Journal of the Knowledge Economy

, Volume 6, Issue 3, pp 611–624 | Cite as

Ideation through Online Open Innovation Platform: Dell IdeaStorm

Article

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.

Keywords

Crowdsourcing Idea generation Implementation Open innovation platform Targeted open innovation 

References

  1. Afuah, A., & Tucci, C. L. (2012). Crowdsourcing as a solution to distant search. Academy of Management Review, 37(3), 355–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alexy, O., Salter, A., & Criscuolo, P. (2012). No soliciting: strategies for managing unsolicited innovative ideas. California Management Review, 54(3), 116–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 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.
  4. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bayus, B. L. (2013). Crowdsourcing new product ideas over time: an analysis of the Dell IdeaStorm community. Management Science, 59(1), 226–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Birkinshaw, J., Bouquet, C., & Barsoux, J. L. (2011). The 5 myths of innovation. MIT Sloan Management Review, 52(2), 42–50.Google Scholar
  7. 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
  8. Boudreau, K. J., & Lakhani, K. R. (2013). Using the crowd as an innovation partner. Harvard Business Review, 91(4), 60–9.Google Scholar
  9. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cairncross, F. (2001). The death of distance: how the communications revolution will change our lives. Harvard Business Press.Google Scholar
  11. Carayannis, E. (2013), OI2 conference—quadruple/quintuple helix innovation https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hwIqwwUM5pI. Accessed 19 December, 2014
  12. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Chesbrough, H. W. (2003). Open innovation: the new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Harvard Business Press.Google Scholar
  15. Chesbrough, H. (2007). Business model innovation: it’s not just about technology anymore. Strategy & Leadership, 35(6), 12–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 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.
  17. Cooper, R. G., & Edgett, S. (2008). Ideation for product innovation: what are the best methods. PDMA Visions Magazine, 1, 12–17.Google Scholar
  18. Dahan, E., & Mendelson, H. (2001). An extreme-value model of concept testing. Management Science, 47(1), 102–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dahlander, L., & Piezunka, H. (2014). Open to suggestions: how organizations elicit suggestions through proactive and reactive attention. Research Policy, 43(5), 812–827.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Felin, T., & Zenger, T. R. (2014). Closed or open innovation? Problem solving and the governance choice. Research Policy, 43(5), 914–925.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gouillart, F., & Billings, D. (2013). Community-powered problem solving. Harvard Business Review, 91(4), 70–7.Google Scholar
  27. Hargadon, A., & Sutton, R. I. (1997). Technology brokering and innovation in a product development firm. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(4), 716–749.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hossain, M. (2012). Performance and potential of open innovation intermediaries. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 58, 754–764.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hossain, M. (2013). Open innovation: so far and a way forward. World Journal of Science, Technology and Sustainable Development, 10(1), 30–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. IBM. (2013). The history of Jams. https://www.collaborationjam.com/. Accessed 21 October 2013.
  32. IdeaStorm. (2013). http://www.ideastorm.com/. Accessed 22 October 2013.
  33. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Jeppesen, L. B., & Lakhani, K. R. (2010). Marginality and problem-solving effectiveness in broadcast search. Organization Science, 21(5), 1016–1033.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Jouret, G. (2009). Inside Cisco’s search for the next big idea. Harvard Business Review, 87(9), 43–45.Google Scholar
  36. King, A., & Lakhani, K. R. (2013). Using open innovation to identify the best ideas. MIT Sloan Management Review, 55(1), 41–48.Google Scholar
  37. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Kristensson, P., & Magnusson, P. R. (2010). Tuning users’ innovativeness during ideation. Creativity and Innovation Management, 19(2), 147–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Malhotra, A., & Majchrzak, A. (2014). Managing crowds in innovation challenges. California Management Review, 56(4), 103–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Morgan, D. L. (1988). Focus groups as qualitative research. Sage Publications, Inc.Google Scholar
  43. Morgan, J., & Wang, R. (2010). Tournaments for ideas. California Management Review, 52(2), 77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Nambisan, S. (2002). Designing virtual customer environments for new product development: toward a theory. Academy of Management Review, 27(3), 392–413.Google Scholar
  45. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 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.Google Scholar
  48. Quenqua, D. (2010). Starbucks’ own good idea. Marketing News, 25, 23–25.Google Scholar
  49. Ramaswamy, V., & Gouillart, F. (2010). Building the co-creative enterprise. Harvard Business Review, 88(10), 100–109.Google Scholar
  50. 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
  51. Sawhney, M., Prandelli, E., & Verona, G. (2003). The power of innomediation. MIT Sloan Management Review, 44(2), 76–82.Google Scholar
  52. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Schulze, A., & Hoegl, M. (2008). Organizational knowledge creation and the generation of new product ideas: a behavioral approach. Research Policy, 37(10), 1742–1750.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 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.
  55. Urban, G. L., & Von Hippel, E. (1988). Lead user analyses for the development of new industrial products. Management Science, 34(5), 569–582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Von Schomberg, R. (2013). A vision of responsible innovation. In R. Owen, M. Heintz, & J. Bessant (Eds.), Responsible innovation. London: John Wiley.Google Scholar
  57. West, J., & Lakhani, K. R. (2008). Getting clear about communities in open innovation. Industry and Innovation, 15(2), 223–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Westerski, A., Dalamagas, T., & Iglesias, C. A. (2013). Classifying and comparing community innovation in idea management systems. Decision Support Systems, 54, 1316–1326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Williams, R. L., & Cothrel, J. (2000). Four smart ways to run online communities. MIT Sloan Management Review, 41(4), 81–92.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Industrial Engineering and Management, Institute of Strategy and VenturingAalto UniversityEspooFinland
  2. 2.Institute of Business AdministrationJahangirnagar UniversitySavarBangladesh

Personalised recommendations