Sustainable Knowledge Contribution: Comparison
View Latest Version
Please note this is a comparison between Version 2 by Dean Liu and Version 1 by Yujie Wang.

在开放式创新平台中，用户通过网络交互学习外部知识，其在交互网络中的位置对用户的可持续知识贡献有影响。由于知识水平的差距，用户对外部知识的吸收和利用效率并不一致。In open innovation platforms, users learn external knowledge through network interaction, and their position in the interactive network has an impact on the user’s sustainable knowledge contribution. Due to the gap in knowledge level, users’ absorption and utilization efficiency of external knowledge is not consistent.

  • open innovation platform
  • knowledge absorption
  • sustainable knowledge contribution

一、简介1. Introduction

随着信息经济的快速发展，产品用户的角色已经从被动的产品接收者转变为主动的价值共同创造者[With the rapid development of the information economy, the role of product users has changed, from a passive product receiver to an active value co-creator [1]. To take advantage of these user innovations, more and more companies have established an open innovative 1platform ]。为了利用这些用户创新，越来越多的公司建立了一个开放的创新平台（(OIP）来收集用户的想法[) to collect user ideas [2]. Open innovation was 2proposed ]。开放式创新由by Chesbrough [[3], and the central idea is to crowdsource knowledge to the public [4]; that is, user groups participate in creative tasks and collaborate to generate innovative ideas [5]. The open innovation platform is a platform sponsored by a company that uses the Internet as a medium, and is mainly aimed at providing an interactive space for companies and end users 3[6][7]. ]Users 提出，其中心思想是将知识众包给公众 [contribute knowledge 4to ]；也就是说，用户群体参与创造性的任务并协作产生创新的想法[the 5company ]。开放式创新平台是企业发起的以互联网为媒介的平台，主要目的是为企业和终端用户提供一个互动的空间。6、7 ]。_through 用户通过the OIP 为公司贡献知识。企业获取大量外部知识，以较低的成本发展知识和技能，提高企业创新绩效[. Companies acquire a large amount of external knowledge, develop knowledge and skills at a lower cost, and improve company innovation performance [8]. There are also some problems in the operation 8of ]。OIP的运营也存在一些问题，用户贡献的点子数量不足。一些 OIP 甚至已经关闭，例如戴尔的, and the number of ideas contributed by users is insufficient. Some OIPs have even been closed, such as IdeaStorm 和星巴克的of Dell and My Starbucks。因此，提高用户活力，促进用户创意贡献是学术界和企业共同研究的课题。 of Starbuck. Therefore, improving user vitality and promote user idea contribution is a joint research problem of academics and enterprises.
知识的学习和创造发生在个人层面，因此有效管理和合理利用个人知识对于企业的可持续发展至关重要[The learning and creation of knowledge occur at the individual level, so effective management and rational use of individual knowledge are essential to the sustainable development of companies 9[9]. ]。在In OIP 中，用户交互是用户获取外部知识的主要方式, user interaction is the main way for users to obtain external knowledge [10][11], and the network location of the user is very important for sustainable knowledge contribution [12]. From the perspective of social network analysis, the existing research believes that in a better position in the network, more and better knowledge of the platform can be obtained. However, different scholars have different judgments on the network location. In the interaction characteristics from the perspective of social networks, scholars believe that users in better network locations can obtain more external knowledge and thus provide more contributions; however, different scholars have different definitions of better network locations. For example, Peng et al. believe that extensive connections will result [in 10more knowledge, thereby promoting user 11sustainable ]，而用户的网络位置对于可持续的知识贡献非常重要knowledge [contributions 12 ]]。从社交网络分析的角度来看，现有研究认为，在网络中处于更好的位置，可以获得更多更好的平台知识。但是，不同的学者对网络位置有不同的判断。在社交网络视角下的交互特征上，学者认为网络位置较好的用​​户可以获得更多的外部知识，从而提供更多的贡献；但是，不同的学者对更好的网络位置有不同的定义。例如，彭等人。相信广泛的联系会带来更多的知识，从而促进用户可持续的知识贡献[[13], 13]，而whereas Garriga 等人。相信整合广泛网络连接的知识会导致协调困难并降低用户贡献知识的动机[et al. believe that integrating knowledge of extensive network connections will lead to coordination difficulties and reduce users’ motivation to contribute knowledge [14]. Freeman et al. believe that deep embedding of the network helps users to more quickly grasp all aspects of the platform’s knowledge [15], whereas Tang believes that if the user’s network is embedded too deeply, users will have less desire to explore new knowledge [16]. The possible reason for this is that these studies implicitly assume that knowledge acquired by users through network locations can be automatically absorbed, that is, knowledge acquisition is equivalent to 14knowledge ]。弗里曼等人。认为网络的深度嵌入有助于用户更快地掌握平台知识的各个方面[absorption. 15Previous ]，而唐认为如果用户的网络嵌入过深，用户探索新知识的欲望就会降低[literature 16 ]]。其可能的原因是这些研究隐含地假设用户通过网络位置获取的知识可以被自动吸收，即知识获取等同于知识吸收。以前关于on OIP has noted the importance of network 的文献已经从社交网络的角度指出了网络位置对于知识贡献的重要性，但很少关注用户知识吸收的重要性。location for knowledge contribution from the perspective of social networks, but little attention has been paid to the importance of user knowledge absorption.
根据知识吸收理论，内部知识构成个体知识吸收能力的基础，反映了吸收外部知识的能力[According to the knowledge absorption theory, internal knowledge constitutes the basis of individual knowledge absorption capacity and reflects the ability to absorb external knowledge [16]. The effective sharing and integration of internal knowledge is the key to knowledge absorption [17]. Therefore, for users with different knowledge levels, the influence of network location on sustainable knowledge contribution may be different, because users with different knowledge levels have different efficiencies in absorbing and using external knowledge. Examining only the impact of network location on users’ sustainable knowledge contribution behavior, while ignoring whether users’ knowledge levels are able to absorb external knowledge acquired through the network location, may yield an inaccurate impact on the perception of users’ sustainable knowledge contribution. Therefore, it is particularly important to study user sustainable knowledge contribution from the perspective of knowledge absorption. From the perspective of knowledge absorption theory, researchers explore the role of knowledge 16absorptive ]。内部知识的有效共享和整合是知识吸收的关键[capacity 17]。因此，对于不同知识水平的用户，网络位置对可持续知识贡献的影响可能不同，因为不同知识水平的用户在吸收和使用外部知识方面的效率不同。仅考察网络位置对用户可持续知识贡献行为的影响，而忽略用户的知识水平是否能够吸收通过网络位置获得的外部知识，可能会对用户可持续知识贡献的感知产生不准确的影响。因此，从知识吸收的角度研究用户可持续的知识贡献就显得尤为重要。从知识吸收理论的角度来看，研究人员探讨了of OIP users 用户的知识吸收能力在网络位置对知识贡献的影响中的作用。用户的网络位置提供了超越其知识边界的外部知识的获取途径，内部知识的高低反映了用户吸收外部知识的能力。in the influence of network location on knowledge contribution. In the model, the user’s network location provides access to external knowledge beyond their knowledge boundaries, and the level of internal knowledge reflects the user’s ability to absorb external knowledge.

2. 网络位置对用户可持续知识贡献的影响The Influence of Network Location on Users’ Sustainable Knowledge Contribution

社会学习理论认为，社会成员在他人的影响下会产生学习行为，这种影响可能是直接互动，也可能是间接观察[Social learning theory believes that social members will have learning behaviors under the influence of others, and this influence may be direct interaction or indirect observation [18]. 37In ]。在an OIP 中，用户可以通过与其他用户互动来增加他们的技能储备，从而增强创造力并促进可持续的知识贡献。OIP 中的交互创建网络关系以获取外部知识。在本文中，网络广度是指用户与其他用户之间的联系程度，网络深度是指在平台交互网络中的嵌入程度。, users can increase their skill reserves by interacting with other users, thereby enhancing creativity and promoting sustainable knowledge contributions. The interaction in an OIP creates a network relationship to obtain external knowledge. In the paper, network breadth refers to the degree of connection between users and other users, and network depth refers to the level of embeddedness in the platform’s interactive network. 网络广度是指用户通过网络连接获得的知识范围。通过交互网络，用户可以直接与网络中的其他用户联系，获取其他用户的外部知识。社会资本理论表明，一个人的关系网络中所有知识资源的集合可以强烈影响人际知识共享的程度[Network breadth refers to the range of knowledge gained by users through network connections. Through the interactive network, users can directly connect with other users in the network and obtain external knowledge of other users. The social capital theory shows that the collection of all knowledge resources in a person’s relationship network can strongly affect the degree of interpersonal knowledge sharing [19]. Knowledge is very important for innovation, but the cost of acquisition is very high. The interaction between members of 38the ]。知识对于创新非常重要，但获取成本非常高。OIP 成员之间的互动为获取更广泛的知识来源提供了一种具有成本效益的方式。用户的社交互动越多，信息交流的强度、频率和广度就越大[provides a cost-effective way to obtain a wider range of knowledge sources. The more social interactions users have, the greater the intensity, frequency, and breadth of information exchange [20]. The more connections a user has on the network, the more innovative resources and external information they can access during the innovation process. The more innovative knowledge exchanges with other users, the higher the innovation performance may be [21]. Extensive network connections can provide users with new insights, reduce cognitive effort, and increase the rate of 39]。用户在网络上的连接越多，他们在创新过程中可以访问的创新资源和外部信息就越多。与其他用户的创新知识交流越多，创新绩效可能就越高[creation 40of ]。广泛的网络连接可以为用户提供新的见解，减少认知工作，并提高新知识的创造率[new 13knowledge ]。[13]. Network depth refers to the contact distance with other users in the interactive network, that is, the degree of embeddedness in the network. In other words, network depth means the distance from a user to other users connected directly or indirectly in the network. When deeply embedded in the network, users can quickly access relevant information. However, an excessively embedded network will cause users to access redundant information, which limits their ability to effectively explore new knowledge in the network [41][22]. Proximity to other users’ network locations may cause similar or redundant information loops, confining users to their perceptions. This kind of cognitive lock-in may inhibit users’ motivation to explore new knowledge from external networks and hinder their motivation to continue to innovate, resulting in a decline in sustainable knowledge contribution. When the user is deeply embedded in the network, the user’s motivation to explore new ideas and create new knowledge from the network will be weakened. As old knowledge becomes obsolete, users further lose their motivation to continue to innovate, which hinders their sustainable knowledge contribution [16].

3. The Influence of Knowledge Diversity on User’s Sustainable Knowledge Contribution

Knowledge diversity refers to the abundance of individual knowledge, experience, and skills, and is a measure of the user’s internal knowledge level [42][23]. The collection of knowledge elements owned by each individual and the relationship between these collections constitute a personal knowledge base. Innovation is the process of reorganizing the knowledge elements in the knowledge base [43][24]. In an OIP, users have different professional levels and experience, and each person’s knowledge inventory is also different, and there is a gap in their innovative ability. Users with diverse knowledge are more able to promote knowledge transfer and sharing [44][25]. According to Nonaka’s research, diverse knowledge will stimulate users’ innovative thinking and produce more practical ideas [21][26]. Users with different knowledge levels have different motivations to contribute to their knowledge. Generally speaking, users with low knowledge levels only contribute knowledge to obtain platform rewards, whereas users with high levels not only gain platform revenue but also gain new knowledge [44][25]. According to the theory of planned behavior, in an OIP, users’ perception and control of knowledge creation are determined by their knowledge level. If users do not have enough knowledge, even if they have the willingness to create new knowledge, they will not undergo sustainable knowledge contribution behavior [45][27]. In other words, the willingness to innovate alone is not enough, and the knowledge and ability to support the generation of innovation is also required [46][28]. In an OIP, users need a series of knowledge related to products and services to propose ideas.

4. Difference Analysis of Knowledge Absorption Effect to User Sustainable Knowledge Contribution

Absorptive capacity is the ability to recognize, digest, transform, and develop and utilize knowledge. Cognitive and behavioral science research shows that absorbing knowledge is the process of using the knowledge through the evaluation of external knowledge, establishing connections with pre-concepts, and associating existing knowledge after possessing internal knowledge [16]. The process of interactive digestion of external knowledge and internal knowledge is the process of knowledge absorption. The knowledge absorption effect expresses the degree of utilization of knowledge after the interaction between internal knowledge and external knowledge [16]. For OIP users, based on existing internal knowledge, they can use external knowledge by establishing network connections with other users. According to cognitive load theory, each user’s attention is limited. When internal knowledge is highly diversified, the value of acquiring external knowledge may be more limited, because a wealth of internal knowledge can provide enough new perspectives. The high network breadth will increase the cost for users to integrate knowledge from different sources. This diverse external knowledge may collide with the existing internal knowledge, resulting in difficult coordination [47][29]. When users accept a wide range of external knowledge, the direction of internal knowledge may be the opposite. Users need to spend more time and energy to coordinate this knowledge, which will significantly reduce the speed of the sustainable knowledge contribution. For users with a high level of knowledge, an extensive network may also increase the complexity of the integration of internal and external knowledge, which reduces the level of user knowledge absorption and leads to a decrease in user sustainable knowledge contribution [48][30]. For users with low knowledge levels, extensive network connections can help users obtain more external knowledge, and the problem of insufficient internal knowledge can be alleviated through extensive external knowledge. Deeply embedded networks can obtain overall network information more easily and quickly, and achieve better performance with “less information transmission, shorter time, and lower cost” [15]. The extensive knowledge base helps users evaluate development trends from different perspectives. When deeply embedded in the network, users can quickly develop the best knowledge about technological trends and related expertise [15[15][16]，and obtain the best development direction. Although excessive network embedding may cause knowledge redundancy for users, for users with high knowledge levels with diverse knowledge,16]，并获得最佳发展方向。虽然过度的网络嵌入可能会导致用户的知识冗余，但对于知识水平高、知识多样的用户来说，他们广泛的知识和多角度的思维可以缓解这种认知锁定。深度嵌入网络，帮助用户更好更快地了解 their broad knowledge and multi-angle thinking can alleviate this cognitive lock-in. The deeply embedded network helps users better and more quickly understand the overall status of the OIP网络的整体状况，掌握最新动向[ network and grasp the latest trends [16]. The smaller the knowledge distance, the fewer intermediate steps the knowledge receiver takes to absorb knowledge, and the efficiency of knowledge absorption increases. For users with high knowledge levels, by quickly acquiring external knowledge, understanding the most promising development direction, and gathering their diversified knowledge, they can create more new knowledge more quickly. For users with low levels of knowledge, based on insufficient internal knowledge, deep embedding in the network makes it worse. Redundant external knowledge can only limit the development of their thinking and is not conducive to their sustainable knowledge 16]。知识距离越小，知识接受者吸收知识所采取的中间步骤就越少，知识吸收的效率就会提高。对于知识水平较高的用户，通过快速获取外部知识，了解最有前景的发展方向，积累多元化的知识，可以更快地创造出更多的新知识。对于知识水平较低的用户，基于内部知识不足，在网络中深度嵌入会使情况变得更糟。多余的外部知识只能限制他们思维的发展，不利于他们可持续的知识贡献。contribution.

References

  1. Wooten, J.O.; Ulrich, K.T. Idea Generation and the Role of Feedback: Evidence from Field Experiments with Innovation Tournaments. Prod. Oper. Manag. 2017, 26, 80–99.
  2. Liu, Q.; Du, Q.; Hong, Y.; Fan, W.; Wu, S. User idea implementation in open innovation communities: Evidence from a new product development crowdsourcing community. Inf. Syst. J. 2020, 30, 899–927.
  3. Chesbrough, W.H. Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology; Harvard Business School Press Books: Boston, MA, USA, 2006.
  4. Schlagwein, D.; Cecez-Kecmanovic, D.; Hanckel, B. Ethical norms and issues in crowdsourcing practices: A Habermasian analysis. Inf. Syst. J. 2018, 29, 811–837.
  5. Chiu, C.-M.; Liang, T.-P.; Turban, E. What can crowdsourcing do for decision support? Decis. Support Syst. 2014, 65, 40–49.
  6. Guo, W.; Liang, R.Y.; Wang, L.; Peng, W. Exploring Sustained Participation in Firm-Hosted Communities in China: The Effects of Social Capital and Active Degree. Behav. Inf. Technol. 2017, 36, 223–242.
  7. Burger-Helmchen, T.; Cohendet, P. User Communities and Social Software in the Video Game Industry. Long Range Plan. 2011, 44, 317–343.
  8. Taylor, J.; Joshi, K.D. Joining the Crowd: The Career Anchors of Information Technology Workers Participating in Crowdsourcing. Inf. Syst. J. 2019, 29, 641–673.
  9. Hulland, J. Organizational learning: The contributing processes and the literatures. Organ. Sci. 1999, 2, 119–126.
  10. Wang, X.; Ow, T.T.; Liu, L.; Feng, Y.; Liang, Y. Effects of Peers and Network Position on User Participation in A Firm-Hosted Software Community: The Moderating Role of Network Centrality. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 2020, 29, 521–544.
  11. Chen, W.; Wei, X.; Zhu, K.X. Engaging Voluntary Contributions in Online Communities: A Hidden Markov Model. MIS Q. 2018, 42, 83–100.
  12. Yang, J.; Sia, C.L.; Liu, L.; Chen, H. Sellers Versus Buyers: Differences in User Information Sharing on Social Commerce Sites. Inf. Technol. People 2016, 29, 444–470.
  13. Peng, G. Co-Membership, Networks Ties, and Knowledge Flow: An Empirical Investigation Controlling for Alternative Mechanisms. Decis. Support Syst. 2019, 118, 83–90.
  14. Garriga, H.; Krogh, G.V.; Spaeth, S. How Constraints and Knowledge Impact Open Innovation. Strateg. Manag. J. 2013, 34, 1134–1144.
  15. Freeman, L.C. Centrality in Social Networks: Conceptual Clarification. Soc. Netw. 1979, 1, 215–239.
  16. Tang, T.Y.; Fang, E.E.; Qualls, W.J. More Is Not Necessarily Better: An Absorptive Capacity Perspective on Network Effects in Open Source Software Development Communities. MIS Q. 2020, 44, 1651–1678.
  17. Zahra, S.A.; George, G. Absorptive Capacity: A Review, Reconceptualization, and Extension. Acad. Manag. Rev. 2002, 27, 185–203.
  18. Heyes, C.M. Social Learning in Animals: Categories and Mechanisms. Biol. Rev. Camb. Philos. Soc. 2010, 69, 207–231.
  19. Phua, J.; Jin, S.V.; Kim, J.J. Uses and gratifications of social networking sites for bridging and bonding social capital: A comparison of Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Snapchat. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2017, 72, 115–122.
  20. Larson, A. Network Dyads in Entrepreneurial Settings: A Study of the Governance of Exchange Relationships. Adm. Sci. Q. 1992, 37, 76–104.
  21. Zheng, H.; Li, D.; Jing, W.; Yun, X. The Role of Multidimensional Social Capital in Crowdfunding: A Comparative Study in China And US. Inf. Manag. Amst. 2014, 51, 488–496.
  22. Hwang, E.H.; Singh, P.V.; Argote, L. Jack of All, Master of Some: Information Network and Innovation in Crowdsourcing Communities. Inf. Syst. Res. 2019, 30, 389–410.
  23. Pollok, P.; Amft, A.; Diener, K.; Luettgens, D.; Piller, F.T. Knowledge diversity and team creativity: How hobbyists beat professional designers in creating novel board games. Res. Policy 2021, 50, 104174.
  24. Yayavaram, S.; Ahuja, G. Decomposability in Knowledge Structures and Its Impact on the Usefulness of Inventions and Knowledge-base Malleability. Adm. Sci. Q. 2008, 53, 333–362.
  25. Zhang, J.; Zhang, J.; Zhang, M. From free to paid: Customer expertise and customer satisfaction on knowledge payment platforms. Decis. Support Syst. 2019, 127, 113140.
  26. Nonaka, I. The Knowledge-Creating Company; Harvard Business Review Press: Boston, MA, USA, 2015.
  27. Wasko, M.M.; Faraj, S. Why Should I Share? Examining Social Capital and Knowledge Contribution in Electronic Networks of Practice. MIS Q. 2005, 29, 35–57.
  28. Hsu, M.H.; Ju, T.L.; Yen, C.H.; Chang, C.M. Knowledge Sharing Behavior in Virtual Communities: The Relationship between Trust, Self-Efficacy, And Outcome Expectations. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 2007, 65, 153–169.
  29. Temizkan, O.; Kumar, R.L. Exploitation and Exploration Networks in Open Source Software Development: An Artifact-Level Analysis. J. Manag. Inf. Syst. 2015, 32, 116–150.
  30. De Luca, L.M.; Atuahene-Gima, K. Market Knowledge Dimensions and Cross-Functional Collaboration: Examining the Different Routes to Product Innovation Performance. J. Mark. 2007, 71, 95–112.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
ScholarVision Creations
Feedback