1.
By
embracing
new
rules
of
(Internet)
marketing
and
utilizing
crowdsourcing
a
firm
can
become
truly
customer
oriented
BUSN32
Internet
Marketing,
Branding,
Consumers
2012-­‐02-­‐29
Individual
Assignment
Written
by
Pia
Faulseit
(840125-­‐T247)

2. Table
of
Content
1
INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................................. 2
2
THEORETICAL
FRAMEWORK ........................................................................................................... 3
2.1
NEW
RULES
OF
INTERNET
MARKETING .....................................................................................................3
2.2
CUSTOMER
ORIENTATION ......................................................................................................................3
2.3
CROWDSOURCING................................................................................................................................4
3
CASE
EXAMPLES ............................................................................................................................. 6
3.1
MY
STARBUCKS
IDEA ............................................................................................................................6
3.2
TCHIBO
IDEAS......................................................................................................................................7
4
DISCUSSION ................................................................................................................................... 9
5
CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................................11
6
BIBLIOGRAPHY ..............................................................................................................................12
1

3. 1
Introduction
The
rapid
development
and
use
of
Information
and
Communication
Technology
within
recent
decades
has
brought
about
several
changes
for
the
business
and
marketing
environments
(Wind
2008,
p.
23;
Lutz,
2011,
p.
225).
The
Internet
has
created
new
rules
and
possibilities
for
companies
and
their
marketing
operations
as
well
as
the
potential
to
enhance
customer
orientation.
Marketing
is
now
characterized
by
a
high
degree
of
interaction
and
collaboration
between
companies
and
their
customers
and
this
relationship
shift
has
created
a
customer
that
is
increasingly
empowered.
(Winer,
2009,
p.
109f.;
Wind
2008,
p.
21;
Pires
et
al.,
2006,
p.
939)
As
empowered
customers
becoming
co-­‐inventors,
co-­‐creators
and
co-­‐marketers,
the
strict
borders
between
companies
and
customers
dilute
(Wind
2008,
p.
22)
and
some
companies
even
seek
to
leverage
this
by
deliberately
ceding
“…power
to
the
collective
for
specific
brand
decisions
and
tasks.”
(Fournier,
Avery,
2011,
p.
196)
One
way
in
which
companies
are
tapping
into
the
collective
for
idea
generation,
advertising
or
to
inform
the
product
pipeline
is
crowdsourcing
(Fournier,
Avery,
2011,
p.
196).
The
implementation
of
collaborative
approaches
like
crowdsourcing
within
business
and
marketing
practice
is
a
growing
trend.
However,
there
is
a
lack
of
academic
contribution,
especially
from
marketing
research,
to
this
growing
field.
(Lutz,
2011,
p.
225;
Bonabeau,
2009,
p.
46,
50;
Zheng
et
al.,
2011,
p.
58)
According
to
Lutz
(2011,
p.
233),
academic
research
in
marketing
tends
to
follow
rather
than
lead
marketing
practice
with
regards
to
collaborative
approaches.
Therefore,
the
purpose
of
this
paper
is
to
address
this
gap
by
exploring
crowdsourcing
from
a
marketing
perspective
and
investigating
its
potential
as
a
vehicle
for
companies
to
become
truly
customer
oriented.
To
explore
this,
three
concepts
–
Internet
marketing,
customer
orientation
and
crowdsourcing
–
are
outlined
based
on
a
literature
review.
With
the
lack
of
academic
literature
on
crowdsourcing
from
a
marketing
perspective,
journal
articles
from
the
adjacent
fields
of
Research
and
Development
(R&D),
Innovation
Management
and
Design
are
consulted.
Two
case
examples
are
provided
that
show
how
crowdsourcing
can
be
used
by
companies
for
customer
orientation.
Finally,
a
conclusion
is
drawn
and
suggestions
for
future
research
are
given.
2

4. 2
Theoretical
framework
The
following
theoretical
framework
outlines
and
defines
the
three
concepts
–
Internet
marketing,
customer
orientation
and
crowdsourcing.
2.1
New
rules
of
Internet
marketing
With
the
advent
of
the
Internet,
a
new
digital
medium
arose
which
has
significantly
changed
marketing
operations
(Wind
2008,
p.
23;
Lutz,
2011,
p.
225)
from
a
linear,
one-­‐way
flow
of
information
from
organizations
to
customers
to
instead,
an
exchange
of
information
which
increasingly
takes
place
in
the
form
of
a
dialogue
on
a
one-­‐to-­‐one,
many-­‐to-­‐many
or
multi-­‐modal
level
(Rowley,
2004,
p.
26;
Winer,
2009,
p.
108;
Muñiz,
Schau,
2011,
p.
209).
Through
this
new
communication
model
that
enables
users
to
generate
and
continuously
modify
content
(User
Generated
Content)
(Kaplan,
Haenlein,
2010,
p.
61),
organizations
now
have
the
possibility
to
interact
with
customers
and
engage
them
in
a
collaborative
and
participatory
way
(Winer,
2009,
p.
108f.;
Kaplan,
Haenlein,
2010,
p.
61)
facilitating
new
customer
relationships
and
mutual
value
creation
(Rowley,
2004,
p.
24;
Fournier,
Avery,
2011,
p.
195).
Additionally,
the
Internet
marketing
environment
has
hailed
new
rules
of
authenticity
and
transparency,
which
organizations
need
to
keep
in
mind
when
operating
online
(Fournier,
Avery,
2011,
p.
198;
Weinberg,
Pehlivan,
2011,
p.
276).
Internet
marketing
can
be
defined
as
“Applying
digital
technologies
which
form
online
channels
to
market
[…]
to
contribute
to
marketing
activities
aimed
at
achieving
profitable
acquisition
and
retention
of
customers
[…]
to
improve
customer
knowledge
[…],
then
delivering
integrated
targeted
communications
and
online
services
that
match
their
individual
needs.”
(IDM
in
Chaffey,
2008,
p.
19)
Social
Media
sites
are
increasingly
where
this
new
Internet
marketing
takes
place
and
it
is
crucial
to
remember,
“it’s
all
about
participation,
sharing,
and
collaboration,
rather
than
straightforward
advertising
and
selling.”
(Kaplan,
Haenlein,
2010,
p.
65)
The
above
discussion
outlines
how
the
digital
era
has
changed
the
rules
of
marketing
but
it
is
important
to
note
that
the
role
of
customers
has
also
changed.
Customers
are
no
longer
passive
recipients
of
marketing
messages
but
rather,
they
take
an
active
role
by
developing
and
disseminating
marketing
messages,
co-­‐creating
marketing
content,
and
becoming
increasingly
in
control
of
what
is
said
about
brands
or
products.
This
power
shift
has
fundamentally
changed
the
relationship
between
companies
and
customers.
(Wind
2008,
p.
21f.;
Winer,
2009,
p.
112;
Rowley,
2004,
p.
26f.;
Muñiz,
Schau,
2011,
p.
210)
The
concept
of
‘consumer
empowerment’
is
widely
discussed
in
the
literature
(e.g.
Fournier,
Avery,
2011,
p.
193;
Pires
et
al.,
2006,
938
f.;
Muñiz,
Schau,
2011,
p.
210;
Wind,
2008,
p.
21).
2.2
Customer
orientation
The
concept
of
customer
orientation
is
part
of
the
theory
of
market
orientation,
which
is
primarily
addressed
by
two
major
groups
of
authors
within
academic
literature.
Slater
and
Narver
(1990,
p.
21;
1994,
p.
22)
conceptualize
customer
orientation
as
one
of
three
major
components
of
market
orientation
and
state
that,
“A
business
is
market-­‐oriented
when
its
culture
is
systematically
and
entirely
committed
to
the
continuous
creation
of
superior
customer
value.
Specifically,
this
entails
collecting
and
coordinating
information
on
customers,
competitors,
and
other
significant
market
influencers
[…]
to
use
in
building
that
value.”
(Slater,
Narver,
1994,
p.
22)
While
Narver
and
Slater
incorporate
customer
orientation
as
one
component
within
their
theory
of
market
orientation,
Kohli
and
Jaworski
(the
second
group
of
authors)
conceptualize
market
orientation
differently
and
refer
to
customer
orientation
in
connection
with
the
broader
concept
of
market
intelligence
(Kohli,
Jaworski,
1990,
p.
3f.;
Jaworski,
Kohli,
1993,
p.
54).
“Market
orientation
is
the
organization-­‐wide
generation
of
3

5. market
intelligence
pertaining
to
current
and
future
customer
needs,
dissemination
of
the
intelligence
across
departments,
and
organization
wide
responsiveness
to
it.”
(Kohli,
Jaworski,
1990,
p.
6)
While
both
groups
of
authors
conceptualize
customer
orientation
differently
within
their
theories
of
market
orientation,
the
understanding
of
customer
orientation
as
such
is
overlapping
(Nwankwo,
1995,
p.
6).
They
commonly
state
that
customer
orientation
is
a
central
element
of
market
orientation
and
that
it
entails
acquisition,
assessment
and
superior
understanding
of
information
about
customers’
current
and
future
needs,
expectations
and
preferences
(Narver,
Slater,
1990,
p.
21;
Kohli,
Jaworski,
1990,
p.
3f.).
This
model
of
information
gathering
goes
beyond
traditional
customer
research
to
identify
not
only
expressed
but
also
latent
customer
needs
(Slater,
Narver,
1998,
p.
1002;
Kohli,
Jaworski,
1990,
p.
4).
Through
an
understanding
of
and
responsiveness
to
customer
needs,
organizations
can
create
superior
customer
value
and
enhance
customer
satisfaction
and
relationships
(Narver,
Slater,
1990,
p.
21;
Slater,
Narver,
1994,
p.
22f.;
Jaworski,
Kohli,
1993,
p.
53;
Kohli,
Jaworski,
1990,
p.
6;
Aziz,
Yasin,
2004,
p.
5f.).
Moreover,
by
embedding
market
orientation
into
their
business
cultures,
organizations
can
gain
sustainable
competitive
advantages
and
are
likely
to
increase
business
performance
and
profitability
(Kohli,
Jaworski,
1990,
p.
13,
Jaworski,
Kohli,
1993,
p.
64;
Narver,
Slater
1990,
p.
21f.;
Slater,
Narver,
1994,
p.
26).
The
theory
of
market
orientation
has
since
been
refined
and
built
upon
(Slater,
Narver,
1998,
p.
1001)
with
the
terms
‘market
orientation’
and
‘customer
orientation’
now
used
almost
interchangeably
and
associated
with
terms
like
‘marketing
concept’
and
‘customer
first’
(Nwankwo,
1995,
p.
6).
However,
most
authors
addressing
this
topic
still
refer
back
to
the
initial
theories
of
market
orientation
by
Kohli
&
Jaworski
and
Slater
&
Narver
(e.g.
Nwankwo,
1995;
Yan,
2011;
Aziz,
Yasin,
2004,
Luo,
Seyedian,
2004).
2.3
Crowdsourcing
The
term
crowdsourcing
initially
appeared
in
a
2006
article,
“The
rise
of
crowdsourcing,”
written
by
Jeff
Howe
and
published
in
the
online
magazine,
Wired
(Busarovs,
2011,
p.
54;
Howe,
2006a,
p.
1).
According
to
Howe
(2006b),
crowdsourcing
can
be
defined
as
“…the
act
of
taking
a
job
traditionally
performed
by
a
designated
agent
(usually
an
employee)
and
outsourcing
it
to
an
undefined,
generally
large
group
of
people
in
the
form
of
an
open
call.”
Although
the
concept
as
such
existed
before
2006
(Busarovs,
2011,
p.
54),
Howe’s
definition
of
crowdsourcing
is
generally
accepted
and
commonly
used
in
current
literature
by
authors
such
as
Miziolek
(2011,
p.
16),
Lutz
(2011,
p.
225)
or
Poetz
and
Schreier
(2012,
p.
246).
With
the
advancement
of
the
Internet
to
Web
2.0,
companies
are
now
able
to
“…tap
into
‘the
collective’
on
a
greater
scale
than
ever
before”
(Bonabeau,
2009,
p.
46).
The
concept
of
crowdsourcing
leverages
these
new
possibilities
and
strives
to
solve
problems
with
the
help
of
the
masses
(Busarovs,
2011,
p.
54;
Zheng
et
al.,
2011,
p.
57).
This
can
take
place
on
companies’
websites,
social
networks
or
on
special
crowdsourcing
platforms
(e.g.
InnoCentive)
which
all
connect
companies
with
individuals
(Busarovs,
2011,
p.
57;
Zheng
et
al.,
2011,
p.
59;
Doan
et
al.,
2011,
p.
88).
Since
the
concept
of
crowdsourcing
is
relatively
new,
there
is
limited
literature
available,
especially
from
a
marketing
perspective.
Therefore
the
consulted
academic
literature
originates
from
adjacent
fields
and
approaches
crowdsourcing
in
terms
of
different
areas
of
application,
such
as
user-­‐driven
innovation
(Busarovs,
2011),
new
product
development
(Poetz,
Schreier,
2012),
decision-­‐making
(Bonabeau,
2009),
or
packaging
and
design
(Miziolek,
2011).
Crowdsourcing
has
its
roots
in
the
idea
of
open
source
solutions
(OSS)
but
is
applied
outside
the
field
of
software
development
(Howe,
2006b;
Poetz,
Schreier,
2012,
p.
246).
The
concept
of
crowdsourcing
was
initially
implemented
in
the
field
of
R&D
projects,
such
as
Innovation
Management
and
New
Product
Development
(Miziolek,
2011,
p.
16;
Albors
et
al.,
2007,
p.
4

6. 197).
Traditionally,
these
projects
were
solely
performed
company-­‐internal
by
the
responsible
departments
(e.g.
R&D,
Marketing,
Engineering),
but
with
the
growing
need
to
be
innovative
in
today’s
business
landscape,
there
is
an
increasing
tendency
to
look
for
innovation
and
ideas
to
emerge
from
outside
of
the
company.
(Busarovs,
2011,
p.
53;
Poetz,
Schreier,
2012,
p.
245;
Ebner
et
al.,
2009,
p.
243)
Based
on
this,
Busarovs
(2011,
p.
53)
refers
to
crowdsourcing
as
a
business
philosophy
for
user-­‐driven
innovation
oriented
towards
true
customer
needs.
Crowdsourcing’s
collaborative
model
is
a
growing
trend
and
besides
R&D
projects,
it
is
increasingly
used
to
address
business
problems
and
challenges
in
marketing
and
its
adjacent
fields
such
as
branding,
advertising,
market
research
and
design
(Fournier,
Avery,
2011,
p.
196;
Miziolek,
2011,
p.
16;
Lutz,
2011,
p.
225;
Bonabeau,
2009,
p.
50f.).
Regardless
of
the
area
of
application,
the
concept
of
crowdsourcing
directs
a
task
towards
a
large,
undefined
group
of
people
via
the
Internet
to
make
use
of
collective
intelligence
(Fournier,
Avery,
2011,
p.
196;
Busarovs,
2011,
p.
54;
Bonabeau,
2009,
p.
46).
The
mechanism
relies
on
a
self-­‐selection
process
among
participants
who
are
willing
and
able
to
respond
to
the
given
task
(Poetz,
Schreier,
2012,
p.
246),
which
can
range
from
routine
to
complex
to
creative
(Busarovs,
2011,
p.
54).
According
to
Zheng
et
al.
(2011,
p.
59),
crowdsourcing
can
implicate
a
contest
where
tasks,
requirements,
duration
and
rewards
are
defined
by
a
company
who
then
evaluates
the
participants’
proposed
solutions.
However,
the
motivation
to
participate
in
crowdsourcing
does
not
necessarily
need
to
be
based
on
monetary
rewards,
it
can
also
be
based
on
other
intrinsic
or
extrinsic
factors
such
as
value
driven
incentives,
recognition
or
the
pleasure
of
solving
a
task
(Zheng
et
al.,
2011,
p.
76f.;
Bonabeau,
2009,
p.
49).
Besides
solution
generation,
crowdsourcing
is
increasingly
used
to
evaluate
proposed
ideas
and
is
often
implemented
for
both
reasons
in
successive
steps
so
that
idea
creation
and
voting
for
selection
are
part
of
the
process
(Bonabeau,
2009,
p.
47;
Fournier,
Avery,
2011,
p.
196).
There
are
a
number
of
advantages
and
risks
of
using
crowdsourcing,
but
for
the
purpose
of
this
paper,
only
certain
aspects
are
relevant
and
will
be
discussed.
Crowdsourcing
can
be
an
alternative
to
or
complement
traditional,
internal
problem-­‐solving
approaches
by
generating
more
ideas
from
a
diverse
and
impartial
crowd
instead
of
relying
solely
on
internal
expertise
(Poetz,
Schreier,
2012,
p.
248;
Busarovs,
2011,
p.
59;
Miziolek,
2011,
p.
17;
Ebner
et
al.,
2009,
p.
243).
It
can
be
used
to
overcome
a
divergence
between
an
expert’s
attempt
to
find
a
solution
and
real
customer
needs
(Busarovs,
2011,
p.
53)
or
to
identify
valuable
consumer
insights
(Miziolek,
2011,
p.
17).
Concurrently,
there
exists
the
threat
of
not
reaching
a
critical
mass
of
participants
or
engaging
a
group
that
does
not
represent
the
target
group
or
consumer
base
and
therewith,
their
real
needs
(Miziolek,
2011,
p.
17,
Busarovs,
2011,
p.
57;
Poetz,
Schreier,
2012,
p.
255).
Moreover,
quantity
does
not
necessarily
equal
quality,
thus,
the
generated
ideas
may
not
be
appropriate
for
the
problem
or
may
lead
to
undesirable
outcomes
(Miziolek,
2011,
p.
17;
Bonabeau,
2009,
p.
48;
Poetz,
Schreier,
2012,
p.
245;
Fournier,
Avery,
2011,
p.
202).
There
are
a
number
of
key
issues
to
remember
when
considering
crowdsourcing.
Control
is
one
crucial
factor
–
finding
the
right
balance
between
ceding
control
to
the
crowd
and
keeping
the
management
and
overall
strategic
direction
in
the
hands
of
the
company
(Miziolek,
2011,
p.
17;
Bonabeau,
2009,
p.
48;
Poetz,
Schreier,
2012,
p.
248).
Furthermore,
companies
need
to
balance
the
need
for
a
diversity
of
ideas
with
the
level
of
expertise
to
ensure
quality
(Bonabeau,
2009,
p.
48).
Turning
to
the
crowd
can
reveal
contrary
interests,
misbehaviour
and
critiques
which
would
then
need
to
be
addressed
(Bonabeau,
2009,
p.
48).
Every
case
should
be
carefully
considered,
weighing
the
potential
benefits
and
downfalls
of
crowdsourcing
with
the
particular
task/problem
in
mind
(Busarovs,
2011,
p.
58;
Miziolek,
2011,
p.
17).
5

7. 3
Case
examples
There
are
a
number
of
companies
and
brands
that
implement
crowdsourcing
as
a
tool
to
generate
ideas
or
solutions
for
a
given
problem
(Lutz,
2011,
p.
225).
MyStarbucksIdeas.com
and
Tchibo-­‐Ideas.de
are
two
interactive
platforms
that
are
examples
of
crowdsourcing
being
used
for
customer
orientation
from
a
marketing
angle.
Due
to
limited
academic
literature
dealing
with
the
selected
cases,
the
descriptive
outlines
below
are
based
mainly
on
an
analysis
of
the
platforms.
3.1
My
Starbucks
Idea
One
mentioned
crowdsourcing
platform
in
the
marketing
literature
is
MyStarbucksIdea.com
by
the
U.S.
coffee
chain
Starbucks
(Fournier,
Avery,
2011,
p.
196;
Kaplan,
Haenlein,
2010,
p.
66).
The
company
describes
MyStarbucksIdea.com
as
“…an
online
community
dedicated
to
sharing
and
discussing
ideas
and
allowing
you
to
see
how
Starbucks
is
putting
top
ideas
into
action.”
(Starbucks
Corporations,
2010a)
MyStarbucksIdea.com
invites
individuals
to
share
ideas
on
how
Starbucks
can
create
better
customer
experiences
in
order
to
improve
its
business
(Kaplan,
Haenlein,
2010,
p.
66;
Starbucks
Corporation,
2010a).
Users
register
online
and
upload
ideas
into
three
main
categories
–
products,
experiences
and
involvement
–
which
are
then
divided
into
sub-­‐categories
with
ideas
ranging
from
small
improvements
to
revolutionary
changes
(Starbucks
Corporation,
2010a;
Starbucks
Corporations,
2010b).
Figure
1:
MyStarbucksIdea.com
The
uploaded
ideas
can
be
discussed
and
voted
on
by
other
users
and
they
can
also
be
posted
to
other
social
media
sites,
like
Facebook.
The
most
popular
or
innovative
ideas
and
suggestions
are
subsequently
considered
by
Starbucks
for
implementation
(independent
of
the
voting
process)
(Kaplan,
Haenlein,
2010,
p.
66;
Starbucks
Corporations,
2010a).
The
company
appoints
employees
from
different
departments
as
‘idea
partners’
to
join
and
host
the
on-­‐going
discussions
and
advocate
ideas
and
suggestions
within
the
6

8. company
(Jarvis,
2008;
Starbucks
Corporations,
2010a).
In
the
Idea
partners’
blog,
‘Ideas
in
Action’,
customers
receive
information
about
the
status
of
the
ideas
–
under
review,
reviewed,
in
the
works,
launched
–
and
are
able
to
comment
on
the
process
(Starbucks
Corporations,
2010a;
Starbucks
Corporations,
2010b;
Starbucks
Corporations,
2010c).
Overall,
the
mechanism
of
Starbucks’
crowdsourcing
platform
does
not
involve
any
monetary
or
tangible
rewards
for
the
proposed
customer
ideas
regardless
of
whether
they
are
implemented
or
not.
Customers
are
engaging
just
for
the
purpose
of
participating
(Starbucks
Corporations,
2010a;
Jarvis,
2008).
MyStarbucksIdea.com
is
a
good
example
of
crowdsourcing
as
a
tool
to
engage
consumers
in
a
well-­‐
structured
process,
while
sending
them
the
message
that
their
input
matters
and
is
taken
seriously.
3.2
Tchibo
Ideas
The
German
coffee
company,
Tchibo,
successfully
expanded
their
business
beyond
coffee
sales
by
developing
a
weekly,
rotating
product
range
that
is
theme-­‐based
(e.g.
household
goods,
sports
equipment)
and
sold
at
shops
or
online
(Tchibo,
2012a;
Tchibo,
2012b).
To
interact
with
its
customers
and
generate
ideas
for
their
product
ranges,
Tchibo
implemented
a
crowdsourcing
platform
called
Tchibo-­‐Ideas.de
(Tchibo
Ideas,
2012a;
Schögel,
Mrkwicka,
2011,
p.
9;
Evans,
McKee,
2010,
p.
335).
Users
register,
create
a
profile
and
interact
on
the
platform
in
three
ways.
First,
they
can
submit
their
own
everyday
problems
in
the
form
of
tasks
which
are
then
directed
toward
other
users
for
input.
Second,
users
can
propose
solutions
in
the
form
of
concrete,
tangible
products
to
the
uploaded
tasks
submitted
by
other
users
or
themselves.
(Tchibo
Ideas,
2012b;
Tchibo
Ideas,
2012c;
Tchibo
Ideas,
2012d)
The
different
tasks
and
proposed
solutions
are
divided
into
categories
(e.g.
kitchen,
health)
and
correlated
with
other,
similar
tasks
or
solutions.
The
platform
allows
interaction
in
the
form
of
task
and
solution
generation,
comments
and
discussion
but
users
are
not
able
to
vote
for
proposed
solutions.
(Tchibo
Ideas,
2012e;
Tchibo
Ideas,
2012f)
The
final
way
in
which
users
can
use
the
platform
is
to
propose
an
innovative,
market-­‐ready
product
design
for
cooperation
in
producing
and
selling
with
Tchibo.
The
product
design
must
fit
Tchibo’s
product
line,
be
new,
legally
defendable
and
producible.
If
a
cooperation
is
achieved,
the
resulting
product
will
be
produced
and
marketed
by
Tchibo
with
the
trademark
rights
remaining
with
the
user
who
also
receives
part
of
the
profit.
(Tchibo
Ideas,
2012g)
However,
Tchibo
reserves
the
right
to
utilize
proposed
tasks
and/or
generated
solutions
from
the
first
two
interaction
categories
without
involving
users
in
the
realization
of
the
idea
and
the
profit
(Tchibo
Ideas,
2012h).
7

9.
Figure
2:
Tchibo-­‐Ideas.de
Tchibo
does
not
offer
monetary
rewards
for
proposed
tasks
and
solutions,
but,
tasks
and
solutions
submitted
by
participants
can
be
selected
as
‘tasks
of
the
month’,
‘solution
of
the
month’
or
‘solution
of
the
year’,
winning
between
€1.200
and
€10.000
for
the
accolade
(Tchibo
Ideas,
2012i,
Tchibo
Ideas,
2012j).
Like
Starbucks,
Tchibo
classifies
their
crowdsourcing
platform
as
a
form
of
a
community
where
users
can
interact
not
only
with
Tchibo,
but
with
each
others’
problems
and
ideas
taking
customer
orientation
and
engagement
to
a
whole
new
level
(Tchibo
Ideas,
2012a).
So
far,
the
platform
has
10.305
registered
users,
1.191
proposed
tasks,
718
submitted
solutions,
8.576
comments,
177
winners
and
19
resulting
products
(Tchibo
Ideas,
2012k).
Tchibo-­‐Ideas.de
illustrates
the
different
possibilities
of
using
crowdsourcing
as
a
tool
to
identify
customer
needs,
generate
solutions
and
new
product
ideas,
and
engage
the
customer
on
an
entirely
new
level.
8

10. 4
Discussion
As
outlined
above,
the
Internet’s
impact
on
marketing
operations
has
changed
the
relationship
between
companies
and
customers
resulting
in
more
reciprocal
interaction
and
increased
collaboration.
This
discussion
addresses
the
question
–
can
companies
use
a
crowdsourcing
platform
as
a
vehicle
to
become
truly
customer
oriented?
Crowdsourcing
embraces
the
new
rules
of
Internet
marketing,
enabling
companies
to
interact
with
their
customers
and
engage
them
in
the
generation
and
evaluation
of
ideas
and
solutions
for
improved
customer
experiences
and
more
innovative
products.
This
concept
embraces
consumer
empowerment
and
deliberately
cedes
power
and
control
from
the
company
to
the
customer.
Crowdsourcing
is
based
on
Web
2.0
technologies
and
like
other
Social
Media
platforms,
amplifies
a
dialogue
between
companies
and
customers.
Both
case
examples
use
their
crowdsourcing
platforms
to
foster
an
ongoing
dialogue
between
customers
and
employees
initiated
by
the
idea
contributions
and
maintained
through
discussions/comments.
These
platforms
provide
a
high
degree
of
transparency
since
all
suggestions
and
discussions
are
disclosed
and
in
the
case
of
MyStarbucksIdea.com,
transparency
is
reinforced
by
posting
the
‘implementation
status’
of
each
idea
on
the
company’s
blog.
The
fact
that
the
ideas
and
solutions
generated
have
the
potential
to
be
realized
in
the
form
of
new
or
improved
products,
gives
these
crowdsourcing
platforms
a
high
degree
of
authenticity.
By
relating
the
case
examples
to
the
theoretical
discussion
of
crowdsourcing,
it
is
apparent
that
the
consulted
literature
does
not
cover
all
facets
of
crowdsourcing,
especially
with
reference
to
marketing.
For
example,
neither
case
uses
crowdsourcing
to
address
specific,
pre-­‐defined
tasks
with
a
time
limit
as
described
in
the
literature.
Rather,
the
open
call
for
idea
generation
takes
place
continuously
and
invites
customers
to
submit
ideas
and
suggestions
based
on
their
own
interests
and
needs.
The
main
purpose
of
both
platforms
is
to
leverage
collective
intelligence
in
order
to
address
business
challenges
and
to
improve
products
and
services.
MyStarbucksIdea.com
works
without
monetary
rewards
while
Tchibo-­‐
Ideas.de
offers
no
fixed
rewards
for
submitted
tasks
and
solutions
but
rewards
outstanding
ideas
on
a
monthly
or
annual
basis.
Furthermore,
there
is
the
possibility
to
enter
into
a
cooperation
with
Tchibo
which
could
result
in
profitable
earnings.
Both
companies
utilize
the
platform
to
crowdsource
ideas
and
generate
solutions
while
Starbucks
extends
this
to
evaluate
the
ideas
generated.
In
both
cases,
the
companies
have
the
ultimate
decision
on
whether
an
idea
will
be
incorporated
into
the
business
or
not.
The
analysis
of
MyStarbucksIdea.com
and
Tchibo-­‐Ideas.de
reveals
that
the
companies
have
taken
the
concept
of
crowdsourcing
one
step
further
by
including
not
only
idea
generation
and
evaluation
features,
but
also
aspects
of
brand-­‐communities
by
empowering
customers
with
a
shared
interest
to
create
profiles
and
interact.
Only
a
few
authors,
such
as
Ebner
et
al.
(2009)
and
Zheng
et
al.
(2011),
address
this
integration
of
crowdsourcing
and
community
building
in
academic
literature.
With
regards
to
the
identified
rules
of
Internet
marketing,
the
chosen
examples
of
crowdsourcing
incorporate
key
characteristics
such
as
interaction,
dialogue
and
transparency
to
an
even
larger
extent
than
the
literature
describes.
The
crowdsourcing
platforms
enable
Starbucks
and
Tchibo
to
capture
valuable
information
about
customer
needs
through
the
direct
evaluation
of
ideas
and
tasks
uploaded
by
the
consumers
and
through
engaging
in
and
monitoring
on-­‐going
conversations,
demonstrating
the
powerful
link
between
crowdsourcing
and
customer
orientation.
Customer
orientation
strategically
focuses
on
customers
and
their
current
and
future
needs
in
order
to
offer
superior
value
and
enhance
satisfaction.
Besides
gathering
information
about
customers
and
their
needs,
Starbucks
and
Tchibo
engage
in
a
discourse
with
9

11. customers
and
collaborate
with
them
to
implement
ideas
that
are
based
on
true
customer
demands.
As
a
response
to
the
generated
ideas
and
suggestions,
new
products
developed
are
more
likely
to
fulfil
real
customer
needs
and
create
superior
customer
value.
Another
requirement
of
customer
orientation
is
the
dissemination
of
customer
needs
throughout
the
organization.
The
Starbucks
example
demonstrates
this
cross-­‐functional
coordination
as
the
‘Idea
Partners’
who
interact
with,
monitor,
and
guide
ideas
and
discussions
represent
different
departments.
Tchibo’s
crowdsourcing
platform
goes
one
step
further
than
Starbucks’
as
it
invites
customers
not
only
to
submit
ideas
relating
to
the
company,
but
also
offers
them
a
platform
for
finding
solutions
to
their
own,
everyday
problems.
With
this
move,
the
company
places
its
customers
and
their
needs
as
a
main
focus
of
their
crowdsourcing
platform.
Through
crowdsourcing,
both
companies
give
their
customers
the
feeling
that
their
input
matters,
is
taken
seriously
and
that
they
are
part
of
the
organization.
Being
truly
customer
oriented
fosters
customer
satisfaction
and
customer
relationships
and
as
Yan
(2011,
p.
692)
addressed
in
the
concept
of
market
orientation
with
relation
to
Internet
and
Social
Media,
these
emerging
channels
enable
organizations
to
be
more
responsive
to
customers
and
their
demands
and
grasp
their
prevailing
mood.
(Yan,
2011,
p.
692)
The
outlined
case
examples
support
this
with
regards
to
crowdsourcing.
There
are
also
possible
downsides
to
crowdsourcing
with
regards
to
customer
orientation
as
it
is
difficult
to
know
if
the
participants
represent
the
actual
customer
base.
This
implies
that
gathered
information
and
generated
ideas
could
not
necessarily
mirror
the
needs
of
actual
customers.
Moreover,
there
is
no
guarantee
that
the
submitted
ideas
are
in
line
with
the
companies’
objectives,
so
companies
should
consider
carefully
if
crowdsourcing
activities
are
strategic
for
their
overall
business
strategy.
Companies
should
not
rely
solely
on
crowdsourcing
as
a
means
to
gather
information
about
customer
needs,
rather
it
should
complement
traditional
approaches
and
when
successfully
utilized,
can
foster
a
stronger
customer
orientation.
10

12. 5
Conclusion
This
paper
examines
crowdsourcing
from
a
marketing
perspective
and
looks
at
its
potential
for
customer
orientation.
After
outlining
the
three
concepts
–
Internet
marketing,
customer
orientation
and
crowdsourcing
–
and
describing
and
analysing
the
online
platforms,
MyStarbucksIdea.com
and
Tchibo-­‐
Ideas.de,
several
things
become
apparent.
First,
the
concept
of
crowdsourcing
embraces
new
rules
of
Internet
Marketing
such
as
interaction,
consumer
empowerment
and
transparency.
Second,
the
current
literature
does
not
cover
all
facets
of
crowdsourcing
that
were
identified
in
the
case
examples
underlining
that
theory
is
still
lagging
behind
practice.
Third,
based
on
the
findings
of
this
paper,
the
research
question
can
be
validated
–
by
embracing
new
rules
of
Internet
marketing,
crowdsourcing
can
be
a
vehicle
for
companies
to
become
truly
customer
oriented.
With
the
help
of
crowdsourcing,
both
companies
gathered
meaningful
information
about
customer
needs
which
can
lead
to
creating
superior
customer
value
and
satisfaction.
There
is
a
lack
of
academic
literature
addressing
collective
approaches,
such
as
crowdsourcing,
especially
from
a
marketing
perspective.
Therefore,
this
paper
contributes
to
current
literature
by
taking
a
step
to
fill
this
gap,
relating
the
new
rules
of
Internet
marketing
to
the
concept
of
crowdsourcing
and
investigating
whether
crowdsourcing
facilitates
customer
orientation.
However,
limitations
did
exist
since
this
paper
only
analyses
two
case
examples
which
use
crowdsourcing
as
a
tool
to
understand
customer
needs,
create
superior
customer
value
and
enhance
customer
satisfaction.
Future
research
needs
to
be
conducted
in
order
to
validate
the
research
question
beyond
the
scope
of
this
paper.
Moreover,
the
correlation
between
the
concepts
of
crowdsourcing
and
community
building
should
be
further
investigated
since
a
connection
was
identified
in
both
case
examples
and
is
not
addressed
in-­‐
depth
by
the
literature
thus
far.
It
is
clear
that
crowdsourcing
–
when
integrated
properly
–
is
a
new
and
positive
way
to
approach
business
and
marketing
challenges,
interact
with
customers,
gain
deeper
insights
and
create
stronger
bonds
by
reaching
out
to
customers
actively
and
empowering
them
to
participate
in
the
business.
11

13. 6
Bibliography
Albors,
J.,
Ramos,
J.
C.,
Hervas,
J.
L.
(2007).
New
learning
network
paradigms:
Communities
of
objectives,
crowdsourcing,
wikis
and
open
source.
International
Journal
of
Information
Management,
28,
194–202.
Aziz,
N.
A.,
Yasin,
N.
M.
(2004).
The
Influence
of
Market
Orientation
on
Marketing
Competency
and
the
Effect
of
Internet-­‐Marketing
Integration.
Asia
Pacific
Journal
of
Marketing
and
Logistics,
16(2),
3-­‐19.
Bonabeau,
E.
(2009).
Decisions
2.0:
The
Power
of
Collective
Intelligence.
MITSloan
Management
Review,
50(2),
45-­‐52.
Busarovs,
A.
(2011).
Crowdsourcing
as
user-­‐driven
innovation,
new
business
philosophy’s
model.
Journal
of
Business
Management,
4,
53-­‐60.
Chaffey,
D.,
Smith,
P.
(2008).
eMarketing
excellence
–
planning
and
optimizing
your
digital
marketing
(3rd
ed.).
Oxford:
Butterworth-­‐Heinemann.
Doan,
A.,
Ramakrishan,
R.
Halevy,
A.
Y.
(2011).
Crowdsourcing
Systems
on
the
World-­‐Wide
Web.
Communication
of
the
ACM,
54(4),
86-­‐96.
Ebner,
W.,
Leimeister
J.
M.,
Krcmar,
H.
(2009).
Community
engineering
for
innovations:
the
ideas
competition
as
a
method
to
nurture
a
virtual
community
for
innovations.
R&D
Management,
39(4),
342-­‐
356.
Evans,
D.,
McKee,
J.
(2010).
Social
Media
Marketing
–
The
Next
Generation
of
Business
Engagement.
Indianapolis:
Wiley
Publishing
Inc.
Fournier,
S.
Avery,
J.
(2011).
The
uninvited
brand.
Business
Horizons,
54,
193-­‐207.
Howe,
J.
(2006a).
The
Rise
of
Crowdsourcing.
Wired
Magazine,
14(6),
Retrieved
February
8,
2012,
from
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/14.06/crowds_pr.html
Howe,
J.
(2006b).
Crowdsourcing
–
Why
the
power
of
the
crowd
is
driving
the
future
business.
Retrieved
February
8,
2012,
from
http://www.crowdsourcing.com/cs/2006/06/index.html
Jarvis,
J.
(2008).
'Hey,
Starbucks,
How
About
Coffee
Cubes?'
Retrieved
February
20,
2012
from
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/08_17/b4081000030457.htm
Jaworski,
B.
T.,
Kohli,
A.
K.
(1993).
Market
Orientation:
Antecedents
and
Consequences.
The
Journal
of
Marketing,
57(3),
53-­‐70.
Kaplan,
A.
M.,
Haenlein,
M.
(2010).
Users
of
the
world,
unite!
The
challenges
and
opportunities
of
Social
Media.
Business
Horizons,
53,
59-­‐68.
Kohli,
A.
K.,
Jaworski,
B.
T.
(1990).
Market
Orientation:
The
Construct,
Research
Propositions,
and
Managerial
Implications.
The
Journal
of
Marketing,
54(2),
1-­‐18.
Luo,
X.,
Seyedian,
M.
(2004).
Contextual
Marketing
and
Customer-­‐Orientation
Strategy
for
E-­‐Commerce:
An
Empirical
Analysis.
International
Journal
of
Electronic
Commerce,
8(2),
95–118.
Lutz,
R.
J.
(2011).
Marketing
Scholarship
2.0.
Journal
of
Marketing,
75,
225-­‐234.
Miziolek,
J.
(2011).
Crowd
Sourcing:
Creativity
2.0.
Brand
Packaging,
15(1),
16-­‐17.
Muñiz,
A.
M.,
Schau,
H.
J.
(2011).
How
to
inspire
value-­‐laden
collaborative
consumer-­‐generated
content.
Business
Horizons,
54,
209-­‐217.
Narver,
J.
C.,
Slater,
S.
F.
(1990).
The
Effect
of
a
Market
Orientation
on
Business
Profitability.
Journal
of
Marketing,
October,
20-­‐35.
Nwankwo,
S.
(1995).
Developing
a
customer
orientation.
Journal
of
Consumer
Marketing,
12(5),
5-­‐15.
Pires,
G.
D.,
Stanton,
J.,
Rita,
P.
(2006).
The
internet,
consumer
empowerment
and
marketing
strategies.
European
Journal
of
Marketing,
40(9/10),
936-­‐949.
12

14. Poetz,
M.
K.,
Schreier,
M.
(2012).
The
Value
of
Crowdsourcing:
Can
Users
Really
Compete
with
Professionals
in
Generating
New
Product
Ideas?
Journal
of
Product
Innovation
Management,
29(2),
245-­‐
256.
Rowley,
J.
(2004).
Just
another
channel?
Marketing
communications
in
e-­‐
business.
Marketing
Intelligence
&
Planning,
22(1),
24-­‐41.
Schögel,
M.,
Mrkwicka,
K.
(2011).
Communication
Shift
–
Chancen
und
Herausforderungen
aus
Marketingsicht.
Marketing
Review
St.
Gallen,
5,
6-­‐10.
Slater,
S.
F.,
Narver,
J.
C.
(1994).
Market
Orientation,
Customer
Value,
and
Superior
Performance.
Business
Horizons,
March-­‐April,
22-­‐28.
Slater,
S.
F.,
Narver,
J.
C.
(1998).
Customer-­‐Led
and
Market-­‐Oriented:
Let's
Not
Confuse
the
Two.
Strategic
Management
Journal,
19(10),
1001-­‐1006.
Starbucks
Corporation.
(2010a).
FAQ’s.
Retrieved
February
22,
2012,
from
http://mystarbucksidea.force.com/ideafaq
Starbucks
Corporation.
(2010b).
My
Starbucks
Idea.
Retrieved
February
22,
2012,
from
http://mystarbucksidea.force.com/
Starbucks
Corporation.
(2010c).
Ideas
in
Action.
Retrieved
February
22,
2012
from
http://blogs.starbucks.com/blogs/Customer/default.aspx
Tchibo.
(2012a).
A
successful
distribution
system.
Retrieved
February
23,
2012
from
http://www.tchibo.com/content/309646/-­‐/en/tchibo-­‐corporate/about-­‐tchibo/distribution-­‐system.html
Internet
Tchibo.
(2012b).
Product
development.
Retrieved
February
23,
2012
from
http://www.tchibo.com/content/654542/-­‐/en/tchibo-­‐corporate/our-­‐product-­‐range/products/weekly-­‐
theme-­‐world.html
Tchibo
Ideas.
(2012a).
Über
uns.
Retrieved
February
23,
2012
from
https://www.tchibo-­‐
ideas.de/index.php/ueberuns
Tchibo
Ideas.
(2012b).
Registrierung.
Retrieved
February
23,
2012
from
https://www.tchibo-­‐
ideas.de/forum/register.php
Tchibo
Ideas.
(2012c).
Aufgaben:
Die
Regeln.
Retrieved
February
23,
2012
from
https://www.tchibo-­‐
ideas.de/index.php/aufgaben/kriterien
Tchibo
Ideas.
(2012d).
Lösungen:
Die
Regeln.
Retrieved
February
23,
2012
from
https://www.tchibo-­‐
ideas.de/index.php/loesungen/kriterien
Tchibo
Ideas.
(2012e).
Alle
Lösungen.
Retrieved
February
23,
2012
from
https://www.tchibo-­‐
ideas.de/index.php/loesungen/liste
Tchibo
Ideas.
(2012f).
Alle
Aufgaben.
Retrieved
February
23,
2012
from
https://www.tchibo-­‐
ideas.de/index.php/aufgaben/liste
Tchibo
Ideas.
(2012g).
Deine
Designlösung.
Dein
Erfolg.
Retrieved
February
23,
2012
https://www.tchibo-­‐ideas.de/index.php/kooperation/design
Tchibo
Ideas.
(2012h).
Allgemeine
Fragen.
Retrieved
February
23,
2012
https://www.tchibo-­‐
ideas.de/index.php/faq/detail/allgemeinefragen
Tchibo
Ideas.
(2012i).
Lösungen
des
Monats.
Retrieved
February
23,
2012
https://www.tchibo-­‐
ideas.de/index.php/loesungen/gewinner/loesungendesmonats
Tchibo
Ideas.
(2012j).
Aufgaben
des
Monats.
Retrieved
February
23,
2012
https://www.tchibo-­‐
ideas.de/index.php/aufgaben/gewinner/aufgabendesmonats
Tchibo
Ideas.
(2012k).
Raum
für
deine
Ideen.
Retrieved
February
23,
2012
https://www.tchibo-­‐
ideas.de/index.php/
13

15. Weinberg,
B.
D.,
Pehlivan,
E.
(2011).
Social
spending:
Managing
the
social
media
mix.
Business
Horizons,
54,
275-­‐282.
Wind,
Y.
J.
(2008).
A
Plan
to
Invent
the
Marketing
We
Need
Today.
MITSloan
Management
Review,
49(4),
20-­‐28.
Winer,
R.
S.
(2009).
New
Communications
Approaches
in
Marketing:
Issues
and
Research
Directions.
Journal
of
Interactive
Marketing,
23,
108–117.
Yan,
J.
(2011).
Social
media
in
branding:
Fulfilling
a
need.
Journal
of
Brand
Management,
18(9),
688–696.
Zheng,
H.
Li,
D.,
Hou,
W.
(2011).
Task
Design,
Motivation,
and
Participation
In
Crowdsourcing
Contests.
International
Journal
of
Electronic
Commerce,
15(4),
57–88.
14