ARI SIVULA Generic Crowdsourcing Model for Holistic Innovation Management ACTA WASAENSIA 355 INDUSTRIAL MANAGEMENT 41 Reviewers Associate Professor Aviv Segev Graduate School of Knowledge Service Engineering Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST) Daehak-ro, Yuseong-gu DAEJEON 34141 REP. OF KOREA Associate Professor Andrea Bikfalvi Department of Business Administration and Product Design University of Girona C/ Mª Aurèlia Capmany, 61 17071 GIRONA GIRONA SPAIN III Julkaisija Julkaisupäivämäärä Vaasan yliopisto Elokuu 2016 Tekijä(t) Julkaisun tyyppi Ari Sivula Artikkeliväitöskirja Julkaisusarjan nimi, osan numero Acta Wasaensia, 355 Yhteystiedot ISBN Vaasan yliopisto Teknillinen tiedekunta Tuotantotalouden yksikkö PL 700 65101 Vaasa 978-952-476-690-6 (painettu) 978-952-476-691-3 (verkkoaineisto) ISSN 0355-2667 (Acta Wasaensia 355, painettu) 2323-9123 (Acta Wasaensia 355, verkkoaineisto) 1456-3738 (Acta Wasaensia. Tuotantotalous 41, painettu) 2324-0407 (Acta Wasaensia. Tuotantotalous 41, verkkoai- neisto) Sivumäärä Kieli 246 Englanti Julkaisun nimike Geneerinen joukkoistamismalli holistiselle innovaatiojohtamiselle Tiivistelmä Innovaatiot ovat merkittävässä roolissa nykypäivän organisaatioissa ja niitä tulee johtaa holistisesti, jotta ne saavuttaisivat riittävän markkinavetoisuuden. Tämän tutkimuksen päämääränä oli selvittää joukkoistamisen geneeristä hyödyntämistä holistisen innovaa- tiojohtamisen kontekstissa. Holistinen innovaatiojohtaminen kattaa strategisen sekä inno- vaatio- ja projektijohtamisen osa-alueet. Joukkoistaminen tarjoaa erilaisia mahdollisuuk- sia vuorovaikutukseen asiakkaiden, potentiaalisten asiakkaiden ja muiden sidosryhmien kanssa. Tutkimus koostuu kuudesta vertaisarvioidusta tutkimusartikkelista, ja sen empiirinen osuus suoritettiin 18 case-organisaatiossa, jotka toimivat eri toimialoilla. Tutkimuksessa hyödynnettiin kvalitatiivisia ja kvantitatiivissa tutkimusmenetelmiä kokonaisvaltaisem- man näkökulman saavuttamiseksi tutkimusaiheeseen. Tutkimuksen kontribuutio olemassa olevaan innovaatiojohtamisen kirjallisuuteen ja tie- teelliseen keskusteluun on monipuolinen. Ensinnäkin, tutkimus tarjoaa tietoa joukkoista- misesta ja sen hyödyntämisestä holistisen innovaatiojohtamisen kontekstissa. Toiseksi, tutkimus esittelee geneerisen joukkoistamismallin, joka on sovellettavissa tieteessä, liike- toiminnassa, innovaatiojohtamisessa sekä tuote- ja palvelukehityksessä. Kolmantena, geneerinen joukkoistamismalli on tutkimuksessa sovellettu holistiseen innovaatiojohta- miseen. Tutkimuksen pääkontribuutiona voidaan pitää tutkimuksen aikana kehitettyä holistisen innovaatiojohtamisen mallia, johon geneerinen joukkoistamismalli on sovellet- tu. Tutkimus osoittaa, että joukkoistamisella on suuri vaikutus organisaation holistiseen in- novaatiojohtamiseen, mikä tekee siitä asiakaslähtöisemmän ja siksi toteutetut innovaatiot ovat luonteeltaan markkinavetoisia. Lisäksi tutkimus osoittaa, että joukkoistamista on mahdollista hyödyntää teollisuuden alasta riippumatta erityyppisten innovaatioiden to- teuttamisessa. Asiasanat Innovaatiojohtaminen, joukkoistaminen, joukkorahoitus, projektijohtaminen, strateginen johtaminen V Publisher Date of publication Vaasan yliopisto August 2016 Author(s) Type of publication Ari Sivula Doctoral thesis by publication Name and number of series Acta Wasaensia, 355 Contact information ISBN University of Vaasa Faculty of Technology Department of Production P. O. Box 700 FI-65101 Vaasa Finland 978-952-476-690-6 (print) 978-952-476-691-3 (online) ISSN 0355-2667 (Acta Wasaensia 355, print) 2323-9123 (Acta Wasaensia 355, online) 1456-3738 (Acta Wasaensia. Industrial Management 41, print) 2324-0407 (Acta Wasaensia. Industrial Management 41, online) Number of pages Language 246 English Title of publication Generic Crowdsourcing Model for Holistic Innovation Management Abstract Innovations are one of the most important economic drivers in modern businesses. An innovation management approach should be holistic within an organization to produce innovations which have demand on the markets. The objective of this study was to re- search how crowdsourcing is generically utilized in the holistic innovation management. The holistic innovation management approach covers strategic, innovation and project management areas in this study. Crowdsourcing provides several possibilities to interact with existing customers, potential customers and other individuals. The dissertation is based on six peer-reviewed research articles and the empirical data of the study were collected from 18 case organizations which are acting in different indus- tries. Qualitative and quantitative approaches were employed to provide a more compre- hensive view of the research topic. The research provides several contributions to existing innovation management litera- ture and discussions. Firstly, the study provides knowledge about crowdsourcing and its utilization in the holistic context of innovation management. Secondly, the study pro- vides a generic crowdsourcing model (GCM) which can be adapted in several ways in science and businesses. Thirdly, the GCM is applied in holistic innovation management and a new model is provided as a final outcome of the study. This research demonstrates that crowdsourcing can have a significant impact on an or- ganization’s holistic innovation management. Utilization of crowdsourcing makes an organization more customer-focused, and, therefore, implemented innovations have more demand on the markets. Moreover, this research indicates that crowdsourcing can be utilized in a wide range of industries when producing different types of innovations. Keywords Crowdfunding, crowdsourcing, innovation management, project management, strategic management VII ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Implementing a dissertation is a challenging job and involves several complex problems which the researcher should be able to solve one way or another. Fur- thermore, research requires a lot of effort and endurance from the researcher. If implementing of dissertation was compared to sports, it would definitely be the Ironman distance triathlon. Both include feelings of success and failure. But if you are able to get through all the challenges and push yourself to the limit, you know that you are the winner at the end of the day. Doing a dissertation does not have to be a lonely job. Being a beginner researcher, one needs to have support from various quarters. I am happy to say that I got a lot of support during the dissertation process. First and most importantly, I want to express my deepest gratitude to my dissertation supervisor, Head of the Depart- ment of Production, Professor Jussi Kantola, for the immeasurable amount of support and guidance which he provided to me during the journey to becoming a doctor. Without you, my dissertation would not be complete. Your advice and support were crucial while implementing research, publications, graduate studies and the entire dissertation. You encouraged me all the time during the process and got the best out of me because of that. This was the most important support, for which I cannot thank you enough. I want to express my gratitude to the Dean of Seinäjoki University of Applied Sciences, Antti Pasila, DSc. You encouraged me to do the dissertation at the very beginning and provided the necessary resources during the process. You lowered the organizational barriers and this way provided me with crucial support. Special thanks go to John Pearce who proof-read my scientific articles and improved my English language. I would like, moreover, to thank my colleagues in Seinäjoki University of Applied Sciences who had time to listen to what I was doing in my dissertation. We had a lot of interesting discussions about innovations, innovation management and crowdsourcing during the process. I wish to thank all the case organizations who participated in my research. With- out your experiences of innovations, innovation management and crowdsourcing, implementing this dissertation would have been impossible. Moreover, I wish to thank Seinäjoki University of Applied Sciences, the Foundation for Economic Education and the University of Vaasa for financial support for my research. Last but not least, I am deeply grateful for the support and encouragement I re- ceived from my family. My parents Armi and Arto and my little brother Marko VIII have always supported me in my choices and encouraged me in many ways in my life. Your encouragement has always meant a lot to me. I would like to give my deepest gratitude to my lovely wife Johanna. You gave me time and understand- ing, and encouraged me when I needed it. Now that this doctoral journey has come to an end, I am happy to give my free time to you and still our very young sons. I am happy to stand here and say that I did it! It was not an easy job but the jour- ney to becoming a doctor was really rewarding. I learned a lot of new things which will benefit me and my family in the future. Seinäjoki, June 2016 Ari Sivula IX CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................................................................... VII CONTENTS ......................................................................................................... IX ARTICLES ........................................................................................................ XIII 1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 1 1.1 Research background and motivation ........................................................ 1 1.2 Positioning of the study .............................................................................. 2 1.3 Research problem and objective ................................................................ 3 1.4 Research questions ..................................................................................... 4 1.5 Research strategy and context .................................................................... 7 1.6 Structure of the dissertation ....................................................................... 9 2 THEORETICAL BACKGROUND ............................................................... 10 2.1 Crowdsourcing ......................................................................................... 10 2.1.1 Defining crowdsourcing ............................................................ 11 2.1.2 Generic crowdsourcing model ................................................... 14 2.1.3 Crowdsourcing compared to open innovation ........................... 18 2.2 Strategic management .............................................................................. 19 2.2.1 Strategy formulation and implementation ................................. 19 2.2.2 Relationship between innovation and strategy .......................... 21 2.2.3 Porter’s value chain ................................................................... 21 2.3 Innovation management ........................................................................... 23 2.3.1 Innovations ................................................................................. 23 2.3.2 Push and pull innovations .......................................................... 24 2.3.3 Scopes for innovations ............................................................... 25 2.3.4 Management of innovations ....................................................... 27 2.4 Project management ................................................................................. 28 2.4.1 Project lifecycle ......................................................................... 29 2.4.2 Management of projects ............................................................. 31 2.5 Synthesis of the conceptual framework ................................................... 31 3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ................................................................... 34 3.1 Research approach ................................................................................... 34 3.1.1 Reasoning ................................................................................... 34 3.1.2 Research categories .................................................................... 35 3.1.3 Paradigm .................................................................................... 35 3.1.4 Data collection and analysis ...................................................... 37 3.1.5 A case study ............................................................................... 39 3.2 Research process ...................................................................................... 40 3.2.1 Planning ..................................................................................... 41 3.2.2 Designing ................................................................................... 41 3.2.3 Preparing .................................................................................... 44 3.2.4 Collecting the case data ............................................................. 46 X 3.2.5 Analyzing ................................................................................... 49 3.2.6 Sharing ........................................................................................ 49 3.3 Quality of the research .............................................................................. 50 3.4 Synthesis of the research methodology .................................................... 53 4 SUMMARY OF THE RESULTS .................................................................. 55 4.1 Summary of publications .......................................................................... 55 4.1.1 Author’s contribution in the scientific publications ................... 55 4.1.2 Crowdsourcing in strategic management (RQ2) ........................ 56 4.1.3 Crowdsourcing in innovation management (RQ3) ..................... 59 4.1.4 Crowdsourcing in project management (RQ4) ........................... 62 4.1.5 Crowdsourcing in holistic innovation management (RQ1) ........ 64 4.2 Theoretical implications ........................................................................... 67 4.3 Managerial implications ........................................................................... 68 5 CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................ 70 5.1 Discussions of the research ....................................................................... 70 5.2 Limitations of the research ....................................................................... 71 5.3 Suggestions for future research ................................................................ 72 REFERENCES ..................................................................................................... 74 APPENDICES ...................................................................................................... 87 Appendix 1: Interview presentation ................................................................ 87 Appendix 2: Research introduction letter ....................................................... 93 Appendix 3: Online survey form questions .................................................... 95 Appendix 4: Verification presentation .......................................................... 127 PUBLICATIONS ................................................................................................ 137 XI LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Position of the research ..................................................................... 2 Figure 2. Summary of research strategy of the dissertation .............................. 8 Figure 3. The GCM ......................................................................................... 15 Figure 4. Strategic management model .......................................................... 20 Figure 5. Porter’s value chain ......................................................................... 22 Figure 6. Innovation management as a process .............................................. 27 Figure 7. Main phases of project management ............................................... 30 Figure 8. Synthesis of the conceptual framework ........................................... 32 Figure 9. Triangulation approaches of the study ............................................ 38 Figure 10. Case study process .......................................................................... 40 Figure 11. The initial framework of the study .................................................. 42 Figure 12. Case study protocol of the research ................................................. 45 Figure 13. Respondent profiles in the research ................................................. 47 Figure 14. Summary of research methodology ................................................. 53 Figure 15. The GCM for holistic innovation management ............................... 65 XII LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Research questions, publications, publication numbers and main contributions ................................................................................. 5 Table 2. Definitions of crowdsourcing ..................................................... 11 Table 3. GCM implementations ............................................................... 16 Table 4. Differentiation between push and pull innovations .................... 25 Table 5. Comparison of four research paradigms..................................... 36 Table 6. Case organizations’ profiles in the research ............................... 46 Table 7. Summary statistics of the case organizations and respondents .. 48 Table 8. Tests and case study strategies for ensuring quality in this research ....................................................................................... 50 XIII ARTICLES This dissertation consists of a summary of the following original research articles: A1 Sivula, A. & Kantola, J. (2016). Integrating Crowdsourcing with Holis- tic Innovation Management. International Journal of Advanced Logis- tics. In process. A2 Sivula, A., Kantola, J., Vanharanta, H. & Salo, M. (2014). Crowdsourcing in Strategic Management. Proceedings of the 11th In- ternational Conference on Innovation & Management, 613-623. Nov 2014, Vaasa, Finland. A3 Sivula, A. & Kantola, J. (2014). Combining Crowdsourcing and Por- ter’s Value Chain. International Journal of Advanced Logistics 3(1-2), 17-26. A4 Sivula, A. & Kantola, J. (2014). Crowdsourcing Utilization in Innova- tion Management. Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Technology Innovation and Industrial Management, S3:53-70. May 2014, Seoul, South Korea. A5 Sivula, A. & Kantola, J. (2016). Adapting Crowdsourcing in Innova- tion Management. International Journal of Innovation and Learning 19(3), 314-334. A6 Sivula, A. & Kantola, J. (2014). Crowdsourcing in a Project Lifecycle. In Knowledge Management in Organizations. 9th International Con- ference, KMO2014, Proceedings. Lecture Notes in Business Infor- mation Processing, Volume 185, 221-232. Ed. Uden, L., Fuenzaliza Oshee, D., Ting, I.-H. & Liberona, D. Switzerland: Springer Interna- tional Publishing. A2 is reprinted with the kind permission from Wuhan University of Technology Press. A3 is reprinted with the kind permission from Taylor and Francis Publishing Group. A4 is reprinted with the kind permission from ToKnowPress. A5 is reprinted with the kind permission from Inderscience Publishing Limited. A6 is reprinted with the kind permission from Springer International Publishing Limited. XIV GENERAL DEFINITIONS Crowdsourcing Crowdsourcing is the act of taking a job traditionally per- formed by a designated agent (usually an employee) and outsourcing it to an undefined, generally large group of peo- ple in the form of an open call (Howe 2015). Can be knowledge, resource or funding focused. Development The systematic use of scientific and technical knowledge to meet specific objectives or requirements (Nnia 2014). Innovation Innovation is the specific instrument of an organization and is the act that provides resources with a new capacity to cre- ate wealth (Drucker 1985). Can be, for instance, a radically, discontinuously or incrementally new product, new service, new process or new phenomenon. Innovation commonly provides the opportunity to enhance profit of an organiza- tion. Innovation diffu- sion Widespread adoption of innovation (Tidd 2010). Innovation man- agement A process of managing innovation which includes search, select, implement and capture phases (Tidd and Bessant 2013). Knowledge A fluid mix of framed experience, values, contextual infor- mation, and expert insight that provides a framework for evaluating and incorporating new experiences and infor- mation (Davenport and Prusak 1998). Project Temporary endeavor involving a connected sequence of ac- tivities and range of resources which are designed to achieve a predefined goal (Lake 1997). Commonly utilized in devel- opment of innovation. Project manage- ment A process of controlling project; generally includes initia- tion, planning, execution and closure phases (Project Man- agement Institute 2013). XV Organization Organized group of people with a particular purpose, such as a business, public institution, university or government de- partment. Can be micro, small, medium or large in size (Centre for Strategy & Evaluation Services 2012). Pull innovation Innovation which has a common demand on the markets (Peters et al. 2012). Push innovation Innovation which does not necessarily have demand on the markets (Brem and Voigt 2009). Strategic man- agement Activity of an organization which includes identifying op- portunities and threats in the business environment and at- taching an estimate of risk to the discernible alternatives (Mintzberg and Quinn 1998). Strategy is first formulated and implemented after formulation. Strategy A plan to reach an organization’s goal in the short or long term (Johnson et al. 2014). An organization can have several strategies or a single one. Value chain The process or activities by which a company adds value to an article, including production, marketing and the provision of after-sales service (Porter 1998). Weak signal Future-oriented information behind forthcoming trends, changes and emerging phenomena (Yoon 2012). XVI “If you always do what you always did, you will always get what you always got.” - Albert Einstein “Business has only two functions - marketing and innovation.” - Peter F. Drucker, Management “No decision-making system is going to guarantee corporate success. The strate- gic decisions that corporations have to make are of mind-numbing complexity. But we know that the more power you give a single individual in the face of com- plexity and uncertainty, the more likely it is that bad decisions will get made.” - James Surowiecki, The Wisdom of Crowds “Victory is always possible for the person who refuses to stop fighting.” - Napoleon Hill XVII “To my lovely wife, Johanna, and our ever-inquisitive sons, Aleksi and Niko.” Ari Sivula 1 INTRODUCTION Innovations have a crucial role in a modern organization’s activities. Innovations lead to economic growth for an organization, an entire industry and all of society (Abernathy and Clark 1985; Porter 1980; Schumpeter 2008). It is profitable for an organization to produce innovations which have demand on the markets. Innova- tion management is a demanding process and requires effective management which should utilize knowledge among other resources from a variety of sources (Trott 2005). An organization should be aware of the needs and opinions of cus- tomers, potential customers and other individuals if it wants to create innovations which have high demand on the markets. Christensen (2011) argues that suppliers and customers must discover new markets together. Customers and other individ- uals can have a role in innovation management. Innovation management is a process which can lead, for instance, to a new prod- uct or service (Cormican and O’Sullivan 2004; Rogers 2003; Tidd and Bessant 2013). Innovation management should be comprehensive management of an or- ganization and cover several management areas. This study highlights a holistic approach to innovation management which is constructed from three management areas: strategic management, innovation management and project management. Innovations should have demand on the markets in order to lead to higher profit for an organization. Organizations should, therefore, be constantly connected to customers, potential customers and other individuals when creating innovations. Crowdsourcing has received a lot of attention in science and businesses after Howe published the first crowdsourcing article in Wired magazine in 2006. Crowdsourcing is a model for employing an undefined internal and external crowd in an organization’s activities. The crowd can be utilized as a knowledge creator, a resource or a funder of an organization’s activities (Sivula and Kantola 2016b). Moreover, crowdsourcing provides flexibility for innovation management when an organization is aware of the needs of the crowd. 1.1 Research background and motivation An organization should be altogether innovative which, therefore, means that in- novation is not the responsibility of a single function or department of an organi- zation. Crowdsourcing provides knowledge, resources and funding for an organi- zation’s activities, and it can be adapted several ways in the context of holistic innovation management. More research and a new model is required for holistic and generic understanding of innovation management and crowdsourcing in an 2 Acta Wasaensia organization’s activities which is the key motivation of this study. Crowdsourcing is a way to implement interaction with the crowd which can consist, for instance, of customers, potential customers, employees and other individuals. Crowdsourc- ing could provide the required resources for implementing innovations. Crowdsourcing is a relatively new concept and, therefore, requires more research to develop new models for science and businesses. This research focused on crowdsourcing and its utilization in several management areas and aimed for the development of a generic crowdsourcing model (GCM) for holistic innovation management which could be utilized in a wide range of industry sectors and in science. The model includes different elements of management and crowdsourc- ing. 1.2 Positioning of the study This study crosses several research areas to provide a holistic view of crowdsourcing and its utilization in an organization’s innovation management activities. The work overlaps different management areas: strategic management, innovation management and project management. Crowdsourcing’s utilization in these management areas was studied and finally the GCM for the holistic innova- tion management model was developed as a final outcome. Figure 1 illustrates the position of the research. Figure 1. Position of the research Acta Wasaensia 3 Crossing the boundaries of several fields of management research has become a general approach in organizational studies as the phenomena examined have be- come increasingly complex (Eriksson 2013). This can be seen in this study as well. Crowdsourcing can be considered a still new and, moreover, complex phe- nomenon, and as an activity which crosses several management areas. Moreover, it can be utilized in various ways in organization activities, as this research em- phasizes. 1.3 Research problem and objective Every management book and research article emphasizes the need for innovations (Drucker 1993; Johnson et al. 2014; Kim and Mauborgne 2005). Innovations are vital; they provide a change to increase an organization’s profit, among other ad- vantages. Innovations can be either pushed in or pulled by the markets. Market demand does not exist in push innovations or new products, and services come from the research activities of an organization (Brem and Voigt 2009; Ottosson 2004; Stefano et al. 2012). Markets create demand in pull innovations which can be more beneficial for an organization (Caetano and Amaral 2011; Drury and Farhoomand 1999; Peters et al. 2012). Nevertheless, new products and services need to accurately respond to customer needs to succeed in the markets (Pantamo and Viassone 2014). Therefore, market pull innovations can be considered the more beneficial model for creating innovations. This study highlights the requirement for pull innovations which have customer needs already available, and which can, therefore, lead to higher profit for an or- ganization. It is profitable for an organization to understand the needs of the cus- tomers and other individuals in its activities in a holistic context. An organization should be constantly connected to customers, potential customers and other indi- viduals. Crowdsourcing provides several ways of interacting with customers, po- tential customers and other individuals. Crowdsourcing is the act of going inside or outside the company’s normal organizational setup to an undefined crowd (Brabham 2008a; Dawson and Bynghall 2012; Howe 2015). Crowdsourcing is still a relatively new model and an emerging area in science and businesses, but its feasibility has been noted in the context of an organization’s activities. Innovation management should cover several management areas within an organ- ization, as earlier research has indicated (Tidd and Bessant 2013; Trott 2005). An organization should have a strategy which provides possibilities for generating innovations (Dasgupta et al. 2011; Love et al. 2014; Wu 2013). The creation of innovations can be included in different levels of strategy. Moreover, an organiza- 4 Acta Wasaensia tion can have an innovation strategy of its own. Generally, innovation manage- ment covers searching, selecting, implementing and capturing value from innova- tions (Tidd and Bessant 2013). Innovations are commonly brought out with pro- jects which, therefore, are a crucial part of innovation management (Shenhar 2001; Shenhar and Dvir 1996). Holistic innovation management is constructed from different management areas in this study. The objective of this study is to research how crowdsourcing is generically uti- lized in the holistic innovation management of an organization. Several levels of knowledge are required about crowdsourcing and its utilization in holistic in- novation management. Firstly, an organization’s strategic management needs knowledge about the internal and external environments of an organization. Or- ganizations’ strategies provide the basis for innovation creation, because they act as guidelines for innovations. Secondly, innovation management should under- stand the needs of customers, potential customers and other individuals during the process. Thirdly, the development project can benefit from internal and external crowdsourcing in a project lifecycle. 1.4 Research questions To accomplish the research objective and solve the research problem, this study addresses four research questions. The first question can be considered the main research question, and the other questions can be seen as sub-research questions. The research questions are as follows: 1. How crowdsourcing is generically utilized in holistic innovation man- agement? 2. How crowdsourcing is utilized in strategic management? 3. How crowdsourcing is utilized in innovation management? 4. How crowdsourcing is utilized in project management? Research questions two to four are answered based on empirical data which were collected from 18 case organizations. The first research question is answered based on the results gained from research questions two to four. The research questions were answered based on articles published in international peer- reviewed scientific journals and conferences. Table 1 presents research questions, Acta Wasaensia 5 publications which answer the research questions, publication numbers and main contributions. Table 1. Research questions, publications, publication numbers and main contributions Research ques- tion Publication answer- ing the research ques- tion Publication number Publication’s main contribution RQ1: How crowdsourcing is generically utilized in holistic innova- tion management? Sivula, A. & Kantola, J. (2016). Integrating Crowdsourcing with Holis- tic Innovation Management. International Journal of Advanced Logistics. In process. A1 This theoretical study contributes GCM for a holistic innovation management model and provides a holistic un- derstanding of crowdsourcing in an organization’s innova- tion management activi- ties. RQ2: How crowdsourcing is utilized in strategic management? Sivula, A., Kantola, J., Vanharanta, H. & Salo, M. (2014). Crowdsourcing in Strategic Management. Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Innovation & Management, 613-623. Nov 2014, Vaasa, Finland. A2 This empirical research contributes knowledge about the formulation and implementation of static and dynamic strategy for crowdsourcing utiliza- tion. RQ2: How crowdsourcing is utilized in strategic management? Sivula, A. & Kantola, J. (2014). Combining Crowdsourcing and Porter’s Value Chain. International Journal of Advanced Logis- tics 3(1-2), 17-26. A3 This empirical study presents the employ- ment of crowdsourcing as part of Porter’s value chain. 6 Acta Wasaensia RQ3: How crowdsourcing is utilized in innova- tion management? Sivula, A. & Kantola, J. (2014). Crowdsourcing Utilization in Innovation Management. Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Technology Innovation and Industrial Management, S3:53-70. May 2014, Seoul, South Korea. A4 This empirical research presents crowdsourcing usage as a generic term in an organization’s innovation management activities, utilizing a four-phase innovation management model. RQ3: How crowdsourcing is utilized in innova- tion management? Sivula, A. & Kantola, J. (2016). Adapting Crowdsourcing in Innova- tion Management. Interna- tional Journal of Innovation and Learning 19(3), 314- 334. A5 Extended version of the article titled “Crowdsourcing Utili- zation in Innovation Management”. Contrib- utes deeper analysis of crowdsourcing utiliza- tion in innovation man- agement and more em- pirical evidence for the topic. RQ4: How crowdsourcing is utilized in project management? Sivula, A. & Kantola, J. (2014). Crowdsourcing in a Project Lifecycle. In Knowledge Management in Organizations. 9th Interna- tional Conference, KMO2014, Proceedings. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, Volume 185, 221-232. Ed. Uden, L., Fuenzaliza Oshee, D., Ting, I.-H. & Liberona, D. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing. A6 This empirical study contributes knowledge about crowdsourcing utilization as a generic term in an organiza- tion’s project manage- ment. The empirical study is based on a four- phase project manage- ment model. Acta Wasaensia 7 The dissertation includes six scientific publications which were divided to answer the research questions as illustrated in Table 1. Sub-research questions aim to answer the main research question and are based on empirical data. 1.5 Research strategy and context The research is a multi-case study and was carried out in 18 case organizations which are acting in a wide range of industry sectors. The industries are the prod- uct and service industries. The study can be considered mainly qualitative, but supporting quantitative elements are included as well. Triangulation was selected as an approach to gain a more comprehensive view of a relatively new and com- plex research topic. Empirical data for the study were collected utilizing semi- structured interviews and a survey which included closed- and open-ended ques- tions. Triangulation was selected as an approach for achieving the research objec- tive in relation to a new topic and to provide a new angle on holistic innovation management. Therefore, qualitative and quantitative methods were utilized on several levels in this research. Figure 2 presents a summary of the research strate- gy of the dissertation. 8 Acta Wasaensia Figure 2. Summary of research strategy of the dissertation Empirical data were collected and analyzed utilizing qualitative and quantitative methods. Empirical results of the study were reported in several scientific forums, as illustrated in Table 1 and Figure 2. This research aimed to develop the GCM for holistic innovation management which is introduced as a final result of the study and in order to answer the main research question. The model highlights crowdsourcing’s necessity and its utilization in holistic innovation management. A detailed description of the research methodology is provided in Chapter 3 which sheds light to the research approach, research process and overall quality of the research. Acta Wasaensia 9 1.6 Structure of the dissertation The dissertation consists of two independent parts. The first is an introductory part and the second is a publication part which includes scientific articles. The introductory part first highlights on relevant literature for the research. Research methodology is presented in Chapter 3 which describes the research background and research process. A summary of the results is given in Chapter 4, and the dis- sertation ends with conclusions and discussions in Chapter 5. The conclusions and discussions in the dissertation are based on qualitative and quantitative evidence collected from 18 case organizations from a wide range of industries. 10 Acta Wasaensia 2 THEORETICAL BACKGROUND This chapter sheds light on relevant literature for the study. The study covers management areas which have important roles in the holistic innovation manage- ment activities of an organization. Strategic management has a crucial role when an organization is making decisions about the organization’s innovations. Innova- tion management is management of innovation processes, and project manage- ment is an activity which in the final stage develops an innovation. Crowdsourc- ing is a useful model in all of these management areas when producing innova- tions. 2.1 Crowdsourcing It is important to understand the opinion of customers, potential customers, em- ployees and other individuals when implementing innovations. The opinion of individuals is important to organizations because it provides a better chance for making a profit, for example, when a new product or service enters the market. Managers and directors may think that they are in charge in their organizations and decide which innovations are the most profitable. However, it is customers, potential customers and other individuals who eventually decide and control what an organization can or cannot do (Christensen 2011). It might be a waste of an organization’s resources if it decides to implement an innovation which does not have demand in the markets. Crowdsourcing is constructed from two words: “crowd” and “sourcing”. Crowdsourcing is a task taking place inside or outside the normal organization setup in an undefined crowd (Sivula and Kantola 2016a). Sourcing refers to out- sourcing. Internal crowdsourcing can be implemented, for instance, between dif- ferent departments, if the organization is large enough (Simula and Vuori 2012; Sivula and Kantola 2014a). Howe published his original crowdsourcing article in Wired magazine in 2006 (Howe 2006). Howe defines crowdsourcing as follows (Howe 2015): “Crowdsourcing is the act of taking a job traditionally performed by a desig- nated agent (usually an employee) and outsourcing it to an undefined, general- ly large group of people in the form of an open call.” Crowdsourcing can be utilized in several situations and it has an effect on an or- ganization’s innovation activities when implemented holistically. Crowdsourcing activities may include online platforms, but this is not necessary. However, Acta Wasaensia 11 Howe’s definition is not the only definition crowdsourcing has been given in the scientific literature. 2.1.1 Defining crowdsourcing Crowdsourcing can be defined in multiple ways based on crowdsourcing imple- mentation method. However, all definitions share the same common element of crowdsourcing which is the utilization of an undefined crowd. Estelles-Arolas and Gonzalez-Ladron-de-Guevara (2012) have conducted a literature review which includes most of the crowdsourcing definitions. Table 2 highlights the most rele- vant crowdsourcing definitions in the literature. Table 2. Definitions of crowdsourcing (Estelles-Arolas and Gonzalez- Ladron-de-Guevara 2012 [adapted]) Reference Definition Alonso and Lease (2011) Crowdsourcing is the outsourcing of tasks to a large group of people instead of assigning such tasks to an in-house employee or contractor. Bederson and Quinn (2011) Crowdsourcing is people being paid to do web-based tasks posted by requestors. Brabham (2008b) Crowdsourcing is an online, distributed problem-solving and production model already in use by for-profit organizations such as Threadless, iStockphoto and InnoCentive. Brabham (2008a) Crowdsourcing is a strategic model to attract an interested, motivated crowd of individuals capable of providing solutions superior in quality and quantity to those that even traditional forms of business can. Buecheler et al. (2010) Crowdsourcing is a special case of such collective intelligence. Burger-Helmchen and Penin (2010) Crowdsourcing is one way for a firm to access external knowledge. Chanal and Caron- Fasan (2008) Crowdsourcing is the opening of the innovation process of a firm to integrate numerous and disseminated outside competencies through web facilities. These competences can be those of individuals (for example, 12 Acta Wasaensia creative people, scientists and engineers) or existing organized communi- ties (for example, OSS communities). Dawson and Bynghall (2012) Tapping the minds of many. DiPalantino and Vojnovic (2009) Crowdsourcing is [a set of] methods for soliciting solutions to tasks via open calls to large-scale communities. Doan et al. (2011) Crowdsourcing is a general-purpose problem-solving method. Grier (2011) Crowdsourcing is a way of using the Internet to employ large numbers of dispersed workers. Crowdsourcing is an industry that is attempting to use human beings and machines in large production systems. Heer and Bostock (2010) Crowdsourcing is a relatively new phenomenon in which web workers complete one or more small tasks, often for micro-payments on the order of $0.01 to $0.10 per task. Haymann and Gar- cia-Molina (2011) Crowdsourcing is getting one or more remote Internet users to perform work via a marketplace. Howe (2015) Crowdsourcing is the act of taking a job traditionally performed by a designated agent (usually an employee) and outsourcing it to an unde- fined, generally large group of people in the form of an open call. Crowdsourcing is the application of open source principles to fields outside of software. Kazai (2011) Crowdsourcing is an open call for contributions from members of the crowd to solve a problem or carry out human intelligence tasks, often in exchange for micro-payments, social recognition or entertainment value. Kleeman et al. (2008) Crowdsourcing is outsourcing of tasks to the general Internet public. Crowdsourcing is a profit-oriented form that outsources specific tasks essential for the making or sale of its product to the general public (the crowd) in the form of an open call over the Internet, with the intention of animating individuals to make a contribution to the firm’s production process for free or for significantly less than that contribution is worth to the firm. Acta Wasaensia 13 Crowdsourcing is a form of integration of users or consumers in internal processes of value creation. The essence of crowdsourcing is the inten- tional mobilization for commercial exploitation of creative ideas and other forms of work performed by consumers. La Vecchia and Cisternino (2010) Crowdsourcing is a tool for addressing problems in organizations and business. Peng and Zhang (2010) Crowdsourcing is a new innovation business model operated through the Internet. Liu and Porter (2010) Crowdsourcing is the outsourcing of a task or a job, such as a new ap- proach to packaging that extends the life of a product, to a large group of potential innovators and inviting a solution. It is essentially open in na- ture and invites collaboration within a community. Mazzola and Diste- fano (2010) Crowdsourcing is an intentional mobilization, through Web 2.0, of crea- tive and innovative ideas or stimuli, to solve a problem, where voluntary users are included by a firm within the internal problem-solving process, not necessarily aiming to increase profit or to create product or market innovations, but in general, to solve a specific problem. Oliveira et al. (2010) Crowdsourcing is a way of outsourcing to the crowd tasks of intellectual asset creation, often collaboratively, with the aim of having easier access to a wide variety of skills and experience. Poetz and Schreier (2012) Crowdsourcing is outsourcing the phase of idea generation to a potential- ly large and unknown population in the form of an open call. Porta et al. (2008) Crowdsourcing is enlisting customers to directly help an enterprise in every aspect of the lifecycle of a product or service. Reichwald and Piller (2006) Crowdsourcing is interactive value creation, in terms of the isolated activity of the individual as directed toward one unit of the product, involving a cooperation between the firm and users in the development of a new product. Ribiere and Tuggle (2010) Crowdsourcing consists of making an open online call for a creative idea, or problem-solving, or evaluation or any other type of business issues, and to let anyone (in the crowd) submit solutions. Sloane (2011) Crowdsourcing is one particular manifestation of open innovation. It is 14 Acta Wasaensia the act of outsourcing a task to a large group of people outside your or- ganization, often by making a public call for response. It is based on the open source philosophy which used a large crowd of developers to build the Linux operating system. Vukovic (2009) Crowdsourcing is a new online distributed problem-solving and produc- tion model in which networked people collaborate to complete a task. Vukovic et al. (2009) Crowdsourcing is a new online distributed production model in which people collaborate and may be rewarded by completing a task. Wexler (2011) Crowdsourcing is focal entity’s use of an enthusiastic crowd or loosely bound public to provide solutions to problems. Whitla (2009) Crowdsourcing is a process of outsourcing activities by a firm to an online community or crowd in the form of an “open call”. Crowdsourcing is a process of organizing labor, where firms parcel out work to some form of (normally online) community, offering payment for anyone within the “crowd” who completes the tasks the firm has set. Yang et al. (2008) Crowdsourcing is the use of an Internet-scale community to outsource a task. It can be concluded from Table 2 that crowdsourcing includes several elements and can be utilized widely in an organization’s activities. Crowdsourcing activi- ties generally include open call and online platforms. On the other hand, crowdsourcing can be implemented offline as well (Prpic et al. 2015). Online platforms can be used for task setting, but the actual crowdsourced work can be implemented offline. 2.1.2 Generic crowdsourcing model Crowdsourcing has several implementation methods and organizations can use it in different ways in their activities. This section sheds light on generic crowdsourcing model (GCM) which can be utilized especially for an organiza- tion’s innovation activities. Crowdsourcing can be categorized based on the im- plementation method and the results of the crowdsourcing activity. Figure 3 illus- trates the GCM. Acta Wasaensia 15 Figure 3. The GCM (Sivula and Kantola 2016b) The GCM shows that crowdsourcing can be divided into knowledge, resource and funding focused crowdsourcing activities which can be implemented internally or externally of an organization. An organization should consider which crowdsourcing implementation methods are appropriate for its activities. Knowledge focused crowdsourcing implementation methods utilize the crowd to create new knowledge about the area in which an organization is interested. This can involve, for example, finding new megatrends or weak signals, or finding ideas for specific market areas. Resource focused crowdsourcing implementation methods are concerned with how the crowd can be utilized as an organization’s resource. This can involve, for example, implementing a project partly or entirely with the crowd. Funding focused crowdsourcing implementation methods are used for the funding of an organization’s activities. Funding focused crowdsourcing implementation methods provide a major opportunity for micro-, small- and medium-sized organ- izations to fund innovations. Table 3 presents crowdsourcing implementation methods, descriptions, examples of public platforms and examples of implemen- tation methods. 16 Acta Wasaensia T ab le 3 . G C M im pl em en ta tio ns (S iv ul a an d K an to la 2 01 6b ) Im pl em en ta tio n m et ho d D es cr ip tio n E xa m pl es o f p ub lic p la tf or m s us in g th e im pl em en ta tio n m et ho d E xa m pl e of im pl em en ta tio n m et ho d K no w le dg e fo cu se d cr ow ds ou rc in g (c ro w dk no w le dg e) C ro w d w is do m A n or ga ni za tio n em pl oy s a cr ow d to e xt en d its kn ow le dg e in t er m s of c ro w d w is do m ( H op ki ns 20 11 ; H ow e 20 09 ). C ro w d ca n be e m pl oy ed , f or ex am pl e, to cr ea te a ne w id ea or di sp er se kn ow le dg e in si de an or ga ni za tio n (S iv ul a & K an to la 2 01 4b ; S iv ul a & K an to la 2 01 6a ). C om m un ity p la tfo rm s, D el l Id ea St or m a nd T w itt er Pr od uc t d ev el op er s u til iz e cr ow d w is do m a nd th e cr ow d pa rti ci pa te d in th e de ve lo pm en t p ro ce ss o f t he ca r F ia t M io (S ol on , 2 01 0) . C ro w dv ot in g C ro w dv ot in g ca n be u til iz ed fo r o rg an iz in g la rg e am ou nt s o f d at a (S iv ul a & K an to la 2 01 4b ; S iv ul a & K an to la 2 01 6a ). C ro w dv ot in g ca n be u se d, fo r in st an ce , t o vo te o n th e us ab ili ty o f a n or ga ni za tio n’ s n ew a nd o ld p ro du ct s o r s er vi ce s (H am m on & H ip pn er 2 01 2; H ow e 20 09 ). A irb nb , C ol la bo ra tio n pl at fo rm s ge ne ra lly a nd IM D b M an ag er s u til iz e cr ow dv ot in g in o n an in te rn al c ol la bo ra tio n pl at fo rm to fin d ou t o rg an iz at io na l c or e va lu es (S iv ul a et a l. 20 14 ). C ro w de va lu at io n C ro w de va lu at io n is a m od el fo r e va lu at io n, fo r ex am pl e, o f a n or ga ni za tio n’ s p ro du ct s, se rv ic es or d ev el op m en t r es ul ts in g en er al (S iv ul a & K an to la 2 01 4b ; S iv ul a & K an to la 2 01 6a ). C ro w de va lu at io n ca n be u se d, fo r e xa m pl e, fo r sc re en in g an d ev al ua tin g ne w d es ig n co nc ep ts o f ne w p ro du ct s ( C ha ng & C he n 20 15 ). C ol la bo ra tio n pl at fo rm s g en er al ly , Tr en dH un te r a nd T rip ad vi so r M an ag er s m ea su re st ra te gy im pl em en ta tio n w ith cr ow de va lu at io n re pe at ed ly se nd in g sh or t s ur ve ys to st ak eh ol de rs o r b y ut ili zi ng a w eb b as ed c ol la bo ra tio n pl at fo rm (S iv ul a et a l. 20 14 ). R es ou rc e fo cu se d cr ow ds ou rc in g (c ro w dr es ou rc in g) C ro w d cr ea tio n Th e cr ow d pa rti ci pa te s i n im pl em en tin g th e ta sk s w ith th e ac tu al p ro du ce rs , s uc h as e m pl oy ee s (G ei ge r e t a l. 20 11 ). C ro w d cr ea tio n ta sk s h av e ge ne ra lly lo os e de fin iti on s a nd th er e ca n be m aj or di ff er en ce s b et w ee n th e qu al iti es w hi ch th e cr ow d pr od uc es (S iv ul a & K an to la 2 01 4b ; S iv ul a & K an to la 2 01 6a ). Id ea C on ne ct io n, T op C od er a nd W ik ip ed ia M an ag er s u til iz e cr ow d cr ea tio n in a w eb b as ed p ro gr am m in g co m pe tit io n at T op C od er to d ev el op an e nt ire ly n ew so ftw ar e (L ak ha ni et a l. 20 10 ). Acta Wasaensia 17 T ab le 3 . G C M im pl em en ta tio ns (S iv ul a an d K an to la 2 01 6b ) Im pl em en ta tio n m et ho d D es cr ip tio n E xa m pl es o f p ub lic p la tf or m s us in g th e im pl em en ta tio n m et ho d E xa m pl e of im pl em en ta tio n m et ho d K no w le dg e fo cu se d cr ow ds ou rc in g (c ro w dk no w le dg e) C ro w d w is do m A n or ga ni za tio n em pl oy s a cr ow d to e xt en d its kn ow le dg e in t er m s of c ro w d w is do m ( H op ki ns 20 11 ; H ow e 20 09 ). C ro w d ca n be e m pl oy ed , f or ex am pl e, to cr ea te a ne w id ea or di sp er se kn ow le dg e in si de an or ga ni za tio n (S iv ul a & K an to la 2 01 4b ; S iv ul a & K an to la 2 01 6a ). C om m un ity p la tfo rm s, D el l Id ea St or m a nd T w itt er Pr od uc t d ev el op er s u til iz e cr ow d w is do m a nd th e cr ow d pa rti ci pa te d in th e de ve lo pm en t p ro ce ss o f t he ca r F ia t M io (S ol on , 2 01 0) . C ro w dv ot in g C ro w dv ot in g ca n be u til iz ed fo r o rg an iz in g la rg e am ou nt s o f d at a (S iv ul a & K an to la 2 01 4b ; S iv ul a & K an to la 2 01 6a ). C ro w dv ot in g ca n be u se d, fo r in st an ce , t o vo te o n th e us ab ili ty o f a n or ga ni za tio n’ s n ew a nd o ld p ro du ct s o r s er vi ce s (H am m on & H ip pn er 2 01 2; H ow e 20 09 ). A irb nb , C ol la bo ra tio n pl at fo rm s ge ne ra lly a nd IM D b M an ag er s u til iz e cr ow dv ot in g in o n an in te rn al c ol la bo ra tio n pl at fo rm to fin d ou t o rg an iz at io na l c or e va lu es (S iv ul a et a l. 20 14 ). C ro w de va lu at io n C ro w de va lu at io n is a m od el fo r e va lu at io n, fo r ex am pl e, o f a n or ga ni za tio n’ s p ro du ct s, se rv ic es or d ev el op m en t r es ul ts in g en er al (S iv ul a & K an to la 2 01 4b ; S iv ul a & K an to la 2 01 6a ). C ro w de va lu at io n ca n be u se d, fo r e xa m pl e, fo r sc re en in g an d ev al ua tin g ne w d es ig n co nc ep ts o f ne w p ro du ct s ( C ha ng & C he n 20 15 ). C ol la bo ra tio n pl at fo rm s g en er al ly , Tr en dH un te r a nd T rip ad vi so r M an ag er s m ea su re st ra te gy im pl em en ta tio n w ith cr ow de va lu at io n re pe at ed ly se nd in g sh or t s ur ve ys to st ak eh ol de rs o r b y ut ili zi ng a w eb b as ed c ol la bo ra tio n pl at fo rm (S iv ul a et a l. 20 14 ). R es ou rc e fo cu se d cr ow ds ou rc in g (c ro w dr es ou rc in g) C ro w d cr ea tio n Th e cr ow d pa rti ci pa te s i n im pl em en tin g th e ta sk s w ith th e ac tu al p ro du ce rs , s uc h as e m pl oy ee s (G ei ge r e t a l. 20 11 ). C ro w d cr ea tio n ta sk s h av e ge ne ra lly lo os e de fin iti on s a nd th er e ca n be m aj or di ff er en ce s b et w ee n th e qu al iti es w hi ch th e cr ow d pr od uc es (S iv ul a & K an to la 2 01 4b ; S iv ul a & K an to la 2 01 6a ). Id ea C on ne ct io n, T op C od er a nd W ik ip ed ia M an ag er s u til iz e cr ow d cr ea tio n in a w eb b as ed p ro gr am m in g co m pe tit io n at T op C od er to d ev el op an e nt ire ly n ew so ftw ar e (L ak ha ni et a l. 20 10 ). M ic ro ta sk in g A n or ga ni za tio n ca n ut ili ze th e cr ow d to p er fo rm m ic ro w or k w hi ch is a ch ie ve d by th e cr ow d’ s in di vi du al s ( Fr an kl in e t a l. 20 11 ). W or k ca n be pa id o r u np ai d, b ut th e ta sk is c om m on ly m in or an d an yo ne c an im pl em en t i t w ith ou t a ny sp ec ifi c pr of es si on al is m re qu ire d. A m az on M ec ha ni ca l T ur k, C lic kw or ke r a nd re C A PT C H A B oo k di gi ta liz er s i n G oo gl e In c. ut ili ze m ic ro ta sk in g to d ig ita liz e te xt b oo ks w ith th e cr ow ds ou rc in g pl at fo rm re C A PT C H A (B ae ch er e t al . 2 01 1) . M ac ro ta sk in g M ac ro ta sk in g ta sk s c om m on ly re qu ire sp ec ia l sk ill s a nd m ig ht b e pr ec is el y ta rg et ed (R ei d 20 13 ). M ac ro ta sk in g is b en ef ic ia l t o an or ga ni za tio n be ca us e th e re su lts a re w id er a nd m or e pr of es si on al th an th at in m ic ro ta sk in g. 99 de si gn s, Fr ee la nc er a nd In no ce nt iv e So ftw ar e de ve lo pe rs u se m ac ro ta sk in g in a F re el an ce r pl at fo rm to d ev el op m ob ile so ftw ar e to m ee t t he n ee ds o f a n or ga ni za tio n (S iv ul a & K an to la 20 14 c) . F un di ng fo cu se d cr ow ds ou rc in g (c ro w df un di ng ) C ro w df un di ng o f a p ro je ct W ith c ro w df un di ng th e re w ar d gi ve n to th e cr ow d ca n be m on et ar y or n on -m on et ar y (B el le fla m m e et a l. 20 13 ). A c ro w df un de r c ou ld re ce iv e, fo r in st an ce , t he p ro du ct w hi ch w as d ev el op ed a nd fin an ce d w ith c ro w df un di ng . T he re w ar d m ig ht al so b e so m et hi ng w hi ch is n ot d ire ct ly re la te d to th e de ve lo pe d pr od uc t o r s er vi ce . In di eg og o, K ic ks ta rte r a nd R oc ke tH ub M an ag er s u til iz e In di eg og o to fu nd th ei r n ew te ch no lo gy d ev el op m en t, fo r i ns ta nc e, n ew se ns or de ve lo pm en t ( Si vu la & K an to la 20 16 a) . A n or ga ni za tio n is u su al ly se nd in g th e de ve lo pe d pr od uc t t o cr ow df un de rs . C ro w df un di ng o f a n or ga ni za tio n A n or ga ni za tio n gi ve s e qu ity st ak es to cr ow df un de rs (M ol lic k 20 14 ). In g en er al , s ha re s of a n or ga ni za tio n ar e gi ve n to th e cr ow df un de rs w ho a re fu nd in g th e bu si ne ss , a nd in th is w ay p ar t of th e pr of its w ill a ls o go to th e fu nd er s i n th e fu tu re . Eq ui ty N et , I nv es do r a nd St ar tU pV al le y Th e C EO o f a st ar tu p co m pa ny is us in g a cr ow df un di ng p la tfo rm li ke In ve sd or to st ar t t he a ct iv iti es o f a co m pa ny a nd p ro vi de s e qu ity st ak es of th e co m pa ny to c ro w df un de rs (M itr a 20 12 ). C ro w df un di ng a s a lo an Th e cr ow d of fe rs p ee r- to -p ee r l en di ng fo r a n or ga ni za tio n. T he lo an is n or m al ly sm al l b ut m ul tip le le nd er s c an ra is e th e am ou nt o f m on ey to a hi gh le ve l ( Li n & V is w an at ha n 20 14 ). Th e in te re st ra te s o n th e lo an s v ar y ba se d on th e cr ow df un di ng e ve nt . Fu nd in gC irc le , F un di ng T re e an d Pr os pe r Th e C EO o f a st ar tu p co m pa ny is ut ili zi ng a c ro w df un di ng p ee r- to - pe er le nd in g pl at fo rm li ke F un di ng Tr ee to p ro vi de th e ne ce ss ar y lo an fo r a st ar tu p co m pa ny ’s a ct iv iti es (B ru to n et a l. 20 15 ). Th e st ar tu p co m pa ny p ro vi de s i nt er es t o n th e lo an to th e cr ow df un de rs . 18 Acta Wasaensia An organization should consider which crowdsourcing implementation methods it can utilize in its innovation activities. Crowdsourcing implementation methods can be internal or external to an organization. In general, organizations are using external crowdsourcing and it can be utilized in any size organization. Internal crowdsourcing requires an organization which is large enough to implement in- ternal crowdsourcing activities, for instance, between departments. Moreover, internal crowdsourcing can increase knowledge flow between an organization’s internal functions (Simula and Vuori 2012). Crowdsourcing can be implemented, for example, between departments or offices which are in different countries. This might lead to innovations because of the cultural differences. Thus, all crowdsourcing implementation methods which are presented in Table 3 can also be utilized internally. Crowdsourcing platforms can be internal or external to an organization. External platforms can be, for instance, social networks or dedicated crowdsourcing plat- forms which are not on an organization’s own servers. Private platforms are on an organization’s own servers and are mostly collaboration-based IT environments (Sivula and Kantola 2014a). An organization should consider which kind of crowdsourcing task is to be used and what the crowd should perform. Based on this consideration an organization can decide which crowdsourcing platform it should utilize to achieve a particular task. 2.1.3 Crowdsourcing compared to open innovation Crowdsourcing is a profitable model for an organization because it receives the results which the crowd generates. However, other types of collaboration exist as well. Crowdsourcing should be separated from open innovation because it is an activity where an organization seeks value from the crowd to support, for in- stance, innovation activities or common organizational activities. Ideas may be sent out in the research or in the development stages in open innovation (Chesbrough 2003). This is not generally profitable for an organization which is trying to compete in a changing and turbulent business environment. Crowdsourc- ing can be considered a more secure model for interacting with customers, poten- tial customers and other individuals. Brabham (2008a) argues that crowdsourcing is not open innovation. Open inno- vation can be seen as one form of product development. Open innovation is open to everyone which means that all the parts of the product or service are available for everyone. Open innovation does not provide the compensation models which crowdsourcing might have (Brabham 2008a). Crowdsourcing activities and re- Acta Wasaensia 19 sults are owned by an organization which is not generally the case in open inno- vation. 2.2 Strategic management Strategic management is the formulation and implementation of an organization’s strategies. Strategic formulation is a logical activity which includes identifying opportunities and threats in the business environment and attaching an estimate of risk to the discernible alternatives (Mintzberg and Quinn 1998). The principal sub-activities of strategy formulation include, for example, capability and market segment identification. Sivula et al. (2014) argue that the strategic management of an organization can be static or dynamic. The static strategic management models aim for a process where the strategy is first planned and then strictly implemented after planning. Dynamic strategies are formulated and implemented based on the situation in the business environment. Dynamic strategic management is geared to constantly creating, executing and revising strategy, and it is essential for success- ful strategy-making (Greiner and Cummings 2009). Innovations require strategic decisions from an organization. One of the crucial strategic decisions in the management of innovation is whether it is important to be a leader or whether it is acceptable to be a follower organization (Christensen 2011). Crowdsourcing can be utilized, for instance, to extend an organization’s knowledge base in strategic formulation and when making strategic decisions for innovations. Generally, crowdsourcing can be utilized as a knowledge creator in planning and implementing any kinds of strategy. 2.2.1 Strategy formulation and implementation Several strategic management models exist in the literature. Most of the models share the same common elements in terms of strategy formulation and implemen- tation. Strategy can be created in short or long periods of time. Moreover, an or- ganization can have several strategies or just one (Sivula et al. 2014). Strategic management concerns development of a strategies and their implementation in time. Figure 4 illustrates Wheelen and Hunger’s approach to strategic manage- ment. 20 Acta Wasaensia Figure 4. Strategic management model (Wheelen and Hunger 2012) Wheelen and Hunger’s approach is a generic model for strategic management and it can be adapted in several ways. Everything begins from environmental scan- ning which is the monitoring, evaluation and dissemination of information from the external and internal environments to key people within the organization (Wheelen and Hunger 2012). Moreover, possible opportunities and threats from an organization’s internal and external environments should be identified in this phase. Strategy formulation is the strategic or long-range planning which con- cerns the development of an organization’s mission, objectives, strategies and policies (Wheelen and Hunger 2012). Strategy implementation is the sum total of the activities and choices required for the execution of a strategic plan (Wheelen and Hunger 2012). Strategy is put into practice during strategy implementation. Moreover, Wheelen and Hunger emphasize evaluation and control in their strate- gic management model. Evaluation and control information consists of performance data and activity re- ports (Wheelen and Hunger 2012). Strategy implementation should be measured to provide understanding of how well an organization is achieving. This infor- mation can be utilized to make adjustments for an organization’s activities. More- Acta Wasaensia 21 over, strategic management should have a continuous feedback and learning pro- cess, as illustrated in Figure 4. An organization can make major or minor adjust- ments to its activities utilizing the feedback and learning in strategic management. 2.2.2 Relationship between innovation and strategy Johnson et al. (2014) define strategy as the long-term direction of an organization. Porter (1996) argues that competitive strategy is about being different which means deliberately choosing a different set of activities to deliver a unique mix of value. Strategies can be created for the short or long term and they can be formu- lated, for example, for different departments or functions of an organization. On the other hand, an organization should have a corporate strategy which all of the departments and organizational functions will follow. Thus, a corporate strategy addresses all of the strategies of the organization’s business units (Porter 1998). An organization can have an innovation strategy of its own. Effective innovation strategy provides an explanation of how it fits into and feeds into the overall busi- ness strategy; a definition of what is meant by innovation in general and further definition and information about different types and levels of innovation; an or- ganization-wide portfolio that outlines what types and levels of innovation the organization wants to pursue and what kinds of resources, time frames, responsi- bilities and success criteria are associated with each of the different portfolio segments; and a structure through which innovation is managed and executed (Stamm 2008). Dodgson et al. (2008) highlights that innovation strategy should be the basis for corporate-level strategy. Blue oceans strategy is one well-known form of innovation strategy. Blue oceans express potential markets which do not currently exist and can be created (Kim and Mauborge 2005). Drucker (1993) claims that innovation strategy is about creating a new business. An organization should constantly search for new busi- ness opportunities in its environment and formulate strategies based on these op- portunities. Moreover, a combination of internal and external knowledge sources is a key element of a successful innovation strategy (Love and Roper 2009; Love et al. 2014). An organization should, therefore, understand the needs of the mar- kets to create profitable strategies. 2.2.3 Porter’s value chain This study utilizes Porter’s value chain for combining crowdsourcing with an organization’s common activities. Porter’s value chain can be considered as a 22 Acta Wasaensia strategic management model because it includes several points of view for an organization’s activities. The value chain includes all the operations which are necessary for a specific industry to deliver a valuable product or service to the markets and customers. Figure 5 illustrates Porter’s value chain. Figure 5. Porter’s value chain (Porter 1998) Porter’s value chain comprises primary and support activities. The value chain includes a margin which is the value that an organization receives from a product or service. Thus, it connects primary and support activities. Primary activities are defined as product- and market-related processes. These processes are required to provide the product for markets. Inbound logistics are, for example, processes which are necessary for receiving, storing and distributing. Operations are trans- formation activities that change all inputs into outputs. Output logistics consist of processes which are necessary for the delivery of a final product or service to the customer. Marketing and sales processes are required for making a product or service tempting to a customer. Service includes all processes which are required to keep a product or service valuable and tempting to a customer. Services are, for example, commonly offered for an organization’s products in the form of custom- er service. Support activities are classified as an organization’s infrastructure, human re- source management, technology development and procurement. Infrastructure includes an organization’s functions which are required to maintain the daily op- erations. Human resource management includes operations of recruiting, training, Acta Wasaensia 23 motivating and retaining the work force. Technology development activities are related to an organization’s technological knowledge, hardware and software. Procurement is an organization’s activity to gain the resources it needs to operate (Johnson et al. 2014). 2.3 Innovation management Innovation management is the management of processes of the creation of inno- vation. This research adapted Tidd and Bessant’s (2013) generic innovation man- agement model. An organization can produce several types of innovation which are commonly based on an organization’s strategy and capabilities. Innovations needs to have customers. Without a customer, innovation is an invention which, however, can lead to innovation in the future (Ortt 2010; Rogers 2003). There- fore, innovation diffusion can be considered to be a part of innovation manage- ment. End users of a product or service can have an active role in innovation management (Shum and Watanabe 2010). However, it is not necessarily possible to define precisely who the customer is and where the markets are. Moreover, organizations commonly wish to have more customers for their products and ser- vices, because this produces higher profit. Customers, potential customers and other individuals can, for instance, generate advertising which provides new opportunities for an organization (Deighton and Kornfeld 2007; Wang 2010). An organization can employ customer generated advertising with crowdsourcing, for instance, in social networks, blogs and other crowdsourcing platforms. Customer generated advertising is effective practice when utilizing crowdsourcing as part of innovation management. 2.3.1 Innovations Innovation as a word originates from the Latin word innovare and it stands for making something new (Johansson and Woodilla 2009). Innovation has several definitions based on the field of research. One thing remains the same in all the studies: it is something new or it has an element of newness. Schumpeter was one of the first researchers to draw attention to innovation in his book in 1942. Schumpeter (2008) defined innovation as creative destruction which occurs when a new product or service enters the markets and leaves some current product or service without customers. Schumpeter (2008) argues that creative destruction leads to an organization’s economic growth. Modern innovation definitions are based on innovation types which makes innovation a more complex phenomenon for research. Trott (2005) defines innovation on a technological basis. 24 Acta Wasaensia “Innovation is the management of all the activities involved in the process of idea generation, technology development, manufacturing and marketing of a new (or improved) product or manufacturing process or equipment.” Trott defines innovation as a management process which leads to a new or im- proved product, process or equipment. Innovations can also be existing products or services which are developed at the next stage. Moreover, innovations can be radical, really new (discontinuous) and incremental innovations. Based on Druck- er (1993), innovation means more than just technology and it applies to every existing organization. Drucker (1985) argues that innovation brings the possibility for new business and is the specific instrument of entrepreneurship. Moreover, innovation, especially technological innovation, requires constant monitoring for new opportunities or changes, for example in technologies (Drucker 1993). 2.3.2 Push and pull innovations Two major categories of innovations are market push and pull innovations. Mar- ket demand does not exist in push innovations, and new products and services come from the research of an organization (Brem and Voigt 2009; Ottosson 2004; Stefano et al. 2012). Market demand exists in pull innovations which can be more beneficial for an organization (Caetano and Amaral 2011; Drury and Farhoomand 1999; Peters et al. 2012). Therefore, an organization should always locate innova- tion opportunities in its business environment. Push and pull innovations have differences in essence as Table 4 illustrates. Acta Wasaensia 25 Table 4. Differentiation between push and pull innovations (Brem and Voigt 2009 [adapted]) Attribute Push innovation Pull innovation Technological uncertainty High Low Research, development and innovation (RDI) expenses High Low RDI duration Long Short Sales market-related uncertainty High Low Time-to-market Uncertain or un- known Certain or known RDI customer integration Difficult Easy Kinds of market research Qualitative- discovering Quantitative- verifying Need for change of customer behavior Extensive Minimal Push innovations refer to technology push in a technological context and pull in- novations refer to market pull innovations (Ulrich and Eppinger 2012). It can be concluded from Table 4 that pull innovations are profitable for an organization because the needs of the markets are known and demand exists. Walsh et al. (2002) claim that pull innovations provide substitutes for existing products, while push innovations, provide major improvements to innovations. Therefore, an or- ganization which is developing its products and services can utilize both innova- tion types in its activities. Pull innovations can be profitable but both innovation categories are required in an organization’s innovation activities. 2.3.3 Scopes for innovations The literature describes several innovation types. An innovation is radical if a new product or service satisfies a formerly unsatisfied customer need for the first time (Gemünden et al. 2007). A completely new market area will be developed and the organization will benefit economically from the radical innovation. Radi- cal innovation may change customer behavior in the markets. An example of rad- 26 Acta Wasaensia ical innovation is the mobile phone or the flat screen television (Sivula and Kan- tola 2014b). A really new innovation (discontinuous) is in between a radical and incremental innovation. A really new innovation is a moderately innovative product or service (Garcia and Calantone 2002). A really new innovation upgrades a product or ser- vice by a great stride and it can evolve into a new product line or create new mar- kets with existing technology. An incremental innovation presents a minor degree of departure from existing practices (Camisón-Zornoza et al. 2004). It enhances the capacities already present in the organization and develops them. Improve- ments can be minor or major for products or services. Incremental innovation makes an existing product or service more tempting to customers. Incremental innovation is the most common innovation type. A technological innovation is a process which generates new or improves on cur- rent technology (Nieto 2004). Technological innovation requires research, devel- opment and learning-by-doing activities in an organization (Sagar and Zwaan 2006). Learning can lead to better results and changes in an organization. The development of new technology can require a significant amount of resources and capital. A product innovation is a process which includes the technical design, RDI, man- ufacturing, management and commercial activities involved in the marketing of a new or improved product (Alegre et al. 2006). Product innovation can include technological and service solutions. Product innovation can include significant improvements in technical components or materials. A service innovation is a new, better or more effective service. Service innovations require creative activi- ties like other innovations (Schwarz et al. 2012). A service innovation can be a new or improved service concept which adds value for the customer. Process innovations are changes in the ways an organization acts (Tidd and Bes- sant 2013). Process innovation generates a new or significantly improved way to produce products or services or way to deliver them to customers. Process inno- vations can reduce production or delivery costs or significantly increase product or service quality. Drucker (1993) highlights the importance of social innovations. Social innovations are changes in economic and social environments and they have bigger role than, for instance, technological innovations (Drucker 1993). Moreover, Drucker (1993) argues that social innovations are opportunities for businesses and business managers. Thus, social innovations may create opportu- nities other innovations, because demand might appear from the social innova- tions. Acta Wasaensia 27 2.3.4 Management of innovations This study utilized Tidd and Bessant’s (2013) generic innovation management model. Innovation processes generally vary in organizations but the same main phases exist (Sivula and Kantola 2016a). Tidd and Bessant (2013) highlight that the innovation process has four phases which are search, select, implement and capture. Tidd and Bessant’s innovation management model can be considered a generic approach to innovation management. Figure 6 illustrates innovation man- agement as a process. Figure 6. Innovation management as a process (Tidd and Bessant 2013 [adapted]) Search, select, implement and capture are the main phases. Figure 6 includes rel- evant questions for an organization’s managers to analyze specific innovation management phases. The search phase includes the scanning of an organization’s internal and external environment and the processing of signals which are rele- vant and may be developed into new products or services. The signals can be, for example, new market opportunities or new product ideas. An organization makes decisions as to which signal it will respond to in the select phase. This phase may include analysis of a new idea which is based on, for ex- ample, the organization’s vision, strategy or values. The development process of an innovation can take a long period of time and demand a lot of the organiza- tional resources. It is important, therefore, to analyze which innovation ideas will precede to the implement phase. The front end of innovation includes search and select phases. The front end innovation activities come before the formal product 28 Acta Wasaensia development which includes opportunity identification, evaluation, idea genera- tion, selection of ideas and new concept development (Peltomaa 2014). The implement phase develops, for example, the new product, service or process. The idea will be translated into innovation and launched to the organization’s internal and external markets. Implementation of an innovation requires knowledge to develop an innovation and to execute the development project. The implement phase requires knowledge about internal or external markets and knowledge of the market area where the innovation will be launched. The capture phase is the final stage of the innovation management process. Cap- turing value from innovation includes sustaining the innovation’s adoption and diffusion. Organizations have a possibility to learn from innovations and innova- tion management. This leads to the development of innovation management. All experiences in innovation management should be processed and carefully ana- lyzed. The result of future products or services is more inclusive if learning hap- pens from former innovations and development processes. Tidd and Bessant’s innovation management model highlights important areas for an innovative organization and the strategies it uses. Blue oceans strategy is one form of innovation strategy. Blue oceans express potential markets which do not currently exist and can be created (Kim and Mauborge 2005). The company’s organizational culture plays an important role in an innovative organization. In- novation culture can, however, be hard to manage. Organizations such as Google Inc. and P&G combine openness to new ideas with a healthy respect for the opin- ions of customers to generate an innovation positive culture (Jaruzelski and Kat- zenbach 2012). 2.4 Project management Innovations are commonly implemented with projects which can be considered an actual development stage of an innovation. Researchers have defined a project in several ways. Definitions have, however, a clear consensus and the same elements exist in each. Projects types are different. Thus, building a house is a different kind of project than implementing a mobile application. Both are projects and they share the same elements, but the outcomes are different. Lake (1997) defines a project as follows: “A project is a temporary endeavor involving a connected sequence of activi- ties and range of resources which is designed to achieve a specific and unique Acta Wasaensia 29 outcome and which operates within time, cost and quality constraints and which is often used to introduce change.” A project implements a task that has been specified beforehand and is temporary. Every project is unique and is established to achieve specific outcomes. A project may have its own organization and might include specialists from several industry fields. Projects can be organized into a matrix organization, but this involves problems as well (Lewis 1998). On the other hand, matrix organization is one of the most common forms used for a project organization. A project can be a research, development or innovation project. Research projects include, for example, studying new phenomena. Development projects imple- ment, for example, a new product or service. Innovation projects target develop- ment of new products, services or processes (Moenkemeyer et al. 2012). Research projects can be a point of departure for development projects. Development pro- jects are clearer to manage than research projects. The results are normally known beforehand in development projects. Research and development projects share the same common elements. On the other hand, every project is unique but has the same basic terms of time, costs and quality. 2.4.1 Project lifecycle Project lifecycle commonly involves four phases for achieving project goals. Pro- jects are implementing something that has not been created before and project results are normally unique (Project Management Institute 2013). The nature of a project is innovative because of the element of newness. Projects are undertaken in different organizational levels and can involve one or more employees. Figure 7 illustrates the Project Management Institute’s approach to project management. 30 Acta Wasaensia Figure 7. Main phases of project management (Project Management Institute 2013 [adapted]) The project initiation phase is the first stage in the project lifecycle. A project gets its aim, scope and purpose, among other requirements. Project resources can be considered in this phase. Most projects have several stakeholder interests (Mok et al. 2014). Interests guide the project’s scope in the project initiation phase. The customers’, potential customers’ or other individuals’ points of view should be considered here. A project is planned more closely in the project planning phase. Resources are allocated for the project implementation. Written project plans can be either long or short, based on the project’s scope. The project’s scope and re- sults should be clear in this phase. Lake (1997) emphasizes the importance of project planning and the use of project management tools during this phase. A project is implemented in the project execution phase using resources which can be internal or external to an organization. The project execution and planning phases are closely related to each other. There might be a need to get back to the planning phase during the execution phase. A project may require, for example, changes in expected activity durations. Changes may also occur in resource productivity and availability, or unanticipated risks may arise (Project Manage- ment Institute 2013). Nevertheless, a project may have iteration in all phases. Management and monitoring is required in the execution phase to keep the project in the predefined scope. The last state of a project lifecycle is the project closure. Evaluation is implemented in this phase. The project subscriber and other stake- Acta Wasaensia 31 holders are normally evaluating the project. The success or failure of a project is decided based on stakeholders’ evaluations. 2.4.2 Management of projects Project management is management of a project lifecycle and includes several tasks (Sivula and Kantola 2014c). Lewis (1999) claims that project management involves three major categories which are planning, scheduling and controlling. Projects consume different resources of an organization which are, for instance, people, premises and equipment (Hornstein 2015). Therefore, scheduling has a crucial role in projects in order to receive correct resources just in time. The Project Management Institute (2013) highlights that project management typ- ically includes identifying requirements; addressing the various needs, concerns and expectations of the stakeholders in planning and executing the project; setting up, maintaining and carrying out communications among stakeholders that are active, effective and collaborative in nature; managing stakeholders towards meeting project requirements and creating project deliverables; and balancing the competing project constraints which include, for instance, scope, quality, sched- ule, budget, resources and risks. Therefore, several objectives need to be managed during a project lifecycle. 2.5 Synthesis of the conceptual framework This research connects literature from several management fields to achieve the research objective. Therefore, general but broadly adapted management theories are applied in this study. Relevant management theories provide background for this study and are the departure point for implementing the research. Even though existing theories provide strong background for innovation and management of innovations, crowdsourcing insights do not exist in the literature which also ex- plains the need for this study. Figure 8 illustrates the synthesis of the conceptual framework of the study. 32 Acta Wasaensia Figure 8. Synthesis of the conceptual framework Holistic innovation management is constructed from strategic management, inno- vation management and project management, as Figure 8 shows. Strategic man- agement is an important management area when implementing innovations. An organization should formulate strategies which provide insights into innovations. An organization can have an innovation strategy of its own, but innovation- related alignments should include other strategies as well. Crowdsourcing can be a useful model for gaining knowledge from an organization’s internal and exter- nal markets when formulating strategies. Moreover, crowdsourcing can be uti- lized when implementing strategies. Innovation management should follow the guidelines which an organization’s strategies provide. Innovation management has four different phases based on Acta Wasaensia 33 Tidd and Bessant’s (2013) generic innovation management model. All of these phases can employ crowdsourcing in several ways. Moreover, crowdsourcing provides knowledge, resources and funding to an organization to produce innova- tions which have demand on the markets. Implementing innovations is generally done with projects. The project lifecycle consists of four common phases, according to the Project Management Institute (2013). Crowdsourcing can be a useful model for implementing innovations and connecting customers, potential customers and other individuals with the new product or service development in the research, development or innovation pro- ject. Therefore, innovation will be more customer-focused when innovation is produced with the crowd. 34 Acta Wasaensia 3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY This chapter sheds light on the research methodology of the study. The first sub- chapter covers the research approach. The second subchapter discusses the re- search process, and the third is about the quality of the research. Finally, the re- search methodology is synthesized. 3.1 Research approach This subchapter sheds light on the research approach, the research methods used and the philosophical background assumptions of the study. Research is generally divided into qualitative and quantitative research. Qualitative research tends to be associated with participant observation and unstructured, in-depth interviewing, while quantitative research is typically taken to be exemplified by the social sur- vey and by experimental investigations (Bryman 1993; Newman and Benz 1998). Both research methods can be utilized within a single study which can lead to a more comprehensive view of the research object. This study can be seen as a mainly qualitative study. However, quantitative research methods were employed during the research process as well. 3.1.1 Reasoning Qualitative research is commonly connected to inductive reasoning, and quantita- tive research to deductive reasoning (Wilson 2010). Inductive reasoning moves from specific observations to broader generalization and theories, and deductive reasoning involves the testing of theoretical propositions, using a research strate- gy to perform this test (Hall and Hall 1996; Saunders and Lewis 2012). The same study can, however, use both reasoning types to provide a more holistic insight into the research object. The reasoning of this study can be considered to be inductive because the theory is constructed from case studies and the study includes generalizations. However, the study included the testing of existing theories that are part of the GCM for the holistic innovation management model which has a connection to deductive rea- soning. Nevertheless, inductive reasoning can be considered the main reasoning type in this study. Acta Wasaensia 35 3.1.2 Research categories Studies are generally classified into three main categories: explorative, descriptive and explanatory research (Blanche et al. 2006; Sue and Ritter 2012). Exploratory research involves studying what is happening, particularly in little-understood situations, and seeks new insights into specific phenomena (Robson 2005; Saun- ders and Lewis 2012). Wilson (2010) argues that explorative research relies on an inductive approach, is largely qualitative and employs focus groups, in-depth in- terviews, historical analysis and observations. Thus, exploratory research can be utilized for understanding a new research topic or gaining a new angle on the top- ic. Robson (2005) argues that descriptive research offers an accurate profile of per- sons, events or situations. Saunders et al. (2009) highlight that it is necessary to have a clear picture of the phenomena on which data will be collected. Thus, de- scriptive research is utilized for describing the research object or phenomenon under study. Explanatory studies establish causal relationships between variables and the emphasis is on studying a situation or a problem in order to explain the relationships between variables (Saunders et al. 2009; Wilson 2010). Explanatory research studies how two or more research objects relate to each other. Sue and Ritter (2012) argue that an individual study can have multiple purposes that span two or all three research categories. This study is mainly explorative and is supported by descriptive research. Strate- gic management, innovation management and project management are not new topics for research. However, studying crowdsourcing utilization in these man- agement areas offers a new angle on these topics and, therefore, the work can be seen as explorative research. The research provided detailed information about how crowdsourcing is utilized in a wide range of industry sectors, and can also be seen as descriptive research. Thus, the GCM for holistic innovation management was developed utilizing explorative and descriptive research results. 3.1.3 Paradigm The selection of the paradigm for the study is one of the most important decisions in academic research. Guba and Lincoln (2004) define a paradigm as the basic belief system or worldview that guides the investigator, not only in choices of method but in ontologically and epistemologically fundamental ways. An episte- mology is a way of understanding and explaining how we know what we know (Crotty 1998). Gruber (1993) defines an ontology as an explicit specification of a conceptualization which is an abstract, simplified view of the world that we wish 36 Acta Wasaensia to represent for some purpose. Axiology is the branch that studies judgments about value (Saunders et al. 2009). Table 5 compares four research paradigms which are common in management research. Table 5. Comparison of four research paradigms (Saunders et al. 2009) Positivism Realism Interpretivism Pragmatism Ontology: the researcher’s view of the nature of reali- ty or being. External, objec- tive and inde- pendent of so- cial actors. Is objective. Ex- ists independently of human thoughts and beliefs or knowledge of their existence (realist), but is interpreted through social conditioning (crit- ical realist). Socially construct- ed, subjective, may change, multiple. External, multi- ple view, chosen to best enable answering of research ques- tion. Epistemology: the researcher’s view regarding wh