Facilitating active participation in web-based co-development


Published on

Research paper presented in the Innovation through Social Media workshop in Oslo, Norway 3 Dec 2012.
Read the paper: http://tapironline.no/last-ned/1086

Published in: Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Facilitating active participation in web-based co-development

  1. 1. Facilitating active participation inweb-based co-developmentInnovation through Social Media, Oslo, 3 Dec 2012Pirjo Friedrich1, Jukka Huhtamäki2, Kaisa Koskela-Huotari1, Kaarina Karppinen1, Kaisa Still11 VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland2 Tampere University of TechnologyRead the paper: http://tapironline.no/last-ned/1086
  2. 2. 11/12/2012 2 IntroductionProblem Innovation does not happen by itself in social media Which factors influence on the success of web-based innovation?Earlier studies Motivation of users (open innovation, online communities) Group facilitation (e-learning, CSCW, collaboration engineering)Research question How can facilitators activate participants to contribute to concept design in web-based co-development?
  3. 3. 11/12/2012 3 Facilitators’ possibilities to activate participantsOnline discussion Well-defined questions, clear guidelines (Beaudin, 1999) Problem-centric and curiosity-arousing wording of the tasks (Friedrich et al., 1999) Clear deadlines (Kienle & Ritterskamp, 2007)Co-design Keep participants motivated and focused, Create and maintain a relaxed atmosphere, Provide concrete materials to begin idea exploration, Allow participants to move from easier tasks to more challenging ones (Lucero et al., 2012)
  4. 4. 11/12/2012 4 “My Internet” case study A real innovation process of a Finnish company  A group of consumers participated in the concept design of a new internet service Web-based co-development on the Owela platform  1000 invitations for members  Advertisements on Facebook and email lists  88 participants, 66 active  5 weeks online study  3000 comments, 200 gallup answers
  5. 5. 11/12/2012 5 Co-development in Owela Facilitated and scheduled co-development  Asynchronous discussion  Everyday life experiences  Evaluation of service concepts based on text, pictures and user interface sketches  Service name suggestions  Minigallups  Chat sessions Analysis of facilitation activities and user participation  Owela logs, facilitators’ emails and notes  Visual analytics
  6. 6. 11/12/2012 6 Facilitation activities in the case study1. Interesting and versatile tasks (scheduled over five weeks)  Weekly discussion topics: carefully planned questions  Daily minigallups  Two chat sessions: two facilitators lead discussion2. Activity points -based rewarding  Points from all activities (answers, comments, ideas)  30 points  a movie ticket  30 most active  a software product of value 100 euro3. Weekly email reminders  Guidelines, reminders of discussions, chat, points & rewards4. (Comments and further questions in online discussion)
  7. 7. 11/12/2012 7 Amount of participants (commenters) per day 4-32 participants per day (avg 16)Most participants during thetwo first weeks
  8. 8. 11/12/2012 8Amount of participants (commenters) per day Email reminders + new tasks
  9. 9. 11/12/2012 9Amount of participants (commenters) per day Email reminders: rewards Email reminders: deadline
  10. 10. 11/12/2012 10 Amount of comments (by users) per day Over 20% on one day (622 comments by 24 users), mainly name suggestionsEveryday life experiences Concept evaluation Name suggestions
  11. 11. 11/12/2012 11 Amount of comments (by users) per day Email reminders: rewards for the most active ones Email reminders: deadlineEveryday life experiences Concept evaluation Name suggestions
  12. 12. 11/12/2012 12 Discussion and recommendations There is a rhythm in participation  The most important topics in the beginning, when participants are eager to contribute  Utilize the rhythm: new tasks and email reminders always on the same days of the week Email reminders of new tasks activate people  Automatic reminders sound like an easy improvement...  ...but we trust on carefully formulated messages with a personal style of the facilitator Rewards and deadlines activate only some people, but can be effective for them
  13. 13. 11/12/2012 13 Future work Rewarding based on the efforts and quality of the work instead of the quantity of the contributions (Antikainen, 2011)  The competition of the activity ranking may lead to less valuable comments Utilizing the activity visualisations during the study to analyse the implications of the interventions  Real-time visual insights integrated in the Owela platform to help the facilitators to target their actions