“Optimal” Feedback Use in Crowdsourcing Contests: Source Effect and Priming Intervention

References

• Acar OA, van den Ende J (2016) Knowledge distance, cognitive-search processes, and creativity: The making of winning solutions in science contests. Psych. Sci. 27(5):692–699.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Afuah A, Tucci CL (2012) Crowdsourcing as a solution to distant search. Acad. Management Rev. 37(3):355–375.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Arkes HR, Faust D, Guilmette TJ, Hart K (1988) Eliminating the hindsight bias. J. Appl. Psych. 73(2):305–307.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bannister BD (1986) Performance outcome feedback and attributional feedback: Interactive effects on recipient responses. J. Appl. Psych. 71(2):203–210.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bayus BL (2013) Crowdsourcing new product ideas over time: An analysis of the Dell IdeaStorm community. Management Sci. 59(1):226–244.Link, Google Scholar
• Boudreau KJ, Lakhani KR (2013) Using the crowd as an innovation partner. Harv. Bus. Rev. 91(4):60–69, 140.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
• Boudrias J-S, Bernaud J-L, Plunier P (2014) Candidates’ integration of individual psychological assessment feedback. J. Management Psych. 29(3):341–359.Google Scholar
• Boussioux L, Lane JN, Zhang M, Jacimovic V, Lakhani KR (2024) The crowdless future? Generative AI and creative problem-solving. Organ. Sci. 35(5):1589–1607.Link, Google Scholar
• Bullinger AC, Neyer A-K, Rass M, Moeslein KM (2010) Community-based innovation contests: Where competition meets cooperation. Creativity Innovation Management 19(3):290–303.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Camacho N, Nam H, Kannan P, Stremersch S (2019) Tournaments to crowdsource innovation: The role of moderator feedback and participation intensity. J. Marketing 83(2):138–157.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cao Z, Feng H, Wiles MA (2024) When do marketing ideation crowdsourcing contests create shareholder value? The effect of contest design and marketing resource factors. J. Marketing 88(2):99–120.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chan KW, Li SY, Ni J, Zhu JJ (2021) What feedback matters? The role of experience in motivating crowdsourcing innovation. Prod. Oper. Management 30(1):103–126.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chen L, Xu P, Liu D (2020a) Effect of crowd voting on participation in crowdsourcing contests. J. Management Inform. Systems 37(2):510–535.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chen YJ, Dai T, Korpeoglu CG, Körpeoğlu E, Sahin O, Tang CS, Xiao S (2020b) OM forum—Innovative online platforms: Research opportunities. Manufacturing Service Oper. Management 22(3):430–445.Link, Google Scholar
• Chua RYJ, Roth Y, Lemoine JF (2015) The impact of culture on creativity: How cultural tightness and cultural distance affect global innovation crowdsourcing work. Admin. Sci. Quart. 60(2):189–227.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Demircioglu MA, Audretsch DB (2017) Conditions for innovation in public sector organizations. Res. Policy 46(9):1681–1691.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fayard A-L (2024) Making time for social innovation: How to interweave clock time and event time in open social innovation to nurture idea generation and social impact. Organ. Sci. 35(3):1131–1156.Link, Google Scholar
• Fishbein M, Ajzen I (1975) Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA).Google Scholar
• Fisher G, Mayer K, Morris S (2021) From the editors—Phenomenon-based theorizing. Acad. Management Rev. 46(4):631–639.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Franke N, Keinz P, Klausberger K (2013) “Does this sound like a fair deal?”: Antecedents and consequences of fairness expectations in the individual’s decision to participate in firm innovation. Organ. Sci. 24(5):1495–1516.Link, Google Scholar
• Füller J, Hutter K, Hautz J, Matzler K (2014) User roles and contributions in innovation-contest communities. J. Management Inform. Systems 31(1):273–308.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gawronski B, Brannon SM (2019) What is cognitive consistency, and why does it matter? Harmon-Jones E, ed. Cognitive Dissonance: Reexamining a Pivotal Theory in Psychology, 2nd ed. (American Psychological Association, Washington, DC), 91–116.Crossref, Google Scholar
• George JM, Zhou J (2007) Dual tuning in a supportive context: Joint contributions of positive mood, negative mood, and supervisory behaviors to employee creativity. Acad. Management J. 50(3):605–622.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Girotra K, Terwiesch C, Ulrich KT (2010) Idea generation and the quality of the best idea. Management Sci. 56(4):591–605.Link, Google Scholar
• Gross DP (2017) Performance feedback in competitive product development. RAND J. Econom. 48(2):438–466.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Harmon-Jones E, Harmon-Jones C, Levy N (2015) An action-based model of cognitive-dissonance processes. Current Directions Psych. Sci. 24(3):184–189.Crossref, Google Scholar
• He T, Minervini MS, Puranam P (2024) How groups differ from individuals in learning from experience: Evidence from a contest platform. Organ. Sci. 35(4):1512–1534.Link, Google Scholar
• InnoCentive (2010) InnoCentive investigation of the challenge driven innovation platform at NASA: An evaluation of the open innovation pilot program between NASA and InnoCentive, Inc. https://web.archive.org/web/20230510220359/www.nasa.gov/pdf/572344main_InnoCentive_NASA_PublicReport_2011-0422.pdf.Google Scholar
• Jeppesen LB, Lakhani KR (2010) Marginality and problem-solving effectiveness in broadcast search. Organ. Sci. 21(5):1016–1033.Link, Google Scholar
• Jian L, Yang S, Ba S, Liu L, Jiang LC (2019) Managing the crowds: The effect of prize guarantees and in-process feedback on participation in crowdsourcing contests. Management Inform. Systems Quart. 43(1):97–112.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jiang J, Wang Y (2020) A theoretical and empirical investigation of feedback in ideation contests. Prod. Oper. Management 29(2):481–500.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kathan W, Hutter K, Füller J, Hautz J (2015) Reciprocity vs. free-riding in innovation contest communities. Creativity Innovation Management 24(3):537–549.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kim YJ, Kim J (2020) Does negative feedback benefit (or harm) recipient creativity? The role of the direction of feedback flow. Acad. Management J. 63(2):584–612.Crossref, Google Scholar
• King A, Lakhani KR (2013) Using open innovation to identify the best ideas. MIT Sloan Management Rev. 55(1):41.Google Scholar
• Koh TK (2019) Adopting seekers’ solution exemplars in crowdsourcing ideation contests: Antecedents and consequences. Inform. Systems Res. 30(2):486–506.Link, Google Scholar
• Koh TK, Cheung MYM (2022) Seeker exemplars and quantitative ideation outcomes in crowdsourcing contests. Inform. Systems Res. 33(1):265–284.Link, Google Scholar
• Lee SM, Farh CIC (2019) Dynamic leadership emergence: Differential impact of members’ and peers’ contributions in the idea generation and idea enactment phases of innovation project teams. J. Appl. Psych. 104(3):411–432.Crossref, 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
• Leimeister JM, Huber M, Bretschneider U, Krcmar H (2009) Leveraging crowdsourcing: Theory-driven design, implementation and evaluation of activation-supporting components for IT-based ideas competition. J. Management Inform. Systems 26(1):1–44.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Linderbaum BA, Levy PE (2010) The development and validation of the feedback orientation scale (FOS). J. Management 36(6):1372–1405.Google Scholar
• Mumma GH, Wilson SB (1995) Procedural debiasing of primacy/anchoring effects in clinical-like judgments. J. Clinical Psych. 51(6):841–853.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pati R, Garud N (2021) Role of feedback on innovative outcomes: Moderating role of resource-constrained environments. IEEE Trans. Engrg. Management 68(3):685–698.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Perry-Smith JE, Mannucci PV (2017) From creativity to innovation: The social network drivers of the four phases of the idea journey. Acad. Management Rev. 42(1):53–79.Crossref, 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
• Piezunka H, Dahlander L (2019) Idea rejected, tie formed: Organizations’ feedback on crowdsourced ideas. Acad. Management J. 62(2):503–530.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Poetz MK, Schreier M (2012) The value of crowdsourcing: Can users really compete with professionals in generating new product ideas? J. Prod. Innovation Management 29(2):245–256.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ren Y, Carley KM, Argote L (2006) The contingent effects of transactive memory: When is it more beneficial to know what others know? Management Sci. 52(5):671–682.Link, Google Scholar
• Riedl C, Seidel VP (2018) Learning from mixed signals in online innovation communities. Organ. Sci. 29(6):1010–1032.Link, Google Scholar
• Riedl C, Grad T, Lettl C (2024) Competition and collaboration in crowdsourcing communities: What happens when peers evaluate each other? Organ. Sci. 35(6):1957–1976.Link, Google Scholar
• Sanyal P, Ye S (2024) An examination of the dynamics of crowdsourcing contests: Role of feedback type. Inform. Systems Res. 35(1):394–413.Link, Google Scholar
• Sawilowsky SS (2009) New effect size rules of thumb. J. Modern. Appl. Statist. Methods 8(2):597–599.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Seeber I, Zantedeschi D, Bhattacherjee A, Füller J (2017) The more the merrier? The effects of community feedback on idea quality in innovation contests. Proc. 50th Hawaii Internat. Conf. System Sci. (Elsevier, Amsterdam), 4334–4343.Google Scholar
• Sheppard BH, Hartwick J, Warshaw PR (1988) The theory of reasoned action: A meta-analysis of past research with recommendations for modifications and future research. J. Consumer Res. 15(3):325–343.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shore J, Bernstein E, Lazer D (2015) Facts and figuring: An experimental investigation of network structure and performance in information and solution spaces. Organ. Sci. 26(5):1432–1446.Link, Google Scholar
• Terwiesch C, Xu Y (2008) Innovation contests, open innovation, and multiagent problem solving. Management Sci. 54(9):1529–1543.Link, Google Scholar
• von Hippel E, von Krogh G (2016) Crossroads—Identifying viable “need–solution pairs”: Problem solving without problem formulation. Organ. Sci. 27(1):207–221.Link, Google Scholar
• Winter SG (2003) Understanding dynamic capabilities. Strategic Management J. 24(10):991–995.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wooten JO, Ulrich KT (2017) Idea generation and the role of feedback: Evidence from field experiments with innovation tournaments. Prod. Oper. Management 26(1):80–99.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ye H, Kankanhalli A (2017) Solvers’ participation in crowdsourcing platforms: Examining the impacts of trust, and benefit and cost factors. J. Strategic Inform. Systems 26(2):101–117.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zaggl MA, Malhotra A, Alexy O, Majchrzak A (2023) Governing crowdsourcing for unconstrained innovation problems. Strategic Management J. 44(11):2783–2817.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zheng H, Xie Z, Hou W, Li D (2014) Antecedents of solution quality in crowdsourcing: The sponsor’s perspective. J. Electronic Commerce Res. 15(3):212–224.Google Scholar
• Zhou J (2003) When the presence of creative coworkers is related to creativity: Role of supervisor close monitoring, developmental feedback, and creative personality. J. Appl. Psych. 88(3):413–422.Crossref, Google Scholar