IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/tuhtim/82.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Exogenous vs. endogenous governance in innovation communities: Effects on motivation, conflict and justice - An experimental investigation

Author

Listed:
  • Störmer, Niclas
  • Herstatt, Cornelius

Abstract

In this study we examine the effects of exogenous vs. endogenous governance rules on a virtual community handling an innovative task. Specifically we investigate the relationship between the two modes (exogenous vs. endogenous) and factors such as motivation, conflict and justice. We conducted an experiment with 70 students, divided into teams of five. We manipulated procedural legitimacy by allowing one group to choose a set of rules and giving the other group the same rules exogenously. Our study indicates, that letting a team choose its own governance rules leads to increasing level of conflict negatively impacting motivation.

Suggested Citation

  • Störmer, Niclas & Herstatt, Cornelius, 2014. "Exogenous vs. endogenous governance in innovation communities: Effects on motivation, conflict and justice - An experimental investigation," Working Papers 82, Hamburg University of Technology (TUHH), Institute for Technology and Innovation Management.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:tuhtim:82
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/96147/1/782386091.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. André Torre, 2006. "Collective action, governance structure and organizational trust in localized systems of production. The case of the AOC organization of small producers," Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(1), pages 55-72, January.
    2. Dahlander, Linus & Wallin, Martin W., 2006. "A man on the inside: Unlocking communities as complementary assets," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(8), pages 1243-1259, October.
    3. B. Demil & X. Lecocq, 2006. "Neither Market nor Hierarchy nor Network: The Emergence of Bazaar Governance," Post-Print hal-00185026, HAL.
    4. Avner Greif, 1997. "On the Social Foundations and Historical Development of Institutions that Facilitate Impersonal Exchange: From the Community Responsibility System to Individual Legal Responsibility in Pre-modern Euro," Working Papers 97016, Stanford University, Department of Economics.
    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. A. Alventosa & Y. Gómez & V. Martínez-Molés & J. Vila, 2016. "Location and Innovation Optimism: a Behavioral-Experimental Approach," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 7(4), pages 890-904, December.
    2. Zeng, Michael A., 2018. "Foresight by online communities – The case of renewable energies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 27-42.

    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. Engelhardt, Sebastian v. & Freytag, Andreas, 2013. "Institutions, culture, and open source," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 90-110.
    2. Christian W. Scheiner & Christian V. Baccarella & John Bessant & Kai-Ingo Voigt, 2018. "Participation Motives, Moral Disengagement, And Unethical Behaviour In Idea Competitions," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 22(06), pages 1-24, August.
    3. van den Broek, Tijs & van Veenstra, Anne Fleur, 2018. "Governance of big data collaborations: How to balance regulatory compliance and disruptive innovation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 330-338.
    4. Stam, Wouter, 2009. "When does community participation enhance the performance of open source software companies?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 1288-1299, October.
    5. Gauguier, Jean-Jacques, 2009. "L’industrialisation de l’Open Source," Economics Thesis from University Paris Dauphine, Paris Dauphine University, number 123456789/4388 edited by Toledano, Joëlle.
    6. Natalya Yu. VLASOVA & Elena L. MOLOKOVA, 2019. "Mechanisms for coordinating stakeholders of the higher education market: Theoretical approaches to identification," Upravlenets, Ural State University of Economics, vol. 10(2), pages 21-30, May.
    7. Michael Fritsch & Sebastian von Engelhardt, 2010. "Who Starts with Open Source? Institutional Choice of Start-Ups in the German ICT Sector," Jena Economics Research Papers 2010-049, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    8. André Torre, 2014. "Proximity relations at the heart of territorial development processes: from clusters, spatial conflicts and temporary geographical proximity to territorial governance," Chapters, in: André Torre & Frédéric Wallet (ed.), Regional Development and Proximity Relations, chapter 2, pages 94-134, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    9. Gorton, Matthew & Torok, Aron & Tregear, Angela, 2014. "The Impact of EU Agri-food Quality Policy in the New Member States: A Case Study of the Makó Onion PDO," 142nd Seminar, May 29-30, 2014, Budapest, Hungary 169085, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    10. Lingyan Meng & Md Qamruzzaman & Anass Hamad Elneel Adow, 2021. "Technological Adaption and Open Innovation in SMEs: An Strategic Assessment for Women-Owned SMEs Sustainability in Bangladesh," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-22, March.
    11. Marie-Claude Bélis-Bergouignan & Elie Brugarolas, 2010. "Building research and technology (R&T) transregional networks through an Interreg IIIB project," Regional Science Policy & Practice, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 2(2), pages 135-155, November.
    12. Bjorn Remneland Wikhamn & Alexander Styhre, 2019. "Open Innovation Groundwork," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 24(02), pages 1-29, January.
    13. Rogo, Francesco & Cricelli, Livio & Grimaldi, Michele, 2014. "Assessing the performance of open innovation practices: A case study of a community of innovation," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 60-80.
    14. Sarah Bowen & Tad Mutersbaugh, 2014. "Local or localized? Exploring the contributions of Franco-Mediterranean agrifood theory to alternative food research," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 31(2), pages 201-213, June.
    15. Chetan Sharma & Damir D. Torrico & Lloyd Carpenter & Roland Harrison, 2021. "Indigenous Meanings of Provenance in the Context of Alternative Food Movements and Supply-Chain Traceability: A Review," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-24, July.
    16. Marina V. Evseeva, 2020. "Comparative effectiveness of high-tech and medium-tech business models: Key indicators and value sustainability," Upravlenets, Ural State University of Economics, vol. 11(3), pages 59-71, July.
    17. Jolink, Albert & Niesten, Eva, 2012. "Recent qualitative advances on hybrid organizations: Taking stock, looking ahead," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 149-161.
    18. Seo, Hangyeol & Chung, Yanghon & Yoon, Hyungseok (David), 2017. "R&D cooperation and unintended innovation performance: Role of appropriability regimes and sectoral characteristics," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 66, pages 28-42.
    19. Amel Charleux & Anne Mione, 2018. "Open source editing business models; the case of software [Les business models de l’édition open source ; Le cas des logiciels]," Post-Print hal-01988127, HAL.
    20. Cailean Osborne & Jennifer Ding & Hannah Rose Kirk, 2024. "The AI community building the future? A quantitative analysis of development activity on Hugging Face Hub," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 7(2), pages 2067-2105, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Governance; Collaborative Innovation Communities;

    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:zbw:tuhtim:82. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ittuhde.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.