IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-01138847.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Analyzing The Micro-Processes Of Collaborative Concept Generation At Ideation Stages: The Case Of Innovation-Oriented Web Community Discussions

Author

Listed:
  • Jovana Kovacevic

    (MLab - DRM - Dauphine Recherches en Management - Université Paris Dauphine-PSL - PSL - Université Paris Sciences et Lettres - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

  • Sophie Hooge

    (CGS i3 - Centre de Gestion Scientifique i3 - Mines Paris - PSL (École nationale supérieure des mines de Paris) - PSL - Université Paris Sciences et Lettres - I3 - Institut interdisciplinaire de l’innovation - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

  • Albert David

    (MLab - DRM - Dauphine Recherches en Management - Université Paris Dauphine-PSL - PSL - Université Paris Sciences et Lettres - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

Abstract

Research question The study investigates the micro-processes of concept generation at ideation stages, on the case of innovation-oriented discussions within online communities of employees. Literature review and research positioning Previous research has already described a variety of approaches and techniques to support collaborative generation of a large number of ideas (Garfield, 2001; Knoll and Horton, 2011; Harvey, 2014). This literature states the importance and interdependence of a cognitive process within individual group members and a social process as group members interact (Knoll and Horton, 2011). Existing innovation studies show that development of collaborative Web platforms facilitates social interaction, enabling different departments to gather knowledge and engage in idea generation (Michaelides et al. 2013). Xiaomi et al. (2013) investigate the role of knowledge management to support Collaborative Innovation Community Capacity Building (CICCB) in order to enhance the effectiveness of innovation within the online community of employees. However, there has been little research that analyzes the micro-process of collaborative concept generation. Taura and Nagai (2012) highlight the concept generation process to be a synthetic one, which is investigated through analogy, blending and integration by thematic relation as a research method (Taura and Nagai, 2012). We propose to empirically investigate this issue in the context of innovation-oriented online discussions. Furthermore, we aim to analyze which sequences of cognitive entities (i.e. groups of words corresponding to elementary ideas) explain the evolution of interactions between the participants and how initial ideas are, successfully or not, developed into concepts. Methodology and empirical material This paper focuses on the nature and dynamics of online discussions at the ideation stage in a virtual idea generation environment. In order to empirically study the micro-processes of concept generation, an action research method (Coughlan & Coghlan, 2002) was employed in this research: through collaboration with a consulting firm, the authors conducted and facilitated four online debates within an international group. The innovation-oriented online discussions were launched in the context of an online community of employees to allow its members to go beyond daily discussions and further explore one trend or opportunity for the group. Our role was to mobilize and stimulate collaborative innovation community capacity (Xiaomi et al, 2013) and creativity of community members during a whole week, in order to support the community ability to generate innovative concepts and ideas for the given topic. To obtain more detailed view of the observed discussions, every interaction and the content of every message posted in the debate were categorized and deeply analyzed through combination of Pena-Schaff and Nicholl's analytical framework (Pena-Shaff & Nicholls, 2004) and Taura and Nagai design theory framework (Taura and Nagai, 2012) Findings and managerial implications We present three sets of results: firstly, we describe the general dynamics of an online innovation-oriented conversation through its main characteristics (the number of participants, the nature of interactions, the response-time between messages and topics discussed); secondly, we describe the micro-processes of concept generation by deeply analyzing the content of the subsets of messages that contributed to generation. We further analyze the innovative potential of generated concepts for the international group; finally, we propose a framework of participatory roles by correlating the nature of interventions to specific cognitive entities. While limited, this study aims to help researchers and practitioners to better understand the process of concept generation in an online environment and thus, provide the archetypes defined by the patterns of analyzed interactions.

Suggested Citation

  • Jovana Kovacevic & Sophie Hooge & Albert David, 2015. "Analyzing The Micro-Processes Of Collaborative Concept Generation At Ideation Stages: The Case Of Innovation-Oriented Web Community Discussions," Post-Print hal-01138847, HAL.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-01138847
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-01138847v1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-01138847v1/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:dau:papers:123456789/2673 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Monica J. Garfield & Nolan J. Taylor & Alan R. Dennis & John W. Satzinger, 2001. "Research Report: Modifying Paradigms—Individual Differences, Creativity Techniques, and Exposure to Ideas in Group Idea Generation," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 12(3), pages 322-333, September.
    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. Zeng, Michael A. & Koller, Hans & Jahn, Reimo, 2019. "Open radar groups: The integration of online communities into open foresight processes," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 204-217.

    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. Gerrit Remane & Andre Hanelt & Jan F. Tesch & Lutz M. Kolbe, 2017. "The Business Model Pattern Database — A Tool For Systematic Business Model Innovation," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 21(01), pages 1-61, January.
    2. William G. Heninger & Alan R. Dennis & Kelly McNamara Hilmer, 2006. "Research Note: Individual Cognition and Dual-Task Interference in Group Support Systems," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 17(4), pages 415-424, December.
    3. L A Franco & M Meadows, 2007. "Exploring new directions for research in problem structuring methods: on the role of cognitive style," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 58(12), pages 1621-1629, December.
    4. Wang Kai & Tao Yu & Wang Hui, 2017. "Combining Ideas in Crowdsourced Idea Generation," Foundations of Management, Sciendo, vol. 9(1), pages 203-212, February.
    5. Parjanen, Satu & Hyypiä, Mirva, 2019. "Innotin game supporting collective creativity in innovation activities," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 26-34.
    6. Gerald C. Kane & Maryam Alavi, 2007. "Information Technology and Organizational Learning: An Investigation of Exploration and Exploitation Processes," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(5), pages 796-812, October.
    7. Zwick, Thomas & Frosch, Katharina & Hoisl, Karin & Harhoff, Dietmar, 2017. "The power of individual-level drivers of inventive performance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 121-137.
    8. Deepa K. Ray & Nicholas C. Romano, 2013. "Creative Problem Solving in GSS Groups: Do Creative Styles Matter?," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 22(6), pages 1129-1157, November.
    9. Tatiana Gavrilova & Artem Alsufyev & Anna-Sophia Yanson, 2014. "Modern Notation of Business Models: A Visual Trend," Foresight and STI Governance (Foresight-Russia till No. 3/2015), National Research University Higher School of Economics, vol. 8(2), pages 56-70.
      • Tatiana Gavrilova & Artem Alsufyev & Anna-sophia Yanson, 2014. "Modern Notation of business models: а visual Trend," Foresight-Russia Форсайт, CyberLeninka;Федеральное государственное автономное образовательное учреждение высшего образования «Национальный исследовательский университет «Высшая школа экономики», vol. 8(2 (eng)), pages 56-70.
    10. Ziheng Zhang & Rui Patricio & Gianluca Carella & Francesco Zurlo, 2022. "Supporting a Sustainable and Engaging Online Transition for Co-Design through Gamification," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-22, May.
    11. Meinel, Martin & Eismann, Tobias T. & Baccarella, Christian V. & Fixson, Sebastian K. & Voigt, Kai-Ingo, 2020. "Does applying design thinking result in better new product concepts than a traditional innovation approach? An experimental comparison study," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 661-671.
    12. Wang Kai, 2019. "Towards a Taxonomy of Idea Generation Techniques," Foundations of Management, Sciendo, vol. 11(1), pages 65-80, January.
    13. Brian BARNARD & Derrick HERBST, 2019. "Entrepreneurship, Innovation and Creativity: The Creative Process of Entrepreneurs and Innovators," Expert Journal of Business and Management, Sprint Investify, vol. 7(1), pages 107-146.
    14. Smith, Antoinette L. & Murthy, Uday S. & Engle, Terry J., 2012. "Why computer-mediated communication improves the effectiveness of fraud brainstorming," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 13(4), pages 334-356.
    15. Kim, Jieun & Lee, Changyong, 2017. "Novelty-focused weak signal detection in futuristic data: Assessing the rarity and paradigm unrelatedness of signals," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 59-76.
    16. Wei Zhang & Qingpu Zhang, 2014. "Multi-stage evaluation and selection in the formation process of complex creative solution," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 48(5), pages 2375-2404, September.
    17. Chen, Fang & Zhang, Limin & Latimer, Joseph, 2014. "How much has my co-worker contributed? The impact of anonymity and feedback on social loafing in asynchronous virtual collaboration," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 652-659.
    18. Evren Ayranci, 2019. "Effects of Shared Leadership Perception on Perceived Intragroup Conflict: An Investigation in Technology Startups in Turkey," International Journal of Academic Research in Accounting, Finance and Management Sciences, Human Resource Management Academic Research Society, International Journal of Academic Research in Accounting, Finance and Management Sciences, vol. 9(4), pages 126-143, October.
    19. I Millet & J L Gogan, 2006. "A dialectical framework for problem structuring and information technology," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(4), pages 434-442, April.
    20. D Shaw & M Westcombe & J Hodgkin & G Montibeller, 2004. "Problem structuring methods for large group interventions," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 55(5), pages 453-463, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    concept generation; online community of employees; community management; organizing innovation; creativity.;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:hal:journl:hal-01138847. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.