Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Ideation through Online Open Innovation Platform: Dell IdeaStorm

  • Published:
Journal of the Knowledge Economy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The objective of this study is to identify factors associated with idea selection and implementation through online open innovation platforms. Analyzing data of implemented ideas from Dell IdeaStorm platform, we found that only a small fraction of the submitted ideas is implementable. Consequently, firms tend to adopt targeted open innovation for idea generation on online platforms. The number of implementable ideas increases steadily overtime; whereas, the number of community members grows very fast. Sole ideas get implemented quicker than those of linked with other ideas. However, sole ideas need longer time, more comments, and points for implementation. Higher number of idea submissions from a member increases his/her chance to achieve more implementable ideas. Active members are involved not only with idea submission but also in various other tasks such as commenting and voting.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Afuah, A., & Tucci, C. L. (2012). Crowdsourcing as a solution to distant search. Academy of Management Review, 37(3), 355–375.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alexy, O., Salter, A., & Criscuolo, P. (2012). No soliciting: strategies for managing unsolicited innovative ideas. California Management Review, 54(3), 116–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • APQC. (2014). Focus on targeted, needs-based open innovation, http://www.apqc.org/knowledge-base/download/296956/K04577_Needs-based.pdf. Accessed 25 December 2014.

  • Autio, E., Dahlander, L., & Frederiksen, L. (2013). Information exposure, opportunity evaluation, and entrepreneurial action: an investigation of an online user community. Academy of Management Journal, 56(5), 1348–1371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bayus, B. L. (2013). Crowdsourcing new product ideas over time: an analysis of the Dell IdeaStorm community. Management Science, 59(1), 226–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Birkinshaw, J., Bouquet, C., & Barsoux, J. L. (2011). The 5 myths of innovation. MIT Sloan Management Review, 52(2), 42–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bjelland, O. M., & Wood, R. C. (2008). An inside view of IBM’s “Innovation Jam”. MIT Sloan Management Review, 50(1), 32–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boudreau, K. J., & Lakhani, K. R. (2013). Using the crowd as an innovation partner. Harvard Business Review, 91(4), 60–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cairncross, F. (2001). The death of distance: how the communications revolution will change our lives. Harvard Business Press.

  • Carayannis, E. (2013), OI2 conference—quadruple/quintuple helix innovation https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hwIqwwUM5pI. Accessed 19 December, 2014

  • Carayannis, E. G., & Rakhmatullin, R. (2014). The quadruple/quintuple innovation helixes and smart specialisation strategies for sustainable and inclusive growth in Europe and beyond. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 5(2), 212–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carayannis, E. G., Barth, T. D., & Campbell, D. F. (2012). The quintuple helix innovation model: global warming as a challenge and driver for innovation. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 1(1), 1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chesbrough, H. W. (2003). Open innovation: the new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Harvard Business Press.

  • Chesbrough, H. (2007). Business model innovation: it’s not just about technology anymore. Strategy & Leadership, 35(6), 12–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chesbrough, H. & Brunswicker, S. (2013). Managing open innovation in large firms, http://Openinnovation.Berkeley.Edu/Managing-Open-Innovation-Survey-Report.pdf. Accessed 21 October 2013.

  • Cooper, R. G., & Edgett, S. (2008). Ideation for product innovation: what are the best methods. PDMA Visions Magazine, 1, 12–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahan, E., & Mendelson, H. (2001). An extreme-value model of concept testing. Management Science, 47(1), 102–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dahlander, L., & Piezunka, H. (2014). Open to suggestions: how organizations elicit suggestions through proactive and reactive attention. Research Policy, 43(5), 812–827.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Di Gangi, P. M., & Wasko, M. (2009). Steal my idea! Organizational adoption of user innovations from a user innovation community: a case study of Dell IdeaStorm. Decision Support Systems, 48(1), 303–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Felin, T., & Zenger, T. R. (2014). Closed or open innovation? Problem solving and the governance choice. Research Policy, 43(5), 914–925.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foss, N. J., Laursen, K., & Pedersen, T. (2011). Linking customer interaction and innovation: the mediating role of new organizational practices. Organization Science, 22(4), 980–999.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Franke, N., Von Hippel, E., & Schreier, M. (2006). Finding commercially attractive user innovations: a test of lead user theory. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 23(4), 301–315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Füller, J., Bartl, M., Ernst, H., & Mühlbacher, H. (2006). Community based innovation: how to integrate members of virtual communities into new product development. Electronic Commerce Research, 6(1), 57–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibbert, M., Leibold, M., & Probst, G. (2002). Five styles of customer knowledge management, and how smart companies use them to create value. European Management Journal, 20(5), 459–469.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gouillart, F., & Billings, D. (2013). Community-powered problem solving. Harvard Business Review, 91(4), 70–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hargadon, A., & Sutton, R. I. (1997). Technology brokering and innovation in a product development firm. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(4), 716–749.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hossain, M. (2012). Performance and potential of open innovation intermediaries. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 58, 754–764.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hossain, M. (2013). Open innovation: so far and a way forward. World Journal of Science, Technology and Sustainable Development, 10(1), 30–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hossain, M. (2015). A review of literature on open innovation in small and medium-sized enterprises. Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research, 5(1), 1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • IBM. (2013). The history of Jams. https://www.collaborationjam.com/. Accessed 21 October 2013.

  • IdeaStorm. (2013). http://www.ideastorm.com/. Accessed 22 October 2013.

  • Jeppesen, L. B., & Frederiksen, L. (2006). Why do users contribute to firm-hosted user communities? The case of computer-controlled music instruments. Organization Science, 17(1), 45–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jeppesen, L. B., & Lakhani, K. R. (2010). Marginality and problem-solving effectiveness in broadcast search. Organization Science, 21(5), 1016–1033.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jouret, G. (2009). Inside Cisco’s search for the next big idea. Harvard Business Review, 87(9), 43–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • King, A., & Lakhani, K. R. (2013). Using open innovation to identify the best ideas. MIT Sloan Management Review, 55(1), 41–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kozinets, R. V. (2002). The field behind the screen: using netnography for marketing research in online communities. Journal of Marketing Research, 39(1), 61–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kristensson, P., & Magnusson, P. R. (2010). Tuning users’ innovativeness during ideation. Creativity and Innovation Management, 19(2), 147–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leydesdorff, L. (2012). The triple helix, quadruple helix,…, and an N-tuple of helices: explanatory models for analyzing the knowledge-based economy? Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 3(1), 25–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malhotra, A., & Majchrzak, A. (2014). Managing crowds in innovation challenges. California Management Review, 56(4), 103–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martínez-Torres, M. R. (2012). Application of evolutionary computation techniques for the identification of innovators in open innovation communities. Expert Systems with Applications, 40, 2503–2510.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, D. L. (1988). Focus groups as qualitative research. Sage Publications, Inc.

  • Morgan, J., & Wang, R. (2010). Tournaments for ideas. California Management Review, 52(2), 77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nambisan, S. (2002). Designing virtual customer environments for new product development: toward a theory. Academy of Management Review, 27(3), 392–413.

    Google Scholar 

  • Natalicchio, A., Messeni Petruzzelli, A., & Garavelli, A. C. (2014). A literature review on markets for ideas: emerging characteristics and unanswered questions. Technovation, 34(2), 65–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Donnell, D., O’Regan, P., Coates, B., Kennedy, T., Keary, B., & Berkery, G. (2003). Human interaction: the critical source of intangible value. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 4(1), 82–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poetz, M. K., & Schreier, M. (2012). The value of crowdsourcing: can users really compete with professionals in generating new product ideas? Journal of Product Innovation Management, 29(2), 245–256.

  • Quenqua, D. (2010). Starbucks’ own good idea. Marketing News, 25, 23–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramaswamy, V., & Gouillart, F. (2010). Building the co-creative enterprise. Harvard Business Review, 88(10), 100–109.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ribiere, V. M., & Tuggle, F. D. D. (2010). Fostering innovation with KM 2.0. The Journal of Information and Knowledge Management Systems, 40(1), 90–101.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sawhney, M., Prandelli, E., & Verona, G. (2003). The power of innomediation. MIT Sloan Management Review, 44(2), 76–82.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sawhney, M., Verona, G., & Prandelli, E. (2005). Collaborating to create: the Internet as a platform for customer engagement in product innovation. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 19(4), 4–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schulze, A., & Hoegl, M. (2008). Organizational knowledge creation and the generation of new product ideas: a behavioral approach. Research Policy, 37(10), 1742–1750.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sigala, M. (2012). Social networks and customer involvement in new service development (NSD): the case of www.mystarbucksidea.com. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 24(7), 966–990.

  • Urban, G. L., & Von Hippel, E. (1988). Lead user analyses for the development of new industrial products. Management Science, 34(5), 569–582.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Von Schomberg, R. (2013). A vision of responsible innovation. In R. Owen, M. Heintz, & J. Bessant (Eds.), Responsible innovation. London: John Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • West, J., & Lakhani, K. R. (2008). Getting clear about communities in open innovation. Industry and Innovation, 15(2), 223–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Westerski, A., Dalamagas, T., & Iglesias, C. A. (2013). Classifying and comparing community innovation in idea management systems. Decision Support Systems, 54, 1316–1326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, R. L., & Cothrel, J. (2000). Four smart ways to run online communities. MIT Sloan Management Review, 41(4), 81–92.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Mokter Hossain is grateful to the Finnish Cultural Foundation for funding this study. The authors are grateful to Raisa Osama for assisting in the data collection for this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Industrial Engineering and Management, Institute of Strategy and Venturing, Aalto University, Otaniementie 17, 02150, Espoo, Finland

    Mokter Hossain

  2. Institute of Business Administration, Jahangirnagar University, Savar, Dhaka, Bangladesh

    K. M. Zahidul Islam

Authors
  1. Mokter Hossain
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. K. M. Zahidul Islam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mokter Hossain.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hossain, M., Islam, K.M.Z. Ideation through Online Open Innovation Platform: Dell IdeaStorm. J Knowl Econ 6, 611–624 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-015-0262-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-015-0262-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation