- P-ISSN2287-1608
- E-ISSN2287-1616
- KCI
ISSN : 2287-1608
Co-creation and Personalization as Incentive Mechanisms of Utilizing External Innovation Sources: Which Performs Better?
Kohei Nishiyama (The University of Tokyo)
Koji Kimita (The University of Tokyo)
Nariaki Nishino (The University of Tokyo)
Abstract
Utilizing outside knowledge for innovation is an important task for companies in the competitive economy. Due to the rapid advance in the internet communication technology, the number and quality of innovation sourcing methods are increasing. We select co-creation, personalization and in-house R&D as the representative forms of innovation sourcing and suggest a game theory model that enables the comparative analysis between them. The decision and surplus outcome of the innovation mechanisms are compared under various settings of the input parameters of the model. The stakeholders voluntarily participate into all mechanisms when the product price is moderately high and the participation cost is low, while co-creation is the only feasible one when the product quality is niche. When the participation cost is relatively high, personalization outperforms co-creation.
- keywords
- Innovation sourcing, Co-creation, Personalization, Game theory, Simulation
Reference
Afuah, A., and Tucci, C.L. (2012) Crowdsourcing as a solution to distant search, Academy of Management Review, 37(3), 355-375.
Baniak A., and Dubina, I. (2012) Innovation analysis and game theory: A review, Innovation, 14(2), 178-191.
Böckem, S. (1994) A Generalized Model of Horizontal Product Differentiation, The Journal of Industrial Economics, 42(3), 287-298.
Cappa, F., Rosso, F., and Hayes, D. (2019) Monetary and social rewards for crowdsourcing, Sustainability, 11(19), 1-14.
Chesbrough, H. (2003) Open innovation: The new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Chu, K-M. (2013) Motives for participation in Internet innovation intermediary platforms, Information Processing and Management, 49(4), 945-953.
Cremer, H., and Thisse, J-F. (1991) Location Models of Horizontal Differentiation: A Special Case of Vertical Differentiation Models, 39(4), 383-390.
De Faria, P., Lima, F., and Santos, R. (2010) Cooperation in innovation activities: The importance of partners. Research Policy, 39(8), 1082– 92.
Felin, T., and Zenger, T. R. (2014) Closed or open innovation? Problem solving and the governance choice, Research Policy, 43(5), 914-925.
Franke, N., Schreier, M., and Kaiser, U. (2010) The “I Designed It Myself” Effect in Mass Customization. Management Science, 56(1), 125-140.
Gilsing, V. A., Lemmens, C. E. A. V., and Duysters G. (2007) Strategic Alliance Networks and Innovation: A Deterministic and Voluntaristic View Combined, Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 19(2), 227-249.
Hagedoorn, J., and Zobel, A.-K. (2015) The role of contracts and intellectual property rights in open innovation, Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 27(9), 1050-1067.
Howe, J. (2006) The rise of crowdsourcing, Wired, 14(6), 1-4.
Huggins, R., Johnston, A., and Thompson, P. (2012) Network Capital, Social Capital and Knowledge Flow: How the Nature of Inter-organizational Networks Impacts on Innovation, Industry and Innovation, 19(3), 203-232.
Jeppesen, L. B., and Lakhani, K. R. (2010) Marginality and problem-solving effectiveness in broadcast search, Organization Science, 21(5), 1016-1033.
Jiang, Z., Hu, L., and Chen, K. (2010) Decisions of knowledge transfer in technology innovation alliance: A stackelberg leader-followers model, Operational Research, 10(2), 231-242.
Leiponen, A, Helfat, C.E. (2010) Innovation objectives, knowledge sources, and the benefits of breadth, Strategic Management Journal, 31, 224–236.
Lichtenthaler, U. (2005) External commercialization of knowledge: Review and research agenda, International Journal of Management Reviews , 7(4), 231–255.
Lüthje, C. (2004) Characteristics of innovating users in a consumer goods field: An empirical study of sport-related product consumers. Technovation, 24(9), 683–695.
Lüthje, C., Herstatt, C., and von Hippel, E. (2005). User-innovators and “local” information: The case of mountain biking. Research Policy, 34, 951–965.
Natalicchio, A., Petruzzelli, A. M., and Garavelli, A. C. (2017) Innovation problems and search for solutions in crowdsourcing platforms – A simulation approach, Technovation, 64-65, 28-42.
Olsen, T., and Carmel, E. (2013) The process of atomization of business tasks for crowdsourcing, Strategic Outsourcing: An International Journal, 6(3).
Pellizzoni, E., Buganza, T., and Colombo, G. (2015) Motivation orientations in innovation contests: Why people participate, International Journal of Innovation Management, 19(4).
Poetz, M. K., and 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.
Prahalad C. K., and Ramaswamy, V. (2004) Co-creation experiences: The next practice in value creation, Journal of Interactive Marketing, 18(3), 5-14.
Slowinski, G., and Sagal, M. W. (2010) Good Practices in Open Innovation, Research-Technology Management, 53(5), 38-45.
Terwiesch, C., and Xu, Y. (2008) Innovation contests, open innovation, and multiagent problem solving, Management Science, 54(9), 1529-1543.
von Hippel, E. (1976) The dominant role of users in the scientific instrument innovation process, Research Policy, 5(3), 212–239.
von Hippel, E. (1986) Lead Users: An important source of novel product concepts. Management Science, 32(7), 791–805.
van de Vrande, V., de Jong, J. P. J., Vanhaverbeke, W., and de Rochemont, M. (2009) Open innovation in SMEs: Trends, motives and management challenges. Technovation, 29(6–7), 423–37.
Wang, W., Ma, H-S., Yang, J-H., and Wang, K-S (2017) Industry 4.0: a way from mass customization to mass personalization production. Advances in Manufacturing, 5, 311–320.
Yang, M., and Han, C. (2021) Stimulating innovation: Managing peer interaction for idea generation on digital innovation platforms, Journal of Business Research, 125, 456–465.
- Downloaded
- Viewed
- 0KCI Citations
- 0WOS Citations