Internal Open Innovation—Lessons Learned from Internal Crowdsourcing at SAP
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Theoretical Background
2.1. Internal Crowdsourcing
2.2. Internal Open Innovation with Crowdsourcing
2.3. Managing the Crowd
2.3.1. Corporate Culture and Change Management
2.3.2. Incentive Design
2.3.3. Task Definition and Decomposition
2.3.4. Quality Assurance
2.3.5. Crowd Selection
2.3.6. Regulations Management
3. Methodology and Case Description
Company Description
4. SAP’s Internal Crowdsourcing Initiatives
4.1. Initiative 1: The InnOvaTor Challenge
4.2. Initiative 2: One Billion Lives (1BL)
Spotlight—Relief.iO
4.3. Initiative 3: Intrapreneurship with SAP.iO
Spotlight: Atlas & Ruum
4.4. Initiative 4: Internal Crowdsourcing of Human Resources (HR)
4.5. Initiative 5: SAP Blue
5. Lessons Learned
5.1. Lesson 1: Provide Dedicated Time Continuously
5.2. Lesson 2: Selection of Solutions Should Be Made by Experts
5.3. Lesson 3: Promote Bottom-Up Development, Demand Top-Down Support
5.4. Lesson 4: Better Integration of IC into the Overall Company-Wide Innovation Process
5.5. Lesson 5: Encourage Ownership of Ideas
5.6. Lesson 6: Openness and Transparency of the IC Process Is Key
6. Conclusions and Limitations
7. Limitations
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Chesbrough, H.W. Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology; Harvard Business Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2003; ISBN 1578518377. [Google Scholar]
- Bogers, M.; Chesbrough, H.; Heaton, S.; Teece, D.J. Strategic management of open innovation: A dynamic capabilities perspective. Calif. Manag. Rev. 2019, 62, 77–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chesbrough, H.W.; Bogers, M. Explicating open innovation: Clarifying an emerging paradigm for understanding innovation. In Open Innovation: New Frontiers and Applications; Chesbrough, H.W., Vanhaverbeke, W., West, J., Eds.; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2014; pp. 3–28. [Google Scholar]
- Laursen, K.; Salter, A. Open for innovation: The role of openness in explaining innovation performance among U.K. manufacturing firms. Strateg. Manag. J. 2006, 27, 131–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Leiponen, A.; Helfat, C.E. Innovation objectives, knowledge sources, and the benefits of breadth. Strateg. Manag. J. 2010, 31, 224–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Salge, T.O.; Farchi, T.; Barrett, M.I.; Dopson, S. When does search openness really matter? A contingency study of health—Care innovation projects. J. Prod. Innov. Manag. 2013, 30, 659–676. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- West, J.; Bogers, M. Leveraging external sources of innovation: A review of research on open innovation. J. Prod. Innov. Manag. 2014, 31, 814–831. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dahlander, L.; Gann, D.M. How open is innovation? Res. Policy 2010, 39, 699–709. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dahlander, L.; Jeppesen, L.B.; Piezunka, H. How organizations manage crowds: Define, broadcast, attract, and select. In Managing Inter-Organizational Collaborations: Process Views; Sydow, J., Berends, H., Eds.; Emerald Publishing Limited: Bingley, UK, 2019; pp. 239–270. ISBN 978-1-78756-592-0. [Google Scholar]
- Afuah, A.; Tucci, C.L. Crowdsourcing as a solution to distant search. Acad. Manag. Rev. 2012, 37, 355–375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Blohm, I.; Zogaj, S.; Bretschneider, U.; Leimeister, J.M. How to manage crowdsourcing platforms effectively? Calif. Manag. Rev. 2017, 60, 122–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Piezunka, H.; Dahlander, L. Distant search, narrow attention: How crowding alters organizations’ filtering of suggestions in crowdsourcing. Acad. Manag. J. 2015, 58, 856–880. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Surowiecki, J. The Wisdom of Crowds. Why the Many are Smarter than the Few and How Collective Wisdom Shapes Business, Economies, Societies, and Nations, 1st ed.; Doubleday: New York, NY, USA, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- Jeppesen, L.B.; Lakhani, K.R. Marginality and problem-solving effectiveness in broadcast search. Organ. Sci. 2010, 21, 1016–1033. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Geiger, D.; Schader, M. Personalized task recommendation in crowdsourcing information systems—Current state of the art. Decis. Support Syst. 2014, 65, 3–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Martinez, M.G.; Walton, B. The wisdom of crowds: The potential of online communities as a tool for data analysis. Technovation 2014, 34, 203–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Song, Z.; Zhang, H.; Dolan, C. Promoting disaster resilience: Operation mechanisms and self-organizing processes of crowdsourcing. Sustainability 2020, 12, 1862. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Giret, A.; Carrascosa, C.; Julian, V.; Rebollo, M.; Botti, V. A crowdsourcing approach for sustainable last mile delivery. Sustainability 2018, 10, 4563. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- 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]
- Zuchowski, O.; Posegga, O.; Schlagwein, D.; Fischbach, K. Internal crowdsourcing: Conceptual framework, structured review, and research agenda. J. Inf. Technol. 2016, 31, 166–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Benbya, H.; Leidner, D. How allianz UK used an idea management platform to harness employee innovation. MIS Q. Exec. 2018, 17, 139–155. [Google Scholar]
- Smith, C.; Fixson, S.K.; Paniagua-Ferrari, C.; Parise, S. The evolution of an innovation capability. Res. Technol. Manag. 2017, 60, 26–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Benbya, H.; van Alstyne, M.W. How to find answers within your company. MIT Sloan Manag. Rev. 2011, 52, 65–76. [Google Scholar]
- Bjelland, O.; Wood, R.C. An inside view of IBM’s ‘innovation jam’. MIT Sloan Manag. Rev. 2008, 50, 32–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Davis, J.R.; Richard, E.E.; Keeton, K.E. Open innovation at NASA: A new business model for advancing human health and performance innovations. Res. Technol. Manag. 2015, 58, 52–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bogers, M.; Zobel, A.-K.; Afuah, A.; Almirall, E.; Brunswicker, S.; Dahlander, L.; Frederiksen, L.; Gawer, A.; Gruber, M.; Haefliger, S.; et al. The open innovation research landscape: Established perspectives and emerging themes across different levels of analysis. Ind. Innov. 2017, 24, 8–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ferraris, A.; Santoro, G.; Bresciani, S. Open innovation in multinational companies’ subsidiaries: The role of internal and external knowledge. Eur. J. Int. Manag. 2017, 11, 452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Malhotra, A.; Majchrzak, A.; Kesebi, L.; Looram, S. Developing innovative solutions through internal crowdsourcing. MIT Sloan Manag. Rev. 2017, 58, 73–79. [Google Scholar]
- Posada, K.; Genis, O. Anreiz- und Prämiensystem im Ideenmanagement der SAP. Ideenmanagement Vorschlagswes. Wirtsch. Und Verwalt. 2011, 37, 48–50. [Google Scholar]
- Arcese, G.; Flammini, S.; Lucchetti, M.; Martucci, O. Evidence and experience of open sustainability innovation practices in the food sector. Sustainability 2015, 7, 8067–8090. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Bogers, M.; Chesbrough, H.; Strand, R. Sustainable open innovation to address a grand challenge. Br. Food J. 2020, 122, 1505–1517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cappa, F.; Del Sette, F.; Hayes, D.; Rosso, F. How to deliver open sustainable innovation: An integrated approach for a sustainable marketable product. Sustainability 2016, 8, 1341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Simula, H.; Ahola, T. A network perspective on idea and innovation crowdsourcing in industrial firms. Ind. Mark. Manag. 2014, 43, 400–408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Villarroel, A.J.; Reis, F. Intra-corporate crowdsourcing (ICC): Leveraging upon rank and site marginality for innovation. In Proceedings of the Crowd Conference, San Francisco, CA, USA, 4 October 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Henttonen, K.; Rissanen, T.; Eriksson, P.; Hallikas, J. Cultivating the wisdom of personnel through internal crowdsourcing. Int. J. Innov. Technol. Manag. 2017, 16, 117–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arena, M.; Cross, R.; Sims, J.; Uhl-Bien, M. How to catalyze innovation in your organization. MIT Sloan Manag. Rev. 2017, 58, 38–48. [Google Scholar]
- Elerud-Tryde, A.; Hooge, S. Beyond the generation of ideas: Virtual idea campaigns to spur creativity and innovation. Creat. Innov. Manag. 2014, 23, 290–302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Leung, N.; van Rooij, A.; van Deen, J. Eureka: Lessons learned from an evaluation of the idea contest at deltares. Res. Technol. Manag. 2014, 57, 44–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rao, D. Enterprise Crowdsourcing to Sustain Culture of Innovation. Available online: http://www.cio.in/opinions/enterprise-crowdsourcing-sustain-culture-innovation (accessed on 21 November 2018).
- Jette, A.; Breck, A.; Johns, R. Integrating balanced scorecard performance management with crowdsourced strategic planning. In Proceedings of the Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting, Washington, DC, USA, 11–15 January 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Simula, H.; Vuori, M. Benefits and barriers of crowdsourcing in B2B firms: Generating ideas with internal and external crowds. Int. J. Innov. Manag. 2012, 16, 1240011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Knop, N.; Blohm, I. Leveraging the internal work force through crowdtesting: Crowdsourcing in banking. In Proceedings of the ICIS 2018 Proceedings, San Francisco, CA, USA, 13–16 December 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Pollok, P.; Lüttgens, D.; Piller, F. How firms develop capabilities for crowdsourcing to increase open innovation performance: The interplay between organizational roles and knowledge processes. J. Prod. Innov. Manag. 2019, 36, 412–441. [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]
- Pedersen, J.; Kocsis, D.; Tripathi, A.; Tarrell, A.; Weerakoon, A.; Tahmasbi, N.; Xiong, J.; Deng, W.; Oh, O.; Vreede, G.-J.d. Conceptual foundations of crowdsourcing: A review of IS research. In Proceedings of the 46th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS 2013), Wailea, HI, USA, 7–10 January 2013; Sprague, R.H., Ed.; IEEE Computer Society: Washington, DC, USA, 2013; pp. 579–588. [Google Scholar]
- Zogaj, S.; Bretschneider, U. Analyzing governance mechanisms for crowdsourcing information systems: A multiple case analysis. In Proceedings of the ECIS 2014 Proceedings, Atlanta, GA, USA, 27–29 October 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Steinhuser, M.; Smolnik, S.; Hoppe, U. Towards a measurement model of corporate social software success—From an exploratory multiple case study. In Proceedings of the 44th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS 2011), Kauai, HI, USA, 4–7 January 2011; Sprague, R.H., Piscataway, N.J., Eds.; IEEE Computer Society: Washington, DC, USA, 2011; pp. 1–10, ISBN 978-1-4244-9618-1. [Google Scholar]
- Stocker, A.; Richter, A.; Hoefler, P.; Tochtermann, K. Exploring appropriation of enterprise wikis. Comput. Supported Coop. Work 2012, 21, 317–356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Scupola, A.; Nicolajsen, H.W. Reengineering the innovation culture through social media crowdsourcing. Det Dan. Ledelsesakademi 2012. Available online: https://vbn.aau.dk/en/publications/reengineering-the-innovation-culture-through-social-media-crowdso (accessed on 20 May 2020).
- Boudreau, K.J.; Lacetera, N.; Lakhani, K.R. Incentives and problem uncertainty in innovation contests: An empirical analysis. Manag. Sci. 2011, 57, 843–863. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Erickson, L.B. Leveraging the crowd as a source of innovation: Does crowdsourcing represent a new model for product and service innovation? In Proceedings of the 50th Annual Conference on Computers and People Research, Milwaukee, WI, USA, 31 May–2 June 2012; pp. 91–96. [Google Scholar]
- Abu El-Ella, N.; Stoetzel, M.; Bessant, J.; Pinkwart, A. Accelerating high involvement: The role of new technologies in enabling employee participation in innovation. Int. J. Innov. Manag. 2013, 17, 1340020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Riemer, K.; Overfeld, P.; Scifleet, P.; Richter, A. Oh, SNEP! The dynamics of social network emergence—The case of capgemini yammer. Bus. Inf. Syst. Work. Pap. Ser. 2012, WP2012-01, 1–16. [Google Scholar]
- Lopez, M.; Vukovic, M.; Laredo, J. People cloud service for enterprise crowdsourcing. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Services Computing, Miami, FL, USA, 5–10 July 2010; pp. 538–545. [Google Scholar]
- Skopik, F.; Schall, D.; Dustdar, S. Discovering and managing social compositions in collaborative enterprise crowdsourcing systems. Int. J. Coop. Inf. Syst. 2012, 21, 297–341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Bonabeau, E. Decisions 2.0: The power of collective intelligence. MIT Sloan Manag. Rev. 2009, 50, 45–52. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, G.; Yu, L. Analysis of enterprise sustainable crowdsourcing incentive mechanism based on principal-agent model. Sustainability 2020, 12, 3238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Dimitrova, S.; Scarso, E. The impact of crowdsourcing on the evolution of knowledge management: Insights from a case study. Knowl. Process Manag. 2017, 24, 287–295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhu, H.; Sick, N.; Leker, J. How to use crowdsourcing for innovation? A comparative case study of internal and external idea sourcing in the chemical industry. In Proceedings of the IEEE Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), Honolulu, HI, USA, 4–8 September 2016; IEEE: Portland, OR, USA, 2016; pp. 887–901. [Google Scholar]
- Muhdi, L.; Boutellier, R. Motivational factors affecting participation and contribution of members in two different swiss innovation communities. Int. J. Innov. Manag. 2011, 15, 543–562. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bailey, B.P.; Horvitz, E. What’s your idea? A case study of a grassroots innovation pipeline within a large software company. In Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Atlanta, GA, USA, 10–15 April 2010; pp. 2065–2074. [Google Scholar]
- Scupola, A.; Nicolajsen, H.W. The impact of enterprise crowdsourcing on company innovation culture: The case of an engineering consultancy. In Nordic Contributions in IS Research; Commisso, T.H., Nørbjerg, J., Pries-Heje, J., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switerland, 2014; pp. 105–120. ISBN 978-3-319-09546-2. [Google Scholar]
- Vukovic, M.; Naik, V.K. Managing enterprise IT systems using online communities. In Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE International Conference on Services Computing, Washington, DC, USA, 4–9 July 2011; Staff, I., Ed.; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2011; pp. 552–559. [Google Scholar]
- Ransbotham, S.; Westerman, G.F. Agency Conflict in Internal Corporate Innovation Contests. 2016. Available online: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2887679 (accessed on 20 May 2020). [CrossRef]
- Majchrzak, A.; Cherbakov, L.; Ives, B. Harnessing the power of the crowds with corporate social networking tools: How IBM does it. MIS Q. Exec. 2009, 8, 103–108. [Google Scholar]
- Young, C. Community management that works: How to build and sustain a thriving online health community. J. Med. Internet Res. 2013, 15, e119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Buettner, R. A systematic literature review of crowdsourcing research from a human resource management perspective. In 2015 48th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Rohrbeck, R.; Thom, N.; Arnold, H. IT tools for foresight: IT tools for foresight: The integrated insight and response system of deutsche telekom innovation laboratories. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2015, 97, 115–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dul, J.; Hak, T. Case Study Methodology in Business Research; Butterworth-Heinemann: Oxford, UK, 2008; ISBN 9780750681964. [Google Scholar]
- Yin, R.K. Case Study Research. Design and Methods, 5th ed.; SAGE: Los Angeles, CA, USA; London, UK; New Delhi, India; Singapore; Washington, DC, USA, 2014; ISBN 9781483302003. [Google Scholar]
- Núñez-Cacho, P.; Molina-Moreno, V.; Corpas-Iglesias, F.A.; Cortés-García, F.J. Family businesses transitioning to a circular economy model: The case of “Mercadona”. Sustainability 2018, 10, 538. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Grosse, M.; Send, H.; Schildhauer, T. Lessons learned from establishing the energy-informatics business model: Case of a German energy company. Sustainability 2019, 11, 857. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- de Massis, A.; Frattini, F.; Pizzurno, E.; Cassia, L. Product innovation in family versus nonfamily firms: An exploratory analysis. J. Small Bus. Manag. 2015, 53, 1–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- SAP. SAP Quartalsmitteilung Q4 2018. Available online: https://www.sap.com/docs/download/investors/2018/sap-2018-q4-mitteilung.pdf (accessed on 26 February 2019).
- Arnold, R. Von der weiterbildung zur kompetenzentwicklung. neue denkmodelle und gestaltungsansätze in einem sich verändernden handlungsfeld. Kompetenzentwicklung 1997, 97, 253–307. [Google Scholar]
- Khandelwal, D. Why CIOs Should Turn to Open Innovation. Available online: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/why-cios-should-turn-open-innovation-dilipkumar-khandelwal/ (accessed on 21 November 2018).
- Mishra, B.R. I Want India to Be the Most Innovative Place for SAP. Available online: https://www.rediff.com/business/interview/interview-i-want-india-to-be-the-most-innovative-place-for-sap/20160609.htm (accessed on 16 November 2018).
- Rao, D.; Gopalakrishnan, S. SAP Blue Crowd Sourcing Platform. Available online: https://www.sap.com/assetdetail/2017/01/ec00c061-a17c-0010-82c7-eda71af511fa.html (accessed on 21 November 2018).
- Menon, V. Innovation Stories from India Inc: Their Story in Their Words; Bloomsbury Publishing: London, UK, 2017; ISBN 9789386432704. [Google Scholar]
- Khandelwal, D. The New Art of Intrapreneurship. Available online: https://medium.com/sap-innovation-spotlight/the-new-art-of-intrapreneurship-c41e6e06c98d (accessed on 21 November 2018).
- Stieger, D.; Matzler, K.; Chatterjee, S.; Ladstaetter-Fussenegger, F. Democratizing strategy: How crowdsourcing can be used for strategy dialogues. Calif. Manag. Rev. 2012, 54, 44–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stephens, B.; Chen, W.; Butler, J.S. Bubbling up the good ideas: A two-mode network analysis of an intra-organizational idea challenge. J. Comput. Mediat. Commun. 2016, 21, 210–229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lüttgens, D.; Pollok, P.; Antons, D.; Piller, F. Wisdom of the crowd and capabilities of a few: Internal success factors of crowdsourcing for innovation. J. Bus. Econ. 2014, 84, 339–374. [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]
- Harrison, R.T.; Leitch, C. Voodoo institution or entrepreneurial university? Spin-off companies, the entrepreneurial system and regional development in the UK. Reg. Stud. 2010, 44, 1241–1262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Process Stage | Criterion | InnOvaTor Challenge | 1 Billion Lives | Intrapreneurship | HR Crowdsourcing | SAP Blue |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
preparation phase | Task | generating ideas and solutions for given or self-identified problems | identifying business ideas for internal start-ups | identifying business ideas for internal start-ups; advising and supporting employees during implementation | sourcing of employees for projects of the consulting unit | organizing product development across teams and locations |
crowd | global since 2017, previously only Germany | all SAP APJ employees to date; from 2018 onwards: all SAP employees | all SAP employees | consultants at SAP | all employees of SAP India; worldwide introduction planned | |
primary objective | competence development through long-term and in-depth engagement with forward-looking technologies | using SAP technologies to promote sustainable ideas with a high social impact | achieve agility and speed of start-ups in product development; gain competitive advantage | fast and efficient matching of demand and supply concerning specific employee profiles | fit between idea generators and developers; promote entrepreneurial thinking | |
secondary objectives | ideas can be transferred to the intrapreneurship program if necessary; values, norms and innovative corporate culture can be conveyed | establishing an entrepreneurial way of thinking; external impact through social commitment | convey an entrepreneurial mindset; identify capable employees and teams | recording qualifications of employees in the consulting department | generate competitive advantages; faster development; efficient use of resources | |
incentive design | partly material bonuses; enable learning of new skills and deepening of existing ones | implement sustainable ideas with significance; gather experience and knowledge around the establishment of a start-up; career prospects through start-up; start-up capital of 200,000 EUR; 20% of working time for implementation | the joy of implementing your idea; gathering experience and knowledge about starting a start-up; agile working environment; recognition by colleagues; career prospects through founding a business | be able to select projects yourself; pursue your interests | pursue individual interests; self-realization; use, share and expand abilities | |
tool | generic software (SAP Jam and e-mail); introduction of specific solution planned (SAP Innovation Management) | specific solution (SAP Innovation Management) and SAP Jam for team collaboration | specific solution (SAP Innovation Management) | generic software (e-mail) | no information | |
intellectual property rights | owned by SAP | owned by SAP | owned by SAP | irrelevant | no information | |
commitment | bottom-up approach; small team which carries out project in part-time work; high credibility among employees | high annual budget and openly communicated to the outside world; top-down approach | bottom-up approach; nowadays direct support of the executive board; very effective in public relations; comparatively many employees | top-down approach | no information | |
resources | 200–300 EUR per team for hardware purchases; coaches and mentors; expert network | 1 million EUR per year; coaches and mentors, expert network, workshops; accelerator | independent business unit with many employees; seed investments; mentoring program; workshops; accelerator | HR department | no hierarchies, self-sufficient as far as possible; team to select and evaluate the most valuable ideas | |
execution phase | frequency and duration | specific campaign; once a year for six months | specific campaign, once a year | permanent open call; specific campaigns in the form of business plan competitions and hackathons | permanent use with specific calls | permanent use with specific calls |
submission mode | competitive between teams, collaborative inside teams | Competitive between teams, collaborative inside teams | competitive between teams, collaborative inside teams | competitive | competitive | |
submission format | closed submission; no collaboration possible on submission platform | open and transparent platform; commenting, evaluation and collaboration possible | open and transparent platform; commenting, evaluation and collaboration possible | closed submission | open and transparent platform; commenting, evaluation and collaboration possible | |
evaluation stage | evaluation criteria / evaluation mode | jury voting after final presentation of the results at a closing event | crowdvoting results; expert votings according to feasibility, social significance; combination of the results of the expert voting, crowdvoting and final presentation | team composition; submission of a video; complex catalogue of criteria; small circle of experts conducts evaluation; final presentation after accelerator phase | fit with required qualifications; fit with the inquiring customer; qualifications of the applicant; job interview with the customer | idea providers evaluate submitters themselves based on the submitted solution proposal |
implementation stage | accomplishments | 2016: 35 participants; 2017: 400 participants; 2018: similar to 2017 | 2016: almost 100 ideas and three start-ups; 2017: >90 ideas and five start-ups | more than 1500 business ideas have already been evaluated; six start-ups received funding | no information | 128 projects with around 600 participants in the first two years; product and process innovations have already been incorporated into the SAP portfolio |
© 2020 by the author. 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 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Pohlisch, J. Internal Open Innovation—Lessons Learned from Internal Crowdsourcing at SAP. Sustainability 2020, 12, 4245. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12104245
Pohlisch J. Internal Open Innovation—Lessons Learned from Internal Crowdsourcing at SAP. Sustainability. 2020; 12(10):4245. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12104245
Chicago/Turabian StylePohlisch, Jakob. 2020. "Internal Open Innovation—Lessons Learned from Internal Crowdsourcing at SAP" Sustainability 12, no. 10: 4245. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12104245