Governance of Web-Based Idea Management System Rewards: From the Perspective of Open Innovation
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Theoretical Framework
2.1. IMS Application Types and Outputs
2.2. Rewards
- The use of just non-financial rewards provides a larger number of ideas created per task than the use of only financial ones.
- The use of just non-financial rewards provides a larger number of ideas selected per task than the use of only financial ones.
- The use of mixed (financial and non-financial) rewards provides a larger number of ideas created per task than the use of only financial or non-financial ones.
- The use of mixed (financial and non-financial) rewards provides a larger number of ideas selected per task than the use of only financial or non-financial ones.
- The impact of mixed (financial and non-financial) rewards on the number of ideas generated and selected is different for different IMS.
- Do just non-financial rewards provide a larger number of ideas created/selected per task than only financial ones (hypothesis 1–2)?
- Do mixed rewards provide a larger number of ideas created/selected per task than only financial/non-financial ones (hypothesis 3–4)?
- Does the impact of mixed (financial and non-financial) rewards on the number of ideas generated and selected differ depending on the different IMS (hypothesis 5)?
3. Methods
3.1. Quantitative Research Instrument and Data Collection
3.2. Research Framework and Data Analysis
- Confirms (agree or strongly agree) the mixed-use of financial and non-financial rewards (F&N);
- Confirms (agree or strongly agree) the use of only financial rewards (FR);
- Confirms (agree or strongly agree) the use of only non-financial rewards (NR).
3.3. Triangulation
4. Results
4.1. Do Just Non-Financial Rewards Provide a Larger Number of Ideas Created/Selected per Task Than Only Financial Ones?
4.2. Do Mixed Rewards Provide a Larger Number of Ideas Created/Selected per Task Than Only Financial/Non-Financial Ones?
4.3. Does the Impact of the Mixed (Financial and Non-Financial) Rewards on the Number of Ideas Generated and Selected Differ Depending on the Different Types of IMS?
4.4. Expert Interview Results
- Financial rewards: for each generated idea, EUR 1 and a bonus to the next salary is given (EUR 5000 for the best idea); a prize of a EUR 500 gift card in-game shop; a 10% salary increase for the best idea author; The top ten authors receive each EUR 100, but the top three receive a EUR 1000 gift card in different shops.
- Non-financial rewards: one day as the boss; special badges for the number of generated ideas; one free day for the top ten contributors; a special concern for the person’s department, the potential to choose the food for the next office party.
- Mixed rewards: a surprise box from the company goods (value: EUR 75) and the title “Idea guru”; EUR 50 cents for each generated idea and badges in the IMS system; EUR 500 for the best idea creators and hockey tickets with the opportunity to meet the hockey team after the game.
4.5. Databases Qualitative Analysis Results
5. Discussion: Web-Based Idea Management System Rewards and Open Innovation
5.1. How to Reward Better?
5.2. Web-Based Idea Rewards System, and Its Way to Motivate Open Innovation
6. Conclusions
6.1. Theoretical and Practical Implications
6.2. Limitations
6.3. Future Research Directions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Chesbrough, H.; Marcel, B. Explicating open innovation: Clarifying an emerging paradigm for understanding innovation. In New Frontiers in Open Innovation; Chesbrough, H., Vanhaverbeke, W., West, J., Eds.; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2014; pp. 3–28. [Google Scholar]
- Bagherzadeh, M.; Markovic, S.; Cheng, J.; Vanhaverbeke, W. How does outside-in open innovation influence innovation performance? Analyzing the mediating roles of knowledge sharing and innovation strategy. IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag. 2020, 67, 740–753. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zobel, A.K. Benefiting from open innovation: A multidimensional model of absorptive capacity. J. Prod. Innov. Manag. 2017, 34, 269–288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gajdzik, B.; Wolniak, R. Smart Production Workers in Terms of Creativity and Innovation: The Implication for Open Innovation. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2022, 8, 68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Adner, R. Ecosystem as structure: An actionable construct for strategy. J. Manag. 2017, 43, 39–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Granstrand, O.; Holgersson, M. Innovation ecosystems: A conceptual review and a new definition. Technovation 2020, 90–91, 102098. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Markovic, S.; Bagherzadeh, M.; Dubiel, A.; Cheng, J.; Vanhaverbeke, W. Do not miss the boat to outside-in open innovation: Enable your employees. Ind. Mark. Manag. 2020, 90, 152–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- 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]
- Aqidawati, E.F.; Sutopo, W.; Pujiyanto, E.; Hisjam, M.; Fahma, F.; Ma’aram, A. Technology Readiness and Economic Benefits of Swappable Battery Standard: Its Implication for Open Innovation. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2022, 8, 88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Blanc, S.; Merlino, V.M.; Versino, A.; Mastromonaco, G.; Sparacino, A.; Massaglia, S.; Borra, D. The Role of Chocolate Web-Based Communication in a Regional Context: Its Implication for Open Innovation. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2022, 8, 84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hansen, G.V.; Dwyer, L.T. Electronic messaging system and the challenges for professional judgement. Int. J. Integr. Care 2019, 19, 273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Attipa, J.; Vatcharaporn, E. A collaborative system to improve knowledge sharing in scientific research projects. Inf. Dev. 2019, 35, 624–638. [Google Scholar]
- Aagaard, A. Idea Management in support of Pharmaceutical Front End of Innovation. Int. J. Technol. Policy Manag. 2012, 12, 373–386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mikelsone, E.; Volkova, T.; Liela, E. Practical Evidence of Web-Based Idea Management Systems: Classification and Application. In Proceedings of the 25th International Scientific Conference “Research for Rural Development 2019”, Riga, Latvia, 15–17 May 2019; pp. 268–275. [Google Scholar]
- Herrmann, T.; Roth, D.; Binz, H. Framework of An Ambidextrous Process Of Idea Management Supporting The Downstream Product Development Process. Proc. Des. Soc. Des. Conf. 2020, 1, 587–596. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sandstrom, C.; Bjork, J. Idea management systems for a changing innovation landscape. Int. J. Prod. Dev. 2010, 11, 310–324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Segers, J.P.; Franco, D.; Mikelsone, E. Ecologies of Biopharmaceutical Business Models and Aspects of Sustainability. In Book of Abstracts of the Scientific Conference on Economics and Entrepreneurship; RTU Press: Riga, Latvia, 2021; p. 14. [Google Scholar]
- Borghys, K.; Graaf, S.; Walravens, N.; Compernolle, M. Multi-Stakeholder Innovation in Smart City Discourse: Quadruple Helix Thinking in the Age of “Platforms”. Front. Sustain. Cities. 2020, 2, 5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Quandt, C.O.; Silva, H.D.F.N.; Ferraresi, A.A.; Frega, J.R. Idea management and innovation programs: Practices of large companies in the south region of Brazil. Int. J. Bus. Innov. Res. 2019, 18, 187–207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rodriguez, J.P.; Lorenzo, A.G. Open Innovation: Organizational Challenges of a New Paradigm of Innovation Management. Eur. Res. Stud. 2011, 1, 75–82. [Google Scholar]
- Messerle, M.; Binz, H.; Roth, D. Existing problems of idea evaluation and possible areas of improvements. In Proceedings of the 12th International Design Conference, Dubrovnik, Croatia, 21–24 May 2012; pp. 1917–1928. [Google Scholar]
- DeSanctis, G.; Poole, M.S. Capturing the Complexity in Advanced Technology Use. Adapt. Struct. Theory Organ. Sci. 1994, 5, 121–147. [Google Scholar]
- Ajjan, H.; Kumar, R.L.; Subramaniam, C. Information technology portfolio management implementation: A case study. J. Enterp. Inf. Manag. 2016, 29, 1–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dennis, A.R.; Garfield, M.J. The Adoption and Use of GSS in Project Teams: Toward More Participative Processes and Outcomes. MIS Q. 2003, 27, 289–323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Charlier, S.D.; Stewart, G.L.; Greco, L.M.; Reeves, C.J. Emergent leadership in virtual teams: A multilevel investigation of individual communication and team dispersion antecedents. Leadersh. Q. 2016, 27, 745–764. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gerlach, S.; Brem, A. Idea management revisited: A review of the literature and guide for implementation. Int. J. Innov. Stud. 2017, 1, 144–161. [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 SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Atlanta, GA, USA, 10–15 April 2010; pp. 2065–2074. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rapp, C.; Eklund, J. Sustainable development of a suggestion system: Factors influencing improvement activities in a confectionary company. Hum. Factors Ergon. Manuf. 2007, 17, 79–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brem, A.; Ziegler, S. Implementierung eines integrierten Ideenmanagements unter besonderer Berücksichtigung anreiz- und motivationstheoretischer Aspekte. Ideenmanagement 2009, 35, 35–45. [Google Scholar]
- Fairbank, J.; Spangler, W.; Williams, S.D. Motivating creativity through a computer-mediated employee suggestion management system. Behav. Inf. Technol. 2003, 22, 305–314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schmitz, K.; Teng, J.J.T.C.; Webb, K. Capturing the Complexity of Malleable IT Use: Adaptive Structuration Theory for individuals. MIS Q. 2016, 40, 663–686. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bayerl, P.S.; Lauche, K.; Axtell, C. Revisiting Group-Based Technology Adoption as a Dynamic Process: The Role of Changing Attitude-Rationale Configurations. MIS Q. 2016, 40, 775–795. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Masli, A.; Richardson, V.; Weidenmier, W.M.; Zmud, R.W. Senior Executives’ It Management Responsibilities: Serious It-Related Deficiencies and Ceo/Cfo Turnover. MIS Q. 2016, 40, 687–718. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wiener, M.; Mahring, M.; Remus, U.; Saunders, C. Control Configuration and Control Enactment in Information Systems Projects: Review and Expanded Theoretical Framework. MIS Q. 2016, 40, 741–789. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Diaz, A.A.; Doolin, B. Information and Communication Technology and the Social Inclusion of Refugee. MIS Q. 2016, 40, 405–416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ganju, K.; Pavlou, P.; Banker, R.D. Does Information and Communication Technology Lead to the Well-Being Of Nations? A Country-Level Empirical Investigation. MIS Q. 2016, 40, 417–441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Sabherwal, R.; Jeyaraj, A. Information Technology Impacts on Firm Performance: An Extension of Kohli and Devaraj. MIS Q. 2015, 39, 809–836. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bose, U. Design and evaluation of a group support system supported process to resolve cognitive conflicts. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2015, 49, 303–312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Deng, H.N.; Joshi, K.D.; Galliers, R.D. The Duality o Empowerment and Marginalization in Microtask Crowdsourcing: Giving Voice to the Less Powerful through Value Sensitive Design. MIS Q. 2016, 40, 279–322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ketter, W.; Peters, M.; Collins, J.; Gupta, A. A Multiagent Competitive Gaming Platform to Address Societal Challenges. MIS Q. 2016, 40, 447–460. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hyun, K.S.; Mukhopadhyay, T.; Kraut, R.E. When does Repository Kms Use Lift Performance? The Role of AlternativeKnowledge Sources and Task Environments. MIS Q. 2016, 40, 133–164. [Google Scholar]
- Mikelsone, E.; Liela, E. Discussion on the Terms of Idea Management and Idea Management Systems. J. Reg. Form. Dev. Stud. 2015, 3, 97–110. [Google Scholar]
- Selart, M.; Johansen, S.T. Understanding the Role of Value—Focused Thinking in Idea Management. Creat. Innov. Manag. 2011, 20, 196–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- MacCrimmon, K.; Wagner, K. Stimulating Ideas through Creative Software. Manag. Sci. 1994, 40, 1514–1532. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Girotra, K.; Terwiesch, C.; Ulrich, K.T. Idea Generation and the Quality of the Best Idea. Manag. Sci. 2010, 56, 591–605. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Korde, R.; Paulus, P.B. Alternating individual and group idea generation: Finding the elusive synergy. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 2016, 70, 177–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Deichmann, D. Idea Management: Perspectives from Leadership, Learning, and Network Theory. Ph.D. Thesis, ERIM, Rotterdam, The Netherland, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Ahmed, M.A.M.B. Staff suggestion scheme (3Ss) within the UAE context. Educ. Bus. Soc. Contemp. Middle East. Issues 2008, 2, 153–167. [Google Scholar]
- Frese, M.; Teng, E.; Wijnen, C.J.D. Helping to improve suggestion systems: Predictors of making suggestions in companies. J. Organ. Behav. 1999, 20, 1139–1155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dijk, V.C.; Ende Jan, V.D. Suggestion systems: Transferring employee creativity into practicable ideas. RD Manag. 2002, 32, 387–395. [Google Scholar]
- van Eck, N.; Waltman, L. VOSviwer Manual. Available online: https://www.vosviewer.com/documentation/Manual_VOSviewer_1.6.18.pdf (accessed on 1 January 2022).
- Boeddrich, H.J. Ideas in the workplace: A new approach towards organizing the fuzzy front end of the innovation process. Creat. Innov. Manag. 2004, 13, 274–285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Charles, A.A.; Chucks, O.K. Adopting the Kaizen suggestion system in South African lean automotive components companies. Sci. J. Bus. Manag. 2012, 2012, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lasrado, F.; Arif, M.Z.; Rizvi, A.H. The determinants for sustainability of an employee suggestion system. Int. J. Qual. Reliab. Manag. 2015, 32, 182–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Norbert, T. Grundlagen des Betrieblichen Innovationsmanagements; Königstein/Ts.: Hanstein, Germany, 1980. [Google Scholar]
- Wilson, G.; Plessis, D.; Marx, A.D. The use of suggestion systems as a tool to solicit input from internal customers. Interdiscip. J. Contemp. Res. Bus. 2010, 2, 212–223. [Google Scholar]
- Bothos, E.; Apostolou, D.; Mentzas, G. Collective intelligence with web-based information aggregation markets: The role of market facilitation in idea management. Expert Syst. Appl. 2012, 39, 1333–1345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Amabile, T.M. How to kill creativity. Harv. Bus. Rev. 1998. Available online: https://hbr.org/1998/09/how-to-kill-creativity (accessed on 2 December 2021).
- Fairbank, J.; Spangler, W.; Williams, S.D. Motivating creativity and enhancing innovation through employee suggestion system technology. Creat. Innov. Manag. 2001, 10, 68–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bartol, K.M.; Srivastava, A. Encouraging knowledge sharing: The role of organizational reward systems. J. Leadersh. Organ. Stud. 2002, 9, 64–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Neagoe, L.N.; Klein, V.M. Employee suggestion system (Kaizen Teian)—The bottom-up approach for productivity improvement. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Economic Engineering and Manufacturing Systems, Brasov, Romania, 26–27 November 2009; Volume 10, pp. 361–366. [Google Scholar]
- Carrier, C. Employee creativity and suggestion programs: An empirical study. Creat. Innov. Manag. 1998, 7, 62–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kankisingi, G.M.; Dhliwayo, S. Rewards and Innovation Performance in Manufacturing Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs). Sustainability 2022, 14, 1737. [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]
- Deutsches Institut für Betriebswirtschaft. DIB-Report: Benchmarking im Ideenmanagement; Deutsches Institut für Betriebswirtschaft: Frankfurt am Main, Germany, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Gerhart, B.; Ledford, G. Negative Effects of Extrinsic Rewards on Intrinsic Motivation: More Smoke than Fire. Worldatwork J. 2013, 16, 17–29. [Google Scholar]
- Deci, E.; Ryan, R.M. Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behavior; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 1985. [Google Scholar]
- Gagné, M.; Deci, E. Self-determination theory and work motivation. J. Organ. Behav. 2005, 26, 331–362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lepper, M.R.; Greene, D.; Nisbett, R.E. Undermining children’s intrinsic interest with extrinsic reward: A test of the “overjustification” hypothesis. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 1973, 28, 129–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Eisenberger, R.; Cameron, J. Detrimental effects of reward. Reality or myth? Am. Psychol. 1996, 51, 1153–1166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Frey, B.S.; Jegen, R. Motivation Crowding Theory: A Survey of Empirical Evidence. J. Econ. Surv. 2000, 51, 313027. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bock, G.W.; Kim, Y. Breaking the Myths of Rewards: An Exploratory Study of Attitudes about Knowledge Sharing. Inf. Resour. Manag. J. 2002, 15, 14–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Martikainen, A. Front End of Innovation in Industrial Organization. Master’s Thesis, University of Vaasa, Vaasa, Finland, 2017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mikelsone, E.; Spilbergs, A.; Segers, J.P.; Volkova, T.; Liela, E. Better Ideation Task Results in Web-Based Idea Management Systems. Businesses 2022, 2, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mikelsone, E.; Spilbergs, A.; Volkova, T.; Liela, E. Idea Management System Types and Creativity. Latvijas Zinātņu Akadēmijas Vēstis 2021, 75, 61–72. [Google Scholar]
- Moore, D.S.; McCabe, G.P.; Alwan, L.C.; Craig, B.A. The Practice of Statistics for Business and Economics, 4th ed.; W. H. Freeman & Co.: New York, NY, USA, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Hatice, O. The Influence of Intrinsic and Extrinsic Rewards on Employee Results: An Empirical Analysis in Turkish Manufacturing Industry. Bus. Econ. Res. J. 2012, 3, 29–48. [Google Scholar]
- Suhada, T.A.; Ford, J.A.; Verreynne, M.L.; Indulska, M. Motivating individuals to contribute to firms’ non-pecuniary open innovation goals. Technovation 2021, 102, 102233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cheng, X.; Fu, S.; de Vreede, T.; de Vreede, G.J.; Seeber, I.; Maier, M.; Weber, B. Idea Convergence Quality in Open Innovation Crowdsourcing: A Cognitive Load Perspective. J. Manag. Inf. Syst. 2020, 37, 349–376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Segers, J.P. The interplay between new technology based firms, strategic alliances and open innovation, within a regional systems of innovation context. J. Glob. Entrep. Res. 2015, 5, 17. Available online: https://hdl.handle.net/2268/207375 (accessed on 1 December 2021). [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Segers, J.P. The Interplay of Regional Systems of Innovation, Strategic Alliances and Open Innovation. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis. ULiège-Université de Liège: Liège, Belgium, 2017. Available online: https://hdl.handle.net/2268/207369 (accessed on 1 December 2021).
- Chesbrough, H.; Brunswicker, S. Managing Open Innovation in Large Firms; Fraunhofer Verlag: Stuttgart, Germany, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Temiz, S. Open Innovation via Crowdsourcing: A Digital Only Hackathon Case Study from Sweden. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2021, 7, 39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vermicelli, S.; Cricelli, L.; Grimaldi, M. How can crowdsourcing help tackle the COVID-19 pandemic? An explorative overview of innovative collaborative practices. R D Manag. 2020, 51, 183–194. [Google Scholar]
- 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]
- Wang, G.; Yu, L. The Game Equilibrium of Scientific Crowdsourcing Solvers Based on the Hotelling Model. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2019, 5, 89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Robbins, P.; O’Gorman, C.; Huff, A.; Moeslein, K. Multidexterity—A New Metaphor for Open Innovation. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2021, 7, 99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Segers, J.P.; Gaila-Sarkane, E. Big pharma’s search for a COVID-19 vaccine: Take It To The Limit! J. Innov. Manag. 2021, 9, I–VII. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mikelsone, E.; Volkova, T.; Spilbergs, A.; Liela, E. Idea management systems as a tool for goals’ setting & achieving and decision making. SHS Web Conf. 2021, 129, 05008. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wood, A. Managing employees’ ideas—From where do ideas come? J. Qual. Particip. 2003, 26, 22. [Google Scholar]
- Hober, B.; Schaarschmidt, M.; von Korflesch, H. Internal idea contests: Work environment perceptions and the moderating role of power distance. J. Innov. Knowl. 2021, 6, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Soleas, E. Leader strategies for motivating innovation in individuals: A systematic review. J. Innov. Entrep. 2020, 9, 1–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dikaputra, R.; Sulung, L.A.K.; Kot, S. Analysis of Success Factors of Reward-Based Crowdfunding Campaigns Using Multi-Theory Approach in ASEAN-5 Countries. Soc. Sci. 2019, 8, 293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Cândido, R.; Gonçalves, A.L.; Lemos, R.R. Information Visualization to Support Idea Management in IEEE Latin America. Transactions 2022, 20, 866–874. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Stages: | Stage 1—in Article Title and/or Keywords in the Article: | Stage 2—Directly about (Full Text Available): | Stage 3—Unique Sources: | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IM | IMS | IM | IMS | IM | IMS | |
Scopus | 66,459 | 28,860 | 126 | 42 | 234 | 86 |
Google Scholar | 5,200,000 | 5,080,000 | 82 | 29 | ||
Ebsco | 94 | 4 | 12 | 4 | ||
Web of Science | 406 | 38 | 62 | 13 | ||
Sum: | 5,266,959 | 5,108,902 | 282 | 88 |
What Is the Average Number of Ideas Created Per Task? | |
---|---|
Using internal idea management | None Up to 10 11–100 101–1000 1001–5000 5001–10,000 More than 10,001 |
Using external idea management | |
Using mixed idea management | |
Using active idea management (focused task) | |
Using passive idea management (unfocused task) | |
What Is the Average Number of Ideas Created Per Task? | |
Using internal idea management | None 1–5 6–10 11–20 21–50 51–99 More than 100 |
Using external idea management | |
Using mixed idea management | |
Using active idea management (focused task) | |
Using passive idea management (unfocused task) |
Data Gathering Method | Data Analysis | Period | Steps |
---|---|---|---|
Survey of the enterprises that apply web-based IMS (Sample size n > 400) | Statistical analysis | 3rd and 4th quarter of 2020 |
|
IMS Type | Reward | Ideas | F-Stat | p-Value | Significance |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Active | Financial | Created | 12.963 | 0.0004 | *** |
Passive | Financial | Created | 4.0121 | 0.0452 | * |
Internal | Financial | Created | 3.4522 | 0.0638 | . |
External | Financial | Created | 51.776 | 0.0000 | *** |
Mixed | Financial | Created | 6.0445 | 0.0143 | * |
Active | Financial | Selected | 7.8796 | 0.0052 | ** |
Passive | Financial | Selected | 3.6451 | 0.0553 | . |
Internal | Financial | Selected | 8.7913 | 0.0032 | ** |
External | Financial | Selected | 10.210 | 0.0015 | ** |
Mixed | Financial | Selected | 5.5665 | 0.0187 | * |
Active | Non-financial | Created | 9.3584 | 0.0023 | ** |
Passive | Non-financial | Created | 13.103 | 0.0003 | *** |
Internal | Non-financial | Created | 6.8891 | 0.0090 | ** |
External | Non-financial | Created | 4.6263 | 0.0323 | * |
Mixed | Non-financial | Created | 14.291 | 0.0002 | *** |
Active | Non-financial | Selected | 10.882 | 0.0010 | ** |
Passive | Non-financial | Selected | 6.8975 | 0.0089 | ** |
Internal | Non-financial | Selected | 6.4158 | 0.0116 | * |
External | Non-financial | Selected | 3.7024 | 0.0549 | . |
Mixed | Non-financial | Selected | 4.3474 | 0.0376 | * |
Active | Mixed | Created | 14.219 | 0.0002 | *** |
Passive | Mixed | Created | 4.1253 | 0.0425 | * |
Internal | Mixed | Created | 3.7841 | 0.0512 | . |
External | Mixed | Created | 25.217 | 0.0000 | *** |
Mixed | Mixed | Created | 17.287 | 0.0000 | *** |
Active | Mixed | Selected | 7.0893 | 0.0081 | ** |
Passive | Mixed | Selected | 3.8753 | 0.0487 | * |
Internal | Mixed | Selected | 3.0621 | 0.0760 | . |
External | Mixed | Selected | 3.4441 | 0.0641 | . |
Mixed | Mixed | Selected | 7.4953 | 0.0064 | ** |
Identifier | Sector | Position | Experience (Years) | Education |
---|---|---|---|---|
INT1 | Academical, private | Innovation consultant | 10 | Business administration |
INT2 | Private | Innovation Lead | 4 | Economics |
INT3 | Academical, private | Innovation consultant | 5 | Business administration |
INT4 | Public, academical | Innovation consultant | 6 | Economics |
INT5 | Private | Innovation Lead | 4 | Business administration |
INT6 | Academical, private | Innovation consultant | 7 | Business administration |
INT7 | Private, public | Innovation Lead | 8 | Economics |
INT8 | Private | Innovation consultant | 9 | Business administration |
INT9 | Private | Innovation Lead | 15 | Business administration |
INT10 | Academical, private | Innovation consultant | 11 | Business administration/Economics |
Main Question Field by IMS Type | Sub-Questions about Rewards in Relation to the Results |
---|---|
Active IMS application | Best rewards to increase idea quantity Best rewards to increase idea quality |
Passive IMS application | |
Internal IMS application | |
External IMS application | |
Mixed IMS application |
Main Analysis Fields | Sub-Questions about Rewards in Relation to Results |
---|---|
Active IMS application | Type of rewards Idea quality Idea quantity |
Passive IMS application | |
Internal IMS application | |
External IMS application | |
Mixed IMS application |
Reward’s Type | Observations | Ideas Created | Ideas Selected | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Mean | Standard Deviation | Mean | Standard Deviation | ||
Non-financial | 207 | 1616.3 | 2569.5 | 9.4 | 14.5 |
Financial | 51 | 3171.2 | 4048.0 | 19.2 | 31.3 |
Mixed | 171 | 3202.8 | 3270.2 | 12.6 | 14.9 |
Impact Type | Non-Financial Reward | Financial Reward | t-Statistic | df | t-Critical | p-Value | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Meani | ni | Meanj | nj | |||||
Ideas created | 1616.3 | 207 | 3171.2 | 51 | −2.6162 | 60.28 | 2.0003 | 0.9944 |
Ideas selected | 9.4 | 207 | 19.2 | 51 | −2.1720 | 55.37 | 2.0040 | 0.9829 |
Impact Type | Comparable Rewards Pairs | Meani | ni | Meanj | nj | t-Statistic | df | t-Critical | p-Value |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Ideas created | F&N vs. FR | 3202.8 | 171 | 3171.2 | 51 | 0.0511 | 70.57 | 1.9944 | 0.5203 |
F&N vs. NR | 3202.8 | 171 | 1616.3 | 207 | 5.1626 | 319.1 | 1.9674 | 0.0000 | |
Ideas selected | F&N vs. FR | 12.6 | 171 | 19.2 | 51 | −1.4509 | 56.94 | 2.0032 | 0.9238 |
F&N vs. NR | 12.6 | 171 | 9.4 | 207 | 2.1001 | 358.3 | 1.9666 | 0.0182 |
IMS Type | Means of Ideas Created | Means of Ideas Selected | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
F&N | FR | NR | Total | F&N | FR | NR | Total | |
Active | 5240.6 | 4948.7 | 2628.5 | 3694.9 | 21.4 | 24.5 | 15.6 | 17.7 |
Passive | 386.1 | 2119.4 | 385.2 | 633.3 | 3.4 | 14.4 | 4.4 | 5.3 |
Internal | 821.2 | 1710.5 | 1083.9 | 1016.9 | 11.5 | 13.9 | 10.8 | 10.9 |
External | 4841.9 | 5993.8 | 1572.5 | 3268.5 | 7.9 | 21.2 | 4.6 | 7.7 |
Mixed | 4724.3 | 1083.3 | 2411.5 | 2930.8 | 18.8 | 22.0 | 11.6 | 14.6 |
Impact Type | Comparable IMS Type Pairs | Meani | Meanj | t-Statistic | df | t-Critical | p-Value |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Ideas created | Active vs. External | 5240.6 | 4841.9 | 1.1994 | 338.7 | 1.9670 | 0.1156 |
Active vs. Mixed | 5240.6 | 4724.3 | 1.4978 | 340.0 | 1.9670 | 0.0676 | |
Ideas selected | Active vs. Mixed | 21.4 | 18.8 | 1.4140 | 324.3 | 1.9673 | 0.0792 |
Identifier | Active IMS Application | Passive IMS Application | Internal IMS Application | External IMS Application | Mixed IMS Application | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Created | Selected | Created | Selected | Created | Selected | Created | Selected | Created | Selected | |
INT1 | F&N | F&N | FR | FR | F&N OR FR | FR | F&N | FR | F&N | F&N or FR |
INT2 | F&N | F&N | F&N | F&N | F&N | F&N | F&N | F&N | F&N | F&N |
INT3 | F&N | FR | FR or F&N | FR | F&N ON FR | FR | F&N | FR | F&N | F&N or FR |
INT4 | FR OR F&N | FR | FR | FR | FR | FR OR F&N | FR OR F&N | FR | F&N | F&N |
INT5 | FR OR F&N | FR | F&N | FR | NR OR FR | FR OR F&N | FR OR F&N | FR OR F&N | F&N or FR | F&N or FR |
INT6 | F&N | F&N | FR | FR | F&N | FR | FR | FR | F&N | F&N or FR |
INT7 | FR OR F&N | FR OR F&N | F&N or FN | FR | NR | FR OR F&N | FR | FR OR F&N | F&N or FR | F&N or FR |
INT8 | FR OR F&N | FR OR F&N | F&N or FN | FR | FR | FR OR F&N | FR | FR | F&N | F&N |
INT9 | F&N | FR | F&N | FR | NR or FR | FR OR F&N | F FR OR F&N | FR OR F&N | F&N or FR | F&N or FR |
INT10 | F&N | F&N OR FR | FR | FR | F&N | F&N | F&N | FR | F&N | F&R |
N | F&N | FR | NR | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Active IMS application | 100 | 60% | 29% | 11% |
Passive IMS application | 29 | 31% | 69% | 0% |
Internal IMS application | 68 | 10% | 87% | 3% |
External IMS application | 51 | 24% | 75% | 2% |
Mixed IMS application | 10 | 70% | 20% | 10% |
N | F&N | FR | NR | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Active IMS application | 90 | 57% | 32% ↑ | 11% |
Passive IMS application | 23 | 17% | 83% ↑ | 0% |
Internal IMS application | 67 | 10% | 87% | 3% |
External IMS application | 51 | 24% | 75% | 2% |
Mixed IMS application | 7 | 57% | 29% ↑ | 14% |
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
Mikelsone, E.; Segers, J.-P.; Spilbergs, A. Governance of Web-Based Idea Management System Rewards: From the Perspective of Open Innovation. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2022, 8, 97. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc8020097
Mikelsone E, Segers J-P, Spilbergs A. Governance of Web-Based Idea Management System Rewards: From the Perspective of Open Innovation. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity. 2022; 8(2):97. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc8020097
Chicago/Turabian StyleMikelsone, Elina, Jean-Pierre Segers, and Aivars Spilbergs. 2022. "Governance of Web-Based Idea Management System Rewards: From the Perspective of Open Innovation" Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity 8, no. 2: 97. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc8020097