How preference markets assist new product idea screening

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to examine the different heuristics adopted by a crowd and a management committee to evaluate new product proposals, and whether, in assessing the value of proposals, they emphasize different features. \ud \ud Design/methodology/approach - The study takes a quantitative analysis approach to study an internal innovation contest held by the biotechnology company Novozymes. The contest generated 201 proposals that were evaluated by 109 research and development professionals by means of a virtual preference market, and by a management committee. \ud \ud Findings - The crowd and the committees' assessments of the value of the proposals were based on different features. The committee emphasized experience and inventors' seniority; the crowd set more store on informative idea descriptions but penalized overly complex and lengthy proposals. \ud \ud Research limitations/implications - The design of the innovation contest does not allow full comparison of the preference functions of crowd and committee. The findings from this case study cannot be generalized. The early stage of new product development seems fruitful for investigating crowdsourcing and knowledge management. \ud \ud Practical implications - Firms should consider adopting preference markets for idea screening and evaluation since they appraise ideas from different angles compared to managers. However, they complement, rather than substitute managerial evaluation, especially in the case of more detailed proposals. \ud \ud Originality/value - This is one of the first attempts to identify differences in the decision-making processes of crowds and committees. The paper identifies their strengths as evaluators of new product ideas and finds that the "wisdom of crowds" has some limitations in relation to the ability to process complex information

Gamified crowdsourcing: Conceptualization, literature review, and future agenda

“…Y. Lee et al, 2013;Y. Liu, Alexandrova, Nakajima et al, 2011;Machnik et al, 2015;Martella et al, 2015;Massung et al, 2013;Melenhorst et al, 2015;Nose and Hishiyama, 2013;Packham and Suleman, 2015;Pothineni et al, 2014;Prandi et al, 2016;Preist et al, 2014;Prestopnik and Tang, 2015;Roengsamut et al, 2015;Runge et al, 2015;Saito et al, 2014;Simões and De Amicis, 2016;Snijders et al, 2015;Sørensen et al, 2016;Talasila et al, 2016;Tinati et al, 2016;Vasilescu et al, 2014 37 33.6 Empirical studies with no results on how gamification works in crowdsourcing Bentzien et al, 2013;Brenner et al, 2014;Brito et al, 2015;Cao et al, 2015;Chamberlain, 2014;Cucari et al, 2016;Deng et al, 2016;Dos Santos et al, 2015;Harris, 2014;He et al, 2014;Inaba et al, 2015;Kacorri et al, 2014;Kurita et al, 2016;Lauto and Valentin, 2016;Lessel et al, 2015;Mason et al, 2012;Nagai et al, 2014;Nunzio et al, 2016;Riegler et al, 2015;…”

Gamification approaches for open innovation implementation: A conceptual framework

“…Gamified crowdsourcing platforms enhance the motivation and engagement of employees and other stakeholders and can help increase the number of contributions (Morschheuser et al, 2017; Roth et al, 2015; Zimmerling et al, 2019) as well as screen ideas and concepts (Lauto & Valentin, 2016).…”

Como a gamificação contribui para melhorar o desempenho da área de vendas?

“…A literatura indica que a tecnologia deve ser acompanhada de uma metodologia dinâmica e envolvente, de formas a viabilizar os objetivos de formação almejados para o público alvo (Harman; Koohang; Paliszkiewicz, 2014), e dentre as opções disponíveis destaca-se como tendência o uso da gamificação (Groza;Locander;Howlett, 2016;Mačiuliene;Skaržauskiene, 2016;Serna;Bachiller;Serna, 2017), principalmente nos setores comerciais (Yalabik;Howard;Roden, 2012;Lauto;Valentin, 2016;Xu;Buhalis;Weber, 2017). Em comparação aos treinamentos convencionais, o uso de tecnologias em treinamentos de vendas contribui para reduzir o tempo de treinamento em até 40%, e reduz os custos em até 50% Karande;Jantan, 2002).…”

“…A gamificação pode representar um avanço na realização de experiências de aprendizagem participativas, motivadoras, envolventes e significativas (De Marcos et al, 2014), sendo vista como uma ferramenta para apoiar a estratégia de negócio que oportuniza pensar a aplicação prática em diferentes áreas e contextos: concepção de produtos serviços e sistemas (Yalabik; Howard; Roden, 2012), treinamento técnico, treinamento de liderança, treinamento de vendas, treinamento de produtos, avaliação de desempenho e avaliação da produtividade (Ballance, 2013), treinamento estratégico (Benito-Ostolaza; Sanchis-Llopis, 2014), inovação de produto (Jung;Kim;Lee, 2014;Lauto;Valentin, 2016), mudança e design cognitivo (Ghanbari; Simila; Markkula, 2015), gestão do conhecimento (Ghanbari;Simila;Markkula, 2015;Allal-Chérif;Makhlouf, 2016), capacidade de gestão de sistemas (Arslan; Yuksel; Gunes, 2015) e avaliação do ambiente organizacional e de mercado (Yalabik;Howard;Roden, 2012;Bevilacqua, et al, 2015).…”