IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/jorgde/v9y2020i1d10.1186_s41469-020-00088-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Why crowdsourcing fails

Author

Listed:
  • Linus Dahlander

    (ESMT)

  • Henning Piezunka

    (INSEAD)

Abstract

Crowdsourcing—asking an undefined group of external contributors to work on tasks—allows organizations to tap into the expertise of people around the world. Crowdsourcing is known to increase innovation and loyalty to brands, but many organizations struggle to leverage its potential, as our research shows. Most often this is because organizations fail to properly plan for all the different stages of crowd engagement. In this paper, we use several examples to explain these challenges and offer advice for how organizations can overcome them.

Suggested Citation

  • Linus Dahlander & Henning Piezunka, 2020. "Why crowdsourcing fails," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 9(1), pages 1-9, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:jorgde:v:9:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1186_s41469-020-00088-7
    DOI: 10.1186/s41469-020-00088-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1186/s41469-020-00088-7
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1186/s41469-020-00088-7?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. Jan W. Rivkin & Nicolaj Siggelkow, 2003. "Balancing Search and Stability: Interdependencies Among Elements of Organizational Design," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(3), pages 290-311, March.
    2. Yang Wang & Benjamin F. Jones & Dashun Wang, 2019. "Early-career setback and future career impact," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 10(1), pages 1-10, December.
    3. Gebauer, Johannes & Füller, Johann & Pezzei, Roland, 2013. "The dark and the bright side of co-creation: Triggers of member behavior in online innovation communities," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(9), pages 1516-1527.
    4. Kevin J. Boudreau & Eva C. Guinan & Karim R. Lakhani & Christoph Riedl, 2016. "Looking Across and Looking Beyond the Knowledge Frontier: Intellectual Distance, Novelty, and Resource Allocation in Science," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(10), pages 2765-2783, October.
    5. Sameer B. Srivastava & Amir Goldberg & V. Govind Manian & Christopher Potts, 2018. "Enculturation Trajectories: Language, Cultural Adaptation, and Individual Outcomes in Organizations," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(3), pages 1348-1364, March.
    6. Daniel A. Levinthal, 1997. "Adaptation on Rugged Landscapes," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(7), pages 934-950, July.
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    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.
    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. Terri L. Griffith & Ann Majchrzak & Luca Giustiniano, 2023. "Hyperloop transportation technologies: practices for open organizing across VUCA contexts," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 12(3), pages 99-120, September.
    2. Cillo, Paola & Priem, Richard L. & Verona, Gianmario & Zanella, Paola, 2021. "Consumer-CEO interaction as catalyst for business model innovation in established firms," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 241-253.
    3. Gurca, Andrei & Bagherzadeh, Mehdi & Velayati, Rezvan, 2023. "Aligning the crowdsourcing type with the problem attributes to improve solution search efficacy," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    4. Mahotra, Arvind & Majchrzak, Ann, 2024. "Digital innovations in crowdsourcing using AI tools," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    5. 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).
    6. Bonazzi, Riccardo & Viscusi, Gianluigi & Solidoro, Adriano, 2024. "Crowd mining as a strategic resource for innovation seekers," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    7. 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).

    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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. Dahlander, Linus & Gann, David M. & Wallin, Martin W., 2021. "How open is innovation? A retrospective and ideas forward," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(4).
    6. Christoph Riedl & Victor P. Seidel, 2018. "Learning from Mixed Signals in Online Innovation Communities," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(6), pages 1010-1032, December.
    7. Andries, Petra & Clarysse, Bart & Costa, Sergio, 2021. "Technology ventures' engagement of external actors in the search for viable market applications: On the relevance of Technology Broadcasting and Systematic Validation," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 36(6).
    8. Jeppesen, Lars Bo, 2021. "Social movements and free innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(6).
    9. Jeppesen, Lars Bo, 2021. "Reprint of: Social movements and free innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(8).
    10. 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.
    11. Elia, Gianluca & Messeni Petruzzelli, Antonio & Urbinati, Andrea, 2020. "Implementing open innovation through virtual brand communities: A case study analysis in the semiconductor industry," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    12. Beck, Susanne & Brasseur, Tiare-Maria & Poetz, Marion & Sauermann, Henry, 2022. "Crowdsourcing research questions in science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(4).
    13. 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.
    14. Goeldner, Moritz & Kruse, Daniel J. & Herstatt, Cornelius, 2017. "Lead user method vs. innovation contest: An empirical comparison of two open innovation methodologies for identifying social innovation for flood Resilience in Indonesia," Working Papers 101, Hamburg University of Technology (TUHH), Institute for Technology and Innovation Management.
    15. 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.
    16. 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.
    17. Giovanni Gavetti & Constance E. Helfat & Luigi Marengo, 2017. "Searching, Shaping, and the Quest for Superior Performance," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(3), pages 194-209, September.
    18. Hazhir Rahmandad & Nelson Repenning, 2016. "Capability erosion dynamics," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(4), pages 649-672, April.
    19. Sai Yayavaram & Wei-Ru Chen, 2015. "Changes in firm knowledge couplings and firm innovation performance: The moderating role of technological complexity," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(3), pages 377-396, March.
    20. 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.

    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:jorgde:v:9:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1186_s41469-020-00088-7. 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.