@article {1165274, title = {Do Experts Listen to Other Experts? Field Experimental Evidence from Scientific Peer Review}, journal = {HBS Working Paper Series}, year = {Working Paper}, abstract = {Organizations in science and elsewhere often rely on committees of experts to make important decisions, such as evaluating early-stage projects and ideas. However, very little is known about how experts influence each other{\textquoteright}s opinions and how that influence affects final evaluations. Here, we use a field experiment in scientific peer review to examine experts{\textquoteright} susceptibility to the opinions of others. We recruited 277 faculty members at seven U.S. medical schools to evaluate 47 early stage research proposals in biomedicine. In our experiment, evaluators (1) completed independent reviews of research ideas, (2) received (artificial) scores attributed to anonymous {\textquotedblleft}other reviewers{\textquotedblright} from the same or a different discipline, and (3) decided whether to update their initial scores. Evaluators did not meet in person and were not otherwise aware of each other. We find that, even in a completely anonymous setting and controlling for a range of career factors, women updated their scores 13\% more often than men, while very highly cited {\textquotedblleft}superstar{\textquotedblright} reviewers updated 24\% less often than others. Women in male-dominated subfields were particularly likely to update, updating 8\% more for every 10\% decrease in subfield representation. Very low scores were particularly {\textquotedblleft}sticky{\textquotedblright} and seldom updated upward, suggesting a possible source of conservatism in evaluation. These systematic differences in how world-class experts respond to external opinions can lead to substantial gender and status disparities in whose opinion ultimately matters in collective expert judgment.}, url = {https://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Pages/item.aspx?num=58470}, author = {Teplitskiy, Misha and Ranu, Hardeep and Gray, Gary and Menietti, Michael and Guinan, Eva and Lakhani, Karim} } @article {1232210, title = {Managerial Recognition as an Incentive for Innovation Platform Engagement: A Field Experiment and Interview Study at NASA}, journal = {HBS Working Paper Series}, year = {Working Paper}, url = {https://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Pages/item.aspx?num=57217}, author = {Jana Gallus and Jung, Olivia S. and Lakhani, Karim R.} } @article {1232209, title = {Engineering Serendipity: When Does Knowledge Sharing Lead to Knowledge Production?}, journal = {Strategic Management Journal}, year = {Forthcoming}, abstract = {

We investigate how knowledge similarity between two individuals is systematically related to the likelihood that a serendipitous encounter results in knowledge production. We conduct a field experiment at a medical research symposium, where we exogenously varied opportunities for face-to-face encounters among 15,817 scientist-pairs. Our data include direct observations of interaction patterns collected using sociometric badges, and detailed, longitudinal data of the scientists{\textquoteright} postsymposium publication records over 6 years. We find that interacting scientists acquire more knowledge and coauthor 1.2 more papers when they share some overlapping interests, but cite each other{\textquoteright}s work between three and seven times less when they are from the same field. Our findings reveal both collaborative and competitive effects of knowledge similarity on knowledge production outcomes.

Click here to view the video abstract.

}, url = {https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.3256}, author = {Jacqueline N. Lane and Ganguli, Ina and Gaule, Patrick and Guinan, Eva C. and Lakhani, Karim R.} } @article {1515531, title = {Ideas from the Frontline: Improvement Opportunities in Federally Qualified Health Centers}, journal = {Journal of General Internal Medicine}, year = {2023}, abstract = {

Background

Engaging frontline clinicians and staff in quality improvement is a promising bottom-up approach to transforming primary care practices. This may be especially true in federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) and similar safety-net settings where large-scale, top-down transformation efforts are often associated with declining worker morale and increasing burnout. Innovation contests, which decentralize problem-solving, can be used to involve frontline workers in idea generation and selection.

Objective

We aimed to describe the ideas that frontline clinicians and staff suggested via organizational innovation contests in a national sample of 54 FQHCs.

Interventions

Innovation contests solicited ideas for improving care from all frontline workers{\textemdash}regardless of professional expertise, job title, and organizational tenure and excluding those in senior management{\textemdash}and offered opportunities to vote on ideas.

Participants

A total of 1,417 frontline workers across all participating FQHCs generated 2,271 improvement opportunities.

Approaches

We performed a content analysis and organized the ideas into codes (e.g., standardization, workplace perks, new service, staff relationships, community development) and categories (e.g., operations, employees, patients).

Key Results

Ideas from frontline workers in participating FQHCs called attention to standardization (n = 386, 17\%), staffing (n = 244, 11\%), patient experience (n = 223, 10\%), staff training (n = 145, 6\%), workplace perks (n = 142, 6\%), compensation (n = 101, 5\%), new service (n = 92, 4\%), management-staff relationships (n = 82, 4\%), and others. Voting results suggested that staffing resources, standardization, and patient communication were key issues among workers.

Conclusions

Innovation contests generated numerous ideas for improvement from the frontline. It is likely that the issues described in this study have become even more salient today, as the COVID-19 pandemic has had devastating impacts on work environments and health/social needs of patients living in low-resourced communities. Continued work is needed to promote learning and information exchange about opportunities to improve and transform practices between policymakers, managers, and providers and staff at the frontlines.

}, url = {https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11606-023-08294-1}, author = {Olivia S. Jung and Fahima Begum and Andrea Dorbu and Sara J. Singer and Patricia Satterstrom} } @article {1515746, title = {Commonwealth Bank: Amplifying Customer Centricity with AI}, journal = {Management and Business Review}, volume = {3}, year = {2023}, pages = {140-143}, url = {https://mbrjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/AI-Customer-Engagement-issue.pdf}, author = {Steven Randazzo and Jin H. Paik and Yael Grushka-Cockayne} } @article {1468391, title = {The Opportunists in Innovation Contests Understanding Whom to Attract and How to Attract Them}, journal = {Research-Technology Management}, volume = {66}, year = {2022}, pages = {30-40}, abstract = {Organizations increasingly turn to innovation contests for solutions to their complex problems. But these contests still face a fundamental inefficiency: they need to attract many participants to find the right solution, resulting in high costs and uncertainty. Studies have identified multiple dichotomies of successful and unsuccessful solver types, but these diverge. These studies also offer little guidance on how to attract successful solver types. We introduce the opportunist-transactor dichotomy, bridging whom to attract and how to attract them. Opportunists view the contest as a onramp to a new pursuit instead of a temporary undertaking. Characterizing solvers according to this new dichotomy was a better predictor of success than existing ones: in our context, most winners were opportunists. This type of solver was also reliably attracted by the seeker{\textquoteright}s in-kind incentives, unlike those described by the other dichotomies. Our insights provide a deeper understanding of participants in complex contests and a concrete lever for influencing who shows up to solve.}, url = {https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/08956308.2022.2132771}, author = {Ademir Vrolijk and Zoe Szajnfarber} } @article {1468396, title = {Relative Feedback Increases Disparities in Effort and Performance in Crowdsourcing Contests: Evidence from a Quasi-Experiment on Topcoder}, journal = {Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction}, volume = {6}, year = {2022}, pages = {1-27}, abstract = {Rankings and leaderboards are often used in crowdsourcing contests and online communities to motivate individual contributions but feedback based on social comparison can also have negative effects. Here, we study the unequal effects of such feedback on individual effort and performance for individuals of different ability. We hypothesize that the effects of social comparison differ for top performers and bottom performers in a way that the inequality between the two increases. We use a quasi-experimental design to test our predictions with data from Topcoder, a large online crowdsourcing platform that publishes computer programming contests. We find that in contests where the submitted code is evaluated against others{\textquoteright} submissions, rather than using an absolute scale, top performers increase their effort while bottom performers decrease it. As a result, relative scoring leads to better outcomes for those at the top but lower engagement for bottom performers. Our findings expose an important but overlooked drawback from using gamified competitions, rankings, and relative evaluations, with potential implications for crowdsourcing markets, online learning environments, online communities, and organizations in general.}, url = {https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/3555649}, author = {Milena Tsvetkova and Sebastian M{\"u}ller and Oana Vuculescu and Haylee Ham and Rinat A. Sergeev} } @article {1379086, title = {How status of research papers affects the way they are read and cited}, year = {2022}, abstract = {Although citations are widely used to measure the influence of scientific works, research shows that many citations serve rhetorical functions and reflect little-to-no influence on the citing authors. If highly cited papers disproportionately attract rhetorical citations then their citation counts may reflect rhetorical usefulness more than influence. Alternatively, researchers may perceive highly cited papers to be of higher quality and invest more effort into reading them, leading to disproportionately substantive citations. We test these arguments using data on 17,154 randomly sampled citations collected via surveys from 9,380 corresponding authors in 15 fields. We find that most citations (54\%) had little-to-no influence on the citing authors. However, citations to the most highly cited papers were 2{\textendash}3 times more likely to denote substantial influence. Experimental and correlational data show a key mechanism: displaying low citation counts lowers perceptions of a paper{\textquoteright}s quality, and papers with poor perceived quality are read more superficially. The results suggest that higher citation counts lead to more meaningful engagement from readers and, consequently, the most highly cited papers influence the research frontier much more than their raw citation counts imply.}, url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2022.104484}, author = {Teplitskiy, Misha and Eamon Duede and Menietti, Michael and Lakhani, Karim R.} } @report {1431703, title = {Census II of Free and Open Source Software {\textemdash} Application Libraries}, year = {2022}, institution = { Harvard Laboratory for Innovation Science (LISH) and Open Source Security Foundation (OpenSSF)}, abstract = {

Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) has become a critical part of the modern economy. There are tens of millions of FOSS projects, many of which are built into software and products we use every day. However, it is difficult to fully understand the health, economic value, and security of FOSS because it is produced in a decentralized and distributed manner. This distributed development approach makes it unclear how much FOSS, and precisely what FOSS projects, are most widely used. This lack of understanding is a critical problem faced by those who want to help enhance the security of FOSS (e.g., companies, governments, individuals), yet do not know what projects to start with. This problem has garnered widespread attention with the Heartbleed and log4shell vulnerabilities that resulted in the susceptibility of hundreds of millions of devices to exploitation.

This report, Census II, is the second investigation into the widespread use of FOSS and aggregates data from over half a million observations of FOSS libraries used in production applications at thousands of companies, which aims to shed light on the most commonly used FOSS packages at the application library level. This effort builds on the Census I report that focused on the lower level critical operating system libraries and utilities, improving our understanding of the FOSS packages that software applications rely on. Such insights will help to identify critical FOSS packages to allow for resource prioritization to address security issues in this widely used software.

The Census II effort utilizes data from partner Software Composition Analysis (SCA) companies including Snyk, the Synopsys Cybersecurity Research Center (CyRC), and FOSSA, which partnered with Harvard to advance the state of open source research. Our goal is to not only identify the most widely used FOSS, but to also provide an example of how the distributed nature of FOSS requires a multi-party effort to fully understand the value and security of the FOSS ecosystem. Only through data-sharing, coordination, and investment will the value of this critical component of the digital economy be preserved for generations to come.

In addition to the detailed results on FOSS usage provided in the report, we identified five high-level findings: 1) the need for a standardized naming schema for software components, 2) the complexities associated with package versions, 3) much of the most widely used FOSS is developed by only a handful of contributors, 4) the increasing importance of individual developer account security, and 5) the persistence of legacy software in the open source space.

}, url = {https://linuxfoundation.org/tools/census-ii-of-free-and-open-source-software--application-libraries/}, author = {Nagle, Frank and Dana, James and Hoffman, Jennifer and Randazzo, Steven and Zhou, Yanuo} } @article {1431103, title = {What{\textquoteright}s driving the diffusion of next-generation digital technologies?}, journal = {Technovation}, year = {2022}, abstract = {The recent development and diffusion of next-generation digital technologies (NGDTs) such as artificial intelligence, the Internet of Things, big data, 3D printing, and so on are expected to have an immense impact on businesses, innovation, and society. While we know from extant research that a firm{\textquoteright}s R\&D investment, intangible assets, and productivity are factors that influence technology use more generally, to date there is little known about the factors that determine how these emerging tools are used, and by who. Using Probit and OLS modeling on a survey of 12,579 South Korean firms in 2017, we conduct one of the first comprehensive examinations highlighting various firm characteristics that drive NGDT implementation. While much of the literature assesses the use of individual technologies, our research attempts to unveil the extent to which firms implement NGDTs in bundles. Our investigation shows that more than half of the firms that use NGDTs deployed multiple technologies simultaneously. One of the insightful complementarities identified in this research exists amongst technologies that generate, facilitate and demand large sums of data, including big data, IoT, cloud computing and AI. Such technologies also appear important for innovative tools such as 3D printing and robotics.}, url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2022.102477}, author = {Cho, Jaehan and Timothy DeStefano and Kim, Hanhin and Kim, Inchul and Jin Hyun Paik} } @case {1432630, title = {Customer-Centric Design with Artificial Intelligence: Commonwealth Bank}, year = {2021}, abstract = {As Commonwealth Bank (CommBank) CEO Matt Comyn delivered the full financial year results in August 2021 over videoconference, it took less than two minutes for him to make his first mention of the organization{\textquoteright}s Customer Engagement Engine (CEE), the AI-driven customer experience platform. With full cross-channel integration, CEE operated using 450 machine learning models that learned from a total of 157 billion data points. Against the backdrop of a once-in-a century global pandemic, CEE had helped the Group deliver a strong financial performance while also supporting customers with assistance packages designed in response to the coronavirus outbreak. Six years earlier, in 2015, financial services were embarking on a transformation driven by the increased availability and standardization of data and artificial intelligence (AI). Speed, access and price, once key differentiators for attracting and retaining customers, had been commoditized by AI, and new differentiators such as customization and enhanced interactions were expected. Seeking to create value for customers through an efficient, data-driven practice, CommBank leveraged existing channels of operations. Angus Sullivan, Group Executive of Retail Banking, remarked, "How do we, over thousands of interactions, try and generate the same outcomes as from a really in-depth, one-to-one conversation?" The leadership team began to make key investments in data and infrastructure. While some headway had been made, newly appointed Chief Data and Analytics Officer, Andrew McMullan, was brought in to catalyze the process and progress of the leadership{\textquoteright}s vision for a new customer experience. Success would depend on continued drive from leadership, buy-in from frontline staff, and a reliable team of passionate and knowledgeable data professionals. How did Comyn and McMullan bring their vision to life: to deliver better outcomes through a new approach to customer-centricity? How did they overcome internal resistance, data sharing barriers, and requirements for technical capabilities?}, url = {https://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Pages/item.aspx?num=61392}, author = {Lakhani, Karim R. and Yael Grushka-Cockayne and Paik, Jin H. and Randazzo, Steven} } @article {1402479, title = {Virtual Watercoolers: A Field Experiment on Virtual Synchronous Interactions and Performance of Organizational Newcomers}, journal = {SSRN}, volume = {Harvard Business School Technology \& Operations Mgt. Unit Working Paper }, year = {2021}, pages = {21-125}, abstract = {Do virtual, yet informal and synchronous, interactions affect individual performance outcomes of organizational newcomers? We report results from a randomized field experiment conducted at a large global organization that estimates the performance effects of {\textquotedblleft}virtual water coolers{\textquotedblright} for remote interns participating in the firm{\textquoteright}s flagship summer internship program. Findings indicate that interns who had randomized opportunities to interact synchronously and informally with senior managers were significantly more likely to receive offers for full-time employment, achieved higher weekly performance ratings, and had more positive attitudes toward their remote internships. Further, we observed stronger results when the interns and senior managers were demographically similar. Secondary results also hint at a possible abductive explanation of the performance effects: virtual watercoolers between interns and senior managers may have facilitated knowledge and advice sharing. This study demonstrates that hosting brief virtual water cooler sessions with senior managers might have job and career benefits for organizational newcomers working in remote workplaces, an insight with immediate managerial relevance.}, url = {https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3855788}, author = {Iavor Bojinov and Prithwiraj Choudhury and Jacqueline N. Lane} } @article {1271139, title = {Improving Deconvolution Methods in Biology through Open Innovation Competitions: An Application to the Connectivity Map}, journal = {Bioinformatics}, year = {2021}, abstract = {Do machine learning methods improve standard deconvolution techniques for gene expression data? This article uses a unique new dataset combined with an open innovation competition to evaluate a wide range of approaches developed by 294 competitors from 20 countries. The competition{\textquoteright}s objective was to address a deconvolution problem critical to analyzing genetic perturbations from the Connectivity Map. The issue consists of separating gene expression of individual genes from raw measurements obtained from gene pairs. We evaluated the outcomes using ground-truth data (direct measurements for single genes) obtained from the same samples.}, url = {https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btab192}, author = {Blasco, Andrea and Natoli, Ted and Endres, Michael G. and Sergeev, Rinat A. and Randazzo, Steven and Paik, Jin and Macaluso, Max and Narayan, Rajiv and Lakhani, Karim R. and Subramaniam, Aravind} } @article {1401842, title = {Less Information, More Comparison, and Better Performance: Evidence from a Field Experiment}, journal = {Journal of Accounting Research }, volume = {59}, year = {2021}, pages = {657-711}, abstract = {We use a field experiment in professional sports to compare effects of providing absolute, relative, or both absolute\ and\ relative measures in performance reports for employees. Although studies have documented that the provision of these types of measures can benefit performance, theory from economic and accounting literature suggests that it may be optimal for firms to direct employees{\textquoteright} attention to some types of measures by omitting others. In line with this theory, we find that relative performance information alone yields the best performance effects in our setting{\textemdash}that is, that a subset of information (relative performance information) dominates the full information set (absolute and relative performance information together) in boosting performance. In cross-sectional and survey-data analyses, we do not find that restricting the number of measures shown per se benefits performance. Rather, we find that restricting the type of measures shown to convey only relative information increases involvement in peer-performance comparison, benefitting performance. Our findings extend research on weighting of and responses to measures in performance reports.}, url = {https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/1475-679X.12362}, author = {Henry Eyring and Patrick J. Ferguson and Sebastian Koppers} } @article {1394313, title = {Indefinitely repeated contests: An experimental study}, journal = {Experimental Economics }, year = {2021}, abstract = {We experimentally explore indefinitely repeated contests. Theory predicts more cooperation, in the form of lower expenditures, in indefinitely repeated contests with a longer expected time horizon. Our data support this prediction, although this result attenuates with contest experience. Theory also predicts more cooperation in indefinitely repeated contests compared to finitely repeated contests of the same expected length, and we find empirical support for this. Finally, theory predicts no difference in cooperation across indefinitely repeated\ winner-take-all\ and\ proportional-prize\ contests, yet we find evidence of less cooperation in the latter, though only in longer treatments with more contests played. Our paper extends the experimental literature on indefinitely repeated games to contests and, more generally, contributes to an infant empirical literature on behavior in indefinitely repeated games with {\textquotedblleft}large{\textquotedblright} strategy spaces.}, url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s10683-021-09703-0}, author = {Philip Brookins and Dmitry Ryvkin and Andrew Smyth} } @article {1394305, title = {Risk preference heterogeneity in group contests}, journal = {Journal of Mathematical Economics}, year = {2021}, abstract = {We analyze the first model of a group contest with players that are heterogeneous in their risk preferences. In our model, individuals{\textquoteright} preferences are represented by a utility function exhibiting a generalized form of constant absolute risk aversion,\ allowing us to consider any combination of risk-averse, risk-neutral, and risk-loving players. We begin by proving equilibrium existence and uniqueness under both linear and convex investment costs. Then, we explore how the sorting of a compatible set of players by their risk attitudes into competing groups affects aggregate investment. With linear costs, a balanced sorting (i.e., minimizing the variance in risk attitudes across groups) always produces an aggregate investment level that is at least as high as an unbalanced sorting (i.e., maximizing the variance in risk attitudes across groups). Under convex costs, however, identifying which sorting is optimal is more nuanced and depends on preference and cost parameters.}, url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmateco.2021.102499}, author = {Philip Brookins and Paan Jindapon} } @article {1334313, title = {AI in Enterprise: AI Product Management}, year = {2020}, abstract = {

While there are dispersed resources to learn more about artificial intelligence, there remains a need to cultivate a community of practitioners for cyclical exposure and knowledge sharing of best practices in the enterprise. That is why\ Laboratory for Innovation Science at Harvard launched the AI in the Enterprise series, which exposes managers and executives to interesting applications of AI and the decisions behind developing such tools.\ 

Moderated by HBS Professor and co-author of Competing in the Age of AI, Karim R. Lakhani, the July virtual session featured Peter Skomoroch from DataWrangling and formerly at LinkedIn. Together, they discussed what differentiates AI product management from managing other tech products and how to adapt to the uncertainty in the AI product lifecycle.

}, author = {Hannah Mayer}, editor = {Paik, Jin H. and Jenny Hoffman and Randazzo, Steven} } @article {1390104, title = {What Has Changed? The Impact of COVID Pandemic on the Technology and Innovation Management Research Agenda}, journal = {Journal of Management Studies}, volume = {57}, year = {2020}, pages = {1754-1758}, abstract = {Whereas the pandemic has tested the agility and resilience of organizations, it forces a deeper look at the assumptions underlying theoretical frameworks that guide managerial decisions and organizational practices. In this commentary, we explore the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on technology and innovation management research. We identify key assumptions, and then, discuss how new areas of investigation emerge based on the changed reality.}, url = {https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12634}, author = {George, Gerard and Lakhani, Karim R. and Puranam, Phanish} } @case {1382383, title = {OpenIDEO (B)}, year = {2020}, abstract = {In the midst of 2020, as the coronavirus pandemic was unfolding, OpenIDEO - an online open innovation platform focused on design-driven solutions to social issues - rapidly launched a new challenge to improve access to health information, empower communities to stay safe during the COVID-19 crisis, and inspire global leaders to communicate effectively. OpenIDEO was particularly suited to challenges which required cross-system or sector-wide collaboration due to its focus on social impact and ecosystem design, but its leadership pondered how they could continue to improve virtual collaboration and to share their insights from nearly a decade of running online challenges. Conceived as an exercise of disruptive digital innovation, OpenIDEO successfully created a strong open innovation community, but how could they sustain - or even improve - their support to community members and increase the social impact of their online challenges in the coming years?}, url = {https://hbsp.harvard.edu/product/621058-PDF-ENG}, author = {Lakhani, Karim R. and Fayard, Anne-Laure and Manos Gkeredakis and Jin Hyun Paik} } @article {1378378, title = {Data Science is the New Accounting}, year = {2020}, abstract = {

In the October session of the AI in Enterprise series, HBS Professor and co-author of\ Competing in the Age of AI, Karim R. Lakhani and Roger Magoulas (Data Science Advisor) delved into O{\textquoteright}Reilly{\textquoteright}s most recent survey of AI adoption in larger companies. The discussion\ explored common risk factors, techniques, tools, as well as the data governance and data conditioning that large companies are using to build and scale their AI practices.\ 

Read Hannah Mayer{\textquoteright}s recap of the event\ to learn more about what senior managers in enterprises need to know about\ AI - particularly, if they want to adopt at scale.\ 

}, author = {Hannah Mayer}, editor = {Paik, Jin H. and Jenny Hoffman} } @case {1382590, title = {Moderna (A)}, year = {2020}, abstract = {In summer 2020, Stephane Bancel, CEO of biotech firm Moderna, faces several challenges as his company races to develop a vaccine for COVID-19. The case explores how a company builds a digital organization, and leverages artificial intelligence and other digital resources to speed its operations, manage its processes and ensure quality across research, testing and manufacturing. Built from the ground up as such a digital organization, Moderna was able to respond to the challenge of developing a vaccine as soon as the gene sequence for the virus was posted to the Web on January 11, 2020. As the vaccine enters Phase III clinical trials, Bancel considers several issues: How should Bancel and his team balance the demands of developing a vaccine for a virus creating a global pandemic alongside the other important vaccines and therapies in Moderna{\textquoteright}s pipeline? How should Moderna communicate its goals and vision to investors in this unprecedented time? Should Moderna be concerned it will be pegged as "a COVID-19 company?"}, url = {https://hbsp.harvard.edu/product/621032-PDF-ENG}, author = {Iansiti, Marco and Lakhani, Karim R. and Hannah Mayer and Herman, Kerry} } @article {1373826, title = {AI in Enterprise: In Tech We Trust... Maybe Too Much?}, year = {2020}, abstract = {

While there are dispersed resources to learn more about artificial intelligence, there remains a need to cultivate a community of practitioners for cyclical exposure and knowledge sharing of best practices in the enterprise. That is why\ Laboratory for Innovation Science at Harvard launched the AI in the Enterprise series, which exposes managers and executives to interesting applications of AI and the decisions behind developing such tools.\ 

In the September session of the AI in Enterprise series, HBS Professor and co-author of\ Competing in the Age of AI, Karim R. Lakhani spoke with Latanya Sweeney about algorithmic bias, data privacy, and the way forward for enterprises adopting AI. They explored how AI and ML can impact society in unexpected ways and what senior enterprise leaders can do to avoid negative externalities. Professor of the Practice of Government and Technology at the Harvard Kennedy School and in the Harvard Faculty of Arts and Sciences, director and founder of the\ Data Privacy Lab, and former Chief Technology Officer at the U.S. Federal Trade Commission, Latanya Sweeney pioneered the field known as data privacy and launched the emerging area known as algorithmic fairness.

}, author = {Hannah Mayer}, editor = {Paik, Jin H. and Jenny Hoffman} } @article {1365587, title = {From Craft to Commodity: The Evolution of AI in Pharma and Beyond}, year = {2020}, author = {Hannah Mayer and Jin Hyun Paik and Timothy DeStefano and Jenny Hoffman} } @article {1365467, title = {Machine learning for pattern discovery in management research}, journal = {Strategic Management Journal}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Supervised machine learning (ML) methods are a powerful toolkit for discovering robust patterns in quantitative data. The patterns identified by ML could be used for exploratory inductive or abductive research, or for post hoc analysis of regression results to detect patterns that may have gone unnoticed. However, ML models should not be treated as the result of a deductive causal test. To demonstrate the application of ML for pattern discovery, we implement ML algorithms to study employee turnover at a large technology company. We interpret the relationships between variables using partial dependence plots, which uncover surprising nonlinear and interdependent patterns between variables that may have gone unnoticed using traditional methods. To guide readers evaluating ML for pattern discovery, we provide guidance for evaluating model performance, highlight human decisions in the process, and warn of common misinterpretation pitfalls. The Supporting Information section provides code and data to implement the algorithms demonstrated in this article.}, url = {https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/smj.3215}, author = {Prithwiraj Choudhury and Ryan T. Allen and Endres, Michael G.} } @article {1365683, title = {From Craft to Commodity: The Evolution of AI in Pharma and Beyond}, year = {2020}, abstract = {

While there are dispersed resources to learn more about artificial intelligence, there remains a need to cultivate a community of practitioners for cyclical exposure and knowledge sharing of best practices in the enterprise. That is why\ Laboratory for Innovation Science at Harvard launched the AI in the Enterprise series, which exposes managers and executives to interesting applications of AI and the decisions behind developing such tools.\ 

Moderated by HBS Professor and co-author of Competing in the Age of AI, Karim R. Lakhani, the August virtual session featured Reza Olfati-Saber, an experienced academic researcher currently managing teams of data scientists and life scientists across the globe for Sanofi. Together, they discussed the evolution of AI in life science experimentation and how it may become the determining factor for R\&D success in pharma and other industries.

}, author = {Hannah Mayer and Paik, Jin H. and Timothy DeStefano and Jenny Hoffman} } @proceedings {1365465, title = {The Role of Inducement Prizes}, year = {2020}, abstract = {On May 29, 2019, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, in cooperation with the Laboratory for Innovation Science at Harvard (LISH), convened a workshop in Washington, D.C. on the role of inducement prizes to spur American innovation. Unlike prizes that recognize past achievements, these inducement prizes are designed to stimulate innovative activity, whether it be the creation of a desired technology, orienting research efforts toward designing products that are capable of being used at scale by customers, or developing products with wide societal benefits. Workshop participants explored how prizes fit into federal and non-federal support for innovation, the benefits and disadvantages of prizes, and the differences between cash and non-cash prizes. Other discussion topics included the conditions under which prizes are most effective, how to measure the effectiveness of prizes, and the characteristics of prize winners. This publication summarizes the presentations and discussions from the workshop.}, url = {https://www.nap.edu/catalog/25892/the-role-of-inducement-prizes-proceedings-of-a-workshop-in}, author = {Anita Eisenstadt and Meghan Ange-Stark and Gail Cohen} } @article {1332063, title = {Unequal effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on scientists}, journal = {Nature Human Behavior}, year = {2020}, url = {https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-020-0921-y}, author = {Myers, Kyle R. and Tham, Wei Yang and Yin, Yian and Cohodes, Nina and Thursby, Jerry G. and Thursby, Marie C. and Schiffer, Peter and Walsh, Joseph T. and Lakhani, Karim R. and Wang, Dashun} } @article {1365464, title = {Innovation contest: Effect of perceived support for learning on participation}, journal = {Health Care Management Review}, volume = {45}, year = {2020}, pages = {255-266}, abstract = {Frontline staff are well positioned to conceive improvement opportunities based on first-hand knowledge of what works and does not work. The\ innovation\ contest\ may be a relevant and useful vehicle to elicit staff ideas. However, the success of the\ contest\ likely depends on perceived organizational support for learning; when staff believe that support for learning-oriented culture, practices, and leadership is low, they may be less willing or able to share ideas.}, url = {https://journals.lww.com/hcmrjournal/Abstract/2020/07000/Innovation_contest__Effect_of_perceived_support.9.aspx}, author = {Jung, Olivia S. and Blasco, Andrea and Lakhani, Karim R.} } @article {1330440, title = {Development of a Deep Learning Algorithm for Periapical Disease Detection in Dental Radiographs}, journal = {Diagnostics}, volume = {10}, year = {2020}, pages = {430}, abstract = {Periapical radiolucencies, which can be detected on panoramic radiographs, are one of the most common radiographic findings in dentistry and have a differential diagnosis including infections, granuloma, cysts and tumors. In this study, we seek to investigate the ability with which 24 oral and maxillofacial (OMF) surgeons assess the presence of periapical lucencies on panoramic radiographs, and we compare these findings to the performance of a predictive deep learning algorithm that we have developed using a curated data set of 2902 de-identified panoramic radiographs. The mean diagnostic positive predictive value (PPV) of OMF surgeons based on their assessment of panoramic radiographic images was 0.69 ({\textpm}0.13), indicating that dentists on average falsely diagnose 31\% of cases as radiolucencies. However, the mean diagnostic true positive rate (TPR) was 0.51 ({\textpm}0.14), indicating that on average 49\% of all radiolucencies were missed. We demonstrate that the deep learning algorithm achieves a better performance than 14 of 24 OMF surgeons within the cohort, exhibiting an average precision of 0.60 ({\textpm}0.04), and an F1\ score of 0.58 ({\textpm}0.04) corresponding to a PPV of 0.67 ({\textpm}0.05) and TPR of 0.51 ({\textpm}0.05). The algorithm, trained on limited data and evaluated on clinically validated ground truth, has potential to assist OMF surgeons in detecting periapical lucencies on panoramic radiographs.\ }, url = { https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4418/10/6/430}, author = {Endres, Michael G. and Hillen, Florian and Salloumis, Marios and Sedaghat, Ahmad R. and Stefan M. and Quatela, Olivia and Hanken, Henning and Smeets, Ralf and Beck-Broichsitter, Benedicta and Rendenback, Carsten and Lakhani, Karim R. and Heiland, Max and Gaudin, Robert} } @journal {1309932, title = {Quantifying the Immediate Effects of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Scientists}, year = {2020}, abstract = {The COVID-19 pandemic has undoubtedly disrupted the scientific enterprise, but we lack empirical evidence on the nature and magnitude of these disruptions. Here we report the results of a survey of approximately 4,500 Principal Investigators (PIs) at U.S.- and Europe-based research institutions. Distributed in mid-April 2020, the survey solicited information about how scientists{\textquoteright} work changed from the onset of the pandemic, how their research output might be affected in the near future, and a wide range of individuals{\textquoteright} characteristics. Scientists report a sharp decline in time spent on research on average, but there is substantial heterogeneity with a significant share reporting no change or even increases. Some of this heterogeneity is due to field-specific differences, with laboratory-based fields being the most negatively affected, and some is due to gender, with female scientists reporting larger declines. However, among the individuals{\textquoteright} characteristics examined, the largest disruptions are connected to a usually unobserved dimension: childcare. Reporting a young dependent is associated with declines similar in magnitude to those reported by the laboratory-based fields and can account for a significant fraction of gender differences. Amidst scarce evidence about the role of parenting in scientists{\textquoteright} work, these results highlight the fundamental and heterogeneous ways this pandemic is affecting the scientific workforce, and may have broad relevance for shaping responses to the pandemic{\textquoteright}s effect on science and beyond.}, url = {https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3608302}, author = {Myers, Kyle R. and Tham, Wei Yang and Yin, Yian and Cohodes, Nina and Thursby, Jerry G. and Thursby, Marie C. and Schiffer, Peter E. and Walsh, Joseph T. and Lakhani, Karim R. and Wang, Dashun} } @article {1324736, title = {AI in the Enterprise: How Do I Get Started?}, year = {2020}, abstract = {

While there are dispersed resources to learn more about artificial intelligence, there remains a need to cultivate a community of practitioners for cyclical exposure and knowledge sharing of best practices in the enterprise. That is why\ Laboratory for Innovation Science at Harvard launched the AI in the Enterprise series, which exposes managers and executives to interesting applications of AI and the decisions behind developing such tools.\ 

Moderated by HBS Professor and co-author of Competing in the Age of AI, Karim R. Lakhani, the most recent virtual session with over 240 attendees featured Rob May, General Partner at PJC, an early-stage venture capital firm, and founder of Inside AI, a premier source for information on AI, robotics and neurotechnology. Together, they discussed why we have seen a rise in interest in AI, what managers should consider when wading into the AI waters, and what steps they can take when it is time to do so.\ 

}, author = {Paik, Jin H. and Randazzo, Steven and Jenny Hoffman} } @article {1355274, title = {Information Disclosure in Contests with Endogenous Entry: An Experiment}, journal = {Management Science}, year = {2020}, abstract = {We use a laboratory experiment to study the effects of disclosing the number of active participants in contests with endogenous entry. At the first stage, potential participants decide whether to enter competition, and at the second stage, entrants choose their investments. In a 2{\texttimes}{\texttimes}2 design, we manipulate the size of the outside option, w, and whether the number of entrants is disclosed between the stages. Theory predicts more entry for lower w and the levels of entry and aggregate investment to be independent of disclosure in all cases. We find empirical entry frequencies decreasing with w. For aggregate investment, we find no effect of disclosure when w is low but a strong positive effect of disclosure when w is high. The difference is driven by substantial overinvestment in contests with a small, publicly known number of players contrasted by more restrained investment in contests in which the number of players is uncertain and may be small. The behavior under disclosure is explained by a combination of joy of winning and entry regret.}, url = {https://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/10.1287/mnsc.2019.3488}, author = {Luke Boosey and Philip Brookins and Dmitry Ryvkin} } @article {1302770, title = {Cloud computing and firm growth}, journal = {VOX}, year = {2020}, abstract = {The last decade has seen a fundamental shift in the way firms access technology, from physical hardware towards cloud computing. This shift not only significantly reduces the cost of such technologies but also allows for the possibility of remote and simultaneous access. This column presents evidence on the impact of cloud adoption by firms using firm level data from the UK. There are marked differences in the effects on young and incumbent firms, where cloud adoption largely impacts the growth of young firms while it affects the geography of incumbent firms.}, url = {https://voxeu.org/article/cloud-computing-and-firm-growth}, author = {Timothy DeStefano and Richard Kneller and Jonathan Timmis} } @article {1291474, title = {Innovation and Design in the Age of Artificial Intelligence}, year = {2020}, abstract = {

At the heart of any innovation process lies a fundamental practice: the way people create ideas and solve problems. This {\textquotedblleft}decision making{\textquotedblright} side of innovation is what scholars and practitioners refer to as {\textquotedblleft}design{\textquotedblright}. Decisions in innovation processes have so far been taken by humans. What happens when they can be substituted by machines? Artificial Intelligence (AI) brings data and algorithms to the core of innovation processes. What are the implications of this diffusion of AI for our understanding of design and innovation? Is AI just another digital technology that, akin to many others, will not significantly question what we know about design? Or will it create transformations in design that current theoretical frameworks cannot capture?

This article proposes a framework for understanding design and innovation in the age of AI. We discuss the implications for design and innovation theory. Specifically, we observe that, as creative problem solving is significantly conducted by algorithms, human design increasingly becomes an activity of\ sense making, i.e. understanding which problems should or could be addressed. This shift in focus calls for new theories and brings design closer to leadership, which is, inherently, an activity of sense making.

Our insights are derived from and illustrated with two cases at the frontier of AI -- Netflix and AirBnB (complemented with analyses in Microsoft and Tesla) --, which point to two directions for the evolution of design and innovation in firms. First, AI enables an organization to overcome many past limitations of human-intensive design processes, by improving the scalability of the process, broadening its scope across traditional boundaries, and enhancing its ability to learn and adapt on the fly. Second, and maybe more surprising, while removing these limitations, AI also appears to deeply enact several popular design\ principles. AI thus reinforces the principles of Design Thinking, namely: being people-centered, abductive, and iterative. In fact, AI enables the creation of solutions that are more highly user-centered than human-based approaches (i.e., to an extreme level of granularity, designed for every single person); that are potentially more creative; and that are continuously updated through learning iterations across the entire product life cycle.

In sum, while AI does not undermine the basic\ principles\ of design, it profoundly changes the\ practice\ of design. Problem solving tasks, traditionally carried out by designers, are now automated into learning loops that operate without limitations of volume and speed. The algorithms embedded in these loops think in a radically different way than a designer who handles complex problems holistically with a systemic perspective. Algorithms instead handle complexity through very simple tasks, which are iterated continuously. This article discusses the implications of these insights for design and innovation management scholars and practitioners.

}, url = {https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/jpim.12523}, author = {Roberto Verganti and Luca Vendraminelli and Iansiti, Marco} } @article {1292912, title = {From Disruption to Collision: The New Competitive Dynamics}, journal = {MIT Sloan Management Review}, year = {2020}, abstract = {In the age of AI, traditional businesses across the economy are being attacked by highly scalable data-driven companies whose operating models leverage network effects to deliver value.}, author = {Iansiti, Marco and Lakhani, Karim R.} } @article {1283054, title = {Innovation Contests for High-Tech Procurement}, journal = {Research-Technology Management}, volume = {63:2}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Innovation managers rarely use crowdsourcing as an innovative instrument despite extensive academic and theoretical research. The lack of tools available to compare and measure crowdsourcing, specifically contests, against traditional methods of procuring goods and services is one barrier to adoption. Using ethnographic research to understand how managers solved their problems, we find that the crowdsourcing model produces higher costs in the framing phase but yields savings in the solving phase, whereas traditional procurement is downstream cost-intensive. Two case study examples with the National Aeronautics and Space Agency (NASA) and the United States Department of Energy demonstrate a potential total cost savings of 27 percent and 33 percent, respectively, using innovation contests. We provide a comprehensive evaluation framework for crowdsourcing contests developed from a high-tech industry perspective, which are applicable to other industries.}, url = {https://doi.org/10.1080/08956308.2020.1707007}, author = {Paik, Jin and Martin Sch{\"o}ll and Sergeev, Rinat and Randazzo, Steven and Lakhani, Karim R.} } @report {1334204, title = {Freelancer, Ltd.}, year = {2020}, institution = {Harvard Business School}, abstract = {Over the course of the 2010s, the rapid advancement of mobile technologies and the rise of online freelancing platforms seemed to portend a radical transformation of labor markets into on-demand, flexible talent pools. Even though several Fortune 500 companies-including Microsoft, Samsung, and General Electric-embraced digital labor solutions, enterprise adoption lagged far behind smaller businesses and startups. Despite the promising potential benefits, concerns persisted about navigating labor regulations, ensuring appropriate vetting, and guaranteeing the quality of work. Sarah Tang, the newly appointed Vice President of Enterprise at Freelancer, Ltd., took on the challenge of crafting the growth strategy, operations, and sales of Freelancer{\textquoteright}s services to Fortune 500 companies. What it would take to convince more enterprises of the potential of on-demand freelance labor that could help them hire skilled freelancers in volume or in multiple countries simultaneously? What did the future hold for open work practices between enterprises and digital labor markets?}, author = {Christopher Stanton and Lakhani, Karim R. and Jennifer L. Hoffman and Jin Hyun Paik and Cohodes, Nina} } @report {1334521, title = {Market for Judgement: Creative Destruction Lab}, year = {2020}, institution = {Harvard Business School}, author = {Lakhani, Karim R. and Hong Luo and Laura Katsnelson} } @article {1382232, title = {Scientific Production: An Exploration into Organization, Resource Allocation, and Funding}, journal = {Harvard Business School Working Paper}, year = {2020}, url = {https://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Pages/item.aspx?num=59245}, author = {Jerry Thursby and Marie Thursby and Lakhani, Karim R. and Myers, Kyle R. and Cohodes, Nina and Sarah Bratt and Dennis Byrski and Cohoon, Johanna and Roche, Maria} } @report {1334526, title = {Kymera Therapeutics: Building a Biotech Execution Plan}, year = {2019}, institution = {Harvard Business School}, url = {https://hbsp.harvard.edu/product/620017-PDF-ENG?Ntt=\&itemFindingMethod=Search}, author = {Peter Barrett and Lakhani, Karim R.} } @report {1334528, title = {TSG Hoffenheim: Football in the Age of Analytics (B)}, year = {2019}, institution = {Harvard Business School}, abstract = {In 2015, Dietmar Hopp, owner of Germany{\textquoteright}s Bundesliga football team TSG Hoffenheim and co-founder of the global enterprise software company SAP, was considering how to ensure long-term sustainability and competitiveness for TSG Hoffenheim. While historically a small team from bottom rungs of the league, TSG Hoffenheim, with revenues of {\texteuro}60 million to {\texteuro}70 million, reached the top division of the Bundesliga in the 2008-2009 season thanks to a deliberate strategy focused on enhanced scouting, strong youth programs, and innovative technology and analytics that improved player development. In 2014 Hopp, who had personally invested {\texteuro}300 million in the club, built a "footbonaut," an automated training environment that collected data on players{\textquoteright} skills and strengths. The tool, one of three in the world, helped scouts and coaches better assess and develop each player. Yet some managers felt the technology was a distraction, an investment too expensive for a team that was not yet cash-flow positive. The team finished the 2014-2015 season in eighth place, below the top division, and Hopp wondered whether the focus on technology and analytics was the right strategy to grow the club. He wondered if the "moneyball" approach-when a smaller team competed with wealthier teams by using statistical analysis to buy undervalued assets and sell overvalued assets-could work in football and if investments in technology could lead the team to financial independence.}, url = {https://hbsp.harvard.edu/product/620055-PDF-ENG?Ntt=\&itemFindingMethod=Search}, author = {Feng Zhu and Sacha L. Schmidt and Lakhani, Karim R. and Sebastian Koppers} } @article {1270673, title = {Crowdsourcing Memories: Mixed Methods Research by Cultural Insiders-Epistemological Outsiders}, journal = {Academy of Management Perspectives}, year = {2019}, abstract = {This paper examines the role that the two lead authors{\textquoteright} personal connections played in the research methodology and data collection for the Partition Stories Project - a mixed methods approach to revisiting the much-studied historical trauma of the Partition of British India in 1947. The Project collected survivors{\textquoteright} oral histories, a data type that is a mainstay of qualitative research, and subjected their narrative data to statistical analysis to detect aggregated trends. In this paper, the authors discuss the process of straddling the dichotomies of insider/outsider and qualitative/quantitative, address the {\textquotedblleft}myth of informed objectivity{\textquotedblright}, and the need for hybrid research structures with the intent to innovate in humanities projects such as this. In presenting key learnings from the project, this paper highlights the tensions that the authors faced between positivist and interpretivist methods of inquiry, between {\textquotedblleft}insider{\textquotedblright} and {\textquotedblleft}outsider{\textquotedblright} categories of positionality, and in the quantification of qualitative oral history data. The paper concludes with an illustrative example from one of the lead authors{\textquoteright} past research experiences to suggest that the tensions of this project are general in occurrence and global in applicability, beyond the specifics of the Partition case study explored here.}, url = {https://journals.aom.org/doi/10.5465/amp.2018.0090}, author = {Khanna, Tarun and Lakhani, Karim and Bhadada, Shubhangi and Khan, Nabil and Dave, Saba and Alam, Rasim and Hewett, Meena} } @article {1228498, title = {Overcoming cultural resistance to open source innovation}, journal = {Strategy \& Leadership}, volume = {47}, year = {2019}, pages = {28-33}, abstract = {

Purpose: This article offers insight on how to effectively help incumbent organizations prepare for global business shifts to open source and digital business models.

Design/methodology/approach: Discussion related to observation, experience and case studies related to incumbent organizations and their efforts to adopt open source models and business tools.

Findings: Companies that let their old culture reject the new risk becoming obsolete if doing so inhibits their rethinking of their future using powerful tools like crowdsourcing, blockchain, customer experience-based connections, integrating workflows with artificial intelligence (AI), automated technologies and digital business platforms. These new ways of working affect how and where work is done, access to information, an organization{\textquoteright}s capacity for work and its efficiency. As important as technological proficiency is, managing the cultural shift required to embrace transformative industry architecture {\textendash} the key to innovating new business models {\textendash} may be the bigger challenge.

Research limitations/implications: Findings are based on original research and case studies. Insights are theoretically, based on additional study, interviews, and research, but need to be tested through additional case studies. Practical implications: The goal is to make the transition more productive and less traumatic for incumbent firms by providing a language and tested methods to help senior leaders use innovative technologies to build on their core even as they explore new business models.

Social implications: This article provides insights that will lead to more effective ideas for helping organizations adapt. Originality/value: This article is based on original research and case experience. That research and experience has then been analyzed and viewed through the lens of models that have been known to work. The result is original insights and findings that can be applied in new ways to further adoption within incumbent organizations.

}, url = {https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/SL-08-2019-0114/full/html}, author = {Winsor, John and Paik, Jin and Tushman, Michael and Lakhani, Karim} } @report {1334542, title = {Nimbus Therapeutics}, year = {2019}, institution = {Harvard Business School}, abstract = {This case focuses on Nimbus Therapeutics, a biotechnology startup based in Cambridge, Massachusetts, as its leadership team tries to determine the company{\textquoteright}s long-term strategy. The startup{\textquoteright}s founders structured Nimbus as a limited liability company, which has given it more flexibility when it comes to funding and development partnerships. Does the operating structure still makes sense as Nimbus looks ahead to the future?}, url = {https://hbsp.harvard.edu/product/620016-PDF-ENG?Ntt=\&itemFindingMethod=Search}, author = {Peter Barrett and Lakhani, Karim R. and Julia Kelley} } @report {1334543, title = {Obsidian: Product or Platform?}, year = {2019}, institution = {Harvard Business School}, url = {https://hbsp.harvard.edu/product/620018-PDF-ENG?Ntt=\&itemFindingMethod=Search}, author = {Lakhani, Karim R. and Herman, Kerry and Julia Kelley} } @report {1334540, title = {2U: Higher Education Rewired}, year = {2019}, institution = {Harvard Business School}, abstract = {In its 2019 Partner Symposium, 2U, an online program management provider (OPM), showcased its new vision: "Career. Curriculum. Continuum. A construct for lifelong learning in the 21st century". 2U, founded in 2008, and went public in 2014, was looking to expand beyond their current degree offerings to include a wider range of programs, such as short courses, bootcamps, and professional certificates. Led by co-founder and CEO Chip Paucek, 2U believed that they were the strongest partner in the OPM market that could enable universities{\textquoteright} digital transformation, allowing them to offer a variety of courses to a changing student profile. The universities, on the other hand, recognized that times were changing and that the appeal of a residential experience might be dwindling. Pressures of offering a more flexible learning format were mounting. Some schools were engaging in partnerships such as with 2U to get themselves online while others saw digital and online as the next evolution of instruction and that it was their responsibility to learn how to master it and own it. The case considers Paucek{\textquoteright}s challenge of leading a for-profit OPM. Was 2U growing in a way that risked alienating their most important stakeholders, the brand named universities themselves? Were the university leaders going to change their approach and start investing in the digital transformation themselves to avoid giving 2U a cut of their revenues?}, author = {Yael Grushka-Cockayne and Lakhani, Karim R.} } @article {1158750, title = {Advancing Computational Biology and Bioinformatics Research Through Open Innovation Competitions}, journal = {PLOS One}, volume = {14}, year = {2019}, month = {Feb 2019}, abstract = {Open data science and algorithm development competitions over a unique avenue for rapid discovery of better computational strategies. We highlight three examples in computational biology and bioinformatics research where the use of competitions has yielded significant performance gains over established algorithms. These include algorithms for antibody clustering, imputing gene expression data, and querying the Connectivity Map (CMap). Performance gains are evaluated quantitatively using realistic, albeit sanitized, data sets. The solutions produced through these competitions are then examined with respect to their utility and the prospects for implementation in the field. We present the decision process and competition design considerations that lead to these successful outcomes as a model for researchers who want to use competitions and non-domain crowds as collaborators to further their research.}, url = {https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0222165}, author = {Blasco, Andrea and Endres, Michael G. and Sergeev, Rinat A. and Jonchhe, Anup and Macaluso, Max and Narayan, Rajiv and Natoli, Ted and Paik, Jin H. and Briney, Bryan and Wu, Chunlei and Su, Andrew I. and Subramanian, Aravind and Lakhani, Karim R.} } @report {1334523, title = {Synthetic Biology Investment Opportunity}, year = {2019}, institution = {Harvard Business School}, url = {https://hbsp.harvard.edu/product/620015-PDF-ENG?Ntt=\&itemFindingMethod=Search}, author = {Peter Barrett and Lakhani, Karim R. and Julia Kelley and Kelly Herman} } @article {1164081, title = {Sustaining open innovation through a {\textquotedblleft}Center of Excellence{\textquotedblright}}, journal = {Strategy \& Leadership}, year = {2019}, abstract = {

This paper presents NASA{\textquoteright}s experience using a Center of Excellence (CoE) to scale and sustain an open innovation program as an effective problem-solving tool and includes strategic management recommendations for other organizations based on lessons learned.

This paper defines four phases of implementing an open innovation program: Learn, Pilot, Scale and Sustain. It provides guidance on the time required for each phase and recommendations for how to utilize a CoE to succeed. Recommendations are based upon the experience of NASA{\textquoteright}s Human Health and Performance Directorate, and experience at the Laboratory for Innovation Science at Harvard running hundreds of challenges with research and development organizations.

Lessons learned include the importance of grounding innovation initiatives in the business strategy, assessing the portfolio of work to select problems most amenable to solving via crowdsourcing methodology, framing problems that external parties can solve, thinking strategically about early wins, selecting the right platforms, developing criteria for evaluation, and advancing a culture of innovation. Establishing a CoE provides an effective infrastructure to address both technical and cultural issues.

The NASA experience spanned more than seven years from initial learnings about open innovation concepts to the successful scaling and sustaining of an open innovation program; this paper provides recommendations on how to decrease this timeline to three years.

}, url = {https://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/full/10.1108/SL-02-2019-0031}, author = {Richard, Elizabeth E. and Davis, Jeffrey R. and Paik, Jin H. and Lakhani, Karim R.} } @article {1165273, title = {Use of Crowd Innovation to Develop an Artificial Intelligence{\textendash}Based Solution for Radiation Therapy Targeting}, journal = {JAMA Oncology}, volume = {5}, year = {2019}, pages = {654-661}, abstract = {

Radiation therapy (RT) is a critical cancer treatment, but the existing radiation oncologist work force does not meet growing global demand. One key physician task in RT planning involves tumor segmentation for targeting, which requires substantial training and is subject to significant interobserver variation.

To determine whether crowd innovation could be used to rapidly produce artificial intelligence (AI) solutions that replicate the accuracy of an expert radiation oncologist in segmenting lung tumors for RT targeting.

We conducted a 10-week, prize-based, online, 3-phase challenge (prizes totaled $55 000). A well-curated data set, including computed tomographic (CT) scans and lung tumor segmentations generated by an expert for clinical care, was used for the contest (CT scans from 461 patients; median 157 images per scan; 77 942 images in total; 8144 images with tumor present). Contestants were provided a training set of 229 CT scans with accompanying expert contours to develop their algorithms and given feedback on their performance throughout the contest, including from the expert clinician.

Main Outcomes and Measures\ \ The AI algorithms generated by contestants were automatically scored on an independent data set that was withheld from contestants, and performance ranked using quantitative metrics that evaluated overlap of each algorithm{\textquoteright}s automated segmentations with the expert{\textquoteright}s segmentations. Performance was further benchmarked against human expert interobserver and intraobserver variation.

A total of 564 contestants from 62 countries registered for this challenge, and 34 (6\%) submitted algorithms. The automated segmentations produced by the top 5 AI algorithms, when combined using an ensemble model, had an accuracy (Dice coefficient = 0.79) that was within the benchmark of mean interobserver variation measured between 6 human experts. For phase 1, the top 7 algorithms had average custom segmentation scores (S scores) on the holdout data set ranging from 0.15 to 0.38, and suboptimal performance using relative measures of error. The average S scores for phase 2 increased to 0.53 to 0.57, with a similar improvement in other performance metrics. In phase 3, performance of the top algorithm increased by an additional 9\%. Combining the top 5 algorithms from phase 2 and phase 3 using an ensemble model, yielded an additional 9\% to 12\% improvement in performance with a final S score reaching 0.68.

A combined crowd innovation and AI approach rapidly produced automated algorithms that replicated the skills of a highly trained physician for a critical task in radiation therapy. These AI algorithms could improve cancer care globally by transferring the skills of expert clinicians to under-resourced health care settings.

}, url = {https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamaoncology/fullarticle/2730638}, author = {Mak, Raymond H. and Endres, Michael G. and Paik, Jin H. and Sergeev, Rinat A. and Aerts, Hugo and Williams, Christopher L. and Lakhani, Karim R. and Guinan, Eva C.} } @article {1104801, title = {Incentives for Public Goods Inside Organizations: Field Experimental Evidence}, journal = {Journal of Economic Behavior \& Organization}, volume = {160}, year = {2019}, month = {4/10/2017}, pages = {214-229}, abstract = {

We report results of a natural field experiment conducted at a medical organization that sought contribution of public goods (i.e., projects for organizational improvement) from its 1200 employees. Offering a prize for winning submissions boosted participation by 85 percent without affecting the quality of the submissions. The effect was consistent across gender and job type. We posit that the allure of a prize, in combination with mission-oriented preferences, drove participation. Using a simple model, we estimate that these preferences explain about a third of the magnitude of the effect. We also find that these results were sensitive to the solicited person{\textquoteright}s gender.

}, keywords = {altruism, behavioral microeconomics, free rider problem, idea generation, innovation contests, organization of work, organizational behavior, public goods, social preferences, tournament incentives}, url = {https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167268119300599}, author = {Blasco, Andrea and Jung, Olivia S. and Lakhani, Karim R. and Menietti, Michael E.} } @report {1334522, title = {Data.gov}, year = {2019}, institution = {Harvard Business School}, abstract = {This case presents the logic and execution underlying the launch of\ Data.gov, an instantiation of President Obama{\textquoteright}s initiative for transparency and open government. The process used by Vivek Kundra, the federal CIO, and his team to rapidly develop the website and to make available high-value data sets for reuse is highlighted. The case recounts Kundra{\textquoteright}s experience at the state and local government levels in developing open data initiatives and the application of that experience to the federal government. The case demonstrates the benefits of making government data available in terms of both engaged citizens and the potential for new innovations from the private sector. Potential drawbacks of open access including security and privacy issues are illustrated. Issues related to the role of government in releasing data and the balance between accountability and private-sector innovation are explored.}, url = {https://hbsp.harvard.edu/product/619043-PDF-ENG?Ntt=\&itemFindingMethod=Search}, author = {Lakhani, Karim R. and Robert D. Austin and Yumi Yi} } @report {1225288, title = {Kangatech}, year = {2019}, institution = {Harvard Business School}, abstract = {On a warm January afternoon in 2019, Steve Saunders, Dave Scerri, Carl Dilena, and Nick Haslam (see Exhibit 1 for biographies), co-founders of KangaTech, wrapped up the latest round of discussions about the future direction of their sports-technology start-up. Focused on injury prediction and prevention in elite sport, the Melbourne, Australia-based KangaTech prepared to launch a new model of their core product, an integrated exercise frame and software system that used strength exercises to identify and mitigate the risk of soft-tissue and ligament injuries (see Exhibit 2 for overview of product). The team was excited about the new product and was confident that it improved upon many of the features of the previous model. However, Saunders and his co-founders couldn{\textquoteright}t help but think about the long-term strategy of the company.
Spun off in 2015 out of an internal R\&D initiative at the North Melbourne Football Club, KangaTech spent the past four years squarely focused on product development and gaining early traction in the elite sports markets in the U.S., the U.K., and Australia (see Exhibit 3 for company timeline). As of 2019, KangaTech had users across 15 different sites, including professional teams in the National Basketball Association, the English Premier League, and the Australian Football League. The company also underwent a successful round of financing recently, and the proceeds of which were used to fund the new version of the KangaTech product.
Off the back of this recent success, the co-founders were focused on how they might be able to navigate the future ahead of them. Dilena explained, {\textquotedblleft}We are going through a pretty robust strategy discussion at the moment. It is one of those decision points for us as to how we best proceed.{\textquotedblright} Dilena continued, {\textquotedblleft}We{\textquoteright}ve been largely product-based and product-development-based until now. How do we scale up? How do we take that next quantum leap as an organization? So part of that has been looking at where do we see the market opportunities?{\textquotedblright} Specifically, KangaTech weighed up three options for unlocking the full commercial value of the company{\textquoteright}s technology: 1) Going deeper into the sports market; 2) Expanding into the allied health market; or, 3) Pursuing contracts in the defense industry. Evaluating the merits of each of these options was not clear. Which market had the greatest upside? Which market would expose the firm to the greatest risk? Which of these opportunities held the most promise for KangaTech?}, url = {https://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Pages/item.aspx?num=55777}, author = {Lakhani, Karim R. and Ferguson, Patrick and Fleischer, Sarah and Paik, Jin H. and Randazzo, Steven} } @article {1225263, title = {Innovation Contest: Effect of Perceived Support for Learning on Participation }, journal = {Health Care Management Review}, year = {2018}, abstract = {Frontline staff are well positioned to conceive improvement opportunities based on first-hand knowledge of what works and does not work. The innovation contest may be a relevant and useful vehicle to elicit staff ideas. However, the success of the contest likely depends on perceived organizational support for learning; when staff believe that support for learning-oriented culture, practices, and leadership is low, they may be less willing or able to share ideas.\ Purpose:\ We examined how staff perception of organizational support for learning affected contest participation, which comprised ideation and evaluation of submitted ideas.\ Methodology/Approach:\ The contest held in a hospital cardiac center invited all clinicians and support staff (n = 1,400) to participate. We used the 27-item Learning Organization Survey to measure staff perception of learning-oriented environment, practices and processes, and leadership.\ Results:\ Seventy-two frontline staff submitted 138 ideas addressing wide-ranging issues including patient experience, cost of care, workflow, utilization, and access. Two hundred forty-five participated in evaluation. Supportive learning environment predicted participation in ideation and idea evaluation. Perceptions of insufficient experimentation with new ways of working also predicted participation.\ Conclusion:\ The contest enabled frontline staff to share input and assess input shared by other staff. Our findings indicate that the contest may serve as a fruitful outlet through which frontline staff can share and learn new ideas, especially for those who feel safe to speak up and believe that new ideas are not tested frequently enough. Practice Implications: The contest{\textquoteright}s potential to decentralize innovation may be greater under stronger learning orientation. A highly visible intervention, like the innovation contest, has both benefits and risks. Our findings suggest benefits such as increased engagement with work and community as well as risks such as discontent that could arise if staff suggestions are not acted upon or if there is no desired change after the contest.}, author = {Lakhani, Karim R. and Blasco, Andrea and Jung, Olivia S.} } @article {1225264, title = {A Study of NASA Scientists Shows How to Overcome Barriers to Open Innovation.}, journal = {Harvard Business Review}, year = {2018}, abstract = {Open innovation processes promise to enhance creative output, yet we have heard little about successful launches of new technologies, products, or services arising from these approaches. Certainly, crowdsourcing platforms (among other open innovation methods) have yielded striking solutions to hard scientific and technological problems{\textemdash}prominent examples being the\ Netflix predictive recommendation algorithm\ and the approach to\ reducing the weight of \ GE jet engine brackets. But most R\&D organizations are still struggling to reap\ the very real rewards of open innovation. We believe we{\textquoteright}ve hit on an important hidden factor for this failure and that it holds the key to a successful integration and execution of open innovation methods.}, url = {https://hbr.org/2018/05/a-study-of-nasa-scientists-shows-how-to-overcome-barriers-to-open-innovation}, author = {Lifshitz-Assaf, Hila and Tushman, Michael and Lakhani, Karim R.} } @inbook {1104781, title = {Charitable Giving in the Laboratory: Advantages of the Piecewise Linear Public Good Game}, booktitle = {The Economics of Philanthropy: Donations and Fundraising}, year = {2018}, publisher = {MIT Press}, organization = {MIT Press}, keywords = {charitable giving, experimental economics, public goods}, url = { https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/11694.003.0006 }, author = {Menietti, Michael and Recalde, M.P. and Vesterlund, L.}, editor = {Tonin, Mirco and Scharf, Kimberley} } @article {1141103, title = {Contests between groups of unknown size}, journal = {Games and Economic Behavior}, year = {2018}, abstract = {We study group contests where group sizes are stochastic and unobservable to participants at the time of investment. When the joint distribution of group sizes is symmetric, with expected group size , the symmetric equilibrium aggregate investment is lower than in a symmetric group contest with commonly known fixed group size . A similar result holds for two groups with asymmetric distributions of sizes. For the symmetric case, the reduction in individual and aggregate investment due to group size uncertainty increases with the variance in relative group impacts. When group sizes are independent conditional on a common shock, a stochastic increase in the common shock mitigates the effect of group size uncertainty unless the common and idiosyncratic components of group size are strong complements. Finally, group size uncertainty undermines the robustness of the group size paradox otherwise present in the model.}, url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geb.2018.09.001}, author = {Luke Boosey and Philip Brookins and Dmitry Ryvkin} } @report {1156314, title = {SOFWERX: Innovation at U.S. Special Operations Command}, year = {2018}, institution = {Harvard Business School }, abstract = {James {\textquotedblleft}Hondo{\textquotedblright} Geurts, the Acquisition Executive for U.S. Special Operations Command was in the middle of his Senate confirmation hearing in 2017 to become Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Research, Development and Acquisition. The questions had a common theme: how would Geurts{\textquoteright}s experience running an innovative procurement effort for U.S. Special Forces units enable him to change a much larger{\textemdash}and much more rigid{\textemdash}organization like the U.S. Navy? In one of the most secretive parts of the U.S. military, Geurts founded an open platform called SOFWERX to speed the rate of ideas to Navy SEALs, Army Special Forces, and the like. His team even sourced the idea for a hoverboard from a YouTube video. But how should things like SOFWERX and protypes like the EZ-Fly find a place within the Navy writ large?}, url = {https://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Pages/item.aspx?num=54751}, author = {Leonard, Herman B. and Weiss, Mitchell B. and Paik, Jin H. and Herman, Kerry} } @article {1141102, title = {Sorting and communication in weak-link group contests}, journal = {Journal of Economic Behavior \& Organization}, volume = {152}, year = {2018}, pages = {64-80}, abstract = {We experimentally study the effects of sorting and communication in contests between groups of heterogeneous players whose within-group efforts are perfect complements. Contrary to the common wisdom that competitive balance bolsters performance in contests, in this setting theory predicts that aggregate output increases in the variation in abilities between groups, i.e., it is maximized by the most unbalanced sorting of players. However, the data does not support this prediction. In the absence of communication, we find no effect of sorting on aggregate output, while in the presence of within-group communication aggregate output is 33\% higher under the balanced sorting as compared to the unbalanced sorting. This reversal of the prediction is in line with the competitive balance heuristic. The results have implications for the design of optimal groups in organizations using relative performance pay.}, url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2018.05.010}, author = {Philip Brookins and John P. Lightle and Dmitry Ryvkin} } @article {1225262, title = {What Problems Will You Solve with Blockchain? Before Jumping on the Bandwagon, Companies Need to Carefully Consider how Ledger Technologies Fit into their Overall Strategy}, journal = { MIT Sloan Management Review}, volume = {60}, year = {2018}, abstract = {

Distributed ledger technologies {\textemdash} collectively known as blockchain {\textemdash} have burst onto the business scene, accompanied by a significant amount of hype.1\ They are widely expected to disrupt existing industries and lead to the creation of new types of companies.

Some of the excitement may indeed be warranted, but only if organizations focus on how these technologies can be used to support their strategy. Without that lens, companies risk making large investments in initiatives that don{\textquoteright}t create meaningful value.

However, with careful planning, businesses can use blockchain to gain an edge over rivals in a number of ways. It can provide a foundation for powerful applications that will streamline core operations. Distributed ledger technologies can lower transaction costs and make intellectual property ownership and payments more transparent, seamless, and automated. But companies should resist jumping on the bandwagon until they first understand what specific problems they can solve with blockchain {\textemdash} and for whom. How will it help them reach new customers? How can it improve efficiency or transparency in their supply chains? And most important, what will blockchain enable them\ to do\ that competitors and new entrants\ can{\textquoteright}t do? Answering these sorts of practical, targeted questions will allow businesses to cut through the hype and create a blockchain strategy that makes sense for them.

To begin, it{\textquoteright}s critical to understand the basic uses and functionalities of blockchains, which tend to get lost in the buzz. So we will provide a quick primer on digital ledgers before discussing how companies should build powerful problem-solving applications that are uniquely configured to their own strategies.

}, url = {https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/what-problems-will-you-solve-with-blockchain/}, author = {Lakhani, Karim R. and Felin, Teppo} } @article {1225266, title = {Managing Our Hub Economy: Strategy, Ethics, and Network Competition in the Age of Digital Superpowers}, journal = {Harvard Business Review}, volume = {95}, year = {2017}, pages = {84-92}, abstract = {The global economy is coalescing around a few digital superpowers. We see unmistakable evidence that a winner-take-all world is emerging in which a small number of {\textquotedblleft}hub firms{\textquotedblright}{\textemdash}including Alibaba, Alphabet/Google, Amazon, Apple, Baidu, Facebook, Microsoft, and Tencent{\textemdash}occupy central positions. While creating real value for users, these companies are also capturing a disproportionate and expanding share of the value, and that{\textquoteright}s shaping our collective economic future. The very same technologies that promised to democratize business are now threatening to make it more monopolistic.}, url = {https://hbr.org/2017/09/managing-our-hub-economy}, author = {Iansiti, Marco and Lakhani, Karim R.} } @article {1225265, title = {Stepwise Distributed Open Innovation Contests for Software Development: Acceleration of Genome-Wide Association Analysis}, journal = {GigaScience}, volume = {6}, year = {2017}, abstract = {The association of differing genotypes with disease-related phenotypic traits offers great potential to both help identify new therapeutic targets and support stratification of patients who would gain the greatest benefit from specific drug classes. Development of low-cost genotyping and sequencing has made collecting large-scale genotyping data routine in population and therapeutic intervention studies. In addition, a range of new technologies is being used to capture numerous new and complex phenotypic descriptors. As a result, genotype and phenotype datasets have grown exponentially. Genome-wide association studies associate genotypes and phenotypes using methods such as logistic regression. As existing tools for association analysis limit the efficiency by which value can be extracted from increasing volumes of data, there is a pressing need for new software tools that can accelerate association analyses on large genotype-phenotype datasets. Results: Using open innovation (OI) and contest-based crowdsourcing, the logistic regression analysis in a leading, community-standard genetics software package (PLINK 1.07) was substantially accelerated. OI allowed us to do this in \<6 months by providing rapid access to highly skilled programmers with specialized, difficult-to-find skill Received: 30 September 2016; Revised: 3 December 2016; Accepted: 18 December 2016 C The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 1 2 Hill et al. sets. Through a crowd-based contest a combination of computational, numeric, and algorithmic approaches was identified that accelerated the logistic regression in PLINK 1.07 by 18- to 45-fold. Combining contest-derived logistic regression code with coarse-grained parallelization, multithreading, and associated changes to data initialization code further developed through distributed innovation, we achieved an end-to-end speedup of 591-fold for a data set size of 6678 subjects by 645 863 variants, compared to PLINK 1.07{\textquoteright}s logistic regression. This represents a reduction in run time from 4.8 hours to 29 seconds. Accelerated logistic regression code developed in this project has been incorporated into the PLINK2 project. Conclusions: Using iterative competition-based OI, we have developed a new, faster implementation of logistic regression for genome-wide association studies analysis. We present lessons learned and recommendations on running a successful OI process for bioinformatics.}, url = {http://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Pages/download.aspx?name=Lakhani_Karim_GigaSci_CompBio\%202017.pdf}, author = {Hill, Andrew and Loh, Po-Ru and Bharadwaj, Ragu B. and Pons, Pascal and Shang, Jingbo and Guinan, Eva C. and Lakhani, Karim R. and Kilty, Iain and Jelinsky, Scott} } @article {1225267, title = {The Truth about Blockchain}, journal = {Harvard Business Review}, volume = {95}, year = {2017}, pages = {118-127}, abstract = {Contracts, transactions, and the records of them are among the defining structures in our economic, legal, and political systems. They protect assets and set organizational boundaries. They establish and verify identities and chronicle events. They govern interactions among nations, organizations, communities, and individuals. They guide managerial and social action. And yet these critical tools and the bureaucracies formed to manage them have not kept up with the economy{\textquoteright}s digital transformation. They{\textquoteright}re like a rush-hour gridlock trapping a Formula 1 race car. In a digital world, the way we regulate and maintain administrative control has to change.}, url = {https://hbr.org/2017/01/the-truth-about-blockchain}, author = {Iansiti, Marco and Lakhani, Karim R.} } @article {1104741, title = {A Field Experiment on Search Costs and the Formation of Scientific Collaborations}, journal = {The Review of Economics and Statistics}, volume = {99}, year = {2017}, month = {October 2017}, pages = {565-576}, abstract = {

Scientists typically self-organize into teams, matching with others to collaborate in the production of new knowledge. We present the results of a field experiment conducted at Harvard Medical School to understand the extent to which search costs affect matching among scientific collaborators. We generated exogenous variation in search costs for pairs of potential collaborators by randomly assigning individuals to 90-minute structured information-sharing sessions as part of a grant funding opportunity for biomedical researchers. We estimate that the treatment increases the baseline probability of grant co-application of a given pair of researchers by 75\% (increasing the likelihood of a pair collaborating from 0.16 percent to 0.28 percent), with effects higher among those in the same specialization. The findings indicate that matching between scientists is subject to considerable frictions, even in the case of geographically-proximate scientists working in the same institutional context with ample access to common information and funding opportunities.

}, keywords = {cost, marketplace matching, matching, Science, search, self-organizing collaborations, teams}, url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2486068}, author = {Boudreau, Kevin and Tom Brady and Ganguli, Ina and Gaule, Patrick and Guinan, Eva and Hollenberg, Tony and Lakhani, Karim R.} } @article {1104806, title = {Firms, Crowds, and Innovation}, journal = {Strategic Organization}, volume = {15:2}, year = {2017}, month = {2017/5/1}, pages = {119-140}, abstract = {

The purpose of this article is to suggest a (preliminary) taxonomy and research agenda for the topic of {\textquotedblleft}firms, crowds, and innovation{\textquotedblright} and to provide an introduction to the associated special issue. We specifically discuss how various crowd-related phenomena and practices{\textemdash}for example, crowdsourcing, crowdfunding, user innovation, and peer production{\textemdash}relate to theories of the firm, with particular attention on {\textquotedblleft}sociality{\textquotedblright} in firms and markets. We first briefly review extant theories of the firm and then discuss three theoretical aspects of sociality related to crowds in the context of strategy, organizations, and innovation: (1) the functions of sociality (sociality as extension of rationality, sociality as sensing and signaling, sociality as matching and identity); (2) the forms of sociality (independent/aggregate and interacting/emergent forms of sociality); and (3) the failures of sociality (misattribution and misapplication). We conclude with an outline of future research directions and introduce the special issue papers and essays.

}, keywords = {collaborative innovation and invention, crowdsourcing, innovation, open innovation, organization theory, Organizations, strategy, theory}, url = {http://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Pages/item.aspx?num=52911}, author = {Felin, Teppo and Lakhani, Karim R. and Tushman, Michael L.} } @article {1104791, title = {Perceived Organizational Support For Learning and Contribution to Improvement by Frontline Staff}, journal = {Academy of Management Proceedings}, volume = {2017}, year = {2017}, month = {January 1, 2017}, abstract = {

Utilizing suggestions from clinicians and administrative staff is associated with process and quality improvement, organizational climate that promotes patient safety, and added capacity for learning. However, realizing improvement through innovative ideas from staff depends on their ability and decision to contribute. We hypothesized that staff perception of whether the organization promotes learning is positively associated with their likelihood to engage in problem solving and speaking up. We conducted our study in a cardiology unit in an academic hospital that hosted an ideation contest that solicited frontline staff to suggest ideas to resolve issues encountered at work. Our primary dependent variable was staff participation in ideation. The independent variables measuring perception of support for learning were collected using the validated 27-item Learning Organization Survey (LOS). To examine the relationships between these variables, we used analysis of variance, logistic regression, and predicted probabilities. We also interviewed 16 contest participants to explain our quantitative results. The study sample consisted of 30\% of cardiology unit staff (n=354) that completed the LOS. In total, 72 staff submitted 138 ideas, addressing a range of issues including patient experience, cost of care, workflow, utilization, and access. Figuring out the cost of procedures in the catheterization laboratory and creating a smartphone application that aids patients to navigate through appointments and connect with providers were two of the ideas that won the most number of votes and funding to be implemented in the following year. Participation in ideation was positively associated with staff perception of supportive learning environment. For example, one standard deviation increase in perceived welcome for differences in opinions was associated with a 43\% increase in the odds of participating in ideation (OR=1.43, p=0.04) and 55\% increase in the odds of suggesting more than one idea (OR=1.55, p=0.09). Experimentation, a practice that supports learning, was negatively associated with ideation (OR=0.36, p=0.02), and leadership that reinforces learning was not associated with ideation. The perception that new ideas are not sufficiently considered or experimented could have motivated staff to participate, as the ideation contest enables experimentation and learning. Interviews with ideation participants revealed that the contest enabled systematic bottom-up contribution to quality improvement, promoted a sense of community, facilitated organizational exchange of ideas, and spread a problem-solving oriented mindset. Enabling frontline staff to feel that their ideas are welcome and that making mistakes is permissible may increase their likelihood to engage in problem solving and speaking up, contributing to organizational improvement.

}, keywords = {behavioral microeconomics, contests, frontline employees, health care management, health economics, organizational behavior, organizational learning}, url = {https://journals.aom.org/doi/10.5465/ambpp.2017.3}, author = {Jung, Olivia and Blasco, Andrea and Lakhani, Karim R.} } @article {1104811, title = {Stepwise Distributed Open Innovation Contests for Software Development: Acceleration of Genome-Wide Association Analysis}, journal = {GigaScience}, volume = {6}, year = {2017}, month = {2017/5/1}, pages = {1-10}, abstract = {

BACKGROUND: The association of differing genotypes with disease-related phenotypic traits offers great potential to both help identify new therapeutic targets and support stratification of patients who would gain the greatest benefit from specific drug classes. Development of low-cost genotyping and sequencing has made collecting large-scale genotyping data routine in population and therapeutic intervention studies. In addition, a range of new technologies is being used to capture numerous new and complex phenotypic descriptors. As a result, genotype and phenotype datasets have grown exponentially. Genome-wide association studies associate genotypes and phenotypes using methods such as logistic regression. As existing tools for association analysis limit the efficiency by which value can be extracted from increasing volumes of data, there is a pressing need for new software tools that can accelerate association analyses on large genotype-phenotype datasets.

RESULTS: Using open innovation (OI) and contest-based crowdsourcing, the logistic regression analysis in a leading, community-standard genetics software package (PLINK 1.07) was substantially accelerated. OI allowed us to do this in \<6 months by providing rapid access to highly skilled programmers with specialized, difficult-to-find skill sets. Through a crowd-based contest a combination of computational, numeric, and algorithmic approaches was identified that accelerated the logistic regression in PLINK 1.07 by 18- to 45-fold. Combining contest-derived logistic regression code with coarse-grained parallelization, multithreading, and associated changes to data initialization code further developed through distributed innovation, we achieved an end-to-end speedup of 591-fold for a data set size of 6678 subjects by 645 863 variants, compared to PLINK 1.07{\textquoteright}s logistic regression. This represents a reduction in run time from 4.8 hours to 29 seconds. Accelerated logistic regression code developed in this project has been incorporated into the PLINK2 project.

CONCLUSIONS: Using iterative competition-based OI, we have developed a new, faster implementation of logistic regression for genome-wide association studies analysis. We present lessons learned and recommendations on running a successful OI process for bioinformatics.

}, keywords = {crowdsourcing, Genome-Wide Association Study, logistic regression, open innovation, PLINK}, url = {http://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Publication\%20Files/Lakhani_Karim_GigaSci_CompBio\%202017_2105a85a-6955-427e-8606-1ceb7bbf52b4.pdf}, author = {Lakhani, Karim R. and Hill, Andrew and Loh, Po-Ru and Bharadwaj, Ragu B. and Pons, Pascal and Shang, Jingbo and Guinan, Eva C. and Kilty, Iain and Jelinsky, Scott} } @report {1104851, title = {Weathernews}, year = {2017}, month = {January 2017}, institution = {Harvard Business School}, type = {Case Study}, abstract = {

Tomohiro Ishibashi (Bashi), chief executive officer for B to S, and Julia Foote LeStage, chief innovation officer of Weathernews Inc., were addressing a panel at the HBS Digital Summit on creative uses of big data. They told the summit attendees about how the Sakura (cherry blossoms) Project, where the company asked users in Japan to report about how cherry blossoms were blooming near them day by day, had opened up opportunities for the company{\textquoteright}s consumer business in Japan. The project ultimately garnered positive publicity and became a foothold to building the company{\textquoteright}s crowdsourcing weather-forecasting service in Japan. It changed the face of weather forecasting in Japan. Bashi and LeStage wondered whether the experience could be applied to the U.S. market.

}, keywords = {climate change, crowdsourcing, forecasting and prediction, global strategy, globalization, operations, weather}, isbn = {617-053}, url = {http://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Pages/item.aspx?num=52367}, author = {Lakhani, Karim R. and Kanno, Akiko} } @article {1225268, title = {Special Section Introduction{\textemdash}Online Community as Space for Knowledge Flows}, journal = {Information Systems Research}, volume = {27}, year = {2016}, pages = {668-684}, abstract = {Online communities frequently create significant economic and relational value for community participants and beyond. It is widely accepted that the underlying source of such value is the collective flow of knowledge among community participants. We distinguish the conditions for flows of tacit and explicit knowledge in online communities and advance an unconventional theoretical conjecture: Online communities give rise to tacit knowledge flows between participants. The crucial condition for these flows is not the advent of novel, digital technology as often portrayed in the literature, but instead the technology{\textquoteright}s domestication by humanity and the sociality it affords. This conjecture holds profound implications for theory and research in the study of management and organization, as well as their relation to information technology.}, url = {https://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/10.1287/isre.2016.0682}, author = {Faraj, Samer and von Krogh, Georg and Monteiro, Eric and Lakhani, Karim R.} } @article {1104766, title = {Detecting Figures and Part Labels in Patents: Competition-Based Development of Image Processing Algorithms}, journal = {International Journal on Document Analysis and Recognition (IJDAR)}, volume = {19}, year = {2016}, month = {2016/06/01}, pages = {155-172}, abstract = {

Most United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) patent documents contain drawing pages which describe inventions graphically. By convention and by rule, these drawings contain figures and parts that are annotated with numbered labels but not with text. As a result, readers must scan the document to find the description of a given part label. To make progress toward automatic creation of {\textquoteleft}tool-tips{\textquoteright} and hyperlinks from part labels to their associated descriptions, the USPTO hosted a monthlong online competition in which participants developed algorithms to detect figures and diagram part labels. The challenge drew 232 teams of two, of which 70 teams (30 \%) submitted solutions. An unusual feature was that each patent was represented by a 300-dpi page scan along with an HTML file containing patent text, allowing integration of text processing and graphics recognition in participant algorithms. The design and performance of the top-5 systems are presented along with a system developed after the competition, illustrating that the winning teams produced near state-of-the-art results under strict time and computation constraints. The first place system used the provided HTML text, obtaining a harmonic mean of recall and precision (F-measure) of 88.57 \% for figure region detection, 78.81 \% for figure regions with correctly recognized figure titles, and 70.98 \% for part label detection and recognition. Data and source code for the top-5 systems are available through the online UCI Machine Learning Repository to support follow-on work by others in the document recognition community.

}, keywords = {competitions, crowdsourcing, graphics recognition, optical character recognition (OCR), text detection}, isbn = {1433-2833, 1433-2825}, url = {https://arxiv.org/pdf/1410.6751v3.pdf}, author = {Riedl, Christoph and Zanibbi, Richard and Hearst, Marti A. and Zhu, Siyu and Menietti, Michael and Crusan, Jason and Metelsky, Ivan and Lakhani, Karim R.} } @inbook {1104771, title = {Innovation Experiments: Researching Technical Advance, Knowledge Production, and the Design of Supporting Institutions}, booktitle = {Innovation Policy and the Economy}, series = {NBER Book Series Innovation Policy and the Economy}, volume = {16}, year = {2016}, month = {January 1, 2016}, pages = {135-167}, address = {Chicago, IL}, abstract = {

This paper discusses several challenges in designing field experiments to better understand how organizational and institutional design shapes innovation outcomes and the production of knowledge. We proceed to describe the field experimental research program carried out by our Crowd Innovation Laboratory at Harvard University to clarify how we have attempted to address these research design challenges. This program has simultaneously solved important practical innovation problems for partner organizations, like NASA and Harvard Medical School (HMS), while contributing research advances, particularly in relation to innovation contests and tournaments. We conclude by proceeding to highlight the opportunity for the scholarly community to develop a {\textquotedblleft}science of innovation{\textquotedblright} that utilized field experiments as means to generate knowledge.

}, keywords = {innovation and invention, knowledge, organizational design, Research}, url = {http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/full/10.1086/684988}, author = {Boudreau, Kevin J. and Lakhani, Karim R.} } @article {1104761, title = {Looking Across and Looking Beyond the Knowledge Frontier: Intellectual Distance, Novelty, and Resource Allocation in Science}, journal = {Management Science}, volume = {62}, year = {2016}, month = {January 8, 2016}, pages = {2765-2783}, abstract = {

Selecting among alternative projects is a core management task in all innovating organizations. In this paper, we focus on the evaluation of frontier scientific research projects. We argue that the {\textquotedblleft}intellectual distance{\textquotedblright} between the knowledge embodied in research proposals and an evaluator{\textquoteright}s own expertise systematically relates to the evaluations given. To estimate relationships, we designed and executed a grant proposal process at a leading research university in which we randomized the assignment of evaluators and proposals to generate 2,130 evaluator{\textendash}proposal pairs. We find that evaluators systematically give lower scores to research proposals that are closer to their own areas of expertise and to those that are highly novel. The patterns are consistent with biases associated with boundedly rational evaluation of new ideas. The patterns are inconsistent with intellectual distance simply contributing {\textquotedblleft}noise{\textquotedblright} or being associated with private interests of evaluators. We discuss implications for policy, managerial intervention, and allocation of resources in the ongoing accumulation of scientific knowledge.

}, keywords = {bounded rationality, decision choices and conditions, evaluation, experience and expertise, innovation, innovation and management, intellectual distance, knowledge, knowledge frontier, novelty, project selection, resource allocation, science-based business}, isbn = {0025-1909}, url = {http://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/10.1287/mnsc.2015.2285}, author = {Boudreau, Kevin J. and Guinan, Eva C. and Lakhani, Karim R. and Riedl, Christoph} } @report {1104776, title = {Motivating Effort in Contributing to Public Goods Inside Organizations: Field Experimental Evidence}, year = {2016}, month = {April 2016}, institution = {National Bureau of Economic Research}, type = {Working Paper}, abstract = {

We investigate the factors driving workers{\textquoteright} decisions to generate public goods inside an organization through a randomized solicitation of workplace improvement proposals in a medical center with 1200 employees. We find that pecuniary incentives, such as winning a prize, generate a threefold increase in participation compared to non-pecuniary incentives alone, such as prestige or recognition. Participation is also increased by a solicitation appealing to improving the workplace. However, emphasizing the patient mission of the organization led to countervailing effects on participation. Overall, these results are consistent with workers having multiple underlying motivations to contribute to public goods inside the organization consisting of a combination of pecuniary and altruistic incentives associated with the mission of the organization.

}, keywords = {behavioral microeconomics, health industry, motivation and incentives, organizational behavior, performance productivity, public goods, service operations}, isbn = {22189}, url = {http://www.nber.org/papers/w22189}, author = {Blasco, Andrea and Jung, Olivia S. and Lakhani, Karim R. and Menietti, Michael} } @article {1104756, title = {Performance Responses to Competition Across Skill-Levels in Rank Order Tournaments: Field Evidence and Implications for Tournament Design}, journal = {The RAND Journal of Economics}, volume = {47}, year = {2016}, month = {February 1, 2016}, pages = {140-165}, abstract = {

Tournaments are widely used in the economy to organize production and innovation. We study individual data on 2775 contestants in 755 software algorithm development contests with random assignment. The performance response to added contestants varies nonmonotonically across contestants of different abilities, precisely conforming to theoretical predictions. Most participants respond negatively, whereas the highest-skilled contestants respond positively. In counterfactual simulations, we interpret a number of tournament design policies (number of competitors, prize allocation and structure, number of divisions, open entry) and assess their effectiveness in shaping optimal tournament outcomes for a designer.

}, keywords = {competitions, contests, innovation, innovation strategy, platforms, tournaments}, isbn = {1756-2171}, url = {http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1756-2171.12121/abstract}, author = {Boudreau, Kevin J. and Lakhani, Karim R. and Menietti, Michael} } @book {1104751, title = {Revolutionizing Innovation: Users, Communities, and Open Innovation}, year = {2016}, month = {2016}, publisher = {MIT Press}, organization = {MIT Press}, address = {Cambridge, MA}, abstract = {

The last two decades have witnessed an extraordinary growth of new models of managing and organizing the innovation process, which emphasize users over producers. Large parts of the knowledge economy now routinely rely on users, communities, and open innovation approaches to solve important technological and organizational problems. This view of innovation, pioneered by the economist Eric von Hippel, counters the dominant paradigm, which casts the profit-seeking incentives of firms as the main driver of technical change. In a series of influential writings, von Hippel and colleagues found empirical evidence that flatly contradicted the producer-centered model of innovation. Since then, the study of user-driven innovation has continued and expanded, with further empirical exploration of a distributed model of innovation that includes communities and platforms in a variety of contexts and with the development of theory to explain the economic underpinnings of this still emerging paradigm. This volume provides a comprehensive and multidisciplinary view of the field of user and open innovation, reflecting advances in the field over the last several decades.

The contributors{\textemdash}including many colleagues of Eric von Hippel{\textemdash}offer both theoretical and empirical perspectives from such diverse fields as economics, the history of science and technology, law, management, and policy. The empirical contexts for their studies range from household goods to financial services. After discussing the fundamentals of user innovation, the contributors cover communities and innovation; legal aspects of user and community innovation; new roles for user innovators; user interactions with firms; and user innovation in practice, describing experiments, toolkits, and crowdsourcing and crowdfunding.

}, keywords = {collaborative innovation and invention, diffusion of innovations, innovation, innovation and management, new products, transformation}, isbn = {978-0-262-02977-3}, url = {https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/revolutionizing-innovation}, author = {Harhoff, Dietmar and Lakhani, Karim R.} } @report {1104956, title = {Havas: Change Faster}, year = {2015}, month = {2015/3/13}, institution = {Harvard Business School}, type = {Teaching Note}, abstract = {

Teaching Note for HBS Case 615-702.

As of 2013, Havas was the 6th largest global advertising, digital, and communications group in the world. Headquartered in Paris, France, the group was highly decentralized, with semi-independent agencies in more than 100 countries offering a variety of services. The largest unit of Havas was Havas Worldwide, an integrated marketing communications agency headquartered in New York, NY.\ CEO David Jones was determined to make Havas Worldwide the most future-focused agency in the industry by becoming a leader in digital innovation.\ The case explores the tensions within the company as David Jones attempts to change the company to compete in an industry undergoing digital transformation. The case uses the example of the acquisition of Victors \& Spoils, a crowdsourcing advertising agency, to examine internal reactions.

}, isbn = {615-054}, url = {https://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Pages/item.aspx?num=48895}, author = {Lakhani, Karim R. and Friar, Greta} } @report {1104856, title = {Innovating with the Crowd}, year = {2015}, month = {2015/3/19}, institution = {Harvard Business School}, type = {Module Note for Instructors}, abstract = {

This note outlines the structure and content of a seven-session module that is designed to introduce students to the fundamentals of innovating with the "crowd." The module has been taught in a second year elective course at the Harvard Business School on "Digital Innovation and Transformation" and is aimed at students that already have an understanding of how to structure an innovation process inside of a company. The module expands the students{\textquoteright} innovation toolkit by exposing them to the theory and practice of extending the innovation process to external participants.

}, isbn = {615-072}, url = {http://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Pages/item.aspx?num=48983}, author = {Lakhani, Karim R.} } @report {1104961, title = {Nivea (A) and (B)}, year = {2015}, month = {2015/3/16}, institution = {Harvard Business School}, type = {Teaching Note}, abstract = {

Teaching Note for HBS Cases 614-042 and 614-043.

The first case describes the efforts of Beiersdorf, a worldwide leader in the cosmetics and skin care industries, to generate and commercialize new R\&D through open innovation using external crowds and "netnographic" analysis. Beiersdorf, best known for its consumer brand Nivea, has a rigorous R\&D process that has led to many successful product launches, but are there areas of customer need that are undervalued by the traditional process? A novel online customer analysis approach suggests untapped opportunities for innovation, but can the company justify a launch based on this new model of research?
The\ supplementary case follows up on an innovative R\&D approach by Beiersdorf, a skin care and cosmetics company. The case relates what happened to the product launched by Beiersdorf, to its Nivea line, following the events of the first case, and how the commercial success of the product informed thinking by leaders in R\&D for the future.

}, isbn = {615-057}, url = {https://cb.hbsp.harvard.edu/cbmp/search?term=Nivea+Lakhani\&n=\&navigation=\&coursepackName=\&libraryItemId=}, author = {Lakhani, Karim R. and Friar, Greta} } @article {1104746, title = {{\textquoteright}Open{\textquoteright} Disclosure of Innovations, Incentives and Follow-on Reuse: Theory on Processes of Cumulative Innovation and a Field Experiment in Computational Biology}, journal = {Research Policy}, volume = {44}, year = {2015}, month = {February 1, 2015}, pages = {4-19}, abstract = {

Most of society{\textquoteright}s innovation systems {\textendash} academic science, the patent system, open source, etc. {\textendash} are {\textquotedblleft}open{\textquotedblright} in the sense that they are designed to facilitate knowledge disclosure among innovators. An essential difference across innovation systems is whether disclosure is of intermediate progress and solutions or of completed innovations. We theorize and present experimental evidence linking intermediate versus final disclosure to an {\textquoteleft}incentives-versus-reuse{\textquoteright} tradeoff and to a transformation of the innovation search process. We find intermediate disclosure has the advantage of efficiently steering development towards improving existing solution approaches, but also has the effect of limiting experimentation and narrowing technological search. We discuss the comparative advantages of intermediate versus final disclosure policies in fostering innovation.

}, keywords = {disclosures, incentives, innovation, open innovation, policy, search}, isbn = {0048-7333}, url = {http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733314001425}, author = {Boudreau, Kevin J. and Lakhani, Karim R.} } @report {1104971, title = {OpenIDEO}, year = {2015}, month = {2015/3/9}, institution = {Harvard Business School}, type = {Teaching Note}, abstract = {

Teaching Note for HBS Case 612-066.

The case describes OpenIDEO, an online offshoot of IDEO, one of the world{\textquoteright}s leading product design firms. OpenIDEO leverages IDEO{\textquoteright}s innovative design process and an online community to create solutions for social issues. Emphasis is placed on comparing the IDEO and OpenIDEO processes using real-world project examples. For IDEO this includes the redesign of Air New Zealand{\textquoteright}s long haul flights. For OpenIDEO this includes increasing bone marrow donor registrations and improving personal sanitation in Ghana. In addition, the importance of fostering a collaborative online environment is explored.

}, isbn = {615-055}, url = {https://cb.hbsp.harvard.edu/cbmp/product/612066-PDF-ENG}, author = {Lakhani, Karim R. and Fayard, Anne-Laure and Levina, Natalia and Friar, Greta} } @report {1104966, title = {Prodigy Network: Democratizing Real Estate Design and Financing}, year = {2015}, month = {2015/3/13}, institution = {Harvard Business School}, type = {Teaching Note}, abstract = {

Teaching Note for HBS Case 614-064.

This case follows Rodrigo Nino, founder and CEO of commercial real estate development company Prodigy Network, as he develops an equity-based crowdfunding model for small investors to access commercial real estate in Colombia, then tries out the model in the U.S. U.S. regulations, starting with the Securities Act of 1933, effectively barred sponsors from soliciting small investors for large commercial real estate. However, the JOBS Act of 2013 loosened U.S. restrictions on equity crowdfunding. Nino believes that crowdfunding will democratize real estate development by providing a new asset class for small investors, revolutionizing the industry. The case also follows Nino{\textquoteright}s development of an online platform to crowdsource design for his crowdfunded buildings, maximizing shared value throughout the development process. Nino faces many challenges as he attempts to crowdfund an extended stay hotel in Manhattan, New York. For example, crowdfunded real estate faces resistance from industry leaders, especially in regards to the concern of fraud, and SEC regulations on crowdfunding remain undetermined at the time of the case.

}, isbn = {615-045}, url = {https://cb.hbsp.harvard.edu/cbmp/product/614064-PDF-ENG}, author = {Lakhani, Karim R. and Friar, Greta} } @article {1104736, title = {Unpaid Crowd Complementors: The Platform Network Effect Mirage}, journal = {Strategic Management Journal}, volume = {36}, year = {2015}, month = {December 1, 2015}, pages = {1761-1777}, abstract = {

Platforms have evolved beyond just being organized as multi-sided markets with complementors selling to users. Complementors are often unpaid, working outside of a price system and driven by heterogeneous sources of motivation{\textemdash}which should affect how they respond to platform growth. Does reliance on network effects and strategies to attract large numbers of complementors remain advisable in such contexts? We test hypotheses related to these issues using data from 85 online multi-player game platforms with unpaid complementors. We find that complementor development responds to platform growth even without sales incentives, but that attracting complementors has a net zero effect on on-going development and fails to stimulate network effects. We discuss conditions under which a strategy of using unpaid crowd complementors remains advantageous.

}, keywords = {business model, competition, crowds, digital innovation, heterogeneous motivations, innovation, innovation and invention, motivation and incentives, network effects, platforms, social and collaborative networks, Software, technology industry, two-sided platforms}, isbn = {1097-0266}, url = {http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/smj.2324/abstract}, author = {Boudreau, Kevin J. and Jeppesen, Lars B.} } @article {1225269, title = {Digital Ubiquity: How Connections, Sensors, and Data Are Revolutionizing Business}, journal = {Harvard Business Review}, volume = {92}, year = {2014}, pages = {90-99}, abstract = {When Google bought Nest, a maker of digital thermostats, for $3.2 billion just a few months ago, it was a clear indication that digital transformation and connection are spreading across even the most traditional industrial segments and creating a staggering array of business opportunities and threats. The digitization of tasks and processes has become essential to competition. General Electric, for example, was at risk of losing many of its top customers to nontraditional competitors{\textemdash}IBM and SAP on the one hand, big data start-ups on the other{\textemdash}offering data-intensive, analytics-based services that could connect to any industrial device. So GE launched a multibillion-dollar initiative focused on what it calls the industrial internet: adding digital sensors to its machines; connecting them to a common, cloud-based software platform; investing in software development capabilities; building advanced analytics capabilities; and embracing crowd-based product development. With all this, GE is evolving its business model. Now, for example, revenue from its jet engines is tied to reduced downtime and miles flown over the course of a year. After just three years, GE is generating more than $1.5 billion in incremental income with digitally enabled, outcomes-based business models. The company expects that number to double in 2014 and again in 2015.}, url = {https://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Pages/item.aspx?num=48199}, author = {Iansiti, Marco and Lakhani, Karim R.} } @report {1104941, title = {Bioinspiration at the San Diego Zoo}, volume = {614-703}, year = {2014}, month = {2014/6/25}, institution = {Harvard Business School}, abstract = {

Traditionally, human ingenuity has been considered the main source of innovation. However, recent research and the development of new products by firms as diverse as P\&G, Speedo and Nike has shown that nature can provide inspiration for new innovative products. The San Diego Zoo, which has established a Center for Bioinspiration, defines bioinspiration as a methodology in which biological systems, processes, and elements are studied to draw analogies that can be applied to human design challenges in a sustainable manner.

}, url = {https://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Pages/item.aspx?num=47572}, author = {Lakhani, Karim R. and Krishnan, Vish V. and Page, Ruth} } @report {1104946, title = {Bioinspiration at the San Diego Zoo}, year = {2014}, month = {2014/6/25}, institution = {Harvard Business School}, type = {Teaching Plan}, abstract = {This teaching plan describes an 80 minute class plan for the case Bioinspiration at the San Diego Zoo.
Traditionally, human ingenuity has been considered the main source of innovation. However, recent research and the development of new products by firms as diverse as P\&G, Speedo and Nike has shown that nature can provide inspiration for new innovative products. The San Diego Zoo, which has established a Center for Bioinspiration, defines bioinspiration as a methodology in which biological systems, processes, and elements are studied to draw analogies that can be applied to human design challenges in a sustainable manner.}, keywords = {innovation, operations management, strategy, technology}, isbn = {615-018}, url = {http://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Pages/item.aspx?num=47458}, author = {Lakhani, Karim R. and Friar, Greta} } @report {1104926, title = {Havas: Change Faster}, volume = {615-702}, year = {2014}, month = {2014/9/24}, institution = {Harvard Business School}, abstract = {

As of 2013, Havas was the 6th largest global advertising, digital, and communications group in the world. Headquartered in Paris, France, the group was highly decentralized, with semi-independent agencies in more than 100 countries offering a variety of services. The largest unit of Havas was Havas Worldwide, an integrated marketing communications agency headquartered in New York, NY. CEO David Jones was determined to make Havas Worldwide the most future-focused agency in the industry by becoming a leader in digital innovation. The case explores the tensions within the company as David Jones attempts to change the company to compete in an industry undergoing digital transformation. The case uses the example of the acquisition of Victors \& Spoils, a crowdsourcing advertising agency, to examine internal reactions.

}, keywords = {advertising, change management, commercials, digital marketing, digital media, digital transition, disruption, open innovation, transformation}, url = {https://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Pages/item.aspx?num=47812}, author = {Lakhani, Karim R. and Tushman, Michael L.} } @report {1104936, title = {Havas: Change Faster}, year = {2014}, month = {2014/10/2}, institution = {Harvard Business School}, type = {Teaching Plan}, abstract = {This teaching plan describes an 80 minute class plan for the case Havas: Change Faster.
As of 2013, Havas was the 6th largest global advertising, digital, and communications group in the world. Headquartered in Paris, France, the group was highly decentralized, with semi-independent agencies in more than 100 countries offering a variety of services. The largest unit of Havas was Havas Worldwide, an integrated marketing communications agency headquartered in New York, NY. CEO David Jones was determined to make Havas Worldwide the most future-focused agency in the industry by becoming a leader in digital innovation. The case explores the tensions within the company as David Jones attempts to change the company to compete in an industry undergoing digital transformation. The case uses the example of the acquisition of Victors \& Spoils, a crowdsourcing advertising agency, to examine internal reactions.}, isbn = {615-004}, url = {https://cb.hbsp.harvard.edu/cbmp/product/615702-HTM-ENG}, author = {Lakhani, Karim and Tushman, Michael} } @report {1104726, title = {Houston, We Have a Problem: NASA and Open Innovation (A)}, year = {2014}, month = {Revised November}, institution = {Harvard Business School}, type = {Case Study}, abstract = {Jeff Davis, director of Space Life Sciences Directorate at NASA, has been working for several years to raise awareness amongst scientists and researchers in his organizations of the benefits of open innovation as a successful and efficient way to collaborate on difficult research problems regarding health and space travel. Despite a number of initiatives, SLSD members have been skeptical about incorporating the approach into their day-to-day research and work, and have resisted Davis{\textquoteright}s and his strategy team{\textquoteright}s efforts. The (A) case outlines these efforts and the organization members{\textquoteright} reactions. The (B) case details what Davis and the SLSD strategy team learned, and how they adapted their efforts to successfully incorporate open innovation as one of many tools used in collaborative research at NASA.}, keywords = {competition and innovation, complementors, contests, open innovation, organizational behavior, R\&D}, isbn = {Harvard Business School Case $\#$414044}, url = {https://hbr.org/product/houston-we-have-a-problem-nasa-and-open-innovation-a/an/414044-PDF-ENG}, author = {Tushman, Michael L. and Lifshitz-Assaf, Hila and Herman, Kerry} } @report {1104731, title = {Houston, We Have a Problem: NASA and Open Innovation (B)}, year = {2014}, month = {Revised November}, institution = {Harvard Business School}, type = {Case Study}, abstract = {Jeff Davis, director of Space Life Sciences Directorate at NASA, has been working for several years to raise awareness amongst scientists and researchers in his organizations of the benefits of open innovation as a successful and efficient way to collaborate on difficult research problems regarding health and space travel. Despite a number of initiatives, SLSD members have been skeptical about incorporating the approach into their day-to-day research and work, and have resisted Davis{\textquoteright}s and his strategy team{\textquoteright}s efforts. The (A) case outlines these efforts and the organization members{\textquoteright} reactions. The (B) case details what Davis and the SLSD strategy team learned, and how they adapted their efforts to successfully incorporate open innovation as one of many tools used in collaborative research at NASA.}, keywords = {competition and innovation, complementors, contests, open innovation, organizational behavior, R\&D}, isbn = {Harvard Business School Case $\#$414057}, url = {https://hbr.org/product/houston-we-have-a-solution-nasa-and-open-innovation-b/an/414057-PDF-ENG}, author = {Tushman, Michael L. and Lifshitz-Assaf, Hila and Herman, Kerry} } @report {1104921, title = {Netflix: Designing the Netflix Prize (A)}, year = {2014}, month = {2014/8/14}, institution = {Harvard Business School}, type = {Case Study}, abstract = {In 2006, Reed Hastings, CEO of Netflix, was looking for a way to solve Netflix{\textquoteright}s customer churn problem. Netflix used Cinematch, its proprietary movie recommendation software, to promote individually determined best-fit movies to customers. Hastings determined that a 10\% improvement to the Cinematch algorithm would decrease customer churn and increase annual revenue by up to $89 million. However, traditional options for improving the algorithm, such as hiring and training new employees, were time intensive and costly. Hastings decided to improve Netflix{\textquoteright}s software by crowdsourcing, and began planning the Netflix Prize, an open contest searching for a 10\% improvement on Cinematch. The case examines the dilemmas Hastings faced as he planned the contest, such as whether to use an existing crowdsourcing platform or create his own, what company information to expose, how to protect customer privacy while making internal datasets public, how to allocate IP, and how to manage the crowd.}, keywords = {Algorithms, collaborative innovation and invention, crowdsourcing, digitization, disruption, entertainment and recreation industry, knowledge sharing, motion pictures and video industry, prizes, recommendation software, technological innovation, technology industry, transformation}, isbn = {615-015}, url = {https://hbr.org/product/netflix-designing-the-netflix-prize-a/615015-PDF-ENG}, author = {Lakhani, Karim R. and Cohen, Wesley M. and Ingram, Kynon and Kothalkar, Tushar and Kuzemchenko, Maxim and Malik, Santosh and Meyn, Cynthia and Friar, Greta and Pokrywa, Stephanie Healy} } @report {1104846, title = {Netflix: Designing the Netflix Prize (B)}, year = {2014}, month = {9/3/2014}, institution = {Harvard Business School}, type = {Supplement}, abstract = {

This supplemental case follows up on the Netflix Prize Contest described in Netflix: Designing the Netflix Prize (A). In the A case, Netflix CEO Reed Hastings must decide how to organize a crowdsourcing contest to improve the algorithms for Netflix{\textquoteright}s movie recommendation software. The B case follows the contest from the building of the platform in 2006 to the awarding of the highest prize in 2009. The B cause also considers the aftermath of the contest, and the issues of successfully implementing a winning idea from a contest.

}, keywords = {Algorithms, collaborative innovation and invention, crowdsourcing, digitization, disruption, knowledge sharing, prizes, recommendation software, technological innovation, transformation}, isbn = {615-025}, url = {https://hbr.org/product/netflix-designing-the-netflix-prize-b/615025-PDF-ENG}, author = {Lakhani, Karim R. and Cohen, Wesley M. and Ingram, Kynon and Kothalkar, Tushar} } @report {1104901, title = {Nivea (A)}, year = {2014}, month = {2014/1/24}, institution = {Harvard Business School}, type = {Case Study}, abstract = {

The case describes the efforts of Beiersdorf, a worldwide leader in the cosmetics and skin care industries, to generate and commercialize new R\&D through open innovation using external crowds and "netnographic" analysis. Beiersdorf, best known for its consumer brand Nivea, has a rigorous R\&D process that has led to many successful product launches, but are there areas of customer need that are undervalued by the traditional process? A novel online customer analysis approach suggests untapped opportunities for innovation, but can the company justify a launch based on this new model of research?

}, keywords = {beauty and cosmetics industry, big data, collaborative innovation and invention, consumer products industry, crowdsourcing, innovation, innovation and management, innovation strategy, knowledge management, knowledge sharing, research and development, social and collaborative networks}, isbn = {614-042}, url = {https://hbr.org/product/nivea-a/614042-PDF-ENG}, author = {Lakhani, Karim R. and Fuller, Johann and Bilgram, Volker and Friar, Greta} } @report {1104906, title = {Nivea (B)}, year = {2014}, month = {2014/1/31}, institution = {Harvard Business School}, type = {Supplement}, abstract = {

This supplementary case follows up on an innovative R\&D approach by Beiersdorf,a skin care and cosmetics company. The case relates what happened to the product launched by Beiersdorf, to its Nivea line, following the events of the A case, and how the commercial success of the product informed thinking by leaders in R\&D for the future.

}, keywords = {beauty and cosmetics industry, collaborative innovation and invention, consumer products industry, innovation, innovation and management, innovation strategy, marketing, product design, research and development}, isbn = {614-043}, url = {https://hbr.org/product/nivea-b/614043-PDF-ENG}, author = {Lakhani, Karim R. and Fuller, Johann and Bilgram, Volker and Friar, Greta} } @report {1104916, title = {Prodigy Network: Democratizing Real Estate Design and Financing}, year = {2014}, month = {2014/3/24}, institution = {Harvard Business School}, type = {Case Study}, abstract = {

This case follows Rodrigo Nino, founder and CEO of commercial real estate development company Prodigy Network, as he develops an equity-based crowdfunding model for small investors to access commercial real estate in Colombia, then tries out the model in the U.S. U.S. regulations, starting with the Securities Act of 1933, effectively barred sponsors from soliciting small investors for large commercial real estate. However, the JOBS Act of 2013 loosened U.S. restrictions on equity crowdfunding. Nino believes that crowdfunding will democratize real estate development by providing a new asset class for small investors, revolutionizing the industry. The case also follows Nino{\textquoteright}s development of an online platform to crowdsource design for his crowdfunded buildings, maximizing shared value throughout the development process. Nino faces many challenges as he attempts to crowdfund an extended stay hotel in Manhattan, New York. For example, crowdfunded real estate faces resistance from industry leaders, especially in regards to the concern of fraud, and SEC regulations on crowdfunding remain undetermined at the time of the case.

}, keywords = {commercial real estate, crowdfunding, crowdsourcing, design, digital innovation, disruption, disruptive innovation, innovation, innovation strategy, online platforms, online technology, real estate, transformation}, isbn = {614-064}, url = {https://hbr.org/product/prodigy-network-democratizing-real-estate-design-and-financing/614064-PDF-ENG}, author = {Lakhani, Karim R. and Hutter, Katja and Friar, Greta} } @report {1104911, title = {Samsung Electronics: TV in an Era of Convergence}, year = {2014}, month = {2014/3/6}, institution = {Harvard Business School}, type = {Case Study}, abstract = {

From the late 1990s to 2006/2007, Samsung Electronics moved from one of 170 TV manufacturers to gain dominant TV market share year over year from 2007-2013. As digital technologies increasingly converged in 2013-2014, the industry faced new questions: What was the future of TV? The case considers Samsung Electronics TV Group{\textquoteright}s product development processes, as the company{\textquoteright}s mobile and TV offerings increasingly converged and consumer demands and behavior pushed the historically clear boundaries of product, content, engagement and interaction.

}, keywords = {digital convergence, digital innovation, digital technology, innovation, innovation and invention, innovation and management, innovation leadership, Korea, product design, product development, Samsung, technological innovation, technology, technology management, television}, isbn = {614-034}, url = {https://hbr.org/product/samsung-electronics-tv-in-an-era-of-convergence/614034-PDF-ENG}, author = {Lakhani, Karim R. and Iansiti, Marco and Herman, Kerry} } @report {1104931, title = {Victors \& Spoils: {\textquoteright}Born Open{\textquoteright}}, volume = {415-701}, year = {2014}, month = {2014/9/24}, institution = {Harvard Business School}, abstract = {

Victors \& Spoils (V\&S), located in Boulder, Colorado, was the first advertising agency built on open innovation and crowdsourcing principles from the ground-up. V\&S was co-founded in 2009 by John Winsor, Claudia Batten and Evan Fry, all former members of the advertising agency Crispin Porter + Bogusky (CP+B). V\&S crowdsourced creative ideas for its ad campaigns through Agency Machine, its proprietary online platform. CEO John Winsor wanted to change the way that advertising was done, a difficult task in an industry entrenched in traditional models. The case follows Winsor as he prepares to scale his business and must determine the best way to do so. He has an offer from Havas, a leading global advertising company interested in acquiring V\&S, which would give V\&S access to unprecedented resources. However, Winsor and the V\&S team have concerns about how their innovative processes may be affected by partnering with a large, traditional company.

}, keywords = {advertising, crowdsourcing, growth, innovation and invention, marketing, open innovation}, url = {https://www.hbs.edu/faculty/pages/item.aspx?num=47814}, author = {Lakhani, Karim R. and Tushman, Michael L.} } @report {1104951, title = {Victors \& Spoils: {\textquoteright}Born Open{\textquoteright}}, year = {2014}, month = {2014/10/2}, institution = {Harvard Business School}, type = {Teaching Plan}, abstract = {

This teaching plan provides an 80 minute class plan for the case Victors \& Spoils: "Born Open".

Victors \& Spoils (V\&S), located in Boulder, Colorado, was the first advertising agency built on open innovation and crowdsourcing principles from the ground-up. V\&S was co-founded in 2009 by John Winsor, Claudia Batten and Evan Fry, all former members of the advertising agency Crispin Porter + Bogusky (CP+B). V\&S crowdsourced creative ideas for its ad campaigns through Agency Machine, its proprietary online platform. CEO John Winsor wanted to change the way that advertising was done, a difficult task in an industry entrenched in traditional models. The case follows Winsor as he prepares to scale his business and must determine the best way to do so. He has an offer from Havas, a leading global advertising company interested in acquiring V\&S, which would give V\&S access to unprecedented resources. However, Winsor and the V\&S team have concerns about how their innovative processes may be affected by partnering with a large, traditional company.

}, isbn = {415-020}, url = {https://cb.hbsp.harvard.edu/cbmp/product/415701-HTM-ENG}, author = {Lakhani, Karim and Friar, Greta} } @booklet {1104796, title = {Do Crowds Have the Wisdom to Self-Organize?}, year = {2013}, month = {2013}, abstract = {

The {\textquotedblleft}self-organizing{\textquotedblright} of online crowds {\textemdash} or workers, more generally {\textemdash} into teams is a non-trivial problem of coordination and matching, in a context in which other parties are simultaneously competing for partners. Here, we experimentally investigate the capacity for workers in online crowds to self-organize into teams, within a scientific crowdsourcing contest. We compare matching outcomes and performance to those in a comparison group in which we eliminate the coordination and matching problem altogether (by directly assigning individuals to Pareto efficient teams). Online crowd members do remarkably well relative to the benchmark achieving 13\% more functioning teams. Teams also tended to be more effective, by several measures. (We found no evidence these levels depending on the size of the self-organizing pool of workers.) Conditional on having formed, the self-organizing teams also benefit from several advantages in performance.

}, keywords = {matching, organizational behavior, team formation, teams, tournament incentives}, author = {Blasco, Andrea and Boudreau, Kevin and Lakhani, Karim R. and Menietti, Michael and Riedl, Christoph} } @magazinearticle {1104721, title = {Experiments in Open Innovation at Harvard Medical School}, volume = {54}, year = {2013}, month = {March 19, 2013}, abstract = {

This article examines an experiment in open innovation applied to scientific research on Type 1 diabetes at Harvard Medical School. In the traditional research process in academic medicine, a single research team typically carries through each stage of the process {\textemdash} from generating the idea to carrying out the research and publishing the results. Harvard Catalyst, a pan-Harvard agency with a mission to speed biomedical research from the lab to patients{\textquoteright} bedsides, modified the traditional grant proposal process as an experiment in bringing greater openness into every stage of research. Participation was successfully extended to nontraditional actors. With support from Dr. William Chin, the executive dean for research at Harvard Medical School and a former vice president of research at Eli Lilly (an early adopter of open innovation), Harvard Catalyst started with the front end of the innovation system by opening up the process of generating research questions. Instead of focusing on identifying individuals who might tackle a tough research problem, Harvard Catalyst wanted to allow an open call for ideas in the form of a prize-based contest to determine the direction of the academic research. This might lead to potentially relevant questions not currently under investigation or largely ignored by the Type 1 diabetes research community. Harvard Catalyst partnered with the InnoCentive online contest platform to initiate the idea generation process. Participants had to formulate well-defined problems and/or hypotheses to advance knowledge about Type 1 diabetes research in new and promising directions. In the end, 150 new hypotheses and research pathways were proposed. Teams were invited to propose projects on the 12 most promising of these; today, seven teams are carrying out the research. The Harvard Catalyst experience suggests that open-innovation principles can be adopted even within a well-established and experienced innovation-driven organization.

}, keywords = {Boston, collaborative innovation and invention, health disorders, innovation, open innovation, partnerships \& alliances, R\&D, research and development}, url = {http://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/experiments-in-open-innovation-at-harvard-medical-school/}, author = {Guinan, Eva C. and Lakhani, Karim R. and Boudreau, Kevin J.} } @inbook {1104701, title = {Open Innovation and Organizational Boundaries: Task Decomposition, Knowledge Distribution and the Locus of Innovation}, booktitle = {Handbook of Economic Organization: Integrating Economic and Organizational Theory}, year = {2013}, month = {March 29, 2013}, pages = {355-382}, publisher = {Edward Elgar Publishing, Inc.}, organization = {Edward Elgar Publishing, Inc.}, abstract = {

This chapter contrasts traditional, organization- centered models of innovation with more recent work on open innovation. These fundamentally different and inconsistent innovation logics are associated with contrasting organizational boundaries and organizational designs. We suggest that when critical tasks can be modularized and when problem- solving knowledge is widely distributed and available, open innovation complements traditional innovation logics. We induce these ideas from the literature and with extended examples from Apple, the National Aeronautics and Astronomical Agency (NASA) and LEGO. We suggest that task decomposition and problem- solving knowledge distribution are not deterministic but are strategic choices. If dynamic capabilities are associated with innovation streams, and if different innovation types are rooted in contrasting innovation logics, there are important implications for firm boundaries, design and identity.

}, keywords = {boundaries, collaborative innovation and invention, innovation, innovation strategy, institutional logics, knowledge sharing, modular innovation, open innovation, organizational boundaries, organizational design}, isbn = {978-1-84980-398-4}, url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.4337/9781782548225}, author = {Lakhani, Karim R. and Lifshitz-Assaf, Hila and Tushman, Michael L.}, editor = {Grandori, Anna} } @report {1104836, title = {Open Innovation at Siemens}, year = {2013}, month = {6/17/2013}, institution = {Harvard Business School}, type = {Case Study}, abstract = {

The case describes Siemens, a worldwide innovator in the Energy, Healthcare, Industry, and Infrastructure \& Cities sectors, and its efforts to develop and commercialize new R\&D through open innovation, including internal and external crowdsourcing contests. Emphasis is placed on exploring actual open innovation initiatives within Siemens and their outcomes. These include creating internal social- and knowledge-sharing networks and utilzing third party platforms to host internal and external contests. Industries discussed include energy, green technology, infrastructure and cities, and sustainability. In addition, the importance of fostering a collaborative online environment and protecting intellectual property is explored.

}, keywords = {creativity, crowdsourcing, energy industry, financial management, green technology industry, health, health industry, information technology, innovation, innovation and management, innovation strategy, knowledge management, knowledge sharing, manufacturing industry, R\&D, research and development, strategy, sustainability}, isbn = {613-100}, url = {https://hbr.org/product/open-innovation-at-siemens/613100-PDF-ENG}, author = {Lakhani, Karim R. and Hutter, Katja and Pokrywa, Stephanie Healy and Fuller, Johann} } @article {1104716, title = {Prize-based Contests Can Provide Solutions to Computational Biology Problems}, journal = {Nature Biotechnology}, volume = {31}, year = {2013}, month = {2013}, pages = {108-111}, abstract = {

In summary, we show that a prize-based contest on a commercial platform can effectively recruit skilled individuals to apply their knowledge to a big-data biomedical problem. Deconstruction and transformation of problems for a heterogeneous solver community coupled with adequate data to produce and validate results can support solution diversity and minimize the risk of sub-optimal solutions that may arise from limited searches. In addition to the benefits of generating new knowledge, this strategy may be particularly useful in situations where the computational or algorithmic problem, or potentially any science problem, represents a barrier to rapid progress but where finding the solution is not itself the major thrust of the investigator{\textquoteright}s scientific effort. The America Competes Act passed by the US Congress provides funding agencies with the authority to administer their own prize-based contests and paves the way for establishing how grant recipients might access commercial prize platforms to accelerate their own research.

}, keywords = {bioinformatics, Computational Biology, contests, Genomics}, url = {https://lish.harvard.edu/files/lish/files/prize-based_contests_can_provide_solutions.pdf}, author = {Lakhani, Karim R. and Boudreau, Kevin J. and Loh, Po-Ru and Backstrom, Lars and Baldwin, Carliss Y. and Lonstein, Eric and Lydon, Mike and MacCormack, Alan and Arnaout, Ramy A. and Guinan, Eva C.} } @magazinearticle {1104711, title = {Using Open Innovation to Identify the Best Ideas}, volume = {55}, year = {2013}, month = {September 17, 20}, abstract = {

As innovation becomes more democratic, many of the best ideas for new products and services no longer originate in well-financed corporate and government laboratories. Instead, they come from almost anywhere and anyone.1 How can companies tap into this distributed knowledge and these diverse skills? Increasingly, organizations are considering using an open-innovation process, but many are finding that making open innovation work can be more complicated than it looks. PepsiCo, the food and beverage giant, for example, created controversy in 2011 when an open-sourced entry into its Super Bowl ad contest that was posted online featured Doritos tortilla chips being used in place of sacramental wafers during Holy Communion. Similarly, Kraft Foods Australia ran into challenges when it launched a new Vegemite-based cheese snack in conjunction with a public naming contest. The name Kraft initially chose from the submissions, iSnack 2.0, encountered widespread ridicule, and Kraft abandoned it. (The company instead asked consumers to choose among six other names. The company ultimately picked the most popular choice among those six, Vegemite Cheesybite.) Reports of such problems have fed uncertainty among managers about how and when to open their innovation processes. Managers tell us that they need a means of categorizing different types of open innovation and a list of key success factors and common problems for each type. Over the last decade, we have worked to create such a guide by studying and researching the emergence of open-innovation systems in numerous sectors of the economy, by working closely with many organizations that have launched open-innovation programs and by running our own experiments.2 This research has allowed us to gain a unique perspective on the opportunities and problems of implementing open-innovation programs. (See {\textquotedblleft}About the Research.{\textquotedblright}) In every organization and industry, executives were faced with the same decisions. Specifically, they had to determine (1) whether to open the idea-generation process; (2) whether to open the idea-selection process; or (3) whether to open both. These choices led to a number of managerial challenges, and the practices the companies implemented were a major factor in whether the innovation efforts succeeded or failed.

}, keywords = {collaborative innovation and invention, innovation, open innovation}, url = {http://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/using-open-innovation-to-identify-the-best-ideas/}, author = {King, Andrew and Lakhani, Karim R.} } @magazinearticle {1104706, title = {Using the Crowd as an Innovation Partner}, volume = {91}, year = {2013}, month = {2013}, pages = {61-69}, abstract = {

From Apple to Merck to Wikipedia, more and more organizations are turning to crowds for help in solving their most vexing innovation and research questions, but managers remain understandably cautious. It seems risky and even unnatural to push problems out to vast groups of strangers distributed around the world, particularly for companies built on a history of internal innovation. How can intellectual property be protected? How can a crowdsourced solution be integrated into corporate operations? What about the costs? These concerns are all reasonable, the authors write, but excluding crowdsourcing from the corporate innovation tool kit means losing an opportunity. After a decade of study, they have identified when crowds tend to outperform internal organizations (or not). They outline four ways to tap into crowd-powered problem solving {\textemdash} contests, collaborative communities, complementors,\ and labor markets {\textemdash} and offer a system for picking the best one in a given situation. Contests, for example, are suited to highly challenging technical, analytical, and scientific problems; design problems; and creative or aesthetic projects. They are akin to running a series of independent experiments that generate multiple solutions{\textemdash}and if those solutions cluster at some extreme, a company can gain insight into where a problem{\textquoteright}s {\textquotedblleft}technical frontier{\textquotedblright} lies. (Internal R\&D may generate far less information.)

}, keywords = {crowdsourcing, innovation, innovation and management, innovation contests, research and development}, url = {http://hbr.org/2013/04/using-the-crowd-as-an-innovation-partner/ar/1}, author = {Boudreau, Kevin J. and Lakhani, Karim R.} } @inbook {1104691, title = {The Confederacy of Heterogeneous Software Organizations and Heterogeneous Developers: Field Experimental Evidence on Sorting and Worker Effort}, booktitle = {The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity Revisited}, series = {National Bureau of Economic Research conference report}, year = {2012}, month = {2012}, publisher = {University of Chicago Press}, organization = {University of Chicago Press}, address = {Chicago, IL}, abstract = {

This chapter reports on an actual field experiment that tests for the influence of {\textquotedblleft}sorting{\textquotedblright} on innovator effort. The focus is on the potential heterogeneity among innovators and whether they prefer a more cooperative versus competitive research environment. The focus of the field experiment is a real-world multiday software coding exercise in which participants are able to express a preference for being sorted into a cooperative or competitive environment{\textemdash}that is, incentives in the cooperative environment are team based, while those in the competitive environment are individualized and depend on relative performance. Half of the participants are indeed sorted on the basis of their preferences, while the other half are assigned to the two modes on a random basis.

}, keywords = {Behavior, competitions, confederacy, cooperation, creativity, employees, field experiment, information technology, innovation and invention, Organizations, product development, Software}, isbn = {978-0-226-47303-1}, url = {http://chicago.universitypressscholarship.com/view/10.7208/chicago/9780226473062.001.0001/upso-9780226473031-chapter-14}, author = {Boudreau, Kevin J. and Lakhani, Karim R.}, editor = {Stern, Scott and Lerner, Josh} } @report {1104891, title = {Innovation at Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools}, year = {2012}, month = {2012/2/9}, institution = {Harvard Business School}, type = {Case Study}, abstract = {

Following its 2011 win of the Broad Prize, the most prestigious award available for urban school districts, Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools must hire a new superintendent. This case examines the context of a large urban public school district and how its Board of Education and superintendent were able to create an environment that successfully fostered innovation, using a variety of tools including policy, structure, tools, and culture. It explores the particular constraints and barriers of public education and how the district leadership navigated them. Covers issues such as the resistance to innovation in the public sector, the importance of leadership in building a culture of innovation, the use of autonomy and accountability to encourage individual creativity, the difficulty of managing multiple stakeholders, and the challenge of sustaining improvements over changes in leadership.

}, keywords = {creativity, education, innovation and invention, innovation and management, public sector}, isbn = {612-065}, url = {https://cb.hbsp.harvard.edu/cbmp/product/612065-PDF-ENG}, author = {Lakhani, Karim R. and Liu, Meredith L.} } @article {1104696, title = {Let a Thousand Flowers Bloom? An Early Look at Large Numbers of Software App Developers and Patterns of Innovation}, journal = {Organization Science}, volume = {23}, year = {2012}, month = {September-Octobe}, pages = {1409-1427}, abstract = {

In this paper, I study the effect of adding large numbers of producers of application software programs ({\textquotedblleft}apps{\textquotedblright}) to leading handheld computer platforms, from 1999 to 2004. To isolate causal effects, I exploit changes in the software labor market. Consistent with past theory, I find a tight link between the number of producers on platform and the number of software varieties that were generated. The patterns indicate the link is closely related to the diversity and distinct specializations of producers. Also highlighting the role of heterogeneity and nonrandom entry and sorting, later cohorts generated less compelling software than earlier cohorts. Adding producers to a platform also shaped investment incentives in ways that were consistent with a tension between network effects and competitive crowding, alternately increasing or decreasing innovation incentives depending on whether apps were differentiated or close substitutes. The crowding of similar apps dominated in this case; the average effect of adding producers on innovation incentives was negative. Overall, adding large numbers of producers led innovation to become more dependent on population-level diversity, variation, and experimentation {\textemdash}while drawing less on the heroic efforts of any one individual innovator.

}, keywords = {competition and innovation, distributed innovation, multisided platforms, network effects, open innovation, software and digital innovation}, isbn = {1047-7039}, url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1110.0678}, author = {Boudreau, Kevin J.} } @report {1104896, title = {OpenIDEO}, year = {2012}, month = {2012/2/24}, institution = {Harvard Business School}, type = {Case Study}, abstract = {

The case describes OpenIDEO, an online offshoot of IDEO, one of the world{\textquoteright}s leading product design firms. OpenIDEO leverages IDEO{\textquoteright}s innovative design process and an online community to create solutions for social issues. Emphasis is placed on comparing the IDEO and OpenIDEO processes using real-world project examples. For IDEO this includes the redesign of Air New Zealand{\textquoteright}s long haul flights. For OpenIDEO this includes increasing bone marrow donor registrations and improving personal sanitation in Ghana. In addition, the importance of fostering a collaborative online environment is explored.

}, keywords = {collaborative innovation and invention, Ghana, New Zealand, product design, social and collaborative networks, social issues}, isbn = {612-066}, url = {https://hbr.org/product/openideo/612066-PDF-ENG}, author = {Lakhani, Karim R. and Fayard, Anne-Laure and Levina, Natalia and Pokrywa, Stephanie Healy} } @article {1104686, title = {Incentives and Problem Uncertainty in Innovation Contests: An Empirical Analysis}, journal = {Management Science}, volume = {57}, year = {2011}, month = {04/01/2011}, pages = {843-863}, abstract = {

Contests are a historically important and increasingly popular mechanism for encouraging innovation. A central concern in designing innovation contests is how many competitors to admit. Using a unique data set of 9,661 software contests, we provide evidence of two coexisting and opposing forces that operate when the number of competitors increases. Greater rivalry reduces the incentives of all competitors in a contest to exert effort and make investments. At the same time, adding competitors increases the likelihood that at least one competitor will find an extreme-value solution. We show that the effort-reducing effect of greater rivalry dominates for less uncertain problems, whereas the effect on the extreme value prevails for more uncertain problems. Adding competitors thus systematically increases overall contest performance for high-uncertainty problems. We also find that higher uncertainty reduces the negative effect of added competitors on incentives. Thus, uncertainty and the nature of the problem should be explicitly considered in the design of innovation tournaments. We explore the implications of our findings for the theory and practice of innovation contests.

}, keywords = {competitions, innovation, innovation and invention, innovation contests, management analysis, tools and techniques, motivation and incentives, performance, practice, problem solving, problems and challenges, risk and uncertainty, Software, theory, tournaments, uncertainty, value}, isbn = {0025-1909, 1526-5501}, url = {https://doi-org.ezp-prod1.hul.harvard.edu/10.1287/mnsc.1110.1322}, author = {Boudreau, Kevin J. and Lacetera, Nicola and Lakhani, Karim R.} } @report {1104866, title = {InnoCentive.com (A) (TN)}, year = {2011}, month = {2011/3/25}, institution = {Harvard Business School}, type = {Teaching Note}, abstract = {

Teaching Note for HBS Case 608-170

InnoCentive.com, a firm connecting R\&D labs of large organizations to diverse external solvers through innovation contests, has to decide if it will enable collaboration in its community. Case covers the basics of a distributed innovation system works and the advantages of having external R\&D. Links how concepts of open source are applied to a non-software setting. Describes the rationale for participation by solvers in innovation contests and the benefits that accrue to firms. Raises the issue if a community can be shifted to collaboration when competition was the basis of prior interaction.

}, keywords = {collaborative innovation and invention, competition, open source distribution, research and development, systems, web services industry}, isbn = {611-072}, url = {https://cb.hbsp.harvard.edu/cbmp/product/608170-PDF-ENG}, author = {Lakhani, Karim R.} } @report {1104881, title = {InnoCentive.com (B)}, year = {2011}, month = {2011/8/17}, institution = {Harvard Business School}, type = {Supplement}, abstract = {

InnoCentive.com enables clients to tap into internal and external solver networks to address various business issues. In 2008, InnoCentive introduced "InnoCentive@Work" (lC@W), which recognized clients{\textquoteright} reluctance to share problems and solutions with an external network. Instead, IC@W enabled clients to foster open collaboration amongst its own employees. IC@W became the fastest growing product in InnoCentive{\textquoteright}s portfolio. In 2010, InnoCentive added "team project rooms" which allowed small groups of solvers from InnoCentive{\textquoteright}s community to openly add posts and discussion threads after agreeing to the confidentiality and IP transfer requirements of the client. The case raises the questions of how the team room concept could be improved and how clients could be convinced of its benefits.

}, keywords = {collaborative innovation and invention, communication technology, cost vs benefits, groups and teams, intellectual property, market platforms, networks}, isbn = {612-026}, url = {https://hbr.org/product/innocentive-com-b/612026-PDF-ENG}, author = {Lakhani, Karim R. and Lonstein, Eric} } @report {1104876, title = {InnoCentive.com (C)}, year = {2011}, month = {2011/8/17}, institution = {Harvard Business School}, type = {Supplement}, abstract = {

InnoCentive.com enables clients to tap into internal and external solver networks to address various business issues. This case focuses on the outcome of InnoCentive{\textquoteright}s decision to post challenges related to environmental issues created by the Gulf Oil Spill. It reviews lessons learned from this experience and asks students to consider whether InnoCentive should post challenges in response to the nuclear crises resulting from the 2011 Japanese earthquake and tsunami.

}, keywords = {decisions, innovation and invention, Japan, natural disasters, natural environment, networks, outcome or result, pollution and pollutants}, isbn = {612-027}, url = {https://hbr.org/product/innocentive-com-c/612027-PDF-ENG}, author = {Lakhani, Karim R. and Lonstein, Eric} } @report {1104826, title = {Innovation and the Challenge of Novelty: The Novelty-Confirmation-Transformation Cycle in Software and Science}, year = {2011}, month = {March 2011}, institution = {Harvard Business School Publishing}, type = {Working Paper}, abstract = {

Innovation requires sources of novelty, but the challenge is that not all sources lead to innovation, so its value needs to be determined. However, since ways of determining value stem from existing knowledge, this often creates barriers to innovation. To understand how people address the challenge of novelty, we develop a conceptual and an empirical framework to explain how this challenge is addressed in a software and scientific context. What is shown is that the process of innovation is a cycle where actors develop a novel course of action and, based on the consequences identified, confirm what knowledge is necessary to transform and develop the next course of action. The performance of the process of innovation is constrained by the capacities of the artifacts and the ability of the actors to create and use artifacts to drive this cycle. By focusing on the challenge of novelty, a problem that cuts across all contexts of innovation, our goal is to develop a more generalized account of what drives the process of innovation.

}, keywords = {Artifacts, creativity, infrastructure, innovation, innovation and invention, knowledge acquisition, knowledge use and leverage, novelty, Science, Software, software and science, value}, isbn = {11-096}, url = {http://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Publication\%20Files/11-096.pdf}, author = {Carlile, Paul R. and Lakhani, Karim R.} } @report {1104981, title = {Myelin Repair Foundation: Accelerating Drug Discovery Through Collaboration (TN)}, year = {2011}, month = {2011/3/25}, institution = {Harvard Business School}, type = {Teaching Note}, abstract = {

Teaching Note for HBS Case 610-074.

This case presents the Myelin Repair Foundation{\textquoteright}s accelerated research collaboration model for drug discovery. It highlights the challenges of building a multi-disciplinary and multi-institutional research collaboration that is attempting to create a treatment for multiple sclerosis based on a novel scientific approach. The case provides details on how norms of academic research and intellectual property had to be updated to enable collaboration. The current dilemma facing the CEO and COO of the foundation relates to setting strategic priorities for research so that a treatment for MS can be ready in the next ten years. The strategic choices need to account for the complexities of drug discovery, the uncertainty of commercial partners{\textquoteright} interest in the therapeutic approach and the constrained donor-based fundraising environment.

}, isbn = {611-073}, url = {https://cb.hbsp.harvard.edu/cbmp/product/610074-PDF-ENG}, author = {Lakhani, Karim R.} } @article {1104786, title = {Seeds to Succeed?: Sequential Giving to Public Projects}, journal = {Journal of Public Economics}, volume = {95}, year = {2011}, month = {2011}, pages = {416-427}, abstract = {

The public phase of a capital campaign is typically launched with the announcement of a large seed donation. Andreoni (1998) argues that such a fundraising strategy may be particularly effective when funds are being raised for projects that have fixed production costs. The reason is that when there are fixed costs of production simultaneous giving may result in both positive and zero provision equilibria. Thus absent announcements donors may get stuck in an equilibrium that fails to provide a desirable public project. Andreoni (1998) demonstrates that such inferior outcomes can be eliminated when the fundraiser initially secures a sufficiently large seed donation. We investigate this model experimentally to determine whether announcements of seed money eliminate the inefficiencies that may result under fixed costs and simultaneous provision. To assess the strength of the theory we examine the effect of announcements in both the presence and absence of fixed costs. Our findings are supportive of the theory for sufficiently high fixed costs.

}, keywords = {charitable giving, coordination, experimental economics, fundraising, public goods, seed money, sequential giving}, url = {https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0047272710001507}, author = {Bracha, Anat and Menietti, Michael and Vesterlund, Lise} } @report {1104871, title = {TopCoder (A): Developing Software through Crowdsourcing (TN)}, year = {2011}, month = {2011/3/25}, institution = {Harvard Business School}, type = {Teaching Note}, abstract = {

Teaching Note for HBS Case 610-032.

TopCoder{\textquoteright}s crowdsourcing-based business model, in which software is developed through online tournaments, is presented. The case highlights how TopCoder has created a unique two-sided innovation platform consisting of a global community of over 225,000 developers who compete to write software modules for its over 40 clients. Provides details of a unique innovation platform where complex software is developed through ongoing online competitions. By outlining the company{\textquoteright}s evolution, the challenges of building a community and refining a web-based competition platform are illustrated. Experiences and perspectives from TopCoder community members and clients help show what it means to work from within or in cooperation with an online community. In the case, the use of distributed innovation and its potential merits as a corporate problem solving mechanism is discussed. Issues related to TopCoder{\textquoteright}s scalability, profitability, and growth are also explored.

}, isbn = {611-071}, url = {https://cb.hbsp.harvard.edu/cbmp/product/610032-PDF-ENG}, author = {Lakhani, Karim R. and Lonstein, Eric} } @report {1104886, title = {TopCoder (B)}, year = {2011}, month = {2011/9/29}, institution = {Harvard Business School}, type = {Supplement}, abstract = {

Metrology plays a key role in the manufacture of mechanical components. Traditionally it is used extensively in a pre-process stage where a manufacturer does process planning, design, and ramp-up, and in post-process off-line inspection to establish proof of quality. The area that is seeing a lot of growth is the in-process stage of volume manufacturing, where feedback control can help ensure that parts are made to specification. The Industrial Metrology Group at Carl Zeiss AG had its traditional strength in high precision coordinate measuring machines, a universal measuring tool that had been widely used since its introduction in the mid-1970s. The market faced a complex diversification of competition as metrology manufacturers introduced new sensor and measurement technologies, and as some of their customers moved towards a different style of measurement mandating speed and integration with production systems. The case discusses the threat of new in-line metrology systems to the core business as well as the arising new opportunities.

}, keywords = {change management, competition, diversification, forecasting and prediction, industry growth, machinery and machining, manufacturing industry, measurement and metrics, planning, product design, production, quality, technology adoption}, isbn = {612-044}, url = {https://hbr.org/product/topcoder-b/612044-PDF-ENG}, author = {Lakhani, Karim R. and Lonstein, Eric and Pokrywa, Stephanie} } @article {1104821, title = {Marginality and Problem-Solving Effectiveness in Broadcast Search}, journal = {Organization Science}, volume = {21}, year = {2010}, month = {September-Octobe}, pages = {1016-1033}, abstract = {

We examine who the winners are in science problem-solving contests characterized by open broadcast of problem information, self-selection of external solvers to discrete problems from the laboratories of large R\&D intensive companies, and blind review of solution submissions. We find that technical and social marginality, being a source of different perspectives and heuristics, plays an important role in explaining individual success in problem solving. The provision of a winning solution was positively related to increasing distance between the solver{\textquoteright}s field of technical expertise and the focal field of the problem. Female solvers{\textemdash}known to be in the "outer circle" of the scientific establishment{\textemdash}performed significantly better than men in developing successful solutions. Our findings contribute to the emerging literature on open and distributed innovation by demonstrating the value of openness, at least narrowly defined by disclosing problems, in removing barriers to entry to non-obvious individuals. We also contribute to the knowledge-based theory of the firm by showing the effectiveness of a market mechanism to draw out knowledge from diverse external sources to solve internal problems.

}, keywords = {broadcasting industry, competitions, ethnicity, gender, heuristics, independent innovation and invention, knowledge use and leverage, marginalization, markets, mathematical models, modeling, open innovation, open source distribution, problem solving, problems and challenges, R\&D, research and development, Science, statistical models, technological innovation}, url = {https://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/abs/10.1287/orsc.1090.0491}, author = {Jeppesen, Lars Bo and Lakhani, Karim R.} } @report {1104976, title = {Myelin Repair Foundation: Accelerating Drug Discovery Through Collaboration}, year = {2010}, month = {2010/3/1}, institution = {Harvard Business School}, type = {Case Study}, abstract = {

This case presents the Myelin Repair Foundation{\textquoteright}s accelerated research collaboration model for drug discovery. It highlights the challenges of building a multi-disciplinary and multi-institutional research collaboration that is attempting to create a treatment for multiple sclerosis based on a novel scientific approach. The case provides details on how norms of academic research and intellectual property had to be updated to enable collaboration. The current dilemma facing the CEO and COO of the foundation relates to setting strategic priorities for research so that a treatment for MS can be ready in the next ten years. The strategic choices need to account for the complexities of drug discovery, the uncertainty of commercial partners{\textquoteright} interest in the therapeutic approach and the constrained donor-based fundraising environment.

}, keywords = {biotechnology industry, collaborative innovation and invention, health disorders, health industry, intellectual property, pharmaceutical industry, research and development, risk and uncertainty, strategic planning}, isbn = {610-074}, url = {https://hbr.org/product/myelin-repair-foundation-accelerating-drug-discovery-through-collaboration/610074-PDF-ENG}, author = {Lakhani, Karim R. and Carlile, Paul R.} } @article {1104681, title = {Open Platform Strategies and Innovation: Granting Access vs. Devolving Control}, journal = {Management Science}, volume = {56}, year = {2010}, month = {September 9, 201}, pages = {1849-1872}, abstract = {

This paper studies two fundamentally distinct approaches to opening a technology platform and their different impacts on innovation. One approach is to grant access to a platform and thereby open up markets for complementary components around the platform. Another approach is to give up control over the platform itself. Using data on 21 handheld computing systems (1990{\textendash}2004), I find that granting greater levels of access to independent hardware developer firms produces up to a fivefold acceleration in the rate of new handheld device development, depending on the precise degree of access and how this policy was implemented. Where operating system platform owners went further to give up control (beyond just granting access to their plat- forms) the incremental effect on new device development was still positive but an order of magnitude smaller. The evidence from the industry and theoretical arguments both suggest that distinct economic mechanisms were set in motion by these two approaches to opening.

}, keywords = {complementors, distributed innovation, information technology, open strategies, platforms, systems, technical change}, url = {https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1100.1215}, author = {Boudreau, Kevin} } @report {1104831, title = {TopCoder (A): Developing Software through Crowdsourcing}, year = {2010}, month = {1/15/2010}, institution = {Harvard Business School}, type = {Case Study}, abstract = {

TopCoder{\textquoteright}s crowdsourcing-based business model, in which software is developed through online tournaments, is presented. The case highlights how TopCoder has created a unique two-sided innovation platform consisting of a global community of over 225,000 developers who compete to write software modules for its over 40 clients. Provides details of a unique innovation platform where complex software is developed through ongoing online competitions. By outlining the company{\textquoteright}s evolution, the challenges of building a community and refining a web-based competition platform are illustrated. Experiences and perspectives from TopCoder community members and clients help show what it means to work from within or in cooperation with an online community. In the case, the use of distributed innovation and its potential merits as a corporate problem solving mechanism is discussed. Issues related to TopCoder{\textquoteright}s scalability, profitability, and growth are also explored.

}, keywords = {business model, competitions, innovation, innovation and invention, motivation and incentives, social and collaborative networks, Software, technology industry, two-sided platforms}, isbn = {610-032}, url = {https://hbr.org/product/topcoder-a-developing-software-through-crowdsourcing/610032-PDF-ENG}, author = {Lakhani, Karim R. and Garvin, David A. and Lonstein, Eric} } @inbook {1104676, title = {Platform Rules: Multi-sided Platforms as Regulators}, booktitle = {Platforms, Markets, and Innovation}, year = {2009}, month = {2009}, publisher = {Edward Elgar Publishing, Inc.}, organization = {Edward Elgar Publishing, Inc.}, address = {Northampton, MA}, abstract = {

This paper provides a basic conceptual framework for interpreting non-price instruments used by multi-sided platforms (MSPs) by analogizing MSPs as "private regulators" who regulate access to and interactions around the platform. We present evidence on Facebook, TopCoder, Roppongi Hills and Harvard Business School to document the "regulatory" role played by MSPs. We find MSPs use nuanced combinations of legal, technological, informational and other instruments (including price-setting) to implement desired outcomes. Non-price instruments were very much at the core of MSP strategies.

}, keywords = {distributed innovation, network effects, platforms, regulation}, url = {http://www.e-elgar.com/shop/platforms-markets-and-innovation}, author = {Boudreau, Kevin and Hagiu, Andrei}, editor = {Gawer, Annabelle} } @article {1225271, title = {Getting Clear About Communities in Open Innovation }, journal = {Industry and Innovation}, volume = {15}, year = {2008}, abstract = {Research on open source software, user innovation and open innovation have increasingly emphasized the role of communities in creating, shaping and disseminating innovations. However, the comparability of such studies has been hampered by the lack of a precise definition of the community construct. In this paper we review prior definitions (implicit and explicit) of the community construct, and other suggestions for future research.}, url = {https://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Pages/item.aspx?num=32556}, author = {West, Joel and Lakhani, Karim R.} } @report {1104861, title = {InnoCentive.com (A)}, year = {2008}, month = {2008/6/10}, institution = {Harvard Business School}, type = {Case Study}, abstract = {

InnoCentive.com, a firm connecting R\&D labs of large organizations to diverse external solvers through innovation contests, has to decide if it will enable collaboration in its community. Case covers the basics of a distributed innovation system works and the advantages of having external R\&D. Links how concepts of open source are applied to a non-software setting. Describes the rationale for participation by solvers in innovation contests and the benefits that accrue to firms. Raises the issue if a community can be shifted to collaboration when competition was the basis of prior interaction.

}, keywords = {collaborative innovation and invention, competition, cooperation, open source distribution, research and development}, isbn = {608-170}, url = {https://hbr.org/product/recommended/an/608170-PDF-ENG?referral=02542\&cm_vc=rr_item_page.rr1}, author = {Lakhani, Karim R.} } @article {1225276, title = {Getting Unusual Suspects to Solve R\&D Puzzles}, journal = {Harvard Business Review}, volume = {85}, year = {2007}, abstract = {For even the toughest of R\&D problems, there are often people out there with innovative solutions already on their shelves or in their back pockets. The trick for corporate executives is finding and gaining access to those individuals. Our research with a company that broadcasts technological problems into the ether{\textemdash}and gets back solid results{\textemdash}has given us a profile of the kind of people most likely to solve R\&D puzzles. We wonder whether firms might be able to emulate this method to draw new insights from the talents and expertise of their own employees.}, url = {https://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Pages/item.aspx?num=24440}, author = {Lakhani, Karim R. and Jeppesen, Lars B.} } @article {1225272, title = {The Principles of Distributed Innovation}, journal = {Innovations: Technology, Governance, Globalization}, volume = {2}, year = {2007}, abstract = {Distributed innovation systems are an approach to organizing for innovation that seems to meet the challenge of accessing knowledge that resides outside the boundaries of any one organization. We provide an overview of distributed innovation systems that are achieving success in three different industries. We explore why people participate, the organizing principles of production, and the implications for intellectual property policy. Finally, the potential extensions and limitations of this alternative model of innovation are considered.}, url = {https://www.researchgate.net/publication/24090028_The_Principles_of_Distributed_Innovation}, author = {Lakhani, Karim R. and Panetta, Jill A.} } @article {1225277, title = {Community, Joining, and Specialization in Open Source Software Innovation: A Case Study}, journal = {Research Policy}, volume = {32}, year = {2003}, pages = {1217-1241}, abstract = {This paper develops an inductive theory of the open source software (OSS) innovation process by focussing on the creation of Freenet, a project aimed at developing a decentralized and anonymous peer-to-peer electronic file sharing network. We are particularly interested in the strategies and processes by which new people join the existing community of software developers, and how they initially contribute code. Analyzing data from multiple sources on the Freenet software development process, we generate the constructs of {\textquotedblleft}joining script{\textquotedblright}, {\textquotedblleft}specialization{\textquotedblright}, {\textquotedblleft}contribution barriers{\textquotedblright}, and {\textquotedblleft}feature gifts{\textquotedblright}, and propose relationships among these. Implications for theory and research are discussed.}, url = {https://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Pages/item.aspx?num=22239}, author = {von Krogh, Georg and Spaeth, Sebastian and Lakhani, Karim R.} } @article {1225284, title = {How Open Source Software Works: "Free" User-to-User Assistance}, journal = {Research Policy}, volume = {32}, year = {2003}, pages = {923-943}, abstract = {Research into free and open source software development projects has so far largely focused on how the major tasks of software development are organized and motivated. But a complete project requires the execution of {\textquotedblleft}mundane but necessary{\textquotedblright} tasks as well. In this paper, we explore how the mundane but necessary task of field support is organized in the case of Apache web server software, and why some project participants are motivated to provide this service gratis to others. We find that the Apache field support system functions effectively. We also find that, when we partition the help system into its component tasks, 98\% of the effort expended by information providers in fact returns direct learning benefits to those providers. This finding considerably reduces the puzzle of why information providers are willing to perform this task {\textquotedblleft}for free.{\textquotedblright} Implications are discussed.}, url = {https://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Pages/item.aspx?num=22241}, author = {Lakhani, Karim R. and von Hippel, Eric} }