Xu, Yanjing & Zhu, Jianming & Mou, Jian, 2021. "Factors influencing bid-winning performance in mixed crowdsourcing: The persuasive effect of credible information sources," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 65(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. repec:wsi:acsxxx:v:21:y:2019:i:08:n:s1363919619500142 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. 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).
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. Yang, Mu & Han, Chunjia, 2021. "Stimulating innovation: Managing peer interaction for idea generation on digital innovation platforms," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 456-465.
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. repec:eee:respol:v:48:y:2019:i:8:p:- is not listed on IDEAS
    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. Nikolaus Franke & Peter Keinz & Katharina Klausberger, 2013. "“Does This Sound Like a Fair Deal?”: Antecedents and Consequences of Fairness Expectations in the Individual’s Decision to Participate in Firm Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(5), pages 1495-1516, October.
    12. 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.
    13. 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.
    14. 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.
    15. Shi, Xiaoxiao & Evans, Richard & Shan, Wei, 2022. "Solver engagement in online crowdsourcing communities: The roles of perceived interactivity, relationship quality and psychological ownership," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    16. 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.
    17. Sara Caprioli & Christoph Fuchs & Bram Van den Bergh, 2023. "On Breaking Functional Fixedness: How the Aha! Moment Enhances Perceived Product Creativity and Product Appeal," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 50(1), pages 48-69.
    18. Pallab Sanyal & Shun Ye, 2024. "An Examination of the Dynamics of Crowdsourcing Contests: Role of Feedback Type," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 35(1), pages 394-413, March.
    19. 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.
    20. 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.
    21. 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.
    22. 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.

    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:spr:custns:v:2:y:2015:i:3:p:209-221. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.