Why Incorporating a Platform-Intermediary can Increase Crowdsourcees’ Engagement

Case-Study Based Insights

Business & Information Systems Engineering volume 61, pages 433–450 (2019)Cite this article

Abstract

While the crowdsourcer’s job is to encourage valuable contributions and sustained commitment in a cost-effective manner, it seems as if the primary attention of management and research is still centered on the evaluation of contributions rather than the crowd. As many crowdsourcers lack the resources to successfully execute such projects, crowdsourcing intermediaries play an increasingly important role. First studies dealt with internal management challenges of incorporating an intermediary. However, the issue of how intermediaries influence crowdsourcees’ psychological and behavioral responses, further referred to as engagement, has not been addressed yet. Consequently, two leading research questions guide this paper: (1) How can the engagement process of crowdsourcees be conceptualized? (2) How and why do crowdsourcing intermediaries impact crowdsourcees’ engagement? This study extends existing knowledge by offering IS-researchers a process perspective on engagement and exploring the underlying mechanisms and IT-enabled stimuli that foster value-creation in a mediated and non-mediated setting. A theoretical process model is first conceptualized and then explored with insights from two common cases in the growing field of crowd testing. By triangulating platform and interview data, initial propositions concerning the role of specific stimuli and the intermediary within the engagement process are derived. It is proposed that crowdsourcing enterprises, incorporating intermediaries, have the potential to generate a desired engagement state when perceived stimuli under their control belong to the so-called group of “game changers” and “value adders”, while the intermediary controls mainly “risk factors” for absorbing negative experiences. Apart from the theoretical relevance of studying mediated engagement processes and explaining voluntary use and participation in a socio-technical system, findings support decisions on how to effectively incorporate platform intermediaries.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

References

  1. Abraham S (2012) Job satisfaction as an antecedent to employee engagement. SIES J Manag 8:2

    Google Scholar 

  2. Afuah A, Tucci CL (2012) Crowdsourcing as a solution to distant search. Acad Manag Rev 37(3):355–375

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Algesheimer R, Dholakia UM, Herrmann A (2005) The social influence of brand community: evidence from European car clubs. J Market 69(3):19–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Attfield S, Kazai G, Lalmas M, Piwowarski B (2011) Towards a science of user engagement (position paper). In: WSDM Workshop on user modelling for web applications, Hong Kong

  5. Blohm I, Leimeister JM, Krcmar H (2013) Crowdsourcing: how to benefit from (too) many great ideas. MIS Q Exec 12(4):199–211

    Google Scholar 

  6. Blohm I, Riedl C, Füller J, Leimeister JM (2016) Rate or trade? Identifying winning ideas in open idea sourcing. Inf Syst Res 27(1):27–48

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Blohm I, Zogaj S, Bretschneider U, Leimeister JM (2018) How to manage crowdsourcing platforms effectively? Calif Manag Rev 60(2):122–149

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Bowden JL-H (2009) The process of customer engagement: a conceptual framework. J Market Theor Pract 17(1):63–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Brabham DC (2010) Moving the crowd at Threadless: motivations for participation in a crowdsourcing application. Inf Commun Soc 13(8):1122–1145

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Briggs RO, Reinig BA, de Vreede G-J (2008) The yield shift theory of satisfaction and its application to the IS/IT domain. J AIS 9(5):267

    Google Scholar 

  11. Brodie RJ, Hollebeek LD, Juric B, Ilic A (2011) Customer engagement: conceptual domain, fundamental propositions, and implications for research. J Serv Res. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094670511411703

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Brodie RJ, Ilic A, Juric B, Hollebeek L (2013) Consumer engagement in a virtual brand community: an exploratory analysis. J Bus Res 66(1):105–114

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Chen C-C, Chuang M-C (2008) Integrating the Kano model into a robust design approach to enhance customer satisfaction with product design. Int J Prod Econ 114(2):667–681

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Colombo G, Buganza T, Klanner I-M, Roiser S (2013) Crowdsourcing intermediaries and problem typologies: an explorative study. Int J Innov Manag 17(02):1350005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Davis FD (1985) A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems: theory and results. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  16. De Vreede T, Nguyen C, De Vreede G-J, Boughzala I, Oh O, Reiter-Palmon R (2013) A theoretical model of user engagement in crowdsourcing. In: Collaboration and technology. Springer, pp 94–109

  17. Djelassi S, Decoopman I (2013) Customers’ participation in product development through crowdsourcing: issues and implications. Ind Market Manag 42(5):683–692

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Durward D, Blohm I, Leimeister JM (2016) Crowd work. Bus Inf Syst Eng 58(4):281–286

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Estellés-Arolas E, González-Ladrón-De-Guevara F (2012) Towards an integrated crowdsourcing definition. J Inf Sci 38(2):189–200. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165551512437638

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Feller J, Finnegan P, Hayes J, O’Reilly P (2012) ‘Orchestrating’ sustainable crowdsourcing: a characterisation of solver brokerages. J Strateg Inf Syst 21(3):216–232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Füller J, Mühlbacher H, Matzler K, Jawecki G (2009) Consumer empowerment through internet-based co-creation. J Manag Inf Syst 26(3):71–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Gebauer J, Füller J, Pezzei R (2013) The dark and the bright side of co-creation: triggers of member behavior in online innovation communities. J Bus Res 66(9):1516–1527

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Geiger D, Seedorf S, Schulze T, Nickerson RC, Schader M (2011) Managing the crowd: towards a taxonomy of crowdsourcing processes. In: AMCIS

  24. Gläser J, Laudel G (2010) Experteninterviews und qualitative Inhaltsanalyse als Instrumente rekonstruierender Untersuchungen, 4th edn. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, Wiesbaden

    Book  Google Scholar 

  25. Gustafsson A, Johnson MD, Roos I (2005) The effects of customer satisfaction, relationship commitment dimensions, and triggers on customer retention. J Market 69(4):210–218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Hallowell R (1996) The relationships of customer satisfaction, customer loyalty, and profitability: an empirical study. Int J Serv Ind Manag 7(4):27–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Hollebeek L (2011a) Exploring customer brand engagement: definition and themes. J Strateg Market 19(7):555–573

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Hollebeek LD (2011b) Demystifying customer brand engagement: exploring the loyalty nexus. J Market Manag 27(7–8):785–807

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Hollebeek LD, Glynn MS, Brodie RJ (2014) Consumer brand engagement in social media: conceptualization, scale development and validation. J Interact Mark 28(2):149–165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Ives B, Olson MH, Baroudi JJ (1983) The measurement of user information satisfaction. Commun ACM 26(10):785–793

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Johnston R, Kong X (2011) The customer experience: a road-map for improvement. Manag Serv Qual 21(1):5–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Jüttner U, Schaffner D, Windler K, Maklan S (2013) Customer service experiences: developing and applying a sequentialincident laddering technique. Eur J Market 47(5/6):738–769

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Kaganer E, Carmel E, Hirschheim R, Olsen T (2013) Managing the human cloud. MIT Sloan Manag Rev 54:2

    Google Scholar 

  34. Kahn WA (1990) Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work. Acad Manag J 33(4):692–724

    Google Scholar 

  35. Kano N, Seraku N, Takahashi F, Tsuji S (1984) Attractive quality and must-be quality. J Jpn Soc Qual Control 14(2):39–48 (in Japanese)

    Google Scholar 

  36. Koenig-Lewis N, Palmer A (2008) Experiential values over time–a comparison of measures of satisfaction and emotion. J Market Manag 24(1–2):69–85

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Kumar V, Aksoy L, Donkers B, Venkatesan R, Wiesel T, Tillmanns S (2010) Undervalued or overvalued customers: capturing total customer engagement value. J Serv Res 13(3):297–310

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Leicht N, Blohm I, Leimeister JM (2017) Leveraging the power of the crowd for software testing. IEEE Softw 34(2):62–69. https://doi.org/10.1109/MS.2017.37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Leimeister JM (2014) Collaboration Engineering: IT-gestützte Zusammenarbeitsprozesse systematisch entwickeln und durchführen. Springer, Heidelberg

    Book  Google Scholar 

  40. Leonardi PM (2011) When flexible routines meet flexible technologies: affordance, constraint, and the imbrication of human and material agencies. MIS Q 35(1):147–167

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Macey WH, Schneider B (2008) The meaning of employee engagement. Ind Organ Psychol 1(1):3–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Mano H, Oliver RL (1993) Assessing the dimensionality and structure of the consumption experience: evaluation, feeling, and satisfaction. J Consum Res 20(3):451–466

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Mayring P (2015) Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse. Grundlagen und Techniken, 12th edn. Beltz, Weinheim

    Google Scholar 

  44. Melone NP (1990) A theoretical assessment of the user-satisfaction construct in information systems research. Manag Sci 36(1):76–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Merlo O, Eisingerich AB, Auh S (2014) Why customer participation matters. MIT Sloan Manag Rev 55(2):81

    Google Scholar 

  46. Mittal B, Lee M-S (1989) A causal model of consumer involvement. J Econ Psychol 10(3):363–389

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Mollen A, Wilson H (2010) Engagement, telepresence and interactivity in online consumer experience: reconciling scholastic and managerial perspectives. J Bus Res 63(9):919–925

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Mustak M, Jaakkola E, Halinen A (2013) Customer participation and value creation: a systematic review and research implications. Manag Serv Qual 23(4):341–359

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Nambisan S, Nambisan P (2008) How to profit from a better’virtual customer environment’. MIT Sloan Manag Rev 49(3):53

    Google Scholar 

  50. Nguyen C, Tahmasbi N, de Vreede T, de Vreede G-J, Oh O, Reiter-Palmon R (2015) Participant engagement in community crowdsourcing. In: Paper presented at the European Conference of Information Systems, Münster

  51. O’Brien HL, Toms EG (2008) What is user engagement? A conceptual framework for defining user engagement with technology. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 59(6):938–955

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Oliver RL (1980) A cognitive model of the antecedents and consequences of satisfaction decisions. J Market Res 17(4):460–469

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Oliver RL (1993) Cognitive, affective, and attribute bases of the satisfaction response. J Consum Res 20(3):418–430

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Oliver RL, De Sarbo WS (1989) Processing of the satisfaction response in consumption: a suggested framework and research propositions. J Consum Satisf Dissatisf Complain Behav 2(1):1–16

    Google Scholar 

  55. Oliver RL, Swan JE (1989) Equity and disconfirmation perceptions as influences on merchant and product satisfaction. J Consum Res 16(3):372–383

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Oliver RL, Rust RT, Varki S (1997) Customer delight: foundations, findings, and managerial insight. J Retail 73(3):311–336

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Owyang J (2015) The state of crowdsourcing in 2015. Crowd Companies™, https://en.eyeka.com/resources/analyst-reports#CSreport2015. Accessed 25 Jan 2016

  58. Pedersen J, Kocsis D, Tripathi A, Tarrell A, Weerakoon A, Tahmasbi N, Xiong J, Deng W, Oh O, De Vreede G-J (2013) Conceptual foundations of crowdsourcing: a review of IS research. In: IEEE 46th Hawaii international conference on system sciences, pp 579–588

  59. Peng X, Babar MA, Ebert C (2014) Collaborative software development platforms for crowdsourcing. IEEE Softw 31(2):30–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Poetz MK, Schreier M (2012) The value of crowdsourcing: can users really compete with professionals in generating new product ideas? J Prod Innov Manag 29(2):245–256

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Riedl C, Blohm I, Leimeister JM, Krcmar H (2013) The effect of rating scales on decision quality and user attitudes in online innovation communities. Int J Electron Commun 17(3):7–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Sashi C (2012) Customer engagement, buyer-seller relationships, and social media. Manag Decis 50(2):253–272

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Schulten MB, Schaefer F (2015) Affective commitment and customer loyalty in crowdsourcing: antecedents, interdependencies, and practical implications. Int Rev Retail Distrib Consum Res 25(5):516–528. https://doi.org/10.1080/09593969.2015.1081099

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Stol K-J, Fitzgerald (2014) B Two’s company, three’s a crowd: a case study of crowdsourcing software development. In: Proceedings of the 36th international conference on software engineering. ACM, pp 187–198

  65. Storbacka K, Brodie RJ, Böhmann T, Maglio PP, Nenonen S (2016) Actor engagement as a microfoundation for value co-creation. J Bus Res 69(8):3008–3017

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Sun Y, Fang Y, Lim KH (2012) Understanding sustained participation in transactional virtual communities. Decis Support Syst 53(1):12–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Terwiesch C, Xu Y (2008) Innovation contests, open innovation, and multiagent problem solving. Manag Sci 54(9):1529–1543

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Troll J, Blohm I, Leimeister J, Marco (2016) Revealing the impact of the crowdsourcing experience on the engagement process. In: International conference on information systems, Dublin

  69. Van Doorn J, Lemon KN, Mittal V, Nass S, Pick D, Pirner P, Verhoef PC (2010) Customer engagement behavior: theoretical foundations and research directions. J Serv Res 13(3):253–266

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Verhoef PC (2003) Understanding the effect of customer relationship management efforts on customer retention and customer share development. J Market 67(4):30–45

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Vivek SD, Beatty SE, Morgan RM (2012) Customer engagement: exploring customer relationships beyond purchase. J Market Theor Pract 20(2):122–146

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Vuković M (2009) Crowdsourcing for enterprises. In: 2009 World Conference on Services-I. IEEE, pp 686–692. https://doi.org/10.1109/services-i.2009.56

  73. Wefald AJ, Downey RG (2009) Construct dimensionality of engagement and its relation with satisfaction. J Psychol 143(1):91–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Wixom BH, Todd PA (2005) A theoretical integration of user satisfaction and technology acceptance. Inf Syst Res 16(1):85–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Ye HJ, Kankanhalli A (2015) Investigating the antecedents of organizational task crowdsourcing. Inf Manag 52(1):98–110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Yin RK (2013) Case study research: design and methods. Sage, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  77. Zheng H, Li D, Hou W (2011) Task design, motivation, and participation in crowdsourcing contests. Int J Electron Commun 15(4):57–88

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Zogaj S, Bretschneider U, Leimeister JM (2014) Managing crowdsourced software testing: a case study based insight on the challenges of a crowdsourcing intermediary. J Bus Econ 84(3):375–405

    Google Scholar 

  79. Zwass V (2010) Co-creation: toward a taxonomy and an integrated research perspective. Int J Electron Commun 15(1):11–48

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Institute of Information Management, University of St. Gallen (HSG), Müller-Friedberg-Strasse 8, 9000, St. Gallen, Switzerland

    Julia Troll, Ivo Blohm & Jan Marco Leimeister

  2. Research Center for IS Design (ITeG), Chair for Information Systems, University of Kassel, Pfannkuchstr. 1, 34121, Kassel, Germany

    Jan Marco Leimeister

Authors
  1. Julia Troll
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ivo Blohm
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jan Marco Leimeister
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Julia Troll.

Additional information

Accepted after two revisions by Jelena Zdravkovic.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (PDF 133 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Troll, J., Blohm, I. & Leimeister, J.M. Why Incorporating a Platform-Intermediary can Increase Crowdsourcees’ Engagement. Bus Inf Syst Eng 61, 433–450 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-018-0558-9

Download citation

Keywords

  • Crowdsourcing
  • Platform intermediaries
  • Crowdsourcing experience
  • Engagement process
  • Satisfaction response
  • Case study research