crowdsourcing a pandemonium for disruptive innovation
TRANSCRIPT
-
7/27/2019 Crowdsourcing A Pandemonium for disruptive innovation
1/34
MAInnova)onManagement 2010-12
Crowdsourcing
A Pandemonium for Disruptive Innovation
Cristbal Ortiz Ehmann
Master of Arts Innovation ManagementCentral Saint Martins College of Art & Design, London
This article is based on the dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirement ofthe degree of Master of Arts in Innovation Management at Central Saint Martins College ofArt & Design, London.
The original dissertation includes four elements: a hypothesis, a research plan, a criticalevaluative report, a feasibility report and the appendix.
Only bibliography relevant to this article has been included in the respective section.
For any questions or inquiries please contact the author at: [email protected]
-
7/27/2019 Crowdsourcing A Pandemonium for disruptive innovation
2/34
Contents
Introduction! 3
What is the degree of innovation that an online community hasbrought about for an organisation?! 6
The concept of innovation! 6
The concept of crowdsourcing! 8
Current results of crowdsourcing initiatives! 9
What could be the possible reasons for the results discovered?! 11
Can disruptive innovations be actively brought about?! 11
Can groups, as opposed to individuals, cause disruptive innovations?! 11
Can online communities produce disruptive innovations?! 12
Is the design of the online crowdsourcing process adequate to realise
disruptive innovations?!
12
Do external factors pertaining to the sponsoring organisations inhibit the
development of disruptive innovations?! 15
How could these crowdsourcing systems evolve in the future?! 19
Bibliography! 22
2
-
7/27/2019 Crowdsourcing A Pandemonium for disruptive innovation
3/34
Introduc)on
Some changes are so radical that they can mean the end of established things or systems.
These disruptions seem to emerge and change the whole landscape of the known world.
What is remarkable about this phenomenon is the fact that they seem to be unforeseeable
and non- influenceable.
Design thinking is a way of transforming things and systems. This approach to
solving problems was developed by design practitioners. In the last two decades this
practice has been so successful that it is competing shoulder to shoulder with established
consulting companies (Hyatt 2010). Its success has been ascribed by the coiners of the
term design thinking to a deep human-centredness of the practice and the resulting
products and services. This human-centredness has been described not only as the ability
to analyse and rationalise but also as the capacity to think intuitively, recognise patterns
and to construct ideas that have emotional meaning (Brown & Wyatt 2010). This design
thinking, as opposed to traditional consultancies, includes the human factor and all that it
means to be human in the value creation loop.
Crowdsourcing is one way to place the human factor at the front-end1 of the value
creation loop. It entails leveraging a large number of people to accomplish certain tasks by
using information and communication technology. On the one hand, the involvement of a
large crowd of people might increase the likelihood that those emotional human traits,
harnessed by design thinking and presumably neglected by other practices, are taken into
account.
On the other hand, according to the philosophical thoughts of Manuel de Landa in
War in the Age of Intelligent Machines, information-processing technology has allowed a
3
1 Front end is a generalised term borrowed from computer science that refers to the initial stage of a process.
In the context of innovation the front end is the stage at which input is collected in various forms from asource. This input is then funnelled down to a reduced set of options that is then implemented. In general theinput is processed and transformed to conform to specifications the back end can adopt and use. The frontend is an interface between the source and the back end
-
7/27/2019 Crowdsourcing A Pandemonium for disruptive innovation
4/34
high amount of interactivity. Resulting open networks used for collective decision-making
allow the machinic phylum2 to cross between many human beings (de Landa 1991, p.
291). Furthermore, de Landa posits, they allow for the creation of the Pandemonium, an
abstract machine concrete enough to allow the control of physical processes, but abstract
enough to allow the spontaneous emergence of order out of chaos (de Landa 1991, p.
291). These pandemoniac conditions seem to resemble those identified at the onset of
disruptive innovations. The beginning of the Internet is a good example of this state. On
one hand, the connection of computers was minimally organised through a common
language and, on the other hand, the usage and benefit of a network of talking
computers was not yet clear to anyone.
The combination of crowdsourcing as a form of open network, which places the
human at the centre of creative endeavours and De Landas surmise as described above
lead to the following assumption:
Organisations will be able to bring about disruptive innovations through the
deployment of crowdsourcing initiatives.
This assumption makes it worth exploring a few notions in the current literature and
discourses concerning collaboration, the role of ICT technology and the innovation new
types of collaboration can bring about. A discourse analysis of the statements the Occupy
Wallt Street movement has produced reveals that the current economic and political
system is not human centred and not based on social consensus. The movement
demands more self-determination and democracy. The discourse analysis has also shown
that these new behaviours might have their origins in the way humans interact with new
technologies and the higher connectivity it enables.
4
2 Manuel de Landa has borrowed this term from Gilles Deleuze to refer to the overall set of self-organizingprocesses in the universe. These include all processes in which a group of previously disconnected elementssuddenly reaches a critical point at which they begin to "cooperate" to form a higher level entity (de Landa,1991, p. 6 and 7)
-
7/27/2019 Crowdsourcing A Pandemonium for disruptive innovation
5/34
Scholars seem to agree that an undefined group of people collaborating off-line or
online can make better decisions than individuals. However, the expert voices are not clear
whether online collaboration can produce innovation. Three different approaches,
corporate strategy, technology & engineering and design thinking, have become common
practice to bring about this type of change. However, their effectiveness and the degree of
radicalness they can bring about is very much contested as well. The literature review also
reveals that there are no unambiguous and generally accepted definitions of innovation.
These discourses lead to the question of the disruptive innovations that online
collaboration has produced so far. Furthermore, it is worth investigating the possible
reasons for the results discovered as they might give an indication about how these
systems might evolve in the future.
5
-
7/27/2019 Crowdsourcing A Pandemonium for disruptive innovation
6/34
Whatisthedegreeofinnova)onthatan
onlinecommunityhasbroughtaboutforanorganisa)on?
This chapter discusses the current results of crowdsourcing initiatives. In a first step and
for the purpose of answering this very first question it is necessary to establish a common
understanding of the concepts involved. The main concepts to be defined are 'disruptive
innovation and 'crowdsourcing'3.
Theconceptofinnova.on
Since there is no 'single or official or widely accepted definition' (Green, 2010) of the
term innovation, it is necessary to resort to a variety of different sources and synthesise
new definitions to check the validity of the assumption. For the term innovation the
following definition has been synthesised through the combination of different statements
from the current discourses: A new thing or system, which didnt exist before. It is neither a
solution to an existing problem (Green, 2010) nor the satisfaction of a current demand
(Briggs 2012), but it generates value by itself and is therefore adopted by a large number
of people over a certain period of time (Christensen, 1997).
This definition has been extended to include theories of innovation established by
Christensen in the Innovators dilemma4 in order to setup a definition for disruptive
innovation:
A disruptive innovation5 is a new thing or system, which didnt exist before. It is
neither a solution to an existingproblem nor the satisfaction of a current demand, but it
6
3 The present section does not pretend nor adhere to generally accepted definitions; it does not pretend toset conclusive definitions either. It merely tries to determine the scope and the boundaries of the meaningsfor further use in this research. Definitions established here will serve solely as a common platform forunderstanding and will not be conclusive.
4
In order to produce a more generally applicable definition of Christensen's findings the scope has beenbroadened by borrowing the terminology of 'deterritorialisation' and 'reterritorialisation' from Deleuze &Guattari; as well as 'actor' and 'things' from the Actor Network Theory.
5 The terms disruptive innovations and breakthrough innovations will be used in this paper indistinctively
-
7/27/2019 Crowdsourcing A Pandemonium for disruptive innovation
7/34
generates value by itself and is therefore adopted by a large number of people over a
certain period of time. This new thing or system is usually created by a deterritorialised
actor at the fringes of an established cultural6 network of actors and things, that is, at a
point where the forces of control and power are dampened, and possibly the conditions
tend to be chaotic. It is measured according to an unconventional set of values, attributes
and their performance trajectories. Established institutions of control and power refuse it
for its misalignment to the predominating set of values. Eventually this new thing or system
moves out of the current cultural circle and triggers the expansion of a new and formerly
non-existent network of actors and things and at some point reterritorialises by overtaking
the performance of the old value system; and thus inhibits continuity of the established
cultural network.
Image1|Courseofdisrup2veinnova2on
7
6 The word cultural is used in this context in its widest sense to include all types of culturally linked people,so that not only corporate culture is included but also other types of cultural networks.
-
7/27/2019 Crowdsourcing A Pandemonium for disruptive innovation
8/34
Examples of disruptive innovations are steam technology, which led to the replacement of
sailing ships by steam-powered ships (De Landa 1991, p. 68). Or hydraulics technology,
which has led to the replacement of mechanical steam powered earthmoving equipment
(Christensen 1997, pp. 6176).
Theconceptofcrowdsourcing
Increased interaction through ICT technology has allowed online crowds to contribute to
several types of tasks. This type of mass contribution to a specific task has been identified
and subsumed under the term crowdsourcing by Jeff Howe (Howe, 2006).
Taking De Landas assumption in its broadest sense crowdsourcing could be
defined as self-organisation of an online crowd that collaborates for a shared goal. A
narrower definition, which fits the purpose of hierarchical organisations might be the
definition offered by Daren C. Brabham (no date) in Crowdsourcing:
Crowdsourcing is an online, distributed problem solving and production model.
Crowdsourcing blends open innovation7concepts with top-down, traditional
management structures so that crowdsourcing organizations can effectively tap the
collective intelligence of online communities for specific purposes.
There are many types of online platforms that generate crowdsourcing. They differ from
each other according to the design of the following components: initiative8,9, brief, sponsor,
crowd and interaction.
8
7 The expression open innovation has been coined by Henry Chesbrough in 2003 to describe a newresearch and development paradigm in which organisational boundaries become more permeable to outsideand inside knowledge flows and thus expedites possible innovation efforts within organisations.
8 In this paper the term initiative and challenge will be used indistinctively.
9 Daren C. Brabham (2011) distinguishes four types: the knowledge discovery and management approach(peertopatent.org), the broadcast search approach (innocentive.com, mathworks.com or topcoder.com), thepeer-vetted creative production approach (threadless.com), and distributed human intelligence tasking(mturk.com).
-
7/27/2019 Crowdsourcing A Pandemonium for disruptive innovation
9/34
Irrespective of the possible types of crowdsourcing, this paper will only examine the
approach that deals with creating and selecting creative ideas (Brabham, 2011, p. 6) and
where there are 'primarily...cooperative relationships among one another with a substantial
amount of technology sharing and deliberate spillovers' (Boudreau & Lakhani, 2009, p.
70). Unlike other types of initiatives10, here the crowd is required to collaborate and funnel
down their inputs. Furthermore the only crowdsourcing purpose considered for the present
research will be the one in which the sponsor expressively intends to innovate irrespective
of the personal understanding of the term innovation.
Currentresultsofcrowdsourcingini.a.ves
A worldwide leading crowdsourcing company11 has provided a large amount of data
related to hundred and twenty three crowdsourcing initiatives carried out between late
2008 and late 2011. Each initiative has produced several ideas of which none, one or more
were awarded a prize by the sponsor and one idea received the highest amount of votes
by participants of the crowd. The best prized idea as well as the most voted idea of each
initiative have been weighted and ranked according to their degree of innovation and
disruptiveness12. This ranking has been developed by asking yes or no questions derived
from the definition of disruptive innovation established earlier. Possible marks range from
0 (lowest) to a maximum of 7 (highest). The average degree of innovation for the best-
prized ideas resulted in a mark of '2.9' and for the most voted ideas '3.8' out of a maximum
of 7 points. Although the most voted ideas have rated significantly higher than the best-
prized ones, both rates are rather low. A qualitative analysis of other cases support these
results. According to Aitamurto, Leiponen & Tee (2011) the results delivered by the crowd
9
10 Due to the irrelevance of these other types of crowdsourcing it is deemed unnecessary to explain them inmore depth.
11 The name of this company will remain undisclosed for confidentiality reasons, any related bibliographicalindications have been removed as well.
12 To simplify matters this degree will be called from here on innovation index.
-
7/27/2019 Crowdsourcing A Pandemonium for disruptive innovation
10/34
at an internal company challenge of Dell were 'regular customer feedback rather than
more elaborate or sophisticated business or innovation ideas. A content analysis of
several case studies published by the crowdsourcing company Brightidea reveals that the
results do show low levels breakthrough innovation as well.
10
-
7/27/2019 Crowdsourcing A Pandemonium for disruptive innovation
11/34
Whatcouldbethepossiblereasonsfortheresults
discovered?
From a global view the reason for these poor results can only be the following:
a. Disruptive innovations cannot actively be brought about, they happen without
the possibility to influence them.
b. Only individuals, as opposed to groups, can bring about disruptive innovations.
c. A group of people interacting online cannot produce disruptive innovations.
d. The design of the online crowdsourcing process is not sufficient to produce
disruptive innovations.
e. External factors related to the organisations initiating the crowdsourcing
challenges inhibit the development of disruptive innovations.
Candisrup.veinnova.onsbeac.velybroughtabout?
Most disruptive innovations come about by a paradigm shift in the way something is
understood and accepted by a larger community (Kuhn, 1962). There is no evidence that
any shift in paradigm has been realised with previous knowledge of the transformation
these shifts will cause, let alone planned and executed accordingly to the results wished
for. No conclusive answer can be given regarding point a) yet. But the elements and
circumstances that led to a paradigm shift can be studied and understood. Therefore it
stands to reason that by recreating similar conditions shifts in paradigm can be caused
deliberately.
Cangroups,asopposedtoindividuals,causedisrup.veinnova.ons?
Disruptive innovation is kicked off by an initial act of creativity, be it by an individual or by a
group. Nevertheless, current literature (Leadbeater, 2009; Johnson, 2011; Paulus &
Nijstad, 2003; Tapscott & Williams, 2008; Surowiecki, 2005) demonstrates that groups of
people perform better when it comes to decision-making and creativity.
11
-
7/27/2019 Crowdsourcing A Pandemonium for disruptive innovation
12/34
Canonlinecommuni.esproducedisrup.veinnova.ons?
According to Dennis & Williams (2003) there are two factors that foster and five that impair
creativity13. As opposed to offline groups, online groups only have one impairing factor and
this is social loafing14. But social loafing can only be present when individuals collaborating
in a group expect to be evaluated and monitored. And the expectation of being evaluated
and individually accountable is related to extrinsic motivation (Amabile, 1997). Extrinsic
motivations are most often detrimental to creativity (Amabile, 1996, cited in Hennessey,
2003, p. 197). The participants of the analysed crowdsourcing initiatives, however, engage
voluntarily through an open call, that is motivated intrinsically and therefore the negative
effects of social loafing should be minor or non-existent.
Isthedesignoftheonlinecrowdsourcingprocess
adequatetorealisedisrup.veinnova.ons?
A further reason that could explain the poor results is the design of the crowdsourcing
process. There are three dimensions to the crowdsourcing process. The first dimension is
the setting of the variables. The second is the design of the crowdsourcing tool and the
last one is how the crowdsourcing tool is deployed within the innovation process.
Sengofthevariables
The following variables seem to have an influence on the outcome of any crowdsourcing
initiative:
The size of the crowd: According to Dennis & Williams (2003) groups withcomputerised support increase their creativity performance with increasing group
size.
12
13 According to Dennis & Williams (2003) the factors that improve creativity performance are synergy and
social facilitation, whereas factors that impair creativity performance are production blocking, social loafing,evaluation apprehension, cognitive interference and communication speed.
14 Social loafing is 'the tendency for individuals to expend less effort when working in a group than whenworking individually' (Dennis & Williams, 2003, p. 162)
-
7/27/2019 Crowdsourcing A Pandemonium for disruptive innovation
13/34
Diversity of the participants: It is widely accepted that diversity promotescreative and innovative outcomes (Koch, 2012; Page, 2008; Surowiecki, 2005;
Milliken, Bartel & Kurtzberg, 2003; Dennis & Williams, 2003). A relevant point
concerning the diversity of the crowd is the process of selection. The crowd can be
self-selecting through an open call or the member of the crowd can be selected by
invitation from a closed pool within the boundaries of the sponsors organisations.
This includes also current customers, who also belong to the wider network of the
sponsor.
Anonymity of the participants: Online creative collaboration offers the possibilityto engage anonymously. This might eliminate the possibility of evaluation
apprehension (Cooper, Gallupe, Pollard & Cadsby, 1998; Dennis & Valacich, 1993
cited in Dennis & Williams, 2003) and to help 'separate ideas from their contributor
so that criticism is more easily recognised as criticism of ideas, not of
people (Dennis & Williams, 2003, p. 173). Participants in the case of the analysed
data belong to an open pool and were able to engage anonymously.
Reward of initiatives: Research shows that intrinsic motivation enhances thecreativity performance of individuals and groups (Hennessey, 2003). In general
there are tangible and intangible motivations. The former is generated through
cash or material prizes. The latter are emotional. These include extrinsic
motivation, like the expectation of better overall performance, or intrinsic
motivation like peer-recognition.
Convergent interactivity: this is the system that stipulates how the many inputsof the crowd are being funnelled down. This variable was measured according to
the number of votes and comments given by the participants for each challenge.
Initial information: this is the brief given to the crowd which determines the taskand its goal. Briefs vary according to the degrees of specificity and the novelty
sought. For the present data these two degrees have been combined to measure
each challenge's brief in terms of its openness.
According to the present analysis of the delivered data it can be stated that the size of the
crowd as well as the openness of the brief plays a minor role in respect to the innovation
outcome. Unfortunately the effects of anonymity could not be measured in any way.
13
-
7/27/2019 Crowdsourcing A Pandemonium for disruptive innovation
14/34
On the contrary diversity could play a major role. Even though it can be assumed
that the diversity of the participants is higher than that of closed pools, the analysis of the
data demonstrates a lack of diversity concerning gender, language and country of origin.
The same can be stated from interactivity. In general, the overall level of
convergence was very low especially in terms of comments.
Furthermore the data delivered suggests that the prize money offered does not
represent an effective motivation. Evidence shows that participants might engage with
several identities to increase votes for their own ideas. It can be assumed that intrinsic
motivation would not trigger off this kind of behaviour and this suggests, in turn, that
participants might expect to win a prize money from the sponsor with higher votes from the
crowd. According to Harwood (2012) the real motivation is the possibility to have an
influence on a companys decisions and that this company actually listens. This motivation
is intrinsic and non-material.
Thedesignofthecrowdsourcingtool
The second dimension within the design of the crowdsourcing process is the design of the
tool itself in terms of software and conceptual framework around that software. Fayard &
Weeks (2011) have identified three design elements that could give answers to why
crowdsourcing tools perform so poorly in terms of disruptive innovation:
Concurrent streams & privacy: the possibility of engaging in concurrent streamsand the resulting ability to structure and direct cognitive focus is believed to be an
important reason for the improved performance of electronic groups (Dennis &
Williams, 2003). Fayard & Weeks (2011) also claim that online participants need to
be able to move from public group interactions, accessible to all, to private
conversations of subgroups or even dyads. None of the crowdsourcing platforms
studied offer the possibility to self-organise private subgroups.
Proximity: Fayard & Weeks (2011) argue that people meeting in a virtual spaceneed compelling reasons to start interacting online. They identify the following: a
14
-
7/27/2019 Crowdsourcing A Pandemonium for disruptive innovation
15/34
core group of participants to bootstrap interaction, easy access to shared spaces
and high awareness of others. According to qualitative research most
crowdsourcing tools fulfil all of these qualifications.
Permission: the former authors also claim that online participants need to beencouraged by management. A crowdsourcing project is usually initiated and
promoted by management, which in turn means that they implicitly give permission
for participation.
Deploymentofthecrowdsourcingtoolwithintheinnova.onprocess
Two things become apparent when organisations deploy crowdsourcing projects. Firstly, it
is used as a tool only for sourcing ideas. So far, no information has indicated that the
crowdsourcing tool is being used for exploration of a problem, gaining insights into human
behaviour, or experimentation with conceptual prototypes. Secondly, these projects are
usually one-off events. With some exceptions (Koch, 2012) and according to the available
data, no sponsor has engaged more than once to launch reiterative challenges in order to
allow for a concept to develop. These two facts seem to indicate that the sponsors follow a
linear, milestone-based process, and this could be one of the reasons why the results
show a low degree of innovation.
Doexternalfactorspertainingtothesponsoringorganisa.onsinhibit
thedevelopmentofdisrup.veinnova.ons?
The innovation index from ideas generated through the analysed crowdsourcing platform
is rather low. This applies to the ideas that the crowd has selected through a convergent
process as reflected by the most voted ideas. However, the ideas selected by the sponsor
(best-prized ideas) had an even lower innovation index. Many organisations limit their
crowds to people from within certain boundaries related to their organisations. This seems
not to be the only problem, however, since, in most analysed challenges, the crowd was
not from within the organisations boundaries.
15
-
7/27/2019 Crowdsourcing A Pandemonium for disruptive innovation
16/34
Qualitative and quantitative research of crowdsourcing projects have shown that the
reasons lie in:
Strict orientation to profit and risk
Inclusion of distorting elements into the process of innovation
Inflexibility of pre-established structures
Lack of knowledge about innovation and sociological phenomena
Organisations engage with a crowdsourcing tool at the beginning of the challenge by
setting up the brief and stating their intentions; and by selecting ideas during or at the end
of the convergence process. An analysis of the briefs has shown that the sponsors have
mainly three reasons for initiating crowdsourcing challenges:
1. Creative ideas for internal or external marketing purposes
2. Improvements or incremental innovations for something already existing
3. Revolutionary things or systems that do not exist yet
For all three reasons sponsors appear to be searching for innovations but only for
the last one they expressively state to be searching for revolutionary things or systems that
do not exist yet. But, although they appear to be searching for this last reason, the ideas
that could lead to such a disruptive innovation are dismissed by the sponsor.
For the sponsors the process of prizing ideas is closely connected to certain evaluation
criteria. These have been expressively stated in many of the briefs and are used to funnel
down complying ideas. These evaluation criteria are usually the following:
1. Originality and novelty
2. Usefulness
3. Feasibility and ease of implementation
4. Effectiveness and expectation of widespread impact
5. Promptness
6. Cost of implementation
16
-
7/27/2019 Crowdsourcing A Pandemonium for disruptive innovation
17/34
7. Alignment with a set of organisationally related values like fitting with brand, for
example
All of these evaluation criteria, except the first one, confine the divergent possibilities to
certain boundaries, which lie in the immediate neighbourhood of possible things and
systems. These boundaries are related to functionality, reliability (Martin, 2009) and
viability (time and money). Some sponsors make the boundary itself the target of the
crowdsourcing project when they mention financial targets like profit or cost savings
(Healey, 2012). These boundaries originate from a profit and risk oriented mindedness that
avoid that members of the crowd can focus on the only two evaluation criteria relevant to
(future) consumers: originality and novelty.
Qualitative research has exposed that one of the motivations to engage with
crowdsourcing for employees is because they believe that this participation will have a
positive impact on their personal performance evaluation process. This evaluation could
prove to be distorting because it refers to the relationship between employees and
superiors and is not related to the innovative goals of the crowdsourcing project.
Furthermore, there is a tendency of pre-established connections and structures to
become inflexible. One example which demonstrates the reductionist view and the rigidity
of structures is a crowdsourcing initiative performed for an energy company (Harwood,
2012). Usually, the cost of energy consumption becomes cheaper the more you consume.
Customers and members of the participating crowd decided that this relationship between
cost and energy consumption should be reversed; that is, the more energy is consumed
the more expensive it should become. The management decided that this was not
possible because it was too complicated to change the billing and invoicing systems. This
indicates an inflexible relationship between humans and systems in the form of machines,
software and processes.
17
-
7/27/2019 Crowdsourcing A Pandemonium for disruptive innovation
18/34
Finally the low compliance between the most voted and the best-prized ideas
makes apparent that the organisations way of gaining knowledge is reductionist. They do
not take into account the synergistic properties of an ecosystem, which emerges as a
result of people interacting with each other (De Landa, 1994).
To conclude, these findings suggest that here could be other important reasons for
the low innovation degree ascertained at the beginning of this chapter.
18
-
7/27/2019 Crowdsourcing A Pandemonium for disruptive innovation
19/34
Howcouldthesecrowdsourcingsystemsevolveinthefuture?
In conclusion, it can be stated that, so far, crowdsourcing has not produced disruptive
innovations. However, crowdsourcing does have the potential and the ability to bring about
disruptive innovations. Johnson (2011) states that most innovations in history, especially in
recent history, have been generated through a network and in a non-commercial
environment. The philosopher Pierre Levy (2012) argues that a crowd can solve existing
problems 'but for disruptive innovations you need to pose new problems' and that 'we still
don't have collective intelligence systems or organisations able to help crowds to pose new
problems' (Levy, 2012). This answer refers to the inability to produce such disruptive
innovations because of the lack of the right tools or systems, not because of the intrinsic
inability of crowdsourcing to do so.
The innovation index from ideas generated through the analysed crowdsourcing
platform is very low. This applies to the ideas that the crowd has selected through a
convergent process as reflected by the most voted ideas. If this is true, it can be claimed
that the reasons lie mainly in a lack of diversity of the crowd and its low level of
interactivity.
A higher level of diversity could be achieved through larger crowd size, but other
systems could be conceivable through a semi-self-selected process with systems that
inhibit a concentration on certain features and with additional voluntaries that bring in more
divergent influences.
With regard to interactivity, the tools need probably to be redesigned to encourage a
higher amount of interaction in the form of comments between the participants. It would
probably be worth designing and experimenting with multi-layered systems both
horizontally to allow the crowd to interact more with each other before starting to give final
judgments in the form of votes and vertically to allow for the creation of concurrent sub-
streams. The systems would also need a mechanism that avoids the duplication of ideas.
19
-
7/27/2019 Crowdsourcing A Pandemonium for disruptive innovation
20/34
So far, crowdsourcing tools have been used to form a component of a very linear,
milestone based innovation process. It would be worth experimenting with a
crowdsourcing tool that resembles a design thinking approach. It is helpful to think of the
crowd as a team of designers, who, rather than being asked to simply deliver ideas to a
brief, are asked to become involved within the overlapping spaces of inspiration, ideation
and implementation (Brown & Wyatt, 2010, p. 33). This would require a shift in the way
crowdsourcing is approached. On the one hand, a major integration of the crowd and the
sponsor from the beginning of the process until the final implementation would be needed.
On the other hand, this approach would require the crowd to switch from being idea
deliverer to explorative researcher or interpreter (Verganti, 2009). The crowd would
become not only the object but also the subject of research. For that to happen, the
crowdsourcing system would need to allow for errors (Johnson, 2011) and loop backs in a
more institutionalised form. Prototyping and testing of ideas would require that the crowd
be involved until the end of the process and in reiterative steps with the possibility of
changing the crowds for each reiterative step.
In relation to design thinking, crowdsourcing could also be used from a much
broader perspective to gain insights about the behaviour of human beings and the
emergent properties that evolve through interaction. These new insights, in turn, could
lead to disruptive innovations.
Most importantly, however, is that organisations choose a different approach in their
search for disruptive innovations through crowdsourcing. In a first step it would be
conducive to avoid using crowds that are related to the sponsoring organisation.
Furthermore the constraints and rules within a brief and by which ideas are selected
should be, neither too narrow or rigid, nor too abstract or loose (Brown & Wyatt 2010; De
Landa & Davis, 1992). Brown (2009) claims that the constraints given in a brief need to be
balanced. The analysed briefs reveal that the constraints given to the crowd were either
20
-
7/27/2019 Crowdsourcing A Pandemonium for disruptive innovation
21/34
too constraining or too open. In most cases, the prize went to ideas that were very specific
and elaborate. High task specificity indicates that the sponsor is looking for a solution for a
precisely formulated problem (Piller & Walcher 2006, p. 310). However, they need to allow
for the crowd to pose new problems by giving constraints which are more relevant to
people and more compatible with the nature of a disruptive innovation. It is not possible to
assess the functionality, reliability and viability of future things and systems, which do not
exist yet and for which there is no demand. The answers will be rather abstract,
unelaborated and unspecified and demand a broad and long-term view.
A right approach for companies could be creating skunkworks in which the
perceived corporate risk is kept low. These skunkworks could have more experimental
character by including the divergent features of crowdsourcing with crowds completely
alien to the sponsor.
21
-
7/27/2019 Crowdsourcing A Pandemonium for disruptive innovation
22/34
Bibliography
100% Open (no date) [Online] Available at: http://www.100open.com/ [Accessed March 9,
2012].
Aitamurto, T., Leiponen, A. & Tee, R.(2011) The Promise of Idea Crowdsourcing
Benefits, Contexts, Limitations. Available at: http://tiny.cc/fd4sg.
Amabile, T.M. (1997) Motivating creativity in organizations: On doing what you love and
loving what you do. California Management Review, 40(1), pp.3958.
Atizo (no date) [Online] Available at: https://www.atizo.com/ [Accessed December 19,
2011].
Basulto, D. (2011) The real Wall Street occupation is online - Ideas@Innovations - The
Washington Post. [Online] Available at: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/innovations/
post/the-real-wall-street-occupation-is-online/2010/12/20/gIQAFKANfM_blog.html
[Accessed December 6, 2011].
Bettermeans (no date) Open enterprise manifesto [Online] Available at: http://
bettermeans.org/front/learn-more/open-enterprise-manifesto/[Accessed March 9, 2012].
Blaikie, N (2000) Designing social research: the logic of anticipation. Cambridge, UK:
Polity Press
Brabham, D.C. (2011) Crowdsourcing: A Model for Leveraging Online Communities.
Available at: http://tiny.cc/yjtd5.
Brabham, D.C. (2012) One question regarding crowdsourcing and disruptive innovation -
Brabham. E-mail to Cristobal Ortiz Ehmann. 15th February 2012. Available at: http://
tiny.cc/4i94aw
Brabham, D.C. (no date) Crowdsourcing. [Online] Available at: http://
dbrabham.wordpress.com/crowdsourcing/[Accessed December 19, 2011].
22
http://dbrabham.wordpress.com/crowdsourcing/http://tiny.cc/4i94awhttp://tiny.cc/yjtd5http://tiny.cc/yjtd5http://bettermeans.org/front/learn-more/open-enterprise-manifesto/http://bettermeans.org/front/learn-more/open-enterprise-manifesto/http://bettermeans.org/front/learn-more/open-enterprise-manifesto/http://bettermeans.org/front/learn-more/open-enterprise-manifesto/http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/innovations/post/the-real-wall-street-occupation-is-online/2010/12/20/gIQAFKANfM_blog.htmlhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/innovations/post/the-real-wall-street-occupation-is-online/2010/12/20/gIQAFKANfM_blog.htmlhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/innovations/post/the-real-wall-street-occupation-is-online/2010/12/20/gIQAFKANfM_blog.htmlhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/innovations/post/the-real-wall-street-occupation-is-online/2010/12/20/gIQAFKANfM_blog.htmlhttp://tiny.cc/fd4sghttp://tiny.cc/fd4sghttp://www.100open.com/http://dbrabham.wordpress.com/crowdsourcing/http://dbrabham.wordpress.com/crowdsourcing/http://dbrabham.wordpress.com/crowdsourcing/http://dbrabham.wordpress.com/crowdsourcing/http://tiny.cc/4i94awhttp://tiny.cc/4i94awhttp://tiny.cc/4i94awhttp://tiny.cc/4i94awhttp://tiny.cc/yjtd5http://tiny.cc/yjtd5http://bettermeans.org/front/learn-more/open-enterprise-manifesto/http://bettermeans.org/front/learn-more/open-enterprise-manifesto/http://bettermeans.org/front/learn-more/open-enterprise-manifesto/http://bettermeans.org/front/learn-more/open-enterprise-manifesto/http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/innovations/post/the-real-wall-street-occupation-is-online/2010/12/20/gIQAFKANfM_blog.htmlhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/innovations/post/the-real-wall-street-occupation-is-online/2010/12/20/gIQAFKANfM_blog.htmlhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/innovations/post/the-real-wall-street-occupation-is-online/2010/12/20/gIQAFKANfM_blog.htmlhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/innovations/post/the-real-wall-street-occupation-is-online/2010/12/20/gIQAFKANfM_blog.htmlhttps://www.atizo.com/https://www.atizo.com/http://tiny.cc/fd4sghttp://tiny.cc/fd4sghttp://www.100open.com/http://www.100open.com/ -
7/27/2019 Crowdsourcing A Pandemonium for disruptive innovation
23/34
Brassett, J. (2011) Searching for a research host organisation or investigator MA student
innovation management at CSM, 13 September 2011. Personal email to: C. Ortiz
([email protected]) from J. Brassett ([email protected]).
Briggs, H. (2012) The Innovation Obsession | Innovation Management. [Online] Availableat: http://www.innovationmanagement.se/2012/01/18/the-innovation-obsession/[Accessed
January 24, 2012].
Brightidea (no date) Brightidea case study China Light & Power [Online] Available at:
http://tiny.cc/m3brt [Accessed March 1, 2012].
Brightidea (no date) Brightidea case study General Electric Ecomagination Challenge:
Powering the grid [Online] Available at: http://tiny.cc/sgbf2b [Accessed March 1, 2012].
Brightidea (no date) Brightidea case study ProdigyWorks [Online] Available at: http://
tiny.cc/7bhlr [Accessed March 1, 2012].
Brightidea (no date) Brightidea: connect with your business [Online] Available at: http://
www.brightidea.com/integrations.bix [Accessed March 1, 2012].
Brightidea (no date) Brightidea: extend your innovation capability [Online] Available at:
http://www.brightidea.com/integrations.bix [Accessed March 1, 2012].
Brightidea (no date) Brightidea: The Global Leader Cloud-Based Enterprise Innovation
Management [Online] Available at: http://www.brightidea.com/ [Accessed March 1, 2012].
Brignull, H. (2010) Design thinking is a nonsensical phrase that deserves to die Don
Norman. [Online] Available at: http://www.90percentofeverything.com/2010/06/08/design-
thinking-is-a-nonsensical-phrase-that-deserves-to-die-%E2%80%93-don-norman/
[Accessed October 29, 2011].
British Design Innovation [Internet] Available from: [Accessed 30 September 2011]
Brown, T. (2009) Change by design: how design thinking can transform organizations and
inspire innovation, New York, NY: HarperCollins Publishers.
23
http://www.britishdesigninnovation.org/http://www.90percentofeverything.com/2010/06/08/design-thinking-is-a-nonsensical-phrase-that-deserves-to-die-%E2%80%93-don-norman/http://www.brightidea.com/http://www.brightidea.com/integrations.bixhttp://www.brightidea.com/integrations.bixhttp://tiny.cc/7bhlrhttp://tiny.cc/sgbf2bhttp://tiny.cc/m3brtmailto:[email protected]://www.britishdesigninnovation.org/http://www.britishdesigninnovation.org/http://www.90percentofeverything.com/2010/06/08/design-thinking-is-a-nonsensical-phrase-that-deserves-to-die-%E2%80%93-don-norman/http://www.90percentofeverything.com/2010/06/08/design-thinking-is-a-nonsensical-phrase-that-deserves-to-die-%E2%80%93-don-norman/http://www.90percentofeverything.com/2010/06/08/design-thinking-is-a-nonsensical-phrase-that-deserves-to-die-%E2%80%93-don-norman/http://www.90percentofeverything.com/2010/06/08/design-thinking-is-a-nonsensical-phrase-that-deserves-to-die-%E2%80%93-don-norman/http://www.brightidea.com/http://www.brightidea.com/http://www.brightidea.com/integrations.bixhttp://www.brightidea.com/integrations.bixhttp://www.brightidea.com/integrations.bixhttp://www.brightidea.com/integrations.bixhttp://www.brightidea.com/integrations.bixhttp://www.brightidea.com/integrations.bixhttp://tiny.cc/7bhlrhttp://tiny.cc/7bhlrhttp://tiny.cc/7bhlrhttp://tiny.cc/7bhlrhttp://tiny.cc/sgbf2bhttp://tiny.cc/sgbf2bhttp://tiny.cc/m3brthttp://tiny.cc/m3brthttp://www.innovationmanagement.se/2012/01/18/the-innovation-obsession/http://www.innovationmanagement.se/2012/01/18/the-innovation-obsession/mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected] -
7/27/2019 Crowdsourcing A Pandemonium for disruptive innovation
24/34
Brown, T. & Wyatt, J. (2010) Design Thinking for Social Innovation. Stanford Social
Innovation Review, (Winter 2010), pp.3135.
Brown, T. & Wyatt, J. (2011) Design Thinking for Social Innovation. [Internet] In: Stanford
Social Innovation Review at IDEO. Available from: . [Accessed 24 January
2011]
Bryman, A. (2012) Social research methods, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Buyology Inc. [Internet] Available from: [Accessed 16 June
2011]
Cambridge Neuroscience [Internet] Available from:
[Accessed 8 September 2011]
Campbell, P. (2012) THE INTERVIEW: Trust me, Ill keep bills low, EDF boss says | This is
Money. [Online] Available at: http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-2101726/
THE-INTERVIEW-Trust-Ill-bil ls-low-EDF-boss-says.html [Accessed March 6, 2012].
Carr, N.G. (2007) The ignorance of crowds - The open source model can play an important
role in innovation, but know its limitations. booz&co, (47). Available at: http://tiny.cc/Czdf2b.
Cauvy, C. (2012) One question regarding crowdsourcing and disruptive innovation -
Cauvy. E-mail to Cristobal Ortiz Ehmann. 7th February 2012. Available at: http://tiny.cc/
hidj2.
Centre for Business Research [Internet] Available from: [Accessed 23 September 2011]
Chesbrough, H.W. (2010) Open innovation: the new imperative for creating and profiting
from technology. Boston, Mass.: Harvard Business School Press.
Christensen, C. (2007) Disruptive Innovation. Leadership Excellence, 24(9), p.7.
24
http://www.cbr.cam.ac.uk/people/index.htmhttp://www.cbr.cam.ac.uk/people/index.htmhttp://tiny.cc/hidj2http://tiny.cc/Czdf2bhttp://tiny.cc/Czdf2bhttp://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-2101726/THE-INTERVIEW-Trust-Ill-bills-low-EDF-boss-says.htmlhttp://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-2101726/THE-INTERVIEW-Trust-Ill-bills-low-EDF-boss-says.htmlhttp://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-2101726/THE-INTERVIEW-Trust-Ill-bills-low-EDF-boss-says.htmlhttp://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-2101726/THE-INTERVIEW-Trust-Ill-bills-low-EDF-boss-says.htmlhttp://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-2101726/THE-INTERVIEW-Trust-Ill-bills-low-EDF-boss-says.htmlhttp://www.ideo.com/by-ideo/design-thinking-for-social-innovation-in-stanford-social-innovation-reviewhttp://www.ideo.com/by-ideo/design-thinking-for-social-innovation-in-stanford-social-innovation-reviewhttp://www.ideo.com/by-ideo/design-thinking-for-social-innovation-in-stanford-social-innovation-reviewhttp://www.ideo.com/by-ideo/design-thinking-for-social-innovation-in-stanford-social-innovation-reviewhttp://www.cbr.cam.ac.uk/people/index.htmhttp://www.cbr.cam.ac.uk/people/index.htmhttp://www.cbr.cam.ac.uk/people/index.htmhttp://www.cbr.cam.ac.uk/people/index.htmhttp://tiny.cc/hidj2http://tiny.cc/hidj2http://tiny.cc/hidj2http://tiny.cc/hidj2http://tiny.cc/Czdf2bhttp://tiny.cc/Czdf2bhttp://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-2101726/THE-INTERVIEW-Trust-Ill-bills-low-EDF-boss-says.htmlhttp://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-2101726/THE-INTERVIEW-Trust-Ill-bills-low-EDF-boss-says.htmlhttp://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-2101726/THE-INTERVIEW-Trust-Ill-bills-low-EDF-boss-says.htmlhttp://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-2101726/THE-INTERVIEW-Trust-Ill-bills-low-EDF-boss-says.htmlhttp://www.neuroscience.cam.ac.uk/http://www.neuroscience.cam.ac.uk/http://www.buyologyinc.com/http://www.buyologyinc.com/http://www.ideo.com/by-ideo/design-thinking-for-social-innovation-in-stanford-social-innovation-reviewhttp://www.ideo.com/by-ideo/design-thinking-for-social-innovation-in-stanford-social-innovation-reviewhttp://www.ideo.com/by-ideo/design-thinking-for-social-innovation-in-stanford-social-innovation-reviewhttp://www.ideo.com/by-ideo/design-thinking-for-social-innovation-in-stanford-social-innovation-review -
7/27/2019 Crowdsourcing A Pandemonium for disruptive innovation
25/34
Christensen, C.M. (1997) The innovators dilemma: when new technologies cause great
firms to fail. Boston, Mass.: Harvard Business School.
Cooper, Gallupe, Pollard & Cadsby, 1998 !!!!
Collins, D. (2011) A CEO Announces their Program for Collaborative Innovation |
InnovationManagement. [Online] Available at: http://www.innovationmanagement.se/
2011/10/04/a-ceo-announces-their-program-for-collaborative-innovation/[Accessed
October 30, 2011].
Collins, D. (no date) Sourcing Crowds for Out of the Box Ideas | Innovation Management.
[Online] Available at: http://tiny.cc/023tn [Accessed January 19, 2012].
Davis, E. & De Landa M. (1992) DeLanda Destratified, Observing the Liquefaction of
Manuel DeLanda. Mondo 2000, (No. 8), pp.4448.
DBA directory [Internet] Available from: [Accessed 21
September 2011]
De Landa, M. (1994) Interview with Manuel De Landa. Available at: http://
www.cddc.vt.edu/host/delanda/pages/interview_pirc.htm [Accessed November 15, 2011].
De Landa, M. (1998) Meshworks, Hierarchies and Interfaces. In The virtual dimension:
architecture, representation, and crash culture. New York: Princeton Architectural Press.
De Landa, M. (1991) War in the age of intelligent machines. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT
Press / Swerve Editions.
Dennis, A.R. & Williams, M.L. (2003) Electronic Brainstorming Theory, Research, and
Future Direction. In P. B. Paulus & B. A. Nijstad, eds. Group creativity. New York; Oxford:
Oxford University Press, pp. 160178.
Economic and social research council: Shaping society [Internet] Available from: [Accessed 22 September 2011]
25
http://www.cddc.vt.edu/host/delanda/pages/interview_pirc.htmhttp://www.cddc.vt.edu/host/delanda/pages/interview_pirc.htmhttp://www.dba.org.uk/index.htmlhttp://www.dba.org.uk/index.htmlhttp://tiny.cc/023tnhttp://www.innovationmanagement.se/2011/10/04/a-ceo-announces-their-program-for-collaborative-innovation/http://www.innovationmanagement.se/2011/10/04/a-ceo-announces-their-program-for-collaborative-innovation/http://www.esrc.ac.uk/http://www.esrc.ac.uk/http://www.esrc.ac.uk/http://www.esrc.ac.uk/http://www.cddc.vt.edu/host/delanda/pages/interview_pirc.htmhttp://www.cddc.vt.edu/host/delanda/pages/interview_pirc.htmhttp://www.cddc.vt.edu/host/delanda/pages/interview_pirc.htmhttp://www.cddc.vt.edu/host/delanda/pages/interview_pirc.htmhttp://www.dba.org.uk/index.htmlhttp://www.dba.org.uk/index.htmlhttp://tiny.cc/023tnhttp://tiny.cc/023tnhttp://www.innovationmanagement.se/2011/10/04/a-ceo-announces-their-program-for-collaborative-innovation/http://www.innovationmanagement.se/2011/10/04/a-ceo-announces-their-program-for-collaborative-innovation/http://www.innovationmanagement.se/2011/10/04/a-ceo-announces-their-program-for-collaborative-innovation/http://www.innovationmanagement.se/2011/10/04/a-ceo-announces-their-program-for-collaborative-innovation/ -
7/27/2019 Crowdsourcing A Pandemonium for disruptive innovation
26/34
Edengene [Internet] Available from: [Accessed 11 August
2011]
Estimating Species Richness and Diversity and Assessing Stream Quality: A Survey of the
Macro-invertebrates in Boulder Creek (no date) [Online] Available at: http://tiny.cc/wiq1p.[Accessed February 15, 2012].
European industrial research management association: Facing the innovation challenge
[Internet] Available from: [Accessed 21 September 2011]
Fayard, A.-L. & Weeks, J. (2011) Who moved my cube? Harvard Business Review, pp.
102110.
Fitch [Internet] Available from: [Accessed 19 September 2011]
Goffin, K. & Mitchell, R. (2010) Innovation management: strategy and implementation
using the pentathlon framework. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Goffin, K. & Mitchell, R. (2010) Innovation Management: Strategy and Implementation
Using the Pentathlon Framework. 2nd ed. Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan
Granma [Internet] Available from: [Accessed 22 September
2011]
Green, L. (2010) Defining Innovation & Forms of Innovation. [Lecture to MA Innovation
Management Year 1]. 23rd November 2010
Harwood, R. (2012) Open Innovation crowdsourcing. Personal experiences - Harwood.
Interview with Roland Harwood. Interviewed by Cristobal Ortiz Ehmann. Available at: http://
tiny.cc/1684aw.
Healey, S. (2012) Meeting notes, BT ideas scheme with Steve Healey. Interview with
Steve Healey, Interviewed by Robert Anderson. Available at: http://tiny.cc/ev0kf.
Healey, S. (2012) My thesis in a nutshell. E-mail to Cristobal Ortiz Ehmann, 31st of
January 2012. Available at: http://tiny.cc/j884aw
26
http://tiny.cc/j884awhttp://tiny.cc/j884awhttp://tiny.cc/ev0kfhttp://tiny.cc/1684awhttp://tiny.cc/1684awhttp://www.fitch.com/http://www.fitch.com/http://www.eirma.org/http://tiny.cc/wiq1phttp://www.edengene.com/http://tiny.cc/j884awhttp://tiny.cc/j884awhttp://tiny.cc/ev0kfhttp://tiny.cc/ev0kfhttp://tiny.cc/1684awhttp://tiny.cc/1684awhttp://tiny.cc/1684awhttp://tiny.cc/1684awhttp://www.granma.de/http://www.granma.de/http://www.fitch.com/http://www.fitch.com/http://www.eirma.org/http://www.eirma.org/http://tiny.cc/wiq1phttp://tiny.cc/wiq1phttp://www.edengene.com/http://www.edengene.com/ -
7/27/2019 Crowdsourcing A Pandemonium for disruptive innovation
27/34
Hennessey, B.A. (2003) Is the Social Psychology of Creativity Really Social? Moving
Beyond a Focus on the Individual. In P. B. Paulus & B. A. Nijstad, eds. Group creativity.
New York; Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 181201.
How mass collaboration changes everything - Wikinomics. Soundview Executive BookSummaries, 29(4) (2007) Available at: http://tiny.cc/cDef2b [Accessed February 27, 2012].
Howe, J. (2009) Crowdsourcing: how the power of the crowd is driving the future of
business. 4. printing., London: Random House.
Howe, J. (no date) Crowdsourcing: Crowdsourcing: A Definition. [Online] Available at:
http://crowdsourcing.typepad.com/cs/2006/06/crowdsourcing_a.html [Accessed February
5, 2012].
Hyatt, J. (2010) Smarter, by Design. The Daily Beast. Available at: http://
www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2010/05/21/smarter-by-design.html [Accessed January
29, 2012].
IDEO [Internet] Available from: [Accessed 25 August 2011]
Induct - The Open Innovation Community solution (no date) [Online] Available at: http://
www.induct.no/ [Accessed October 28, 2011].
Induct Reference Handbook (no date) Available at: http://tiny.cc/x1v11. [Accessed January
26, 2011].
InnoCentive (no date) Frequently Asked Questions | InnoCentive [Online] Available at:
http://www.innocentive.com/faq/Seeker#25n1254[Accessed February 6, 2012].
Innosight [Internet] Available from: [Accessed 19 September
2011]
Innovation Management (2011) Next Generation Innovation What does it Mean to Me as
a Practitioner? Available at: http://tiny.cc/tvt95 [Accessed October 27, 2011].
27
http://tiny.cc/tvt95http://www.innocentive.com/faq/Seeker#25n1254http://www.innocentive.com/faq/Seeker#25n1254http://www.innocentive.com/faq/Seeker#25n1254http://www.innocentive.com/faq/Seeker#25n1254http://www.induct.no/http://www.induct.no/http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2010/05/21/smarter-by-design.htmlhttp://crowdsourcing.typepad.com/cs/2006/06/crowdsourcing_a.htmlhttp://tiny.cc/cDef2bhttp://tiny.cc/tvt95http://tiny.cc/tvt95http://www.innosight.com/http://www.innosight.com/http://www.innocentive.com/faq/Seeker#25n1254http://www.innocentive.com/faq/Seeker#25n1254http://tiny.cc/x1v11http://tiny.cc/x1v11http://www.induct.no/http://www.induct.no/http://www.induct.no/http://www.induct.no/http://www.ideo.com/http://www.ideo.com/http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2010/05/21/smarter-by-design.htmlhttp://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2010/05/21/smarter-by-design.htmlhttp://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2010/05/21/smarter-by-design.htmlhttp://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2010/05/21/smarter-by-design.htmlhttp://crowdsourcing.typepad.com/cs/2006/06/crowdsourcing_a.htmlhttp://crowdsourcing.typepad.com/cs/2006/06/crowdsourcing_a.htmlhttp://tiny.cc/cDef2bhttp://tiny.cc/cDef2b -
7/27/2019 Crowdsourcing A Pandemonium for disruptive innovation
28/34
Innovation-3 (no date) [Online] Available at: http://innovation-3.com/ [Accessed November
24, 2011].
Instinct Laboratory [Internet] Available from:
[Accessed 25 August 2011]
Internationales Design Zentrum Berlin [Internet] Available from: [Accessed 19 September 2011]
Johnson, S. (2011) Where good ideas come from: the seven patterns of innovation.
London: Penguin.
Koch, F. (2012) Open Innovation crowdsourcing. Personal experiences - Koch. Interview
with Felix Koch. Interviewed by Cristobal Ortiz Ehmann. Available at: http://tiny.cc/3584aw
Konczal, M. (2011) Fifteen Definitions of Freedom from #OccupyWallStreet | Rortybomb.
Available at: http://rortybomb.wordpress.com/2011/10/02/fifteen-definitions-of-freedom-
from-occupywallstreet/[Accessed December 5, 2011].
Konczal, M. (2011) Understanding the Theory Behind Occupy Wall Streets Approach |
Rortybomb. Available at: http://rortybomb.wordpress.com/2011/09/30/understanding-the-
theory-behind-the-different-approach-of-the-occupy-wall-street-protests/[Accessed
December 5, 2011].
Kuhn, T.S. (1962) The structure of scientific revoutions 3rd ed., Chicago: The University of
Chicago Press.
Lakhani, K.R. & Boudreau, K.J (2009) How to Manage Outside Innovation. MIT Sloan
Management Review, 50(4). Available at: http://tiny.cc/8z14v.
Lanier, J. (2011) You are not a gadget: a manifesto. Jaron Lanier., London: Penguin.
Latour, B. (2005) Reassembling the social: an introduction to actor-network-theory, Oxford;
New York: Oxford University Press.
28
http://tiny.cc/8z14vhttp://rortybomb.wordpress.com/2011/09/30/understanding-the-theory-behind-the-different-approach-of-the-occupy-wall-street-protests/http://rortybomb.wordpress.com/2011/10/02/fifteen-definitions-of-freedom-from-occupywallstreet/http://rortybomb.wordpress.com/2011/10/02/fifteen-definitions-of-freedom-from-occupywallstreet/http://tiny.cc/3584awhttp://tiny.cc/3584awhttp://www.idz.de/de/sites/http://www.idz.de/de/sites/http://www.instinctlaboratory.com/http://tiny.cc/8z14vhttp://tiny.cc/8z14vhttp://rortybomb.wordpress.com/2011/09/30/understanding-the-theory-behind-the-different-approach-of-the-occupy-wall-street-protests/http://rortybomb.wordpress.com/2011/09/30/understanding-the-theory-behind-the-different-approach-of-the-occupy-wall-street-protests/http://rortybomb.wordpress.com/2011/09/30/understanding-the-theory-behind-the-different-approach-of-the-occupy-wall-street-protests/http://rortybomb.wordpress.com/2011/09/30/understanding-the-theory-behind-the-different-approach-of-the-occupy-wall-street-protests/http://rortybomb.wordpress.com/2011/10/02/fifteen-definitions-of-freedom-from-occupywallstreet/http://rortybomb.wordpress.com/2011/10/02/fifteen-definitions-of-freedom-from-occupywallstreet/http://rortybomb.wordpress.com/2011/10/02/fifteen-definitions-of-freedom-from-occupywallstreet/http://rortybomb.wordpress.com/2011/10/02/fifteen-definitions-of-freedom-from-occupywallstreet/http://tiny.cc/3584awhttp://tiny.cc/3584awhttp://www.idz.de/de/sites/http://www.idz.de/de/sites/http://www.idz.de/de/sites/http://www.idz.de/de/sites/http://www.instinctlaboratory.com/http://www.instinctlaboratory.com/http://innovation-3.com/http://innovation-3.com/ -
7/27/2019 Crowdsourcing A Pandemonium for disruptive innovation
29/34
Leadbeater, C. (2009) We-think: [mass innovation, not mass production] Updated ed.,
London: Profile.
Levy, P. (2012) One question regarding crowdsourcing and disruptive innovation - Levy. E-
Mail to Cristobal Ortiz Ehmann. 19th January 2012. Available at: http://tiny.cc/hidj2.
MacCormack, A. (2007) Best Practices of Global Innovators HBS Working Knowledge.
Available at: http://tiny.cc/7faf2b [Accessed November 7, 2011].
Mangrove consulting [Internet] Available from:
[Accessed 19 September 2011]
Mark202 (2008) Struggles with Philosophy. [Online] Available at: http://
struggleswithphilosophy.blogspot.com/2008/02/how-are-you-stratified.html [Accessed
March 1, 2012]
Martin, R. (2009) The design of business: why design thinking is the next competitive
advantage, Boston, Mass.: Harvard Business Press.
Martin, R. (2012) Roger Martin: What CEOs and Hedge Funds Dont Want the 99% to
Understand. [Online] Available at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/roger-martin/stock-
based-compensation_b_1206800.html [Accessed March 6, 2012].
Mattes, F. (no date) Which Software is Right for Open Innovation? | Innovation
Management. [Online] Available at: http://www.innovationmanagement.se/2010/09/27/
which-software-is-right-for-open-innovation/[Accessed February 4, 2012].
McCullagh, K. (2010) Plan - Stepping up. [Online] Available at: http://www.plan.bz/plan-
views/2010/september/steppingup [Accessed October 29, 2011].
McCullagh, K. (2010) Stepping up [Internet] In: Plan. Available from: < http://www.plan.bz/
plan-views/2010/september/steppingup>. [Accessed 20th September 2011]
Milliken, F.J., Bartel, C.A. & Kurtzberg, T.R.(2003) Diversity and Creativity in Work Groups,
A Dynamic Perpective on the Affective and Cognitive Processes That Link Diversity and
29
http://www.plan.bz/plan-views/2010/september/steppinguphttp://www.plan.bz/plan-views/2010/september/steppinguphttp://www.plan.bz/plan-views/2010/september/steppinguphttp://www.plan.bz/plan-views/2010/september/steppinguphttp://www.plan.bz/plan-views/2010/september/steppinguphttp://www.plan.bz/plan-views/2010/september/steppinguphttp://www.innovationmanagement.se/2010/09/27/which-software-is-right-for-open-innovation/http://www.innovationmanagement.se/2010/09/27/which-software-is-right-for-open-innovation/http://www.huffingtonpost.com/roger-martin/stock-based-compensation_b_1206800.htmlhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/roger-martin/stock-based-compensation_b_1206800.htmlhttp://struggleswithphilosophy.blogspot.com/2008/02/how-are-you-stratified.htmlhttp://tiny.cc/7faf2bhttp://tiny.cc/7faf2bhttp://tiny.cc/hidj2http://tiny.cc/hidj2http://tiny.cc/hidj2http://www.plan.bz/plan-views/2010/september/steppinguphttp://www.plan.bz/plan-views/2010/september/steppinguphttp://www.plan.bz/plan-views/2010/september/steppinguphttp://www.plan.bz/plan-views/2010/september/steppinguphttp://www.plan.bz/plan-views/2010/september/steppinguphttp://www.plan.bz/plan-views/2010/september/steppinguphttp://www.plan.bz/plan-views/2010/september/steppinguphttp://www.plan.bz/plan-views/2010/september/steppinguphttp://www.innovationmanagement.se/2010/09/27/which-software-is-right-for-open-innovation/http://www.innovationmanagement.se/2010/09/27/which-software-is-right-for-open-innovation/http://www.innovationmanagement.se/2010/09/27/which-software-is-right-for-open-innovation/http://www.innovationmanagement.se/2010/09/27/which-software-is-right-for-open-innovation/http://www.huffingtonpost.com/roger-martin/stock-based-compensation_b_1206800.htmlhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/roger-martin/stock-based-compensation_b_1206800.htmlhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/roger-martin/stock-based-compensation_b_1206800.htmlhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/roger-martin/stock-based-compensation_b_1206800.htmlhttp://struggleswithphilosophy.blogspot.com/2008/02/how-are-you-stratified.htmlhttp://struggleswithphilosophy.blogspot.com/2008/02/how-are-you-stratified.htmlhttp://struggleswithphilosophy.blogspot.com/2008/02/how-are-you-stratified.htmlhttp://struggleswithphilosophy.blogspot.com/2008/02/how-are-you-stratified.htmlhttp://www.mangroveconsulting.co.uk/http://www.mangroveconsulting.co.uk/http://tiny.cc/7faf2bhttp://tiny.cc/7faf2bhttp://tiny.cc/hidj2http://tiny.cc/hidj2 -
7/27/2019 Crowdsourcing A Pandemonium for disruptive innovation
30/34
Performance. In P. B. Paulus & B. A. Nijstad, eds. Group creativity. New York; Oxford:
Oxford University Press, pp. 3262.
Mindcode [Internet] Available from: [Accessed 9 September
2011]
Native [Internet] Available from: [Accessed 19 September 2011]
Neller, M. (no date) Lexikon: Brockhaus beerdigt seine Enzyklopdie - IT + Medien -
Unternehmen - Handelsblatt. Available at: http://www.handelsblatt.com/unternehmen/it-
medien/lexikon-brockhaus-beerdigt-seine-enzyklopaedie/3224592.html [Accessed
February 27, 2012].
NESTA [Internet] Available from: [Accessed 8 September 2011]
Neurosense [Internet] Available from: [Accessed 10
September 2011]
Norman, D. (2009) Technology Vs. Design--What is the Source of Innovation? -
BusinessWeek - Comment of Donald Norman. [Online] Available at: http://
www.businessweek.com/innovate/NussbaumOnDesign/archives/2009/12/
technology_vs_c.html [Accessed October 30, 2011].
Norman, D.A. (2009) Don Normans jnd.org / Technology First, Needs Last. Technology
First, Needs Last. [Online] Available at: http://www.jnd.org/dn.mss/
technology_first_needs_last.html [Accessed October 29, 2011].
Nussbaum, B. (no date) Design Thinking Is A Failed Experiment. So Whats Next? | Co.
Design. Fastcodesign. [Online] Available at: http://www.fastcodesign.com/1663558/design-
thinking-is-a-failed-experiment-so-whats-next [Accessed October 30, 2011].
Ogilvy Group [Internet] Available from: [Accessed 19 September
2011]
OpenIDEO (no date) Home [Online] Available at: http://www.openideo.com/ [Accessed
February 27, 2012].
30
http://www.fastcodesign.com/1663558/design-thinking-is-a-failed-experiment-so-whats-nexthttp://www.fastcodesign.com/1663558/design-thinking-is-a-failed-experiment-so-whats-nexthttp://www.jnd.org/dn.mss/technology_first_needs_last.htmlhttp://www.jnd.org/dn.mss/technology_first_needs_last.htmlhttp://www.businessweek.com/innovate/NussbaumOnDesign/archives/2009/12/technology_vs_c.htmlhttp://www.businessweek.com/innovate/NussbaumOnDesign/archives/2009/12/technology_vs_c.htmlhttp://www.businessweek.com/innovate/NussbaumOnDesign/archives/2009/12/technology_vs_c.htmlhttp://www.businessweek.com/innovate/NussbaumOnDesign/archives/2009/12/technology_vs_c.htmlhttp://www.neurosense.com/http://www.nesta.org.uk/http://www.handelsblatt.com/unternehmen/it-medien/lexikon-brockhaus-beerdigt-seine-enzyklopaedie/3224592.htmlhttp://www.handelsblatt.com/unternehmen/it-medien/lexikon-brockhaus-beerdigt-seine-enzyklopaedie/3224592.htmlhttp://www.native.com/http://www.native.com/http://www.native.com/http://www.native.com/http://www.openideo.com/http://www.openideo.com/http://www.pdd.co.uk/http://www.pdd.co.uk/http://www.fastcodesign.com/1663558/design-thinking-is-a-failed-experiment-so-whats-nexthttp://www.fastcodesign.com/1663558/design-thinking-is-a-failed-experiment-so-whats-nexthttp://www.fastcodesign.com/1663558/design-thinking-is-a-failed-experiment-so-whats-nexthttp://www.fastcodesign.com/1663558/design-thinking-is-a-failed-experiment-so-whats-nexthttp://www.jnd.org/dn.mss/technology_first_needs_last.htmlhttp://www.jnd.org/dn.mss/technology_first_needs_last.htmlhttp://www.jnd.org/dn.mss/technology_first_needs_last.htmlhttp://www.jnd.org/dn.mss/technology_first_needs_last.htmlhttp://www.businessweek.com/innovate/NussbaumOnDesign/archives/2009/12/technology_vs_c.htmlhttp://www.businessweek.com/innovate/NussbaumOnDesign/archives/2009/12/technology_vs_c.htmlhttp://www.businessweek.com/innovate/NussbaumOnDesign/archives/2009/12/technology_vs_c.htmlhttp://www.businessweek.com/innovate/NussbaumOnDesign/archives/2009/12/technology_vs_c.htmlhttp://www.businessweek.com/innovate/NussbaumOnDesign/archives/2009/12/technology_vs_c.htmlhttp://www.businessweek.com/innovate/NussbaumOnDesign/archives/2009/12/technology_vs_c.htmlhttp://www.neurosense.com/http://www.neurosense.com/http://www.nesta.org.uk/http://www.nesta.org.uk/http://www.handelsblatt.com/unternehmen/it-medien/lexikon-brockhaus-beerdigt-seine-enzyklopaedie/3224592.htmlhttp://www.handelsblatt.com/unternehmen/it-medien/lexikon-brockhaus-beerdigt-seine-enzyklopaedie/3224592.htmlhttp://www.handelsblatt.com/unternehmen/it-medien/lexikon-brockhaus-beerdigt-seine-enzyklopaedie/3224592.htmlhttp://www.handelsblatt.com/unternehmen/it-medien/lexikon-brockhaus-beerdigt-seine-enzyklopaedie/3224592.htmlhttp://www.native.com/http://www.native.com/http://www.mindcode.com/http://www.mindcode.com/ -
7/27/2019 Crowdsourcing A Pandemonium for disruptive innovation
31/34
Page, S.E. (2008) The difference: how the power of diversity creates better groups, firms,
schools, and societies, Princeton, N.J.; Woodstock: Princeton University Press.
Pallota, D. (2011) Stop Thinking Outside the Box - Dan Pallotta - Harvard Business
Review. [Online] Available at: http://blogs.hbr.org/pallotta/2011/11/stop-thinking-outside-the-box.html?cm_sp=blog_flyout-_-pallotta-_-stop_thinking_outside_the_box [Accessed
January 20, 2012].
PDD [Internet] Available from: [Accessed 19 September 2011]
Piller, F.T. & Walcher, D. (2006) Toolkits for idea competitions: a novel method to integrate
users in new product development. R&D Management, 36(3), pp.307318.
Pink, D.H. (2011) Drive: the surprising truth about what motivates us, Edinburgh:
Canongate.
Plan [Internet] Available from: [Accessed 19 September 2011]
Precht, R. D. (2011) Who Am I and If so How Many?: a Journey through Your Mind.
London: Constable
Rees, G. (2011) Searching for a research host organisation or investigator MA student
innovation management at CSM, 9 September 2011. Personal email to: C. Ortiz
([email protected]) from G. Rees ([email protected]).
Rose, G. (2007) Visual methodologies: an introduction to the interpretation of visual
materials. 2nd ed., London: SAGE Publications.
Saffo, P. (2007) Paul Saffo: essays, future technologies, technology trends. [Online]
Available at: http://www.saffo.com/essays/capitalismsfuture.pdf [Accessed October 30,
2011].
Saffo, P. (2009) What Matters: Get ready for a new economic era. [Online] Available at:
http://whatmatters.mckinseydigital.com/internet/get-ready-for-a-new-economic-era
[Accessed October 30, 2011].
31
http://www.saffo.com/essays/capitalismsfuture.pdfmailto:[email protected]:[email protected]://www.plan.bz/http://www.pdd.co.uk/http://blogs.hbr.org/pallotta/2011/11/stop-thinking-outside-the-box.html?cm_sp=blog_flyout-_-pallotta-_-stop_thinking_outside_the_boxhttp://whatmatters.mckinseydigital.com/internet/get-ready-for-a-new-economic-erahttp://whatmatters.mckinseydigital.com/internet/get-ready-for-a-new-economic-erahttp://www.saffo.com/essays/capitalismsfuture.pdfhttp://www.saffo.com/essays/capitalismsfuture.pdfmailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]://www.plan.bz/http://www.plan.bz/http://www.pdd.co.uk/http://www.pdd.co.uk/http://blogs.hbr.org/pallotta/2011/11/stop-thinking-outside-the-box.html?cm_sp=blog_flyout-_-pallotta-_-stop_thinking_outside_the_boxhttp://blogs.hbr.org/pallotta/2011/11/stop-thinking-outside-the-box.html?cm_sp=blog_flyout-_-pallotta-_-stop_thinking_outside_the_boxhttp://blogs.hbr.org/pallotta/2011/11/stop-thinking-outside-the-box.html?cm_sp=blog_flyout-_-pallotta-_-stop_thinking_outside_the_boxhttp://blogs.hbr.org/pallotta/2011/11/stop-thinking-outside-the-box.html?cm_sp=blog_flyout-_-pallotta-_-stop_thinking_outside_the_box -
7/27/2019 Crowdsourcing A Pandemonium for disruptive innovation
32/34
Scearce, D., Kasper, G. & McLeod Grant, H. (2009) Working wikily 2.0 Social change with
a network mindset. [Online] Available at: http://tiny.cc/u7We2b.
Schenk, E. & Guittard, C. (2009) Crowdsourcing: What can be Outsourced to the Crowd,
and Why? [Online] Available at: http://tiny.cc/0tmgr.
Schneider, N. (2011) Occupy Wall Street: FAQ | The Nation. [Online] Available at: http://
www.thenation.com/article/163719/occupy-wall-street-faq [Accessed December 5, 2011].
Schn, D.A. (2006) The reflective practitioner : how professionals think in action, London:
Ashgate Publ.
Seymorepowell [Internet] Available from: [Accessed 19
September 2011]
Shaughnessy, H. (2011) Eric Von Hippel on Innovation | InnovationManagement. [Online]
Available at: http://www.innovationmanagement.se/2011/02/21/eric-von-hippel-on-
innovation/[Accessed November 24, 2011].
Shirky, C. (2009) Here comes everybody: how change happens when people come
together., London: Penguin.
Sir Timothy Berners-Lee Interview -- Academy of Achievement: Print Preview (2010)
[Online] Available at: http://www.achievement.org/autodoc/printmember/ber1int-1
[Accessed February 28, 2012].
Spigit (no date) [Online] Available at: http://www.spigit.com/ [Accessed February 27, 2012].
Stoller, M. (2011) Matt Stoller: #OccupyWallStreet Is a Church of Dissent, Not a Protest
naked capitalism. [Online] Available at: http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/09/matt-
stoller-occupywallstreet-is-a-church-of-dissent-not-a-protest.html [Accessed December 5,
2011].
Strategos [Internet] Available from: [Accessed 21 September
2011]
32
http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/09/matt-stoller-occupywallstreet-is-a-church-of-dissent-not-a-protest.htmlhttp://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/09/matt-stoller-occupywallstreet-is-a-church-of-dissent-not-a-protest.htmlhttp://www.spigit.com/http://www.achievement.org/autodoc/printmember/ber1int-1http://www.achievement.org/autodoc/printmember/ber1int-1http://www.achievement.org/autodoc/printmember/ber1int-1http://www.innovationmanagement.se/2011/02/21/eric-von-hippel-on-innovation/http://www.innovationmanagement.se/2011/02/21/eric-von-hippel-on-innovation/http://www.seymourpowell.com/http://www.thenation.com/article/163719/occupy-wall-street-faqhttp://www.thenation.com/article/163719/occupy-wall-street-faqhttp://tiny.cc/0tmgrhttp://tiny.cc/u7We2bhttp://www.strategos.com/http://www.strategos.com/http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/09/matt-stoller-occupywallstreet-is-a-church-of-dissent-not-a-protest.htmlhttp://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/09/matt-stoller-occupywallstreet-is-a-church-of-dissent-not-a-protest.htmlhttp://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/09/matt-stoller-occupywallstreet-is-a-church-of-dissent-not-a-protest.htmlhttp://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/09/matt-stoller-occupywallstreet-is-a-church-of-dissent-not-a-protest.htmlhttp://www.spigit.com/http://www.spigit.com/http://www.achievement.org/autodoc/printmember/ber1int-1http://www.achievement.org/autodoc/printmember/ber1int-1http://www.innovationmanagement.se/2011/02/21/eric-von-hippel-on-innovation/http://www.innovationmanagement.se/2011/02/21/eric-von-hippel-on-innovation/http://www.innovationmanagement.se/2011/02/21/eric-von-hippel-on-innovation/http://www.innovationmanagement.se/2011/02/21/eric-von-hippel-on-innovation/http://www.seymourpowell.com/http://www.seymourpowell.com/http://www.thenation.com/article/163719/occupy-wall-street-faqhttp://www.thenation.com/article/163719/occupy-wall-street-faqhttp://www.thenation.com/article/163719/occupy-wall-street-faqhttp://www.thenation.com/article/163719/occupy-wall-street-faqhttp://tiny.cc/0tmgrhttp://tiny.cc/0tmgrhttp://tiny.cc/u7We2bhttp://tiny.cc/u7We2b -
7/27/2019 Crowdsourcing A Pandemonium for disruptive innovation
33/34
Surowiecki, J. (2005) The wisdom of crowds: why the many are smarter than the few and
how collective wisdom shapes business, economies, societies and nations, London:
Abacus.
Sutton, T. Innovation and Control: Navigating the complicated space between creativityand control in medical device design. [Internet] Available from: [Accessed 21
September 2011]
Tapscott, D. & Williams, A.D. (2008) Wikinomics: how mass collaboration changes
everything, London: Atlantic.
Technology Strategy Board [Internet] Available from:
[Accessed 30 September 2011]
The innovation beehive [Internet] Available from:
[Accessed 23 September 2011]
Theraft Innovaton and Design Management [Internet] Available from: [Accessed 30 September 2011]
UCL Institute of cognitive neuroscience [Internet] Available from: [Accessed 8 September 2011]
UK innovation research centre [Internet] Available from:
[Accessed 22 September 2011]
User-driven innovation Danish German center [Internet] Available from: [Accessed 22 September 2011]
Verganti, R. (2009) Design driven innovation: changing the rules of competition by radically
innovating what things mean, Harvard Business Press: Boston.
Verganti, R. & Pisano, G.P. (2008) Which Kind of Collaboration Is Right for You? - Harvard
Business Review. Available at: http://hbr.org/2008/12/which-kind-of-collaboration-is-right-
for-you/ar/1 [Accessed November 13, 2011].
33
http://hbr.org/2008/12/which-kind-of-collaboration-is-right-for-you/ar/1http://hbr.org/2008/12/which-kind-of-collaboration-is-right-for-you/ar/1http://userdr2.fox.pil.dk/http://userdr2.fox.pil.dk/http://www.theraftconsultancy.co.uk/http://www.theraftconsultancy.co.uk/http://designmind.frogdesign.com/articles/health/innovation-and-control.html?http://hbr.org/2008/12/which-kind-of-collaboration-is-right-for-you/ar/1http://hbr.org/2008/12/which-kind-of-collaboration-is-right-for-you/ar/1http://hbr.org/2008/12/which-kind-of-collaboration-is-right-for-you/ar/1http://hbr.org/2008/12/which-kind-of-collaboration-is-right-for-you/ar/1http://userdr2.fox.pil.dk/http://userdr2.fox.pil.dk/http://userdr2.fox.pil.dk/http://userdr2.fox.pil.dk/http://www.ukirc.ac.uk/http://www.ukirc.ac.uk/http://www.icn.ucl.ac.uk/http://www.icn.ucl.ac.uk/http://www.theraftconsultancy.co.uk/http://www.theraftconsultancy.co.uk/http://www.theraftconsultancy.co.uk/http://www.theraftconsultancy.co.uk/http://innovationbeehive.com/http://innovationbeehive.com/http://www.innovateuk.org/http://www.innovateuk.org/http://designmind.frogdesign.com/articles/health/innovation-and-control.html?http://designmind.frogdesign.com/articles/health/innovation-and-control.html?http://designmind.frogdesign.com/articles/health/innovation-and-control.html?http://designmind.frogdesign.com/articles/health/innovation-and-control.html? -
7/27/2019 Crowdsourcing A Pandemonium for disruptive innovation
34/34
Visciola, M. (2009) Technology Vs. Design--What is the Source of Innovation? -
BusinessWeek - Comment of Michele Visciola. [Online] Available at: http://
www.businessweek.com/innovate/NussbaumOnDesign/archives/2009/12/
technology_vs_c.html [Accessed October 30, 2011].
Visciola, M., (2009) People-Centred Innovation or Culture Evolution? Interactions,
(November + December 2009), pp.4245.
Wall, K. (2010) Scott Anthony on Innovation Management [Internet] In: Innovation
Management. Available from: . [Accessed 5th October 2011]
Wayner, P. (2000) Free for All: How Linux and the Free Software Movement Undercut the
High-Tech Titans, SiSU information Structuring Universe. [Online] Available at:
www.jus.uio.no/sisu/free_for_all.peter_wayner/portrait.pdf.
We Are the 99 Percent (no date) [Online] Available at: http://
wearethe99percent.tumblr.com/ [Accessed December 5, 2011].
Wikipedia (no date) Actornetwork theory [Online] Available at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Actor%E2%80%93network_theory [Accessed January 31, 2012].
Wikipedia (no date) Brockhaus Enzyklopdie [Online] Available at: http://en.wikipedia.org/
wiki/Brockhaus_Enzyklop%C3%A4die [Accessed February 27, 2012].
Wright, N. (2012) Open Innovation crowdsourcing. Personal experiences - Wright.Interview
with Nick Wright. Interviewed by Cristobal Ortiz Ehmann. 3rd February 2012. Available at:http://tiny.cc/o094aw
http://tiny.cc/o094awhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brockhaus_Enzyklop%C3%A4diehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brockhaus_Enzyklop%C3%A4diehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actor%E2%80%93network_theoryhttp://wearethe99percent.tumblr.com/http://wearethe99percent.tumblr.com/http://www.jus.uio.no/sisu/free_for_all.peter_wayner/portrait.pdfhttp://www.jus.uio.no/sisu/free_for_all.peter_wayner/portrait.pdfhttp://www.innovationmanagement.se/2010/10/14/scott-anthony-on-innovation-management/http://www.innovationmanagement.se/2010/10/14/scott-anthony-on-innovation-management/http://tiny.cc/o094awhttp://tiny.cc/o094awhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brockhaus_Enzyklop%C3%A4diehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brockhaus_Enzyklop%C3%A4diehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brockhaus_Enzyklop%C3%A4diehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brockhaus_Enzyklop%C3%A4diehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actor%E2%80%93network_theoryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actor%E2%80%93network_theoryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actor%E2%80%93network_theoryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actor%E2%80%93network_theoryhttp://wearethe99percent.tumblr.com/http://wearethe99percent.tumblr.com/http://wearethe99percent.tumblr.com/http://wearethe99percent.tumblr.com/http://www.jus.uio.no/sisu/free_for_all.peter_wayner/portrait.pdfhttp://www.jus.uio.no/sisu/free_for_all.peter_wayner/portrait.pdfhttp://www.innovationmanagement.se/2010/10/14/scott-anthony-on-innovation-management/http://www.innovationmanagement.se/2010/10/14/scott-anthony-on-innovation-management/http://www.innovationmanagement.se/2010/10/14/scott-anthony-on-innovation-management/http://www.innovationmanagement.se/2010/10/14/scott-anthony-on-innovation-management/http://www.businessweek.com/innovate/NussbaumOnDesign/archives/2009/12/technology_vs_c.htmlhttp://www.businessweek.com/innovate/NussbaumOnDesign/archives/2009/12/technology_vs_c.htmlhttp://www.businessweek.com/innovate/NussbaumOnDesign/archives/2009/12/technology_vs_c.htmlhttp://www.businessweek.com/innovate/NussbaumOnDesign/archives/2009/12/technology_vs_c.htmlhttp://www.businessweek.com/innovate/NussbaumOnDesign/archives/2009/12/technology_vs_c.htmlhttp://www.businessweek.com/innovate/NussbaumOnDesign/archives/2009/12/technology_vs_c.html