Résumés
Abstract
Few studies focus on how ideas circulate during community-based innovation contests. This research studies a contest employing two creativity methods: the hybrid and the speedstorming. Participants initially ideated individually, then ideated in pairs, and finally selected ideas for development. A novel research method that permits to track the “life” of ideas is settled. We found that final ideas are moderately original in comparison to the remainder of ideas submitted. We also found that participants did not reveal their most original ideas. Finally, we show that the final ideas were not co-created by the participants but came from solitary individuals.
Keywords:
- innovation contest,
- creativity,
- ideation,
- co-creation,
- idea generation,
- idea selection,
- speedstorming
Résumé
Peu de recherches visent à comprendre comment les idées circulent dans des communautés de création. Cette recherche étudie un concours d’idées organisé selon deux méthodes de créativité (hybride et speedstorming). Les participants commencent par générer des idées individuellement, ensuite par binôme, enfin, ils sélectionnent ensemble les idées finales. A partir d’une méthode de recherche permettant de suivre les idées, nous observons que les idées finales sont moyennement originales par rapport aux idées générées et que les participants ne révèlent pas leurs idées les plus originales. Enfin, nous trouvons que les idées finales ne résultent pas de co-création mais d’initiatives individuelles.
Mots-clés :
- communauté créative,
- co-création,
- concours d’idées,
- créativité,
- génération d’idées,
- sélection des idées,
- speedstorming
Resumen
Pocos estudios se centran en cómo las ideas circulan en un concurso de innovación abierta. Esta investigación estudia un concurso que utiliza dos métodos de creatividad: el híbrido y el speedstorming. Los participantes comienzan creando ideas individualmente, luego en parejas y, finalmente, seleccionaron ideas para desarrollarlas. Se establece un nuevo método que permite trazar el “ciclo de vida” de las ideas. Obtuvimos que las ideas finales son moderadamente originales en comparación con el resto de ideas presentadas, que los participantes no revelaron sus ideas más originales y que las ideas finales no fueron co-creadas, sino que surgieron de individuos aislados.
Palabras clave:
- concurso de innovación abierta,
- creatividad,
- ideation,
- co-creación,
- generación de idea,
- selección de idea,
- speedstorming
Parties annexes
Bibliography
- Adamczyk, S., Bullinger, A. C., & Möslein, K. M. (2012). Innovation Contests: A Review, Classification and Outlook. Creativity and Innovation Management, 21(4), 335-360.
- Allio, R.J. (2004). CEO interview: the InnoCentive model of open innovation. Strategy & Leadership, 32(4), 4-9.
- Anderson, N., Potočnik, K., & Zhou, J. 2014. Innovation and Creativity in Organizations A State-of-the-Science Review, Prospective Commentary, and Guiding Framework. Journal of Management, 40(5), 1297-1333
- Antikainen, M., Mäkipää, M., & Ahonen, M. (2010). Motivating and supporting collaboration in open innovation. European Journal of Innovation Management, 13(1), 100-119.
- Armisen, A., & Majchrzak, A. (2015). Tapping the innovative business potential of innovation contests. Business Horizons, 58(4), 389-399.
- Barczak, G., Kahn, K. B., & Moss, R. (2006). An exploratory investigation of NPD practices in nonprofit organizations. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 23(6), 512-527.
- Bayus, B. L. (2013). Crowdsourcing New Product Ideas over Time: An Analysis of the Dell IdeaStorm Community. Management Science, 59(1), 226-244.
- Berg, J. M. (2016). Balancing on the Creative Highwire: Forecasting the Success of Novel Ideas in Organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 61(3), 433 - 468.
- Bettencourt, L. M. A., Kaiser, D. I., Kaur, J., Castillo-Chávez, C., & Wojick, D. E. (2008). Population modeling of the emergence and development of scientific fields. Scientometrics, 75(3), 495-518.
- Blair, C. S., & Mumford, M. D. (2007). Errors in idea evaluation: Preference for the unoriginal? The Journal of Creative Behavior, 41(3), 197-222.
- Boons, M., Stam, D., & Barkema, H. G. (2015). Feelings of Pride and Respect as Drivers of Ongoing Member Activity on Crowdsourcing Platforms. Journal of Management Studies, 52(6): 717-741.
- Bullinger, A. C., Neyer, A.-K., Rass, M., & Moeslein, K. M. (2010). Community-Based Innovation Contests: Where Competition Meets Cooperation. Creativity and Innovation Management, 19(3), 290-303.
- Burt, R. S. (2004). Structural Holes and Good Ideas. American Journal of Sociology, 110(2): 349-399.
- Criscuolo, P., Dahlander, L., Grohsjean, T., & Salter, A. (2017). Evaluating Novelty: The Role of Panels in the Selection of R&D Projects. Academy of Management Journal, 60(2): 433-460.
- Diehl, M., & Stroebe, W. (1987). Productivity loss in brainstorming groups: Toward the solution of a riddle. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53(3), 497-509.
- DiFiore, A. (2013, January 18). Make your next innovation jam work. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2013/01/learning-how-to-jam
- DiVincenzo, F., Mascia, D., Bjork, J., & Magnusson, M. (2014). Idea generation and survival in an organizational innovation jam. Paper presented at the Academy of Management Conference, Philadelphia, PA.
- Dubois, L. E., Le Masson, P., Weil, B., & Cohendet, P. (2014). From organizing for innovation to innovating for organization: how co-design fosters change in organizations. Presented at the AIMS Conference, Rennes, France.
- Enkel, E., & Gassmann, O. (2009). Open R&D and open innovation: Exploring the phenomenon. R&D Management, 39(4), 311-316.
- Ekvall, G. (1996). Organizational climate for creativity and innovation. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 5(1), 105-123.
- Faraj, S., Jarvenpaa, S. L., & Majchrzak, A. (2011). Knowledge collaboration in online communities. Organization Science, 22(5), 1224-1239.
- Faraj, S., & Johnson, S. L. (2010). Network Exchange Patterns in Online Communities. Organization Science, 22(6): 1464-1480.
- Füller, J., Hutter, K., & Faullant, R. (2011). Why co-creation experience matters? Creative experience and its impact on the quantity and quality of creative contributions: Why co-creation experience matters? R&D Management, 41(3), 259-273.
- Füller, J., Matzler, K., & Hoppe, M. (2008). Brand Community Members as a Source of Innovation. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 25(6): 608-619.
- Füller, J., Jawecki, G., & Muhlbacher, H. (2007). Innovation creation by online basketball communities. Journal of Business Research, 60(1): 60-71.
- Gallupe, R. B., Dennis, A. R., Cooper, W. H., Valacich, J. S., Bastianutti, L. M., & Nunamaker, J. F. (1992). Electronic brainstorming and group size. Academy of Management Journal, 35(2), 350-369.
- Garcia Martinez, M. (2015). Solver engagement in knowledge sharing in crowdsourcing communities: Exploring the link to creativity. Research Policy, 44(8): 1419-1430.
- Gillier, T., Piat, G., Roussel, B., & Truchot, P. 2010. Managing Innovation Fields in a Cross-Industry Exploratory Partnership with C-K Design Theory. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 27(6), 883-896.
- Girotra, K., Terwiesch, C., & Ulrich, K. T. (2010). Idea generation and the quality of the best idea. Management Science, 56(4), 591-605.
- Glen, R., Suciu, C., & Baughn, C. (2014). The Need for Design Thinking in Business Schools. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 13(4), 653-667.
- Goffman, W. (1966). Mathematical approach to the spread of scientific ideas—The history of mast cell research. Nature, 212, 449-452.
- Goldschmidt, G. (2014). Linkography. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Retrieved from https://mitpress.mit.edu/linkography
- Guilford, J. P., Christensen, P. R., Merrifield, P. R., & Wilson, R. C. (1967). Alternate Uses. Sheridan Supply Co.
- Hooge, S., BéJean, M., & Arnoux, F. (2016). Organizing for radical innovation: the benefits of the interplay between cognitive and organizational processes in KCP workshops. International Journal of Innovation Management, 20(4).
- Hutter, K., Hautz, J., Füller, J., Mueller, J., & Matzler, K. (2011). Communitition: The Tension between Competition and Collaboration in Community-Based Design Contests. Creativity and Innovation Management, 20(1), 3-21.
- Islam, T., & Meade, N. (1997). The diffusion of successive generations of a technology: A more general model. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 56(1), 49-60.
- Jansson, D., & Smith, S. (1991). Design fixation. Design Studies, 12(1), 3-11.
- Janzik, L., & Raasch, C. (2011). Online communities in mature markets: Why join, why innovate, why share? International Journal of Innovation Management, 15(4), 797-836.
- Joyce, C. K., Jennings, K. E., Hey, J., Grossman, J. C., & Kalil, T. (2010). Getting down to business: Using speedstorming to initiate creative cross-disciplinary collaboration. Creativity and Innovation Management, 19(1), 57-67.
- Kathan, W., Hutter, K., Füller, J., & Hautz, J. (2015). Reciprocity vs. Free-Riding in Innovation Contest Communities. Creativity and Innovation Management, 24(3), 537-549.
- Kermack, W. O., & McKendrick, A. G. (1927). A contribution to the mathematical theory of epidemics. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 115(772), 700-721.
- Kijkuit, B., & VanDenEnde, J. (2007). The Organizational Life of an Idea: Integrating Social Network, Creativity and Decision-Making Perspectives. Journal of Management Studies, 44(6), 863-882.
- Kohn, N. W., & Smith, S. M. (2011). Collaborative fixation: Effects of others’ ideas on brainstorming. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 25(3), 359-371.
- Krackhardt, D. (1992). The Strength of Strong Ties: The Importance of Philos. In Organizations. Networks and Organizations: Structure, Form, and Action: 216-239. Harvard Business School Press.
- Krackhardt, D., & Stern, R. N. (1988). Informal networks and organizational crises: An experimental simulation. Social Psychology Quarterly, 51(2), 123-140.
- Mueller, J. S., Melwani, S., & Goncalo, J. A. (2012). The bias against creativity: Why people desire but reject creative ideas. Psychological Science, 23(1), 13-17.
- Mullen, B., Johnson, C., & Salas, E. (1991). Productivity loss in brainstorming groups: A meta-analytic integration. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 12(1), 3-23.
- Mumford, M. D., & Gustafson, S. B. 1988. Creativity syndrome: Integration, application, and innovation. Psychological Bulletin, 103(1), 27-43.
- Nijstad, B. A., Stroebe, W., & Lodewijkx, H. F. M. (2002). Cognitive stimulation and interference in groups: Exposure effects in an idea generation task. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38(6), 535-544.
- Nikander, J. B., Liikkanen, L. A., & Laakso, M. (2014). The preference effect in design concept evaluation. Design Studies, 35(5), 473-499.
- Osborn, A. F. (1953). Applied imagination: principles and procedures of creative thinking. New York: Scribner.
- Paulus, P. B., Nakui, T., Putman, V. L., & Brown, V. R. (2006). Effects of task instructions and brief breaks on brainstorming. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 10(3): 206-219.
- Perry-Smith, J. E. (2006). Social yet creative: the role of social relationships in facilitating individual creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 49(1), 85-101.
- Perry-Smith, J., & Mannucci, P. V. (2015). From creativity to innovation: The social network drivers of the four phases of the idea journey. Academy of Management Review, 42(1), 53-79.
- Piezunka, H., & Dahlander, L. (2014). Distant search, narrow attention: How crowding alters organizations’ filtering of suggestions in crowdsourcing. Academy of Management Journal, 58(3), 856-880.
- Purcell, A. T., & Gero, J. S. (1996). Design and other types of fixation. Design Studies, 17(4), 363-383.
- Riedl, C., Blohm, I., Leimeister, J. M., & Krcmar, H. (2010). Rating scales for collective intelligence in innovation communities: Why quick and easy decision making does not get it right (SSRN scholarly paper No. ID 1714524). Rochester, NY: Social Science Research Network. Retrieved from http://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=1714524
- Riedl, C., Blohm, I., Leimeister, J. M., & Krcmar, H. 2013. The Effect of Rating Scales on Decision Quality and User Attitudes in Online Innovation Communities. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 17(3), 7-36.
- Rietzschel, E. F., Nijstad, B. A., & Stroebe, W. (2010). The selection of creative ideas after individual idea generation: Choosing between creativity and impact. British Journal of Psychology, 101(1), 47-68.
- Rietzschel, E., Nijstad, B., & Stroebe, W. (2006). Productivity is not enough: A comparison of interactive and nominal brainstorming groups on idea generation and selection. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42(2), 244-251.
- Stasser, G. (1999). The uncertain role of unshared information in collective choice. In. L. Leigh, L. Thompson & David M. (Eds.) Shared Cognition in Organizations: The Management of Knowledge (pp. 49-69). New York: psychology Press.
- Taylor, D. W., Berry, P. C., & Block, C. H. (1958). Does group participation when using brainstorming facilitate or inhibit creative thinking? Administrative Science Quarterly, 3(1), 23-47.
- Uzzi, B., & Spiro, J. 2005. Collaboration and Creativity: The Small World Problem. American Journal of Sociology, 111(2), 447-504.
- Van Aken, J. E. (2005). Management Research as a Design Science: Articulating the Research Products of Mode 2 Knowledge Production in Management. British Journal of Management, 16(1): 19-36.
- Yin, R. K. (1990). Case study Research: Design and Methods. Applied Social Research Methods Series, 5.
- Zwass, V. (2010). Co-Creation: Toward a Taxonomy and an Integrated Research Perspective. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 15(1): 11-48.