A risk worth taking? The effects of risk and prior experience on co-innovation participation

Abstract

Purpose Co-innovation networks face the important challenge of cultivating collective innovation outcomes while also preserving the interests of individual contributors. Addressing this challenge requires first understanding and then managing individuals’ perception of co-innovation risks. The purpose of this paper is to provide a meaningful approach to addressing co-innovation risks using a valid and reliable model to assess actors’ perception of risk and examine its effect on actor co-innovation behavior. Design/methodology/approach The construct of co-innovation risk from the actor’s perspective was conceptualized based on a case study of a co-innovation network. The measurement items underwent a pilot study and a field study to establish the necessary reliability and validity. This paper also empirically assesses a nomological network that illustrates the effect of risk on co-innovation behavior with a moderating effect of prior experience. Findings Co-innovation actors perceived four different individual risks: time, social, intellectual property right, and financial. The empirical results from the field study demonstrate a high degree of confidence in both translation validity and criterion-related validity. Negative effects of perceived co-innovation risk on actors’ continuous intention to ideate, collaborate, and communicate in co-innovation were evident, but prior experience moderated these relationships. Originality/value Drawing from co-innovation and individual risk literature, this study develops and validates a general instrument to measure co-innovation risk from the actors’ perspective. The result is a reliable and parsimonious instrument with 15 items, which contributes significantly to future empirical investigations of co-innovation behavior on virtual platforms.

Antecedents, consequences, and reducers of perceived risk in social media: A systematic literature review and directions for further research

“…None of the studies considered all the factors at once. These factors influenced the use of social media, risk management (Munnukka & Jarvi, ), word of mouth (WoM; Eisingerich, Chun, Liu, Jia, & Bell, ) behavioral intentions, coinnovation, perceived usefulness, information seeking and adoption, and OSN satisfaction (Abhari, Davidson, & Xiao, ; Chen & Kuo, ; Nelmapius & Boshoff, ; Tseng & Wang, ). One study investigated the effect of mode of communication (social WoM vs. face‐to‐face WoM) on social risk.…”

“…Coinnovation risk is another new risk facet. It is defined as “an individual actor's perception of potential loss when contributing to coinnovation.” Intellectual property rights (IPR) risk, a form of coinnovation risk, is getting popular in the context of social media (Abhari et al, ; Baccarella et al, ). Mental intangibility is also conceptualized as consumer risk because of the intangible nature of online services (Li, Wang, Lin, & Hajli, ).…”

“…Some articles suggested to conduct longitudinal studies, control group experiments, manipulation and causal studies to assess the differential effects of PR on consumer intentions and behaviors (Farivar et al, ; Hansen, Saridakis, & Benson, ; Loiacono, ; Saridakis et al, ; W. L. Wu & Li, ). One of the future avenues is to examine the moderating role of age, personality type, and quality of experience (Abhari et al, ; Lin, Featherman, & Sarker, ; Loiacono, ). As a significant number of people are reluctant to sign in OSNs, therefore, it was recommended as another potential area to explore the reasons that why people are reluctant to use social media (Nelmapius & Boshoff, ).…”

“…| 83 moderating role of age, personality type, and quality of experience (Abhari et al, 2018;Lin, Featherman, & Sarker, 2017;Loiacono, 2015). As a significant number of people are reluctant to sign in OSNs, therefore, it was recommended as another potential area to explore the reasons that why people are reluctant to use social media (Nelmapius & Boshoff, 2016).…”

When it comes to the impact of absorptive capacity on co-innovation, how really harmful is knowledge leakage?

“…That is, leakage slows down knowledge flows on virtual innovation platforms (Galati and Bigliardi, 2019; Raza–Ullah and Eriksson, 2017). In addition to this, leakage undermines the loyalty and commitment of external allies, who may end up adopting opportunistic behaviors and improperly appropriating previously shared key knowledge of the company; this constitutes not only a loss of key knowledge but also of other resources such as time and finances (Abhari et al , 2018).…”