How to invent a new business model based on crowdsourcing : the Crowdspirit ® case

Chesbrough's work on open innovation provides a theoretical framework to understand how firms can access external knowledge in order to support their R&D processes. The author defines open innovation as a paradigm that assumes that firms can and should use both external and internal ideas and internal and external paths to market. He considers that industrial R&D is undergoing a paradigm shift from the closed to the open model. Information and communication technologies and especially web 2.0 technologies accelerate this shift in so far they provide access to collective and distributed intelligence disseminated in the “crowd”. This phenomenon named “crowdsourcing” is defined by Jeff Howe as “the act of a company or institution taking a function once performed by employees and outsourcing it to an undefined - and generally large – network of people in the form of an open call.” Though this approach may sound appealing to firms and R&D organizations, there is little research available about the strategic use of crowdsourcing for innovation processes. In this paper we develop the argument that crowdsourcing raises a certain number of strategic issues that we discuss on the basis of a real size crowdsourcing experiment. We were associated in the project from the very outset up to the strategic analysis of the company. Our data is made up of the minutes of three strategic workshops with the managers that we completed step by step by additional theoretical study and some benchmarking of crowdsourcing experiments on the web. Although we started this collaboration with no other objectives than to help this company to design its optimal business model, this action research process has led us to address the following research questions: how can a firm create and capture value by means of a strategy based on crowdsourcing? What are the main strategic issues to be considered when a firm intends to open its innovation process through crowdsourcing? Due to the action research approach used, we do not dissociate the theoretical part from the empirical data, but rather to present our research process step by step. We therefore successively present the three main phases of the strategic analysis carried out with the Crowdspirit team: (1) elaboration of Crowdspirit business model; (2) value creation process related to profiles of crowdspirit community of contributors (3)Theoretical framework on business models based on crowdsourcing. In the conclusion we summarize the main strategic issues that emerged during this work on Crowdspirit's strategy with its managers, and interpret them on the basis of existing literature on open innovation. This leads us to complete Chesbrough's open innovation approach and Nambissan and Sawney network-centric innovation model by introducing new options for companies whose strategy is based on crowdsourcing.Open innovation, crowdsourcing, business models

How giving away CMT chip hardware implementations creates value for Sun microsystems

Thesis (S.M.)--Massachusetts Institute of Technology, System Design and Management Program, 2009.Includes bibliographical references (p. 79-81).This thesis uses systems thinking and system dynamics modeling to explore how open source communities such as OpenSPARC can lead to enhancement of the performance of Sun's multithreaded systems and thereby increase its market share by increasing its share of the CMT ecosystem, and the share that CMT systems have within the overall computer server business ecosystem. This study explores Sun's motivation behind its investment in the OpenSPARC community, and explains how OpenSPARC creates value for Sun. The insight into Sun's value creation and capture strategy gained from this study can be generalized and applied to similar companies who are entering a new market where the ecosystem is not yet fully developed. The companies who benefit most from this study are ones which are strategically positioned to disclose relevant knowledge of a critical component within the ecosystem that enables its development without thereby compromising the full potential for value capture within the market. The key findings of this study include: a) Market adoption of multitcore and multithreaded servers is dependent on the rewriting of software applications with parallelization in order to boost the performance of multicore and multithreaded systems. b) The overhaul of these software applications will take the coordination and involvement of all the major players in the computer industry. c) The specific business structure of Sun allows for open sourcing the components of its systems while still gaining revenue on the sale of the system as a whole.(cont.) d) Factors attracting open source developers to write software for a particular platform include a developer's belief that his program will be successful in the market. e) The information leakage to competitors from open sourcing Sun's multithreaded processor implementation does not diminish Sun's value capture of the market. f) The benefits that open source communities can have on market adoption of multicore and multithreaded servers, provided that the disclosure of the chip hardware implementation actually improves the technical performance and economics of the application software. This thesis will explore the reasons that Sun believes the open source community can be a catalyst for the wide-spread adoption of multithreaded processors and multithreaded software required simultaneously by all the major players in the computer industry.by Julie Mitchell.S.M

Experiential Approach to Social Platform Design: A Case of Social Travel Application

Digital platforms focusing on tourism have become increasingly popular as companies implement them to reach out to a broader audience (McKenna et al., 2018). However, there are limited practical design guidelines that help these platforms to create values beyond marketing and outreach. Hence, this study is an attempt to explore the current state of social platform design in the context of tourism and offer a new framework to design and evaluate the next generation of social travel applications. We used a case study including a series of end-user interviews to understand how different design features of social travel platforms shape users’ experiences and how they ultimately contribute to the platform’s survivability, scalability, and profitability. Our case study included the examination of market response to a mobile application recently launched to encourage and facilitate travel by connecting travelers through shared experiences and interests without the superficiality of social media. As part of this study, we developed a series of questions regarding the design, functionalities, utility, and overall user experience of this application. The data were collected through 90 email interviews of recently joined members with 10 open-ended questions. A total of 900 anonymous responses were recorded and openly coded. Then, we categorized initial codes into four categories, value capture, value communication, value creation, and value delivery. Each category consisted of a set of sub-categories that were associated with a set of platform design features and design outcomes (user experiences). The value creation category rendered the design features related to the application’s functions such as identifying the right events, finding a travel companion, and connecting to local tour guides. The design outcomes were mainly associated with the utility of such design for potential users. For example, the findings revealed that social connections offered by the application would fail to attract a large user base if they were not tied to explicit behavioral experiences such as travel co-planning, co-organization, and co- (e.g., following a user without being able to invite her to an event). The next category, value communication, mainly included the design features related to the navigation of the socialization opportunities offered by the application. The related design features mainly evoke users’ emotional experiences—the main reason behind user retention. A successful example of value communication was the gamification of discovering different travel destinations. Further, the value delivery category reflected the mechanisms that facilitate social experiences, from creating and participating in events to obtaining social recognition by rewards, discounts, or badges. These design features were the key to differentiating the application in the market. Lastly, the value capture category rendered how the platform should generate revenues through social mechanisms. The design features were related to the business model and associated mostly with cognitive experiences (e.g., the value of money, Offer relevance). The final set of features and user experiences was translated into a list of design recommendations. While we are not able to generalize these findings to other types of digital platforms, we believe the list of design features and corresponding affordances can help with more systematic investigations of similar platforms and ultimately successful design solutions

How to invent a new business model based on crowdsourcing: the Crowdspirit ® case

Chesbrough's work on open innovation provides a theoretical framework to understand how firms can access external knowledge in order to support their R&D processes. The author defines open innovation as a paradigm that assumes that firms can and should use both external and internal ideas and internal and external paths to market. He considers that industrial R&D is undergoing a paradigm shift from the closed to the open model. Information and communication technologies and especially web 2.0 technologies accelerate this shift in so far they provide access to collective and distributed intelligence disseminated in the “crowd”. This phenomenon named “crowdsourcing” is defined by Jeff Howe as “the act of a company or institution taking a function once performed by employees and outsourcing it to an undefined - and generally large - network of people in the form of an open call.”Though this approach may sound appealing to firms and R&D organizations, there is little research available about the strategic use of crowdsourcing for innovation processes. In this paper we develop the argument that crowdsourcing raises a certain number of strategic issues that we discuss on the basis of a real size crowdsourcing experiment. We were associated in the project from the very outset up to the strategic analysis of a start-up: Crowdspirit. The company's concept is based on the outsourcing of the entire R&D process to a community of designers and users, in the domain of consumer electronics. Our data is made up of the minutes of three strategic workshops with the managers that we completed step by step by additional theoretical study and some benchmarking of crowdsourcing experiments on the web. Although we started this collaboration mainly to help the company design its optimal business model, this action research process has led us to address the following research questions: how can a firm create and capture value by means of a strategy based on crowdsourcing? What are the main strategic issues to be considered when a firm intends to open its innovation process through crowdsourcing? Due to the action research approach used, we do not dissociate the theoretical part from the empirical data, but rather to present our research process step by step. We therefore successively present four main phases of the strategic analysis carried out with the Crowdspirit team: (1) The emergence of the Crowdspirit business model; (2) The value creation process related to profiles of crowdspirit community of contributors (3) The challenging of the company's initial business model and (4) The creation of a new business model successively open and closed models. In the discussion we summarize the main strategic issues that emerged during the work on Crowdspirit's strategy with its managers, and interpret them on the basis of existing literature on open innovation. This leads us to complete Chesbrough's open innovation approach and Nambissan and Sawney network-centric innovation model by introducing new options for companies whose strategy is based on crowdsourcing.Open innovation, crowdsourcing, business models

Reflections on Multiple Perspective Problem Framing

The researchers have developed a system of value innovation modelling founded on the application of a multiple perspective problem framing theory (English 2008). This approach has been used to map the attributes of 43 businesses in order to reveal untapped value in these organisations, as described in a previous paper (2010). The system considers both the attributes of a company and the experience of the researchers as parameters in a design problem. This paper aims to show how the process can reveal value by taking the reader through a step-by-step guide, incorporating case studies to demonstrate the relationship between concepts and the development of the researcher’s awareness. An integrated mapping activity provides a clear overview of the company and describes relationships between technology, intellectual property and commercialisation. This mapping process is used to reveal patterns and disharmonies, enabling the researchers to identify gaps and make connections that can lead to new business opportunities. This paper describes the mapping process in detail and the researchers reflect on the way that insights have been revealed through their development of new perspectives on each company

How innovation intermediaries are shaping the technology market? An analysis of their business model

In an era with abundant and widely distributed knowledge across the globe, technology markets became prominent. As technology transactions suffer from several market imperfections, a rapidly increasing number of various innovation intermediaries are facilitating these transactions. We analyse how a subset of these intermediaries create value in a two-sided market and how they can capture part of the value. A detailed analysis of the business model of 12 innovation intermediaries clarifies how these organizations improve the effectiveness of technology markets providing benefits for both sides of the market. We also look at managerial trade-offs between the use of intermediaries’ services and in-house innovation platforms.innovation intermediaries; open innovation; business model; two-sided markets

HR: Innovation\u27s Accelerator

[Excerpt] Amazon and Borders. Netflix and Blockbuster. Uber and taxi drivers. Digital camera makers and Kodak. The list could go on and on. Individual stories of disruptive innovation such as these are some of the most well known - and ca utionary - business tales of our times. Yet, many firms remain blindly confident that such an outcome will never happen to their company. Recent research suggests otherwise. According to a 2016 report by the innova tion -focused firm Innosight, high M&A activity and billion -dollar startup valuations are creating significant market turbulence, with 28 companies being replaced on the S&P 500 index in 2015 alone. At current churn rates, Innosight estimates that by 2026, half of the entire S&P 500 will be replaced-a staggering and sobering figure. As such, the ability to develop deep innovation capabilities has never been more important, for both growth and survival. This year\u27s CAHRs Research Assistant (RA) project takes on this very topic, examining the intersection between HR & Innovation, and how progressive HR leaders can create value and impact through a range of human capital strategies and solutions. Consistent with past CAHRS RA projects, the research methodology for this paper was qualitative in nature, including 41 interviews with HR and business executives at 31 different partner companies, all within the Fortune 500. Unique to this year\u27s project, and in addition to the traditional focus on HR leaders, research assistants also spoke with more than 10 business and innovation leaders, to get a richer, deeper view of innovation. Interviews consisted of 11 questions, but largely focused on three key categories: Why is innovation often so hard? What factors lead to innovation success? How can HR leaders be innovation change agents within their company? Our findings and recommendations follow below

London Creative and Digital Fusion

date-added: 2015-03-24 04:16:59 +0000 date-modified: 2015-03-24 04:16:59 +0000date-added: 2015-03-24 04:16:59 +0000 date-modified: 2015-03-24 04:16:59 +0000The London Creative and Digital Fusion programme of interactive, tailored and in-depth support was designed to support the UK capital’s creative and digital companies to collaborate, innovate and grow. London is a globally recognised hub for technology, design and creative genius. While many cities around the world can claim to be hubs for technology entrepreneurship, London’s distinctive potential lies in the successful fusion of world-leading technology with world-leading design and creativity. As innovation thrives at the edge, where better to innovate than across the boundaries of these two clusters and cultures? This booklet tells the story of Fusion’s innovation journey, its partners and its unique business support. Most importantly of all it tells stories of companies that, having worked with London Fusion, have innovated and grown. We hope that it will inspire others to follow and build on our beginnings.European Regional Development Fund 2007-13

On IP and secrecy : The relevance of intellectual property rights to design-led start-up businesses

This paper will unveil how design-led start-up businesses can enhance their growth potential through securing exclusive access to intellectual property (IP). Many design-led start-up companies commonly see themselves confronted with a dilemma in that they need funds for the design development of their offerings, prototyping, field tests etc., as well as for overheads on the one hand, and for IP on the other. In their book, 'The Smart Entrepreneur', Clarysse and Kiefer claim that 'Patents are particularly important when your business is not close to market, because the exclusivity afforded by a solid patent can buy you some time by preventing competitors from encroaching on your idea while you develop applications.' (p.127) The UK Design Council on the other hand suggests to 'Approach patenting with caution. Multinational cover is expensive and premature filing can do more harm than good' (www.designcouncil.org.uk). Clarysse and Kiefer admit that '...a patent suit can cost $10-15 million and drag on for several years' (p.93). This beckons the question as to what is the best IP strategy for a design-led start-up. Is a patent an effective means for start-ups to overcome competition? In search for an answer, this paper will show a range of case studies of award winning British designs including the SEA Interface, a patent-pending platform technology for building pressure-sensitive touch interfaces, Cupris, a smartphone-enabled clinical device that transmits data between patients and healthcare practitioners, Yossarian Lives, a novel metaphor-based database search engine, and Arctica, a highly sustainable ventilation system. The inventors of these technologies will be interviewed in relation to their IP strategy, and in relation to their personal views on the international patenting system. The comparative study of interviews will identify the best approach to IP protection for design entrepreneurs whose funds are limited. Through reconciling the seemingly opposed views expressed by the Design Council Design Council on the one hand, and Clarysse and Kiefer on the other, this paper will discuss how designers can optimize the form and timing for IP protection for their start-up businesses. The author has previously received a business development award from NESTA (The National Endowment for Science, Technology and the Arts), and was subsequently involved in the Design London business incubator scheme, which was the birthplace of some of the ventures listed above. He is now studying for PhD at the Department for Service Design at the Royal College of Art in London, UK.Peer reviewedSubmitted Versio

When will we learn: key factors and potential barriers

The overall aim of this research was to improve the dissemination of Lessons Learned in construction projects so that contractors’ project teams have access to the most relevant lessons at the most appropriate time, in the most appropriate format. The outcome of the research aimed to provide (1) an understanding of the different systems and tools used for recording Lessons Learned amongst major construction contractors; (2) an understanding of the needs in terms of what sort of lessons are required, the level of detail required and how best these should be made available; and (3) an approach on how best to disseminate Lessons Learned. The key objectives of the research were to: 1. Investigate current practice for recording and disseminating Lessons Learned; 2. Identify potential barriers for successfully disseminating Lessons Learned; and 3. Identify key factors affecting company processes to encourage a more systematic dissemination of Lessons Learned. The study was conducted in three phases. The first investigated contractors’ current practices for recording and disseminating Lessons Learned through a questionnaire survey. The second phase identified key factors that would encourage the institutionalisation of Lessons Learned and also the factors that inhibit their use. The third phase examined how current processes could be adapted to develop a process that would embed the systematic dissemination of Lessons Learned within an organisation’s existing practices. This report focuses on the second stage of the project that identified from the end users those factors that would encourage the institutionalisation of Lessons Learned and also the factors that inhibit their use of Lessons Learned