Identifying New Product Ideas: Waiting for the Wisdom of the Crowd or Screening Ideas in Real Time
Open accessAbstract
Crowdsourcing ideas from consumers can enrich idea input in new product development. After a decade of initiatives (e.g., Starbucks’ MyStarbucksIdea, Dell's IdeaStorm), the implications of crowdsourcing for idea generation are well understood, but challenges remain in dealing with the large volume of rapidly generated ideas produced in crowdsourcing communities. This study proposes a model that can assist managers in efficiently processing crowdsourced ideas by identifying the aspects of ideas that are most predictive of future implementation and identifies three sources of information available for an idea: its content, the contributor proposing it, and the crowd's feedback on the idea (the “3Cs”). These information sources differ in their time of availability (content/contributor information is available immediately; crowd feedback accumulates over time) and in the extent to which they comprise structured or unstructured data. This study draws from prior research to operationalize variables corresponding to the 3Cs and develops a new measure to quantify an idea's distinctiveness. Applying automated information retrieval methods (latent semantic indexing) and testing several linear methods (linear discriminant analysis, regularized logistic regression) and nonlinear machine‐learning algorithms (stochastic adaptive boosting, random forests), this article identifies the variables that are most useful towards predicting idea implementation in a crowdsourcing community for an IT product (Mendeley). Our results indicate that consideration of content and contributor information improves ranking performance between 22.6 and 26.0% over random idea selection, and that adding crowd‐related information further improves performance by up to 48.1%. Crowd feedback is the best predictor of idea implementation, followed by idea content and distinctiveness, and the contributor's past idea‐generation experience. Firms are advised to implement two idea selection support systems: one to rank new ideas in real time based on content and contributor experience, and another that integrates the crowd's idea evaluation after it has had sufficient time to provide feedback.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
AI is often operationalized in cloud-based forums or idea crowdsourcing platforms intended to allow users to discuss unmet needs, unarticulated desires, and propose ideas.
“The literature indicates that AI is often operationalized in cloud-based forums or idea crowdsourcing platforms intended to allow users to discuss unmet needs, unarticulated desires, and propose ideas (Govindan, 2022; Hoornaert et al., 2017).”
From Artificial intelligence in innovation management: A review of innovation capabilities and a taxonomy of <scp>AI</scp> applications (2025) · cites this paper as Hoornaert et al., 2017
Cites
Collaborating to create: The Internet as a platform for customer engagement in product innovation
Sawhney, M., Verona, G., & Prandelli, E. (2005) · Journal of Interactive Marketing · doi:10.1002/dir.20046 · Cited by 1,406 · see citing works
Jansson, D. G., & Smith, S. M. (1991) · Design Studies · doi:10.1016/0142-694x(91)90003-f · Cited by 1,087 · see citing works
Design and other types of fixation
Purcell, A. T., & Gero, J. S. (1996) · Design Studies · doi:10.1016/s0142-694x(96)00023-3 · Cited by 552 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Gama, F., & Magistretti, S. (2025) · Journal of Product Innovation Management · doi:10.1111/jpim.12698 · Cited by 388 · see citing works
- Authors
- Hoornaert, S., Ballings, M., Malthouse, E. C., & Van den Poel, D.
- Affiliations
- Ghent University (BE)
- University of Tennessee at Knoxville (US)
- Northwestern University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Ballings, Michel
- Venue
- Journal of Product Innovation Management
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2017-06-19
- Volume
- 34
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 580-597
- ISSN
- 0737-6782 (ISSN-L)
- 1540-5885
- OpenAlex
- W2711140174
- Cited by
- 152
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 9 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 24 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 2
- FWCI
- 17.05
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Journal of Product Innovation Management (publishedVersion)
- Ghent University Academic Bibliography (Ghent University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Open Source Software Innovations
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Mobile Crowdsensing and Crowdsourcing
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Service and Product Innovation
- Keywords
- crowdsourcing, new product development, idea generation, idea screening, wisdom of crowds, Mendeley, IT products
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review