Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Jörg Haller is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Jörg Haller.


Business & Information Systems Engineering | 2011

Innovation Contests: An IT-Based Tool for Innovation Management

Jörg Haller; Angelika C. Bullinger; Kathrin M. Möslein

2,232, 4,298, 26,617, 8,582 . . . these are key figures of a recent IT-based innovation contest conducted by Bombardier (http://yourail-design.bombardier.com). This initiative aimed at identifying “new and innovative interior designs for trains”. The numbers mentioned at the beginning of this article hence spell out in the following manner: During a ten weeks period, 2,232 persons participated in the innovation contest by submitting 4,298 designs, immense 26,617 ratings, and 8,582 comments on competing submissions. Thus, by an IT-based innovation management tool, even a B2B company like Bombardier can get in touch with end users and other outside experts (e.g., designers). Bombardier took advantage of the worldwide innovative potential (by calling for submissions), to gather firsthand customer insights (by evaluation of submissions, ratings, and comments), and, even more, it spread the word about the company as participants voluntarily acted as word of mouth marketers. While an organizational innovation to Bombardier, the principle of innovation contests is tried and tested. Early examples date back more than 450 years, when the king of Spain initiated the Spanish Longitude Prize to discover a method to find longitude at sea (Masters and Delbecq 2008). In the course of time, innovation contests have first been applied by public institutions which used their reputation and financial power to stimulate participation. Since the beginning of the 19th century, also industry has organized innovation contests. One early example of this time is the Billiard Ball Prize, which granted


Praxis Der Wirtschaftsinformatik | 2010

Open Evaluation: ein IT-basierter Ansatz für die Bewertung innovativer Konzepte

Kathrin M. Möslein; Jörg Haller; Angelika C. Bullinger

10,000 for a suitable substitute for ivory to make billiard balls (Masters and Delbecq 2008). Nowadays, with the global availability of broadband access to the World Wide Web, IT-based innovation contests are used for a broad range of tasks – from designing wristbands for watches (e.g., Swarovski) to solving complex scientific problems (e.g., XPrize foundation). Innovation contests allow tapping into the wisdom of the crowd (Surowiecki 2004) and integrating interested customers, end users, partners, and other outside innovators (Neyer et al. 2009) into the innovative activities of an organization. This open innovation approach follows the assumption of Bill Joy, co-founder of Sun Microsystems, that “No matter who you are, most of the smartest people work for someone else.” Integration of interested innovators allows access to both, participants’ tacit knowledge concerning needs (need information) – and their expertise with problem solving (solution information). Advances in innovation technology impact the opportunities to globally tap into this knowledge, making innovation contests a powerful tool for a variety of goals.


R & D Management | 2017

Open evaluation of new product concepts at the front end of innovation: objectives and contingency factors

Vivek K. Velamuri; Dirk Schneckenberg; Jörg Haller; Kathrin M. Moeslein

ZusammenfassungenKunden und externe Partner stellen eine wichtige Informationsquelle für neue Produkt- und Dienstleistungskonzepte dar. Ihre aktive Einbindung in den Innovationsprozess wird als »Open Innovation« bezeichnet. Zahlreiche IT-basierte Werkzeuge unterstützen heute Open Innovation als Komponente des betrieblichen Innovationsmanagements. Unter den möglichen Methoden zur Einbindung Externer kommt IT-basierten, online durchgeführten Innovationswettbewerben eine besonders prominente Rolle zu. Die Bewertung der im Rahmen von Innovationswettbewerben generierten Innovationsvorschläge wird heute meist unternehmensinternen Experten überlassen. Sie folgt damit dem klassischen Paradigma der geschlossenen Bewertung. Experten besitzen jedoch nur eine begrenzte Vorhersagegüte und stehen extern generierten Innovationen oft ablehnend gegenüber. Auch die Quantität der zu bewertenden Innovationen stellt eine Herausforderung dar. Es liegt daher nahe zu prüfen, inwieweit eine offene Innovationsbewertung durch die Teilnehmer eines Innovationswettbewerbs oder andere Interessengruppen — anstelle von internen Experten — erfolgen könnte. In Anlehnung an das Paradigma der Open Innovation sprechen wir im Falle der Einbindung Externer in den Bewertungsprozess von Open Evaluation. Der vorliegende Beitrag erörtert Grundlagen, Ausprägungsformen und Erfolgschancen offener Innovationsbewertung mittels Open Evaluation und zeigt das Potenzial und die Grenzen dieses IT-basierten Ansatzes für die Bewertung innovativer Konzepte anhand von fünf Fallstudien auf.


Journal of Strategy and Management | 2017

Exploring the design elements of open evaluation

Jörg Haller; Vivek K. Velamuri; Dirk Schneckenberg; Kathrin M. Möslein

The proliferation of innovation contests has fostered community-based idea evaluation as an alternative to expert juries to filter and select new product concepts at the fuzzy front end of corporate R&D innovation. We refer to this phenomenon as open evaluation, as all registered participants can engage in jury activities like voting, rating, and commenting. While previous research on innovation contests and user engagement includes participant-based evaluation, the investigative focus so far has not been on this phenomenon. Access to jury activities in open evaluation practice contradicts innovation theory, which recommends careful selection procedures to establish expert juries for assessing new product concepts. Additionally, little is known about contingency factors that influence the performance and acceptance of open evaluations results. To address these two questions on the objectives and contingency factors for open evaluation of new product concepts, this study applies exploratory multiple-case research of open evaluation in nine innovation contests. Data collection encompassed expert interviews and complementary sources of evidence. Results indicate that firms pursue six distinct objectives to support participant-based generation and selection of new concepts. In addition, eight contingency factors influence the performance of open evaluation and the acceptance of its results. Finally, results showed open evaluation output to efficiently complement jury decisions in filtering and selecting ideas for new product development.


Archive | 2013

The Evaluation Challenge

Jörg Haller

Purpose Firms increasingly integrate a wide range of actors in the early ideation and concept creation phases of innovation processes leading to the collection of a large number of ideas. This creates the challenge of filtering the most promising ideas from a large number of submissions. The use of external stakeholders into the evaluation and selection of submissions (i.e. open evaluation (OE)) might be a viable alternative. The purpose of this paper is to provide a state-of-the-art analysis on how such OE systems are designed and structured. Design/methodology/approach Since OE is a new phenomenon, an exploratory qualitative research approach is adopted. In all, 122 instances of OE in 90 innovation contest cases are examined for their design elements. Findings This research reveals that OE systems are configured in many different ways. In total, 32 design elements and their respective parameters are identified and described along the six socio-technical system components of an OE system. This study allows for a comprehensive understanding of what OE is and what factors need to be taken into consideration when designing an OE system. Practical implications Scholars and professionals may draw insights on what design choices to make when implementing OE. Originality/value The comprehensive analysis performed in this study contributes to research on open and user innovation by examining the concept of OE. In particular, it extends knowledge on design elements of OE systems.


Archive | 2013

Structure of Thesis

Jörg Haller

Innovation, i.e., “the successful implementation of creative ideas,” is at the core of every business. Not surprisingly, huge efforts have been undertaken – by both research and industry – to understand how to best manage innovation related activities. These include the identification of opportunities, the generation of ideas or concepts, and their development into products or services.


Archive | 2013

Summary of Studies and Contribution

Jörg Haller

This dissertation is divided into five parts aimed at better understanding open evaluation. Each part of the thesis represents one step in the research process. Each part is further divided into chapters, which in turn contain sections. Part I introduces open evaluation and its relevance. Parts II, III and IV address respectively the three research questions previously outlined.


Archive | 2013

The Value of Open Evaluation

Jörg Haller

This dissertation dealt with open evaluation as an innovative way to help companies in the effective and efficient selection of new product ideas. The overall objective was to gain a deeper understanding of open evaluation. This chapter (chapter 1) provides a summary along with contributions of parts I to V. Chapter 2 presents managerial implications for the design of open evaluation.


Archive | 2013

The Dominant Design of Open Evaluation

Jörg Haller

This chapter presents the findings of part IV in four sections. In the first section, results are presented regarding the ability of simple votes and comments to predict the quality of submissions as perceived by the overall community.


Archive | 2013

The Design Elements of Open Evaluation

Jörg Haller

This chapter deals with the design of open evaluation in three sections. The first section presents the dominant design of open evaluation. The second section discusses whether the identified dominant design is also the best way to go about open evaluation. Finally, the third section summarizes the results of this part and outlines the relevance of the subsequent studies in this work.

Collaboration


Dive into the Jörg Haller's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Kathrin M. Möslein

University of Erlangen-Nuremberg

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Angelika C. Bullinger

Chemnitz University of Technology

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Vivek K. Velamuri

HHL Leipzig Graduate School of Management

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Dirk Schneckenberg

ESC Rennes School of Business

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Katja Hutter

University of Innsbruck

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Kathrin M. Moeslein

University of Erlangen-Nuremberg

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Sabrina Adamczyk

University of Erlangen-Nuremberg

View shared research outputs
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge