The DOI matches its Crossref record; 19 of the 19 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Why Do Users Contribute to Firm-Hosted User Communities? The Case of Computer-Controlled Music Instruments
Abstract
Studies of the sources of innovations have recognized that many innovations are developed by users. However, the fact that firms employ communities of users to strengthen their innovation process has not yet received much attention. In online firm-hosted user communities, users freely reveal innovations to a firm's product platform, which can put the firm in a favorable position (a) because these new product features become available to all users through sharing on a user-to-user basis, or (b) because it allows the firm to pick up the innovations and integrate them in future products and then benefit by selling them to all users. We study the key personal attributes of the individuals responsible for innovations, namely the innovative users, to explain creation of value in this organizational context. The main question is why such users contribute to firm-hosted user communities. Analyzing data derived from multiple sources (interviews, a Web-log, and questionnaires), we find that innovative users are likely to be (i) hobbyists, an attribute that can be assumed to (positively) affect innovators' willingness to share innovations, and (ii) responsive to “firm recognition” as a motivating factor for undertaking innovation, which explains their decision to join the firm's domain. In agreement with earlier studies, we also find that innovative users are likely to be “lead users,” an attribute that we assume to affect the quality of user innovation. Whether or not a firm-hosted user community can be turned into an asset for the firm is to a great extent conditional on the issues studied in this paper.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage
Barney, J. (1991) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/014920639101700108 · Cited by 48,334
Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations: Classic Definitions and New Directions
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000) · Contemporary Educational Psychology · doi:10.1006/ceps.1999.1020 · Cited by 18,666
Building Theories from Case Study Research
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258557 · Cited by 17,455
Estimating Nonresponse Bias in Mail Surveys
Armstrong, J. S., & Overton, T. S. (1977) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.2307/3150783 · Cited by 12,222
Estimating nonresponse bias in mail surveys
Armstrong, J. S., & Overton, T. S. (1977) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/002224377701400320 · Cited by 10,390
Mixing Qualitative and Quantitative Methods: Triangulation in Action.
Jick, T. D. (1979) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2392366 · Cited by 7,103 · cited 2×
“It may be used by the organizational researcher to enhance the precision of his conclusions by collecting different data related to the same phenomenon (Jick 1979).”
MethodMuniz, A. M., & O'Guinn, T. C. (2001) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/319618 · Cited by 3,998
Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation
Benabou, R., & Tirole, J. (2003) · Review of Economic Studies · doi:10.1111/1467-937x.00253 · Cited by 2,913
Deci, E. L. (1975) · doi:10.1007/978-1-4613-4446-9 · Cited by 2,911
Lakhani, K. R., & Wolf, R. G. (2003) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.443040 · Cited by 1,531
Cited by
The digital transformation of innovation and entrepreneurship: Progress, challenges and key themes
Nambisan, S., Wright, M., & Feldman, M. (2019) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2019.03.018 · Cited by 3,089
Service Innovation: A Service-Dominant Logic Perspective1
Lusch, R. F., & Nambisan, S. (2015) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.25300/misq/2015/39.1.07 · Cited by 1,949
Introducing COBRAs: Exploring motivations for brand-related social media use
Muntinga, D. G., Moorman, M., & Smit, E. G. (2011) · International Journal of Advertising · doi:10.2501/ija-30-1-013-046 · Cited by 1,468
Ma, M., & Agarwal, R. (2007) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.1070.0113 · Cited by 1,143
What makes a useful online review? Implication for travel product websites
Liu, Z., & Park, S. (2015) · Tourism Management · doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2014.09.020 · Cited by 963
Metadata
- Authors
- Jeppesen, L. B., & Frederiksen, L.
- Venue
- Organization Science
- Published
- 2006-02
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 45-63
- ISSN
- 1047-7039 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-5455
- OpenAlex
- W2160021187
- Cited by
- 999
- References
- 19
- FWCI
- 65.89
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Why Do Users Contribute to Firm-Hosted User Communities? The Case of Computer-Controlled Music Instruments. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1287/orsc.1050.0156
- The paper
- Jeppesen, L. B., & Frederiksen, L. (2006). Why Do Users Contribute to Firm-Hosted User Communities? The Case of Computer-Controlled Music Instruments. Organization Science. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1050.0156
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.