1. Co-creation from a consumer perspective Consumer motivations to partake in and success factors of a co-creation initiative 13-04-2011 Bart Zwartjes

2. What is co-creation? “The practice of product or service creation that is collaboratively executed, by both the firm and customer, together at multiple points of interaction within experience environments to create mutual value” (Prahalad and Ramaswamy, 2004)

3. Co-creation in theory and practice

4. Main & sub research question(s) Which factors influence how consumers value the co-creation initiative after participation? What are motivations for novice as well as expert participants to partake in a co-creation initiative? Which factors do novice and expert co-creating consumers perceive as determinant for the success/failure of a co-creation initiative? Which factors influence the success of a co-creation initiative according to firms? To what extent do novice and expert co-creating consumers present similar motivations to participate in a co-creation initiative and factors that determine the success of a co-creation initiative? And what will be the impact for an ideal co-creation initiative? Motivation Co-creation Success factor

5. Motivationliterature – Hierarchy of Needs Maslowdescribedfiveneedlevels for anindividual. The top 3 can also be related to co-creation: Belongingness: the need to belong to an online community Self-esteem: Low level (recognition, prestige, status) vs. High level (need for competence, self-confidence, mastery) Self-actualization: to becomeeverythinganindividual is competent of becoming Hierarchy of Needs (Maslow, 1987)

7. Need for competence: Being effective in the environment an individual finds himself in.

8. Need for relatedness: The need to be connected, interact and care for others.

9. Externalregulation: Can control an individual’s behavior by stimulating the desire to obtain a reward or avoid punishment .

10. Introjection: a behavior where an individual feels pressure or tension within the self when the said behavior is not carried out.

11. Identification: An individual consciously appreciates a regulation or goals and acts by accepting this goal or regulation to be of personal importance.

13. Need for competence: Feedback fromother participants and firm can have positiveinfluence

15. Introjection: feeling pressure from environment to participate (e.g. for an excellent CV)

16. Identification: For gaining human capital or for self-marketing.

19. Design can be: anidea, conceptorfinished product.

20. Uploaded designs are visiblefor everyone and feedback can be given by community members as well as firms.

21. Winning concepts are rewardedwithpoints, which can be exchanged in money orproducts.

22. Battle of Concepts offers challengesthatvaryfromdilemmas in the socialsphere to practical and technicalproblems.

23. Uploadeddesigns can only be viewed by the initiator of the challenge

25. The participants, interviewed for this research, all had background in designing(e.g. education, career)

26. To participate in a challenge anindividual has to be a studentoryoung professional with a maximum age of 30.

29. The firms differ in size and corporatestrategy.

31. Results – Motivations to partake in co-creation (2) Possibility to watch concepts of other community members, to do what? Partly to test own capabilities against that of others Expert participants of RedesignMe partly see this as an opportunity to anticipate on the concepts of others during the challenge R8 (83-85): “Yes, that is actually quite annoying. You would like to read the products of others, to see how they dealt with it, so you can learn from them. So it would be nice to… read the reports of others after the deadline has passed.” (Expert participant 8, Battle of Concepts) R6 (140-141): “So the minimum criterion is now that I first would like to see what others do, so I can react upon that.” (Expert participant 6, RedesignMe)

32. Results – Factors for success - Consumers Interactionwith initiator during the challenge Initiators should be carefulwiththeir feedback during the challenge, do not express favouriteconcepts Receivingattention – Feedback Feedback notoftenmentioned as a motivation to participate Interviews with participants indicatethat participants want to receiveattention R4 (324-328): “A good example of this challenge, in which I participated, was the feedback. There was little feedback provided and the feedback which was provided, from the start, was primarily focused on two participants. Everyone else got the feeling that is was useless to hand in an idea, because the company indirectly had already chosen the winner.” (Expert participant 4, RedesignMe) R3 (436-438): “Yes, I appreciate the feedback. It feels like I cooperated with the company, for the company. That I really add something, and not that I’m just dumping stuff on the Internet. For me it definitely has added value.” (Expert participant 3, RedesignMe)

34. Conclusion

35. Implications of the results “…we want out of the box ideas…” “You would like to read the products of others, ....so you can learn from them” “I appreciate the feedback. It feels like I cooperated with the company” “…there always has to be a reward, which can take different forms.” Formulate a challenge and determine the degree of concreteness and openness for this challenge. Develop a tool which allows participants to view work of others and interact with each other. Interact with the participants and share concerns and benefits of concepts with the group. However, beware not to focus on preferred concepts. Reward the winners by involving them in next steps of the initiative. Explain choice for winning concept (dependent on co-creation set-up)