Factors Influencing Solvers’ Behaviors in Knowledge-Intensive Crowdsourcing: A Systematic Literature Review
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Methods Used
2.1. Planning the Review
2.2. Conducting the Review
2.2.1. Identification of Keywords and Search Terms
2.2.2. Assessment and Selection of Studies
2.2.3. Data Extraction
3. Results and Analysis
3.1. Descriptive Analysis
3.1.1. Publications by Year
3.1.2. Publications by Journal
3.1.3. Types of Knowledge-Intensive Task
3.1.4. Research Methods Used
3.1.5. Theoretical Foundations
3.2. RQ1: What Behaviors Do Solvers Exhibit in KI-C?
3.2.1. Participating in a KI-C Platform
3.2.2. Choosing a Task to Participate in
3.2.3. Making Effort in a Task
3.2.4. Contributing High-Quality Solutions
3.2.5. Continuous Participation and Contribution
3.3. RQ2: What (Motives) Motivates Solvers to Exhibit the Behaviors?
3.3.1. The Solver Motives
3.3.2. The Interactive Effect of Solvers’ Motives
3.3.3. The Transformation of Solvers’ Motives
3.4. RQ3: What Factors Influence the Solvers’ Behaviors?
3.4.1. Task Attributes
- (1)
- Monetary reward
- (2)
- Task complexity
- (3)
- Task autonomy and variety
- (4)
- Task instruction
- (5)
- Task in-process status
3.4.2. Solver Characteristics
- (1)
- Domain expertise
- (2)
- Participation experience
- (3)
- Cultural background
- (4)
- Personality traits
- (5)
- Interaction with peers
3.4.3. Requester Behaviors
- (1)
- Fairness
- (2)
- Give feedback
3.4.4. Platform Designs
- (1)
- System-generated visual feedback
- (2)
- Be trustworthy
- (3)
- Incentive design
- (4)
- Foster a community
3.5. RQ4: What Roles Do the Factors Play in the Solvers’ Behaviors?
- (1)
- The solver motives
- (2)
- Task attributes
- (3)
- Requester behaviors
- (4)
- Solver characteristics
- (5)
- Platform designs
4. Discussion and Identification of Future Research Needs
4.1. Linking the Factors Together and Investigating Their Relations
4.2. Exploring the Transformation of Solvers’ Behaviors and Their Influential Factors
4.3. Improving Solvers’ Behaviors from a Global Perspective and a Local Perspective
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Basu Roy, S.; Lykourentzou, I.; Thirumuruganathan, S.; Amer-Yahia, S.; Das, G. Task assignment optimization in knowledge-intensive crowdsourcing. VLDB J. 2015, 24, 467–491. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kittur, A.; Nickerson, J.V.; Bernstein, M.; Gerber, E.; Shaw, A.; Zimmerman, J.; Lease, M.; Horton, J. The future of crowd work. In Proceedings of the 2013 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, San Antonio, TX, USA, 23–27 February 2013; pp. 1301–1318. [Google Scholar]
- Terwiesch, C.; Xu, Y. Innovation Contests, Open Innovation, and Multiagent Problem Solving. Manag. Sci. 2008, 54, 1529–1543. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Zhao, Y.; Zhu, Q. Evaluation on crowdsourcing research: Current status and future direction. Inf. Syst. Front. 2014, 16, 417–434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cappa, F.; Oriani, R.; Pinelli, M.; De Massis, A. When does crowdsourcing benefit firm stock market performance? Res. Policy 2019, 48, 103825. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Penin, J.; Burger-Helmchen, T. Crowdsourcing of inventive activities: Definition and limits. Int. J. Innov. Sustain. Dev. 2011, 5, 246–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mack, T.; Landau, C. Submission quality in open innovation contests—An analysis of individual-level determinants of idea innovativeness. RD Manag. 2020, 50, 47–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Estellés-Arolas, E. Towards an integrated crowdsourcing definition. J. Inf. Sci. 2012, 38, 189–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ye, H.; Kankanhalli, A. Solvers’ participation in crowdsourcing platforms: Examining the impacts of trust, and benefit and cost factors. J. Strateg. Inf. Syst. 2017, 26, 101–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sun, Y.; Fang, Y.; Lim, K.H. Understanding sustained participation in transactional virtual communities. Decis. Support Syst. 2012, 53, 12–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, X.; Khasraghi, H.J.; Schneider, H. Towards an Understanding of Participants’ Sustained Participation in Crowdsourcing Contests. Inf. Syst. Manag. 2020, 37, 213–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Battistella, C.; Nonino, F. Exploring the impact of motivations on the attraction of innovation roles in open innovation web-based platforms. Prod. Plan. Control. 2013, 24, 226–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chris Zhao, Y.; Zhu, Q. Effects of extrinsic and intrinsic motivation on participation in crowdsourcing contest: A perspective of self-determination theory. Online Inf. Rev. 2014, 38, 896–917. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wijnhoven, F.; Ehrenhard, M.; Kuhn, J. Open government objectives and participation motivations. Gov. Inf. Q. 2015, 32, 30–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cappa, F.; Rosso, F.; Hayes, D. Monetary and Social Rewards for Crowdsourcing. Sustainability 2019, 11, 2834. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Zhu, J.J.; Li, S.Y.; Andrews, M. Ideator Expertise and Cocreator Inputs in Crowdsourcing-Based New Product Development. J. Prod. Innov. Manag. 2017, 34, 598–616. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Piazza, M.; Mazzola, E.; Perrone, G. How can I signal my quality to emerge from the crowd? A study in the crowdsourcing context. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2022, 176, 121473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bayus, B.L. Crowdsourcing New Product Ideas over Time: An Analysis of the Dell IdeaStorm Community. Manag. Sci. 2013, 59, 226–244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khasraghi, H.J.; Aghaie, A. Crowdsourcing contests: Understanding the effect of competitors’ participation history on their performance. Behav. Inf. Technol. 2014, 33, 1383–1395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chua, R.Y.J.; Roth, Y.; Lemoine, J.-F. The Impact of Culture on Creativity: How Cultural Tightness and Cultural Distance Affect Global Innovation Crowdsourcing Work. Adm. Sci. Q. 2014, 60, 189–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bockstedt, J.; Druehl, C.; Mishra, A. Problem-solving effort and success in innovation contests: The role of national wealth and national culture. J. Oper. Manag. 2015, 36, 187–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Franke, N.; Keinz, P.; Klausberger, K. “Does This Sound Like a Fair Deal?”: Antecedents and Consequences of Fairness Expectations in the Individual’s Decision to Participate in Firm Innovation. Organ. Sci. 2012, 24, 1495–1516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Zou, L.; Zhang, J.; Liu, W. Perceived justice and creativity in crowdsourcing communities: Empirical evidence from China. Soc. Sci. Inf. 2015, 54, 253–279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kohler, T.; Chesbrough, H. From collaborative community to competitive market: The quest to build a crowdsourcing platform for social innovation. RD Manag. 2019, 49, 356–368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Randhawa, K.; Wilden, R.; West, J. Crowdsourcing without profit: The role of the seeker in open social innovation. RD Manag. 2019, 49, 298–317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Heo, M.; Toomey, N. Motivating continued knowledge sharing in crowdsourcing: The impact of different types of visual feedback. Online Inf. Rev. 2015, 39, 795–811. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wooten, J.O.; Ulrich, K.T. Idea Generation and the Role of Feedback: Evidence from Field Experiments with Innovation Tournaments. Prod. Oper. Manag. 2017, 26, 80–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Steils, N.; Hanine, S. Recruiting valuable participants in online IDEA generation: The role of brief instructions. J. Bus. Res. 2019, 96, 14–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zheng, H.; Li, D.; Hou, W. Task Design, Motivation, and Participation in Crowdsourcing Contests. Int. J. Electron. Commer. 2011, 15, 57–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Garcia Martinez, M. Inspiring crowdsourcing communities to create novel solutions: Competition design and the mediating role of trust. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2017, 117, 296–304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Tang, J.; Zhou, X.; Zhao, Y.; Wang, T. How the type and valence of feedback information influence volunteers’ knowledge contribution in citizen science projects. Inf. Process. Manag. 2021, 58, 102633. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Taylor, J.; Joshi, K.D. Joining the crowd: The career anchors of information technology workers participating in crowdsourcing. Inf. Syst. J. 2019, 29, 641–673. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pee, L.G.; Koh, E.; Goh, M. Trait motivations of crowdsourcing and task choice: A distal-proximal perspective. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2018, 40, 28–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nakatsu, R.T.; Grossman, E.B.; Iacovou, C.L. A taxonomy of crowdsourcing based on task complexity. J. Inf. Sci. 2014, 40, 823–834. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cricelli, L.; Grimaldi, M.; Vermicelli, S. Crowdsourcing and open innovation: A systematic literature review, an integrated framework and a research agenda. Rev. Manag. Sci. 2021, 16, 1269–1310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Olson, D.L.; Rosacker, K. Crowdsourcing and open source software participation. Serv. Bus. 2013, 7, 499–511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Martinez-Corral, A.; Grijalvo, M.; Palacios, M. An organisational framework for analysis of crowdsourcing initiatives. Int. J. Entrep. Behav. Res. 2019, 25, 1652–1670. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Modaresnezhad, M.; Iyer, L.; Palvia, P.; Taras, V. Information Technology (IT) enabled crowdsourcing: A conceptual framework. Inf. Process. Manag. 2020, 57, 102135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hossain, M.; Kauranen, I. Crowdsourcing: A comprehensive literature review. Strateg. Outsourcing: Int. J. 2015, 8, 2–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nevo, D.; Kotlarsky, J. Crowdsourcing as a strategic IS sourcing phenomenon: Critical review and insights for future research. J. Strateg. Inf. Syst. 2020, 29, 101593. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Assis Neto, F.R.; Santos, C.A.S. Understanding crowdsourcing projects: A systematic review of tendencies, workflow, and quality management. Inf. Process. Manag. 2018, 54, 490–506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, C.; Han, L.; Stein, G.; Day, S.; Bien-Gund, C.; Mathews, A.; Ong, J.J.; Zhao, P.-Z.; Wei, S.-F.; Walker, J.; et al. Crowdsourcing in health and medical research: A systematic review. Infect. Dis. Poverty 2020, 9, 8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Crescenzi, V.; Fernandes, A.A.A.; Merialdo, P.; Paton, N.W. Crowdsourcing for data management. Knowl. Inf. Syst. 2017, 53, 1–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ghezzi, A.; Gabelloni, D.; Martini, A.; Natalicchio, A. Crowdsourcing: A Review and Suggestions for Future Research. Int. J. Manag. Rev. 2018, 20, 343–363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jiang, J.; An, B.; Jiang, Y.; Lin, D.; Bu, Z.; Cao, J.; Hao, Z. Understanding Crowdsourcing Systems from a Multiagent Perspective and Approach. ACM Trans. Auton. Adapt. Syst. 2018, 13, 8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xia, H.; McKernan, B. Privacy in Crowdsourcing: A Review of the Threats and Challenges. Comput. Support. Coop. Work (CSCW) 2020, 29, 263–301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jain, S.; Deodhar, S.J. Social mechanisms in crowdsourcing contests: A literature review. Behav. Inf. Technol. 2021, 41, 1080–1114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Morschheuser, B.; Hamari, J.; Koivisto, J.; Maedche, A. Gamified crowdsourcing: Conceptualization, literature review, and future agenda. Int. J. Hum. -Comput. Stud. 2017, 106, 26–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Zhao, Y.; Zhu, Q. Conceptualizing task affordance in online crowdsourcing context. Online Inf. Rev. 2016, 40, 938–958. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thuan, N.H.; Antunes, P.; Johnstone, D. Factors influencing the decision to crowdsource: A systematic literature review. Inf. Syst. Front. 2016, 18, 47–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tranfield, D.; Denyer, D.; Smart, P. Towards a Methodology for Developing Evidence-Informed Management Knowledge by Means of Systematic Review. Br. J. Manag. 2003, 14, 207–222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Crossan, M.M.; Apaydin, M. A Multi-Dimensional Framework of Organizational Innovation: A Systematic Review of the Literature. J. Manag. Stud. 2010, 47, 1154–1191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, X.; Chen, Q. Towards an understanding of the decision process of solvers’ participation in crowdsourcing contests for problem solving. Behav. Inf. Technol. 2021, 1–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Durward, D.; Blohm, I.; Leimeister, J.M. The Nature of Crowd Work and its Effects on Individuals’ Work Perception. J. Manag. Inf. Syst. 2020, 37, 66–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Blohm, I.; Zogaj, S.; Bretschneider, U.; Leimeister, J.M. How to Manage Crowdsourcing Platforms Effectively? Calif. Manag. Rev. 2018, 60, 122–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Feng, Y.; Jonathan Ye, H.; Yu, Y.; Yang, C.; Cui, T. Gamification artifacts and crowdsourcing participation: Examining the mediating role of intrinsic motivations. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2018, 81, 124–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, D.; Hu, L. Exploring the effects of reward and competition intensity on participation in crowdsourcing contests. Electron. Mark. 2017, 27, 199–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Deodhar, S.J. Interplay between Constraints and Rewards in Innovation Tournaments: Implications for Participation. Int. J. Coop. Inf. Syst. 2020, 29, 2040004. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, Z.; Hatton, M.R.; Kull, T.; Dooley, K.; Oke, A. Is a large award truly attractive to solvers? The impact of award size on crowd size in innovation contests. J. Oper. Manag. 2020, 67, 420–449. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liang, H.; Wang, M.-M.; Wang, J.-J.; Xue, Y. How intrinsic motivation and extrinsic incentives affect task effort in crowdsourcing contests: A mediated moderation model. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2018, 81, 168–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, J.; Wang, Y.; Yu, D.; Liu, C. Solvers’ committed resources in crowdsourcing marketplace: Do task design characteristics matter? Behav. Inf. Technol. 2021, 41, 1689–1708. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dissanayake, I.; Zhang, J.; Yasar, M.; Nerur, S.P. Strategic effort allocation in online innovation tournaments. Inf. Manag. 2018, 55, 396–406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Deodhar, S. Different eyes on the same prize: Implications of entry timing heterogeneity and incentives for contestant effort in innovation tournament. Inf. Technol. People 2020, 34, 526–556. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ogink, T.; Dong, J.Q. Stimulating innovation by user feedback on social media: The case of an online user innovation community. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2019, 144, 295–302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Han, L.; Roitero, K.; Gadiraju, U.; Sarasua, C.; Checco, A.; Maddalena, E.; Demartini, G. The Impact of Task Abandonment in Crowdsourcing. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 2021, 33, 2266–2279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Boons, M.; Stam, D. Crowdsourcing for innovation: How related and unrelated perspectives interact to increase creative performance. Res. Policy 2019, 48, 1758–1770. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dissanayake, I.; Zhang, J.; Gu, B. Task Division for Team Success in Crowdsourcing Contests: Resource Allocation and Alignment Effects. J. Manag. Inf. Syst. 2015, 32, 8–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Acar, O.A. Motivations and solution appropriateness in crowdsourcing challenges for innovation. Res. Policy 2019, 48, 103716. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Heo, M.; Toomey, N. Supporting sustained willingness to share knowledge with visual feedback. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2016, 54, 388–396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Piezunka, H.; Dahlander, L. Idea Rejected, Tie Formed: Organizations’ Feedback on Crowdsourced Ideas. Acad. Manag. J. 2018, 62, 503–530. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Liu, Y.; Liu, Y.M. The effect of workers’ justice perception on continuance participation intention in the crowdsourcing market. Internet Res. 2019, 29, 1485–1508. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chan, K.W.; Li, S.Y.; Ni, J.; Zhu, J.J. What Feedback Matters? The Role of Experience in Motivating Crowdsourcing Innovation. Prod. Oper. Manag. 2021, 30, 103–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Garcia Martinez, M. Solver engagement in knowledge sharing in crowdsourcing communities: Exploring the link to creativity. Res. Policy 2015, 44, 1419–1430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Soliman, W.; Tuunainen, V.K. Understanding Continued Use of Crowdsourcing Systems: An Interpretive Study. J. Theor. Appl. Electron. Commer. Res. 2015, 10, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Liu, T.X.; Yang, J.; Adamic, L.A.; Chen, Y. Crowdsourcing with All-Pay Auctions: A Field Experiment on Taskcn. Manag. Sci. 2014, 60, 2020–2037. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Battistella, C.; Nonino, F. Open innovation web-based platforms: The impact of different forms of motivation on collaboration. Innovation 2012, 14, 557–575. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tang, C.; Li, X.; Cao, M.; Zhang, Z.; Yu, X. Incentive Mechanism for Macrotasking Crowdsourcing: A Zero-Determinant Strategy Approach. IEEE Internet Things J. 2019, 6, 8589–8601. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xie, H.; Lui, J.C.S. Incentive Mechanism and Rating System Design for Crowdsourcing Systems: Analysis, Tradeoffs and Inference. IEEE Trans. Serv. Comput. 2018, 11, 90–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ebner, W.; Leimeister, J.M.; Krcmar, H. Community engineering for innovations: The ideas competition as a method to nurture a virtual community for innovations. RD Manag. 2009, 39, 342–356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Alam, S.L.; Campbell, J. Temporal Motivations of Volunteers to Participate in Cultural Crowdsourcing Work. Inf. Syst. Res. 2017, 28, 744–759. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brabham, D.C. Moving the crowd at threadless. Inf. Commun. Soc. 2010, 13, 1122–1145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xu, L.; Nian, T.; Cabral, L. What Makes Geeks Tick? A Study of Stack Overflow Careers. Manag. Sci. 2019, 66, 587–604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lee, J.; Park, H.; Zaggl, M. When to Signal? Contingencies for Career-Motivated Contributions in Online Collaboration Communities. J. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 2022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Johnson, E.; Liew Chern, L. Engagement-oriented design: A study of New Zealand public cultural heritage institutions crowdsourcing platforms. Online Inf. Rev. 2020, 44, 887–912. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bakici, T. Comparison of crowdsourcing platforms from social-psychological and motivational perspectives. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2020, 54, 102121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dissanayake, I.; Mehta, N.; Palvia, P.; Taras, V.; Amoako-Gyampah, K. Competition matters! Self-efficacy, effort, and performance in crowdsourcing teams. Inf. Manag. 2019, 56, 103158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sun, Y.; Wang, N.; Yin, C.; Zhang, J.X. Understanding the relationships between motivators and effort in crowdsourcing marketplaces: A nonlinear analysis. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2015, 35, 267–276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schäper, T.; Foege, J.N.; Nüesch, S.; Schäfer, S. Determinants of idea sharing in crowdsourcing: Evidence from the automotive industry. RD Manag. 2021, 51, 101–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tinati, R.; Luczak-Roesch, M.; Simperl, E.; Hall, W. An investigation of player motivations in Eyewire, a gamified citizen science project. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2017, 73, 527–540. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, W.; Gong, X. Motivation and sustained participation in the online crowdsourcing community: The moderating role of community commitment. Internet Res. 2020, 31, 287–314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fedorenko, I.; Berthon, P.; Rabinovich, T. Crowded identity: Managing crowdsourcing initiatives to maximize value for participants through identity creation. Bus. Horiz. 2017, 60, 155–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Frey, K.; Lüthje, C.; Haag, S. Whom Should Firms Attract to Open Innovation Platforms? The Role of Knowledge Diversity and Motivation. Long Range Plan. 2011, 44, 397–420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mack, T.; Landau, C. Winners, losers, and deniers: Self-selection in crowd innovation contests and the roles of motivation, creativity, and skills. J. Eng. Technol. Manag. 2015, 37, 52–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mazzola, E.; Piazza, M.; Acur, N.; Perrone, G. Treating the crowd fairly: Increasing the solvers’ self-selection in idea innovation contests. Ind. Mark. Manag. 2020, 91, 16–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Acar, O.A. Harnessing the creative potential of consumers: Money, participation, and creativity in idea crowdsourcing. Mark. Lett. 2018, 29, 177–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lee, C.K.M.; Chan, C.; Ho, S.; Choy, K.; Ip, W. Explore the feasibility of adopting crowdsourcing for innovative problem solving. Ind. Manag. Data Syst. 2015, 115, 803–832. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zheng, H.; Xie, Z.; Hou, W.; Li, D. Antecedents of solution quality in crowdsourcing: The sponsor’s perspective. J. Electron. Commer. Res. 2014, 15, 212–224. [Google Scholar]
- Jian, L.; Yang, S.; Ba, S.L.; Lu, L.; Jiang, L.C. Managing the Crowds: The Effect of Prize Guarantees and In-Process Feedback on Participation in Crowdsourcing Contests. Mis Q. 2019, 43, 97–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Shao, B.; Shi, L.; Xu, B.; Liu, L. Factors affecting participation of solvers in crowdsourcing: An empirical study from China. Electron. Mark. 2012, 22, 73–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pollok, P.; Lüttgens, D.; Piller, F.T. Attracting solutions in crowdsourcing contests: The role of knowledge distance, identity disclosure, and seeker status. Res. Policy 2019, 48, 98–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vrgović, P.; Jošanov-Vrgović, I. Crowdsourcing user solutions: Which questions should companies ask to elicit the most ideas from its users? Innovation 2017, 19, 452–462. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gillier, T.; Chaffois, C.; Belkhouja, M.; Roth, Y.; Bayus, B.L. The effects of task instructions in crowdsourcing innovative ideas. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2018, 134, 35–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Koh, T.K. Adopting Seekers’ Solution Exemplars in Crowdsourcing Ideation Contests: Antecedents and Consequences. Inf. Syst. Res. 2019, 30, 486–506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mazzola, E.; Acur, N.; Piazza, M.; Perrone, G. “To Own or Not to Own?” A Study on the Determinants and Consequences of Alternative Intellectual Property Rights Arrangements in Crowdsourcing for Innovation Contests. J. Prod. Innov. Manag. 2018, 35, 908–929. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Natalicchio, A.; Messeni Petruzzelli, A.; Garavelli, A.C. Innovation problems and search for solutions in crowdsourcing platforms—A simulation approach. Technovation 2017, 64–65, 28–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Körpeoğlu, E.; Cho, S.-H. Incentives in Contests with Heterogeneous Solvers. Manag. Sci. 2017, 64, 2709–2715. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Zhang, X.; Gong, B.; Cao, Y.; Ding, Y.; Su, J. Investigating participants’ attributes for participant estimation in knowledge-intensive crowdsourcing: A fuzzy DEMATEL based approach. Electron. Commer. Res. 2022, 22, 811–842. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, X.; Chen, S.; Zhao Yuxiang, C.; Song, S.; Zhu, Q. The influences of social value orientation and domain knowledge on crowdsourcing manuscript transcription: An empirical investigation of the Transcribe-Sheng project. Aslib J. Inf. Manag. 2019, 72, 219–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shi, X.; Pan, W.; Shan, W. Understanding the effects of personality traits on solver engagement in crowdsourcing communities: A moderated mediation investigation. Inf. Technol. People 2022, 35, 750–780. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Majchrzak, A.; Malhotra, A.; Zaggl, M.A. How Open Crowds Self-Organize. Acad. Manag. Discov. 2020, 7, 104–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhu, H.; Kock, A.; Wentker, M.; Leker, J. How Does Online Interaction Affect Idea Quality? The Effect of Feedback in Firm-Internal Idea Competitions. J. Prod. Innov. Manag. 2019, 36, 24–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Chan, K.W.; Li, S.Y.; Zhu, J.J. Fostering Customer Ideation in Crowdsourcing Community: The Role of Peer-to-peer and Peer-to-firm Interactions. J. Interact. Mark. 2015, 31, 42–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ren, R.; Yan, B.; Jian, L. Show me your expertise before teaming up. Internet Res. 2020, 30, 845–868. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Faullant, R.; Fueller, J.; Hutter, K. Fair play: Perceived fairness in crowdsourcing competitions and the customer relationship-related consequences. Manag. Decis. 2017, 55, 1924–1941. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Camacho, N.; Nam, H.; Kannan, P.K.; Stremersch, S. Tournaments to Crowdsource Innovation: The Role of Moderator Feedback and Participation Intensity. J. Mark. 2019, 83, 138–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Huang, N.; Burtch, G.; Gu, B.; Hong, Y.; Liang, C.; Wang, K.; Fu, D.; Yang, B. Motivating User-Generated Content with Performance Feedback: Evidence from Randomized Field Experiments. Manag. Sci. 2019, 65, 327–345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, M.-M.; Wang, J.-J. Understanding Solvers’ Continuance Intention in Crowdsourcing Contest Platform: An Extension of Expectation-Confirmation Model. J. Theor. Appl. Electron. Commer. Res. 2019, 14, 17–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Boons, M.; Stam, D.; Barkema, H.G. Feelings of Pride and Respect as Drivers of Ongoing Member Activity on Crowdsourcing Platforms. J. Manag. Stud. 2015, 52, 717–741. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bauer, J.; Franke, N.; Tuertscher, P. Intellectual Property Norms in Online Communities: How User-Organized Intellectual Property Regulation Supports Innovation. Inf. Syst. Res. 2016, 27, 724–750. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hanine, S.; Steils, N. Ideation contests: Crowd management and valorization to avoid negative feelings of participants. Creat. Innov. Manag. 2019, 28, 425–435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Leimeister, J.M.; Huber, M.; Bretschneider, U.; Krcmar, H. Leveraging Crowdsourcing: Activation-Supporting Components for IT-Based Ideas Competition. J. Manag. Inf. Syst. 2009, 26, 197–224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ren, J.; Ozturk, P.; Yeoh, W. Online Crowdsourcing Campaigns: Bottom-Up versus Top-Down Process Model. J. Comput. Inf. Syst. 2019, 59, 266–276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kohler, T. How to Scale Crowdsourcing Platforms. Calif. Manag. Rev. 2017, 60, 98–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Malhotra, A.; Majchrzak, A. Managing Crowds in Innovation Challenges. Calif. Manag. Rev. 2014, 56, 103–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schörpf, P.; Flecker, J.; Schönauer, A.; Eichmann, H. Triangular love–hate: Management and control in creative crowdworking. New Technol. Work Employ. 2017, 32, 43–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schäfer, S.; Antons, D.; Lüttgens, D.; Piller, F.; Salge, T.O. Talk to Your Crowd. Res. -Technol. Manag. 2017, 60, 33–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pacauskas, D.; Rajala, R.; Westerlund, M.; Mäntymäki, M. Harnessing user innovation for social media marketing: Case study of a crowdsourced hamburger. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2018, 43, 319–327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rosestiel Von, L. Grundlagen der Organisationspsychologie: Basiswissen und Anwendungshinweise [Basics of Organizational Psychology]; Schäffer-Poeschel: Stuttgart, Germany, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Ryan, R.M.; Deci, E.L. Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations: Classic Definitions and New Directions. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 2000, 25, 54–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, X.; Su, J.; Herrera-Viedma, E. A decision support model for estimating participation-oriented designs of crowdsourcing platforms based on quality function deployment. Expert Syst. Appl. 2022, 202, 117308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- May, A.; Ross, T. The design of civic technology: Factors that influence public participation and impact. Ergonomics 2018, 61, 214–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Year | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
No. of articles | 2 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 13 | 6 | 15 | 13 | 25 | 21 | 13 |
Solvers’ Behaviors | Major Indicators | No. of Relevant Articles |
---|---|---|
Participating in a KI-C platform | solvers’ self-expressed willingness to participate in a platform | 21 |
Choosing a task to participate in | solvers’ self-expressed willingness to participate in a task, the number of engaged solvers in a task, and task choice | 31 |
Making effort in a task | physical, cognitive, and emotional engagement of energies exerted in a task; number of solutions and comments that solvers submit in a task | 30 |
Contributing high-quality solutions | the quality of a solution evaluated by requesters, team rank in the contest, the likelihood of solution implementation, solution innovativeness, and solution appropriateness | 36 |
Continuous participation and contribution | solvers’ self-expressed willingness to participate and contribute further | 19 |
Categories | Specific Factors | Participating in a KI-C Platform | Choosing a Task to Participate in | Making Effort in a Task | Contributing High-Quality Solutions | Continuous Participation and Contribution |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Task attributes (37) | Monetary reward (21) | - | 10 | 11 | 5 | - |
Task complexity (7) | - | 4 | 3 | - | - | |
Task autonomy (6) | - | 3 | 3 | 2 | - | |
Task variety (6) | - | 3 | 3 | 2 | - | |
Task instruction (8) | - | 4 | 3 | 4 | - | |
Task in-process status (8) | - | 4 | 4 | - | - | |
Solver characteristics (22) | Domain expertise (10) | - | 2 | 2 | 7 | - |
Participation experience (5) | - | - | - | 3 | 2 | |
Cultural background (2) | - | 1 | 1 | 1 | - | |
Personality traits (6) | - | 3 | - | 3 | - | |
Interaction with peers (4) | - | - | 2 | 2 | - | |
Requester behaviors (19) | Fairness (7) | - | 1 | 2 | 1 | 4 |
Give feedback (13) | - | - | 6 | 5 | 4 | |
Platform designs (31) | System-generated visual feedback (5) | 4 | - | - | - | 2 |
Trustworthy (7) | 1 | - | - | - | 6 | |
Incentive design (17) | 9 | - | 2 | 5 | 2 | |
Foster a community (6) | 6 | - | - | - | 5 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Zhang, X.; Xia, E.; Shen, C.; Su, J. Factors Influencing Solvers’ Behaviors in Knowledge-Intensive Crowdsourcing: A Systematic Literature Review. J. Theor. Appl. Electron. Commer. Res. 2022, 17, 1297-1319. https://doi.org/10.3390/jtaer17040066
Zhang X, Xia E, Shen C, Su J. Factors Influencing Solvers’ Behaviors in Knowledge-Intensive Crowdsourcing: A Systematic Literature Review. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research. 2022; 17(4):1297-1319. https://doi.org/10.3390/jtaer17040066
Chicago/Turabian StyleZhang, Xuefeng, Enjun Xia, Chao Shen, and Jiafu Su. 2022. "Factors Influencing Solvers’ Behaviors in Knowledge-Intensive Crowdsourcing: A Systematic Literature Review" Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research 17, no. 4: 1297-1319. https://doi.org/10.3390/jtaer17040066
APA StyleZhang, X., Xia, E., Shen, C., & Su, J. (2022). Factors Influencing Solvers’ Behaviors in Knowledge-Intensive Crowdsourcing: A Systematic Literature Review. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research, 17(4), 1297-1319. https://doi.org/10.3390/jtaer17040066