Skip to main content

Performance Assessment of Co-creation Initiatives: A Conceptual Framework for Measuring the Value of Idea Contests

  • Chapter
Evolution of Innovation Management

Abstract

In 2010, more than 1,200 external users from 80 different countries answered an open call by the BMW Group and submitted 1,072 ideas within 8 weeks (Jawecki et al. 2010). The instrument involving users from outside the company in ideation is called an idea contest. The BMW Group’s idea contests are just one example of a plethora of similar initiatives recently taken by leading innovative companies. Since the turn of the millennium, many companies such as 3M (von Hippel et al. 1999), Lego (Moon & Sproull 2001), Ducati Motor (Sawhney et al. 2005, 10–12), Procter & Gamble (Sakkab 2002), and Beiersdorf (Bilgram et al. 2011) have undergone a radical change in innovation strategy by opening up their innovation processes and making external stakeholders a part of their innovation endeavors (Bartl 2006; Brem & Voigt 2007). For example, 3M embarked upon an extensive innovation program involving external lead users to generate breakthrough innovations with a revenue potential eight times higher than that of ideas from conventional ideation approaches (von Hippel et al. 1999). The foundations of this phenomenon have been laid by von Hippel’s seminal work on the Customer Active Paradigm in the late 1970s (von Hippel 1978) and on the sources of innovation outside the company’s walls (von Hippel 1988). Von Hippel found that innovations not only originate from the manufacturers' domain, but also to a large extent from users (von Hippel 1988, 2005).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Baldwin, C. Y., & vonHippel, E. (2009) Modeling a paradigm shift: From producer innovation to user and open collaborative innovation. MIT Sloan Research Paper, 4764–09, 1–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ballantyne, D., & Varey, R. J. (2006) Creating value-in-use through marketing interaction: The exchange logic of relating, communicating and knowing. Marketing Theory, 6(3), 335–348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bartl, M. (2006) Virtuelle Kundenintegration in die Neuproduktentwicklung. Doctoral Dissertation, WHU - Otto Beisheim School of Management Vallendar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benkler, Y. (2006) The Wealth of Networks — How Social Production Transforms Markets and Freedom. New Haven, Conneticut: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernoff, J., & Li, C. (2008) Harnessing the power of the oh-so-social web. MIT Sloan Management Review, 49(3), 36–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bilgram, V., Bartl, M., & Biel, S. (2011) Getting closer to the consumer: How Nivea co-creates new products. Marketing Review St. Gallen, 1, 34–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bilgram, V., & Jawecki, G. (2011) Erfolgsmessung von Open Innovation Projekten: Über Kennzahlen in Forschung und Praxis. Controller Magazine, 4, 60–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Birch, H., & Rabinowitzs, H. (1951) The negative effect of previous experience on productive thinking. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 41(2), 121–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bjelland, O. M., & Wood, R. C. (2008) An inside view of IBM’s “Innovation Jam”. MIT Sloan Management Review, 50(1), 31–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blau, P. (1970) A formal theory of differentiation in organizations. American Sociology Review, 35(2), 201–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blazevic, V., & Lievens, A. (2008) Managing innovation through customer coproduced knowledge in electronic services: An exploratory study. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 36(1), 138–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blohm, I., Leimeister, J. M., Rieger, M., & Krcmar, H. (2011) Controlling von Ideencommunities: Entwicklung und Test einer Ideencommunity-Scorecard. Controlling - Zeitschrift für erfolgsorientierte Unternehmensführung, 23(2), 96–103.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bösch, D. (2006) Controlling im betrieblichen Innovationssystem. Doctoral dissertation, University of Vienna.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brem, A., & Voigt, K.-I. (2007) Innovation management in emerging technology ventures: The concept of an integrated idea management. International Journal of Technology, Policy and Management, 7(3), 304–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bremser, W. G., & Barsky, N. P. (2004) Utilizing the balanced scorecard for R&D performance measurement. R&D Management, 34(3), 229–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brockhoff, K. (1999) Produktpolitik. Stuttgart: Lucius & Lucius.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, M. G., & Svenson, R. A. (1988) Measuring R&D productivity. Research Technology Management, 41(6), 30–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, A. J., & Cooper, R. G. (1999) Do customer partnerships improve new product success rates? Industrial Marketing Management, 28(5), 507–519.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chesbrough, H. (2005) Open innovation: A new paradigm for understanding industrial innovation. Paper presented at the DRUID 10th Anniversary Summer Conference, Copenhagen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chiesa, V., & Masella, C. (1996) Searching for an effective measure of R&D performance. Management Decision, 34(7), 49–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clemons, E. K., Pac, M.F., & Savin, S. (2011). Designing innovation tournaments to maximize their value: An economic perspective. Working Paper, Wharton University of Pennsylvania, Operations and Information Management Department.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, R. G. (1990) Stage-gate systems: A new tool for managing new products. Business Horizons, 33(3), 44–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cordero, R. (1989) The measurement of innovation performance in the firm: An overview. Research Policy, 19(2), 185–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cothrel, J. P. (2000) Measuring the success of an online community. Strategy & Leadership, 28(2), 17–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2002) Creativity: Flow and the Psychology of Discovery and Invention. New York, NY: Harper Perennial.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahan, E., & Hauser, J. (2002) The virtual customer. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 19(5), 332–353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dearborn, D. C., & Simon, H. A. (1958) Selective perception: A note on the departmental identifications of executives. Sociometry, 21(2), 140–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diewert, W. E. (1992) The measurement of productivity. Bulletin of Economic Research, 44(3), 164–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donnelly, G. (2000) A P&L for R&D. CFO Magazine, February, 44–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drongelen, I. C. K.-v., & Bilderbeek, J. (1999) R&D performance measurement: More than choosing a set of metrics. R&D Management, 29(1), 35–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drongelen, I. C. K.-v., Nixon, B., & Pearson, A. (2000) Performance measurement in industrial R&D. International Journal of Management Reviews, 2(2), 111–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ebner, W., Leimeister, J. M., & Krcmar, H. (2009) Community engineering for innovations: The ideas competition as a method to nurture a virtual community for innovations. R&D Management, 39(4), 342–356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Füller, J. (2010a) Refining virtual co-creation from a consumer perspective. California Management Review, 52(2), 98–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Füller, J. (2010b) Virtual co-creation of new products and its impact on consumers’ product and brand relationships. Paper presented at the meeting of the Academy of Management Annual Meeting, Montreal.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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(2), 57–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Füller, J., Mühlbacher, H., Matzler, K., & Jawecki, G. (2010) Consumer empowerment through Internet-based co-creation. Journal of Management Information Systems, 26(3), 71–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gebauer, J., Füller, J., & Pezzei, R. (2012) The dark and the bright side of co-creation: Triggers of member behavior in online innovation communities. Accepted for publication in Journal of Business Research, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2012.09.013.

  • Griffin, A. (1993) Metrics for measuring product development cycle time. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 10(4), 112–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griffin, A., & Page, A. L. (1993) An interim report on measuring product development success and failure. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 10(4), 291–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gruner, K., & Homburg, C. (2000) Does customer interaction enhance new product success. Journal of Business Research, 49(1), 1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haberfellner, R. (1974) Die Unternehmung als dynamisches System. Der Prozesscharakter der Unternehmungsaktivität. Zurich: Industrielle Organisation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hagedoorn, J., & Cloodt, M. (2003) Measuring innovative performance: Is there an advantage in using multiple indicators?. Research Policy, 32(8), 1365–1379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hallerstede, S. H., & Bullinger, A. C. (2010) Do you know where you go? A taxonomy of online innovation contests. Paper presented at the XXIth ISPIM Conference, Bilbao.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hauschildt, J. (2004) InnovationsManagement. München: Vahlen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman, D. L., & Fodor, M. (2010) Can you measure the ROI of your social media marketing? MIT Sloan Management Review, 52(1), 41–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horvath, P. (2008) Controlling. Munich: Vahlen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howe, J. (2006) The rise of crowdsourcing. Wired, 14(6).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hutter, K., Hautz, J., Füller, J., Matzler, K., & Mayr, A. (2010) Ideenwettbewerbe als innovatives Markenbindungsinstrument. Marketing Review St. Gallen, 4, 26–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jawecki, G., Bilgram, V., & Wiegandt, P. (2010) The BMW group co-creation lab: Managing an innovation hub for a panopticon of users. Paper presented at the ESOMAR Innovate Conference, Barcelona.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1996) The Balanced Scorecard. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kozinets, R. (2002) The field behind the screen: Using netnography for marketing research in online communications. Journal of Marketing Research, 39(1), 61–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kristensson, P., Gustafsson, A., & Archer, T. (2004) Harnessing the creative potential among users. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 21(1), 4–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lakhani, K. R. (2006) Broadcast search in problem solving: Attracting solutions from the periphery. Working Paper, MIT Sloan School of Management.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lakhani, K. R., Jeppesen, L. B., Lohse, P. A., & Panetta, J. A. (2007) The value of openness in scientific problem solving. Working Paper 07–050, Harvard Business School.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence, P. R., & Lorsch, J. W. (1967) Differentiation and integration in complex organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 12(1), 1–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leontief, W. W. (1986) Input-output Economics. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lilien, G. L., Morrison, P. D., Searls, K., Sonnack, M., & vonHippel, E. (2002) Performance assessment of the lead user idea-generation process for new product development. Management Science, 48(8), 1042–1059.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Littkemann, J. (2005) Innovationscontrolling. In S. Albers & O. Gassmann (Eds), Handbuch Technologie und Innovationsmanagement: Strategie-Umsetzung-Controlling (pp. 585–602). Wiesbaden: Gabler.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Lynch, R. L., & Cross, K. F. (1991) Measure Up: The Essential Guide to Measuring Business Performance. London: Mandarin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Matthing, J., Sanden, B., & Edvardsson, B. (2004) New service development learning from and with customers. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 15(5), 479–498.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moon, J. Y., & Sproull, L. (2001) Turning love into money: How some firms may profit from voluntary electronic customer communities. Working Paper, Stern School of Business.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, J., & Wang, R. (2010) Tournament for ideas. California Management Review, 52(2), 77–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nambisan, S., & Baron, R. A. (2007) Interactions in virtual customer environments: Implications for product support and customer relationship management. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 21(2), 42–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nambisan, S., & Nambisan, P. (2008) How to profit from a better “Virtual Customer Environment”. MIT Sloan Management Review, 49(3), 53–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nambisan, S., & Sawhney, M. (2007) The Global Brain: Your Roadmap for Innovating Faster and Smarter in a Networked World. Upper Saddle River: Wharton School Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ng, I. C. L., Nudurupati, S. S., & Tasker, P. (2010) Value co-creation in the delivery of outcome based contracts for business-to-business service. Working Paper, E.P.S.R. Council.

    Google Scholar 

  • Novak, T. P., Hoffman, D. L., & Yung, Y.-F. (2000) Measuring the customer experience in online environments: A structural modeling approach. Marketing Science, 19(1), 22–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ogawa, S., & Piller, F. (2006) Reducing the risks of new product development. Sloan Management Review, 47(2), 65–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patzak, G., & Rattay, G. (2004) Projekt Management: Leitfaden zum Management von Projekten, Projektportfolios und projektorientierten Unternehmen. Wien: Linde.

    Google Scholar 

  • Piller, F., & Walcher, D. (2006) Toolkits for idea competitions: A novel method to integrate users in new product development. R&D Management, 36(3), 307–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prahalad, C. K., & Ramaswamy, V. (2003) The new frontier of experience innovation. MIT Sloan Management Review, 44(4), 11–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prahalad, C. K., & Ramaswamy, V. (2004) The Future of Competition: Co-creating Unique Value with Customers. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prandelli, E., Verona, G., & Raccagni, D. (2006) Diffusion of web-based product innovation. California Management Review, 48(4), 109–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Preece, J. (2001) Sociability and usability: Twenty years of chatting online. Behavior and Information Technology Journal, 20(5), 347–356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raynor, M. E., & Panetta, J. A. (2005) A better way to R&D? Strategy & Innovation, 3(2), 14–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reichwald, R., & Piller, F. (2009) Interaktive Wertschöpfung: Open Innovation, Individualisierung und neue Formen der Arbeitsteilung. Wiesbaden: Gabler.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Roser, T., Samson, A., Humphreys, P., & Cruz-Valdiviesco, E. (2009) Co-creation: New Pathways to Value. London, LSE Enterprise.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sakkab, N. Y. (2002) Connect & develop complements research & development at P&G. Research Technology Management, 45(2), 38–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saren, M. A. (1984) A classification and review of models of the intra-firm innovation process. R&D Management, 14(1), 11–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Terwiesch, C., & Xu, Y. (2008) Innovation contests, open innovation, and multiagent problem solving. Management Science, 54(9), 1529–1543.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Twiss, B. C. (1980) Managing Technological Innovation. London: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ulrich, H. (1970) Die Unternehmung als produktives soziales System. Grundlage der allgemeinen Unternehmungslehre. Bern: Haupt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2004) Evolving to a new dominant logic for marketing. Journal of Marketing, 68(1), 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2008) Service-dominant logic: Continuing the evolution. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 36(1), 1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • von Hippel, E. (1978) A customer-active paradigm for industrial product idea generation. Research Policy, 7(3), 240–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • von Hippel, E. (1988) The Sources of Innovation. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Hippel, E. (1994) “Sticky information” and the locus of problem solving: Implications for innovation. Management Science, 40(4), 429–439.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • von Hippel, E. (2005) Democratizing Innovation. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Hippel, E., Thomke, S., & Sonnack, M. (1999) Creating breakthroughs at 3M. Harvard Business Review, 77(11), 47–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wakasugi, R., & Koyata, F. (1997) R&D, firm size and innovation outputs: Are Japanese firms efficient in product development? Journal of Product Innovation Management, 14(5), 383–392.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Werner, B. M., & Souder, W. E. (1997) Measuring R&D performance: State of the art. Research Technology Management, 40(2), 34–42.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Copyright information

© 2013 Volker Bilgram

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Bilgram, V. (2013). Performance Assessment of Co-creation Initiatives: A Conceptual Framework for Measuring the Value of Idea Contests. In: Brem, A., Viardot, É. (eds) Evolution of Innovation Management. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137299994_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics