Knowledge Sharing in Online Co-Creation

Miia Kosonen and Chunmei Gan

E-mail: koomikoo (at) gmail.com, Twitter: MiiaKosonen

Results from sub-project within

”Knowledge Protection and Sharing in Global Value Networks”

Why to share openly?

• Co-innovators and consumerism as innovation trends

• Valuable user input into the innovation process

• Lead over companies that do not empower customers, users or larger crowds

• Increasing problem-solving effectiveness

In this sub-project, the focus was on open knowledge-sharing mechanisms: online co-creation and crowdsourcing

Examples of crowdsourcing

CONTEST MODE

COMMUNITY MODE

HYBRID MODE

Research setting: three perspectivesto online co-creation

Case IdeasProject• Observation• 4 interviews with company hosts• 244 survey responses from Chinese users in Spring 2012

Results 1: The users

1. Internal motives dominate external ones − knowledge sharing intentions mostly driven by expected

social and learning benefits – helping, sense of belonging, valuable knowledge

− recognition from the host company as important as winning an award!

2. Hedonic benefits, e.g. enjoyment of developing ideas, and propensity to trust did not have a significant effect

3. Intentions to share knowledge lead to actual knowledge sharing behaviour

Results 2: The community

Community trust – perceived properties of or reliance on a social system constituting a community

• Collaborative norms – expectations of collaborative values and behavior

• Trust in the community sponsor – beliefs of its goodwill and integrity

Community support – providing the necessary conditions for sharing and creating knowledge

• Technology-based support – perceived easiness of use, making the community more comprehensive and usable

• Knowledge-based support – inspiring creativity and helping users to formulate their thoughts

Results 2: The community

1. Trust in hosting firm more significant for knowledge sharing than trust in community and its norms

2. Perceived community support also needed

The hosting firm and its actions key to establishing positive image and collaborative behaviour; fair practices, care-taking

Supporting the actual knowledge creation: constructive feedback, channels for user-to-user interaction

Results 3: The hosting firm

The identified management practices

1. Selecting appropriate communication technologies

2. Defining tasks

3. Evaluating crowd size and its knowledge base

4. Launching tasks and supporting interpretation

5. Giving feedback and encouraging interaction

6. Allowing user-driven idea evaluations

Practical implications

1. Inspiration drives participation and altruism beats opportunism: online sociability and ’love of community’ are valuable assets to nurture

2. Provide more explicit linkages with experts and professional knowledge to support ideation

3. Focus on appropriate resourcing and learning from experience

4. Incorporate crowds also in outlining problems or tasks

Practical implications

Community management: breeding overall activity

1. Turn positive intentions into actual behaviour by increasing the efficacy of idea sharing: publish success stories, give active users more visibility

2. Attract specific groups, e.g. university students, to participate

3. Apply prizes with caution in order not to harm internal motivation

Community management: enhancing participation in specific tasks

1. Expand the spectrum of challenges provided to cover different users’ interests

2. Increase challenge complexity & design challenges so that they require user collaboration and community-based idea development

3. Encourage cooperation, e.g., among similar ideas or users

4. Publish more product-based knowledge, so that users could also learn more from the community and get help in formulating their ideas

Academic contributions

Three modes of crowdsourcing opened up: contest, community, and hybrid

Linking the Uses & Gratifications perspective – expected benefits of using certain media – with crowdsourcing and co-creation

Conceptual development and measures for Community Trust and Community Support

Identifying community-management practices that support user participation among external crowds, to be tested empirically in further studies

Outputs from the sub-project

Journal articles:

Kosonen M., Gan C., Vanhala M. & Blomqvist K. (forthcoming, 2014): User motivation and knowledge sharing in idea crowdsourcing. Accepted to International Journal of Innovation Management.

Kosonen M., Gan C., Olander H. & Blomqvist K. (2013): My idea is our idea! Supporting user-driven innovation activities in crowdsourcing communities. International Journal of Innovation Management, 17(3), June 2013, 18 pages.

Kosonen M. & Henttonen K. (under review): Cheer the crowd? Facilitating user participation in idea crowdsourcing. Submitted to International Journal of Technology Marketing, September, 2013.

In addition, 3 conference papers (presented in ISPIMs 2012-2013 and ISPIM Innovation Symposium 2012), 2 firm-internal workshops, 2 workshops for all customer firms, 1 open workshop and summarizing article on IdeasProject website.

Summary of the project

− Duration: 7/2011 – 6/2013

− Carried out by Lappeenranta University of Technology, at Technology Business Research Center (TBRC)

− Project Leader prof. Kirsimarja Blomqvist, Project Manager D.Sc. Heidi Olander

− Funded by Tekes (Digital Product Process program), Nokia, KONE, Outotec and Teknologiateollisuus

− Collaboration partners in Finland, China, and New Zealand