Literature DB >> 23593768

Using the crowd as an innovation partner.

Kevin J Boudreau1, Karim R Lakhani.   

Abstract

From Apple to Merck to Wikipedia, more and more organizations are turning to crowds for help in solving their most vexing innovation and research questions, but managers remain understandably cautious. It seems risky and even unnatural to push problems out to vast groups of strangers distributed around the world, particularly for companies built on a history of internal innovation. How can intellectual property be protected? How can a crowd-sourced solution be integrated into corporate operations? What about the costs? These concerns are all reasonable, the authors write, but excluding crowdsourcing from the corporate innovation tool kit means losing an opportunity. After a decade of study, they have identified when crowds tend to outperform internal organizations (or not). They outline four ways to tap into crowd-powered problem solving--contests, collaborative communities, complementors, and labor markets--and offer a system for picking the best one in a given situation. Contests, for example, are suited to highly challenging technical, analytical, and scientific problems; design problems; and creative or aesthetic projects. They are akin to running a series of independent experiments that generate multiple solutions--and if those solutions cluster at some extreme, a company can gain insight into where a problem's "technical frontier" lies. (Internal R&D may generate far less information.)

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23593768

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Harv Bus Rev        ISSN: 0017-8012


  11 in total

1.  [Urology 2.0 - new social media in urology].

Authors:  H Borgmann; J H Wölm; K Probst; J Salem
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 0.639

Review 2.  Crowdsourcing biomedical research: leveraging communities as innovation engines.

Authors:  Julio Saez-Rodriguez; James C Costello; Stephen H Friend; Michael R Kellen; Lara Mangravite; Pablo Meyer; Thea Norman; Gustavo Stolovitzky
Journal:  Nat Rev Genet       Date:  2016-07-15       Impact factor: 53.242

3.  Crowdsourcing the unknown: the satellite search for Genghis Khan.

Authors:  A Y M Lin; Albert Yu-Min Lin; Andrew Huynh; Gert Lanckriet; Luke Barrington
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-12-30       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Healthcare Hackathons Provide Educational and Innovation Opportunities: A Case Study and Best Practice Recommendations.

Authors:  Julie K Silver; David S Binder; Nevena Zubcevik; Ross D Zafonte
Journal:  J Med Syst       Date:  2016-06-08       Impact factor: 4.460

5.  Computational Challenges and Collaborative Projects in the NCI Quantitative Imaging Network.

Authors:  Keyvan Farahani; Jayashree Kalpathy-Cramer; Thomas L Chenevert; Daniel L Rubin; John J Sunderland; Robert J Nordstrom; John Buatti; Nola Hylton
Journal:  Tomography       Date:  2016-12

6.  Firms, crowds, and innovation.

Authors:  Teppo Felin; Karim R Lakhani; Michael L Tushman
Journal:  Strateg Organ       Date:  2017-05-09

7.  Scientific crowdsourcing in wildlife research and conservation: Tigers (Panthera tigris) as a case study.

Authors:  Özgün Emre Can; Neil D'Cruze; Margaret Balaskas; David W Macdonald
Journal:  PLoS Biol       Date:  2017-03-22       Impact factor: 8.029

8.  Rapid crowdsourced innovation for COVID-19 response and economic growth.

Authors:  Khalil B Ramadi; Freddy T Nguyen
Journal:  NPJ Digit Med       Date:  2021-02-09

9.  The more the merrier? Increasing group size may be detrimental to decision-making performance in nominal groups.

Authors:  Ofra Amir; Dor Amir; Yuval Shahar; Yuval Hart; Kobi Gal
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-02-27       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 10.  Crowdsourcing and open innovation in drug discovery: recent contributions and future directions.

Authors:  David C Thompson; Jörg Bentzien
Journal:  Drug Discov Today       Date:  2020-10-02       Impact factor: 7.851

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.