Challenge Accepted: The Effects of Contest Participation on a User-Generated Content Community

References

• ADOBE (2017) Challenge your perspective contest: Official rules [Online]. Accessed June 10, 2025, https://www.adobe.com/uk/pdfs/AS-Challenge-perspective-Contest-Rules-en.pdf.Google Scholar
• Afuah A, Tucci CL (2012) Crowdsourcing as a solution to distant search. Acad. Management Rev. 37(3):355–375.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ales L, Cho S-H, Körpeoğlu E (2017) Optimal award scheme in innovation tournaments. Oper. Res. 65(3):693–702.Link, Google Scholar
• Allon G, Babich V (2020) Crowdsourcing and crowdfunding in the manufacturing and services sectors. Manufacturing Service Oper. Management 22(1):102–112.Link, Google Scholar
• Amabile T (1996) Creativity in Context (Westview Press, Boulder, CO).Google Scholar
• Amabile TM (1997) Entrepreneurial creativity through motivational synergy. J. Creative Behav. 31(1):18–26.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Anderson A, Cabral LM (2007) Go for broke or play it safe? Dynamic competition with choice of variance. RAND J. Econom. 38(3):593–609.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Archak N, Sundararajan A (2009) Optimal design of crowdsourcing contests. Proc. 30th Internat. Conf. Inform. Systems (ICIS 2009) (Association for Information Systems, Atlanta), 200.Google Scholar
• Bailey D, Faraj S, Hinds P, Von Krogh G, Leonardi P (2019) Special issue of organization science: Emerging technologies and organizing. Organ. Sci. 30(3):642–646.Link, Google Scholar
• Baldwin C, Von Hippel E (2011) Modeling a paradigm shift: From producer innovation to user and open collaborative innovation. Organ. Sci. 22(6):1399–1417.Link, Google Scholar
• Baron RA (2006) Opportunity recognition as pattern recognition: How entrepreneurs “connect the dots” to identify new business opportunities. Acad. Management Perspect. 20(1):104–119.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baron RA, Ensley MD (2006) Opportunity recognition as the detection of meaningful patterns: Evidence from comparisons of novice and experienced entrepreneurs. Management Sci. 52(9):1331–1344.Link, Google Scholar
• Benjaafar S, Hu M (2021) Introduction to the special issue on sharing economy and innovative marketplaces. Manufacturing Service Oper. Management 23(3):549–552.Link, Google Scholar
• Berger J, Milkman KL (2012) What makes online content viral? J. Marketing Res. 49(2):192–205.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bimpikis K, Papanastasiou Y (2019) Inducing exploration in service platforms. Hu M, ed. Sharing Economy: Making Supply Meet Demand (Springer, Cham, Switzerland), 193–216.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bimpikis K, Ehsani S, Mostagir M (2019) Designing dynamic contests. Oper. Res. 67(2):339–356.Abstract, Google Scholar
• Bockstedt J, Druehl C, Mishra A (2016) Heterogeneous submission behavior and its implications for success in innovation contests with public submissions. Production Oper. Management 25(7):1157–1176.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bockstedt J, Druehl C, Mishra A (2022) Incentives and stars: Competition in innovation contests with participant and submission visibility. Production Oper. Management 31(3):1372–1393.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Boosey L, Brookins P, Ryvkin D (2020) Information disclosure in contests with endogenous entry: An experiment. Management Sci. 66(11):5128–5150.Link, Google Scholar
• Bornstein RF, D’agostino PR (1992) Stimulus recognition and the mere exposure effect. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 63(4):545–552.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Boudreau KJ, Hagiu A (2009) Platform rules: Multi-sided platforms as regulators. Platforms Markets Innovation 1:163–191.Google Scholar
• Boudreau KJ, Lacetera N, Lakhani KR (2011) Incentives and problem uncertainty in innovation contests: An empirical analysis. Management Sci. 57(5):843–863.Link, Google Scholar
• Brynjolfsson E, Kim ST, Oh JH (2023) The attention economy: Measuring the value of free goods on the internet. Inform. Systems Res. 35(3):978–991.Link, Google Scholar
• Butler BS (2001) Membership size, communication activity, and sustainability: A resource-based model of online social structures. Inform. Systems Res. 12(4):346–362.Link, Google Scholar
• Cabral LM (2003) R&D competition when firms choose variance. J. Econom. Management Strategy 12(1):139–150.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chan HK, Wang X, Lacka E, Zhang M (2016) A mixed‐method approach to extracting the value of social media data. Production Oper. Management 25(3):568–583.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Che Y-K, Gale I (2003) Optimal design of research contests. Amer. Econom. Rev. 93(3):646–671.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chen B, Chen B, Knyazev D (2022) Information disclosure in dynamic research contests. RAND J. Econom. 53(1):113–137.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chen L, Xu P, Liu D (2020) Effect of crowd voting on participation in crowdsourcing contests. J. Management Inform. Systems 37(2):510–535.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chen PY, Pavlou P, Wu S, Yang Y (2021) Attracting high‐quality contestants to contest in the context of crowdsourcing contest platform. Production Oper. Management 30(6):1751–1771.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chesbrough HW (2003) Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology (Harvard Business Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Choi TM, Wallace SW, Wang Y (2018) Big data analytics in operations management. Production Oper. Management 27(10):1868–1883.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Claussen J, Halbinger MA (2021) The role of pre-innovation platform activity for diffusion success: Evidence from consumer innovations on a 3D printing platform. Res. Policy 50(8):103943.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cohan A, Feldman S, Beltagy I, Downey D, Weld DS (2020) Specter: Document-level representation learning using citation-informed transformers. Preprint, submitted April 15, https://arxiv.org/abs/2004.07180.Google Scholar
• Constant D, Sproull L, Kiesler S (1996) The kindness of strangers: The usefulness of electronic weak ties for technical advice. Organ. Sci. 7(2):119–135.Link, Google Scholar
• Cooper LG, Inoue A (1996) Building market structures from consumer preferences. J. Marketing Res. 33(3):293–306.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cui Z, Kumar Pm S, Gonçalves D (2019) Scoring vs. ranking: An experimental study of idea evaluation processes. Production Oper. Management 28(1):176–188.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Davenport TH, Beck JC (2001) The attention economy. Ubiquity 2001:1–es.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Day GS, Shocker AD, Srivastava RK (1979) Customer-oriented approaches to identifying product-markets. J. Marketing 43(4):8–19.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dholakia UM, Blazevic V, Wiertz C, Algesheimer R (2009) Communal service delivery: How customers benefit from participation in firm-hosted virtual P3 communities. J. Service Res. 12(2):208–226.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Eisenhardt KM, Furr NR, Bingham CB (2010) Microfoundations of performance: Balancing efficiency and flexibility in dynamic environments. Organ. Sci. 21(6):1263–1273.Link, Google Scholar
• Erat S, Krishnan V (2012) Managing delegated search over design spaces. Management Sci. 58(3):606–623.Link, Google Scholar
• Erhardt S, Ghosh M, Buunk E, Rose ME, Harhoff D (2022) Logic mill–A knowledge navigation system. Preprint, submitted December 31, https://arxiv.org/abs/2301.00200.Google Scholar
• Festinger L (1954) A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations 7(2):117–140.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Florack A, Egger M, Hübner R (2020) When products compete for consumers attention: How selective attention affects preferences. J. Bus. Res. 111:117–127.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gallus J (2017) Fostering public good contributions with symbolic awards: A large-scale natural field experiment at Wikipedia. Management Sci. 63(12):3999–4015.Link, Google Scholar
• Gantz W, Wang Z, Paul B, Potter RF (2006) Sports versus all comers: Comparing TV sports fans with fans of other programming genres. J. Broadcasting Electronic Media 50(1):95–118.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ghazawneh A, Henfridsson O (2013) Balancing platform control and external contribution in third‐party development: The boundary resources model. Inform. Systems J. 23(2):173–192.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gong Y, Wu J, Song LJ, Zhang Z (2017) Dual tuning in creative processes: Joint contributions of intrinsic and extrinsic motivational orientations. J. Appl. Psych. 102(5):829–844.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gross DP (2020) Creativity under fire: The effects of competition on creative production. Rev. Econom. Statist. 102(3):583–599.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gu B, Ye Q (2014) First step in social media: Measuring the influence of online management responses on customer satisfaction. Production Oper. Management 23(4):570–582.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Guha S, Kumar S (2018) Emergence of big data research in operations management, information systems, and healthcare: Past contributions and future roadmap. Production Oper. Management 27(9):1724–1735.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Guttmann A (2004) Sports: The First Five Millennia (University of Massachusetts Press, Amherst, MA).Google Scholar
• Hippel EV, Krogh GV (2003) Open source software and the “private-collective” innovation model: Issues for organization science. Organ. Sci. 14(2):209–223.Link, Google Scholar
• Holmström B (1999) Managerial incentive problems: A dynamic perspective. Rev. Econom. Stud. 66(1):169–182.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hu M, Wang L (2021) Joint vs. separate crowdsourcing contests. Management Sci. 67(5):2711–2728.Link, Google Scholar
• Hu F, Huizingh E, Bijmolt T (2023) Innovation contests: Attracting new solvers and new high‐quality solutions. R&D Management 53(1):149–167.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Huang Y, Vir Singh P, Srinivasan K (2014) Crowdsourcing new product ideas under consumer learning. Management Sci. 60(9):2138–2159.Link, Google Scholar
• Huang N, Burtch G, Gu B, Hong Y, Liang C, Wang K, Fu D, Yang B (2019) Motivating user-generated content with performance feedback: Evidence from randomized field experiments. Management Sci. 65(1):327–345.Link, Google Scholar
• Hutter K, Hautz J, Füller J, Mueller J, Matzler K (2011) Communitition: The tension between competition and collaboration in community‐based design contests. Creativity Innovation Management 20(1):3–21.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hwang EH, Singh PV, Argote L (2019) Jack of all, master of some: Information network and innovation in crowdsourcing communities. Inform. Systems Res. 30(2):389–410.Link, Google Scholar
• Janiszewski C, Kuo A, Tavassoli NT (2013) The influence of selective attention and inattention to products on subsequent choice. J. Consumer Res. 39(6):1258–1274.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jeppesen LB, Frederiksen L (2006) Why do users contribute to firm-hosted user communities? The case of computer-controlled music instruments. Organ. Sci. 17(1):45–63.Link, Google Scholar
• Jiang J, Wang Y (2020) A theoretical and empirical investigation of feedback in ideation contests. Production Oper. Management 29(2):481–500.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jiang Z, Huang Y, Beil DR (2021) The role of problem specification in crowdsourcing contests for design problems: A theoretical and empirical analysis. Manufacturing Service Oper. Management 23(3):637–656.Link, Google Scholar
• Joyce E, Kraut RE (2006) Predicting continued participation in newsgroups. J. Comput-Mediated Comm. 11(3):723–747.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kahneman D (1973) Attention and Effort (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ).Google Scholar
• Katila R (2002) New product search over time: Past ideas in their prime? Acad. Management J. 45(5):995–1010.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Katila R, Ahuja G (2002) Something old, something new: A longitudinal study of search behavior and new product introduction. Acad. Management J. 45(6):1183–1194.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Khorasani S, Körpeoğlu E, Krishnan VV (2024) Dynamic development contests. Oper. Res. 72(1):43–59.Link, Google Scholar
• Körpeoğlu E, Cho S-H (2018) Incentives in contests with heterogeneous solvers. Management Sci. 64(6):2709–2715.Link, Google Scholar
• Korpeoglu CG, Körpeoğlu E, Tunç S (2021) Optimal duration of innovation contests. Manufacturing Service Oper. Management 23(3):657–675.Link, Google Scholar
• Kraut RE, Resnick P (2011) Encouraging contribution to online communities. Building Successful Online Communities: Evidence-Based Social Design (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA), 21–76.Google Scholar
• Kreiger M, Pearce JM (2013) Environmental life cycle analysis of distributed three-dimensional printing and conventional manufacturing of polymer products. ACS Sustainable Chemistry Engrg. 1(12):1511–1519.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kunda Z (1990) The case for motivated reasoning. Psych. Bull. 108(3):480.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kyriakou H, Nickerson JV, Sabnis G (2017) Knowledge reuse for customization: Metamodels in an open design community for 3D printing. Preprint, submitted February 26, https://arxiv.org/abs/1702.08072.Google Scholar
• Lakhani KR (2016) Managing communities and contests to innovate with crowds. Harhoff DAL, Karim R, eds. Revolutionizing Innovation: Users, Communities, and Open Innovation (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lakhani KR, Hippel EV (2004) How open source software works: “Free” user-to-user assistance. Produktentwicklung Mit Virtuellen Communities (Springer, Wiesbaden, Germany).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lakhani K, Wolf RG (2003) Why hackers do what they do: Understanding motivation and effort in free/open source software projects. Preprint, submitted September 15, http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.443040.Google Scholar
• Lakhani KR, Wolf RG (2005) Perspectives on Free and Open Source Software (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Lee HCB, Ba S, Li X, Stallaert J (2018) Salience bias in crowdsourcing contests. Inform. Systems Res. 29(2):401–418.Link, Google Scholar
• Lerner J, Tirole J (2002) Some simple economics of open source. J. Indust. Econom. 50(2):197–234.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Levinthal DA, March JG (1993) The myopia of learning. Strategic Management J. 14(52):95–112.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Li Q, Maggitti PG, Smith KG, Tesluk PE, Katila R (2013) Top management attention to innovation: The role of search selection and intensity in new product introductions. Acad. Management J. 56(3):893–916.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lifshitz-Assaf H (2018) Dismantling knowledge boundaries at NASA: The critical role of professional identity in open innovation. Admin. Sci. Quart. 63(4):746–782.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lifshitz-Assaf H, Lebovitz S, Zalmanson L (2021) Minimal and adaptive coordination: How hackathons’ projects accelerate innovation without killing it. Acad. Management J. 64(3):684–715.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Liu Z, Hatton MR, Kull T, Dooley K, Oke A (2021) Is a large award truly attractive to solvers? The impact of award size on crowd size in innovation contests. J. Oper. Management 67(4):420–449.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lo CK, Tang CS, Zhou Y (2022) Do polluting firms suffer long term? Can government use data‐driven inspection policies to catch polluters? Production Oper. Management 31(12):4351–4363.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mack T, Landau C (2015) Winners, losers, and deniers: Self-selection in crowd innovation contests and the roles of motivation, creativity, and skills. J. Engrg. Tech. Management 37:52–64.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Majchrzak A, Malhotra A (2016) Effect of knowledge-sharing trajectories on innovative outcomes in temporary online crowds. Inform. Systems Res. 27(4):685–703.Link, Google Scholar
• March JG (1991) Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organ. Sci. 2(1):71–87.Link, Google Scholar
• Mcgrath RG (2001) Exploratory learning, innovative capacity, and managerial oversight. Acad. Management J. 44(1):118–131.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Menon N, Mishra A, Ye S (2020) Beyond related experience: Upstream vs. downstream experience in innovation contest platforms with interdependent problem domains. Manufacturing Service Oper. Management 22(5):1045–1065.Link, Google Scholar
• Mihm J, Schlapp J (2019) Sourcing innovation: On feedback in contests. Management Sci. 65(2):559–576.Link, Google Scholar
• Mo J, Sarkar S, Menon S (2018) Know when to run: Recommendations in crowdsourcing contests. MIS Quart. 42(3):919–944.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Moilanen J, Daly A, Lobato R, Allen DW (2014) Cultures of sharing in 3D printing: What can we learn from the licence choices of Thingiverse users? Preprint, submitted May 23, https://ssrn.com/abstract=2440027.Google Scholar
• Montoya RM, Horton RS, Vevea JL, Citkowicz M, Lauber EA (2017) A re-examination of the mere exposure effect: The influence of repeated exposure on recognition, familiarity, and liking. Psych. Bull. 143(5):459–498.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nadkarni A, Hofmann SG (2012) Why do people use Facebook? Personality Individual Differences 52(3):243–249.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nambisan S, Lyytinen K, Majchrzak A, Song M (2017) Digital innovation management: Reinventing innovation management research in a digital world. MIS Quart. 41(1):223–238.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nickerson RS (1998) Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Rev. General Psych. 2(2):175–220.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nov O (2007) What motivates Wikipedians? Comm. ACM 50(11):60–64.Crossref, Google Scholar
• O’Mahony S, Lakhani KR (2011) Organizations in the shadow of communities. Res. Sociol. Organ. 33:3–36.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ocasio W (2011) Attention to attention. Organ. Sci. 22(5):1286–1296.Link, Google Scholar
• Parker G, Van Alstyne M, Choudary S (2016) Platform Revolution: How Networked Markets Are Transforming the Economy-and How to Make Them Work for You (W. W. Norton & Company, New York).Google Scholar
• Piezunka H, Dahlander L (2015) Distant search, narrow attention: How crowding alters organizations’ filtering of suggestions in crowdsourcing. Acad. Management J. 58(3):856–880.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pisano GP, Verganti R (2008) Which kind of collaboration is right for you. Harvard Bus. Rev. 86:78–86.Google Scholar
• Privette G (1983) Peak experience, peak performance, and flow: A comparative analysis of positive human experiences. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 45(6):1361–1368.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ren Y, Kraut R, Kiesler S (2007) Applying common identity and bond theory to design of online communities. Organ. Stud. 28(3):377–408.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Riedl C, Seidel VP (2018) Learning from mixed signals in online innovation communities. Organ. Sci. 29(6):1010–1032.Link, Google Scholar
• Roberts JA, Hann I-H, Slaughter SA (2006) Understanding the motivations, participation, and performance of open source software developers: A longitudinal study of the Apache projects. Management Sci. 52(7):984–999.Link, Google Scholar
• Rosenkopf L, Nerkar A (2001) Beyond local search: Boundary‐spanning, exploration, and impact in the optical disk industry. Strategic Management J. 22(4):287–306.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ryan RM, Deci EL (2000) Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. Amer. Psych. 55(1):68–78.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shah SK (2006) Motivation, governance, and the viability of hybrid forms in open source software development. Management Sci. 52(7):1000–1014.Link, Google Scholar
• Sidhu JS, Commandeur HR, Volberda HW (2007) The multifaceted nature of exploration and exploitation: Value of supply, demand, and spatial search for innovation. Organ. Sci. 18(1):20–38.Link, Google Scholar
• Simon HA (1957) A behavioral model of rational choice. Models of Man; Social and Rational: Mathematical Essays on Rational Human Behavior in a Social Setting (Wiley, New York).Google Scholar
• Stanko MA (2016) Toward a theory of remixing in online innovation communities. Inform. Systems Res. 27(4):773–791.Link, Google Scholar
• Stouras KI, Hutchison-Krupat J, Chao RO (2022) The role of participation in innovation contests. Management Sci. 68(6):4135–4150.Link, Google Scholar
• Subramanian H, Mitra S, Ransbotham S (2021) Capturing value in platform business models that rely on user-generated content. Organ. Sci. 32(3):804–823.Link, Google Scholar
• Terwiesch C, Ulrich KT (2009) Innovation Tournaments: Creating and Selecting Exceptional Opportunities (Harvard Business Press, Boston).Google Scholar
• Terwiesch C, Xu Y (2008) Innovation contests, open innovation, and multiagent problem solving. Management Sci. 54(9):1529–1543.Link, Google Scholar
• Tilson D, Lyytinen K, Sørensen C (2010) Research commentary—Digital infrastructures: The missing IS research agenda. Inform. Systems Res. 21(4):748–759.Link, Google Scholar
• Toma CL, Hancock JT (2013) Self-affirmation underlies Facebook use. Personality Soc. Psych. Bull. 39(3):321–331.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tversky A, Kahneman D (1974) Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases: Biases in judgments reveal some heuristics of thinking under uncertainty. Science 185(4157):1124–1131.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Van Knippenberg D, Dahlander L, Haas MR, George G (2015) Information, attention, and decision making. Acad. Management J. 58(3):649–657.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Von Hippel E (2017) Free Innovation (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Von Krogh G, Von Hippel E (2006) The promise of research on open source software. Management Sci. 52(7):975–983.Link, Google Scholar
• Wagner L, Calvo E, Amorim P (2023) Better together! The consumer implications of delivery consolidation. Manufacturing Service Oper. Management 25(3):903–920.Link, Google Scholar
• Wasko MM, Faraj S (2005) Why should I share? Examining social capital and knowledge contribution in electronic networks of practice. MIS Quart. 29(1):35–57.Crossref, Google Scholar
• West J, Kuk G (2016) The complementarity of openness: How MakerBot leveraged Thingiverse in 3D printing. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 102:169–181.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Whittlesea B (1997) The representation of general and particular knowledge. Lamberts K, Shanks D, eds. Knowledge, Concepts, and Categories (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wooten JO, Ulrich KT (2017) Idea generation and the role of feedback: Evidence from field experiments with innovation tournaments. Production Oper. Management 26(1):80–99.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Yoo Y, Henfridsson O, Lyytinen K (2010) Research commentary—The new organizing logic of digital innovation: An agenda for information systems research. Inform. Systems Res. 21(4):724–735.Link, Google Scholar
• Zajonc RB (1968) Attitudinal effects of mere exposure. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 9(1):1–27.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zajonc RB (2001) Mere exposure: A gateway to the subliminal. Curr. Dir. Psych. Sci. 10(6):224–228.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zhang S, Singh PV, Ghose A (2019) A structural analysis of the role of superstars in crowdsourcing contests. Inform. Systems Res. 30(1):15–33.Link, Google Scholar
• Zittrain JL (2006) The generative internet. Harvard Law Rev. 119:1974–2040.Google Scholar