Lurkers versus Contributors: An Empirical Investigation of Knowledge Contribution Behavior in Open Innovation Communities

Abstract

This study aims to examine and compare the mechanisms through which social learning processes influence the knowledge contribution behavior of lurkers and contributors in open innovation communities (OICs). Based on social learning theory and stimulus–organism–response (SOR) framework, this study developed a model of knowledge contribution formation mechanism from environmental stimuli (observational learning, reinforcement learning), organism cognition (self-efficacy, outcome expectancy) to behavioral response (initial contribution, continuous contribution). The model was tested using structural equation modeling based on a dataset collected through a questionnaire from an OIC of business intelligence and analytics software. The empirical results showed that, at the initial participation stage, observational learning had a significant effect on the organism’s cognition of the lurkers, and indirectly influenced the initial knowledge contribution behavior through self-efficacy and outcome expectancy. At the continuous participation stage, observational learning had a significantly lower impact on the organism’s cognition of contributors and only indirectly influenced continuous knowledge contribution behavior through outcome expectancy. In contrast, reinforcement learning influenced the organism’s cognition of contributors and partially influenced their continuous knowledge contribution behavior through the mediating effects of self-efficacy and outcome expectancy. However, self-efficacy had a more pronounced effect on contributors’ continuous knowledge contribution behavior than outcome expectancy. These findings provide practical guidance for the management of OICs to reduce knowledge contributor attrition and induce lurkers to evolve into knowledge contributors for sustainable community development.

Navigating Value Co-Destruction in Open Innovation Communities: An Empirical Study of Expectancy Disconfirmation and Psychological Contracts in Business Analytics Communities

“…Therefore, it is convenient to find a sufficient sample of contributors to study and compare the interaction dynamics between the motivating factors of value co-destruction in the OIC. In addition, the large user base provided a valuable source of data for previous academic studies [ 4 , 5 , 58 ]. Therefore, as successful professional OICs, these innovation communities can serve as a typical case study for academic research and provide useful suggestions for the development of other OICs [ 4 ].…”

“…In addition, the large user base provided a valuable source of data for previous academic studies [ 4 , 5 , 58 ]. Therefore, as successful professional OICs, these innovation communities can serve as a typical case study for academic research and provide useful suggestions for the development of other OICs [ 4 ].…”

“…The basis for decentralized cooperation among members is formed through the openness of knowledge and the exclusion of proprietary exploitation patterns, characterizing the form of coordination of innovation communities. Moreover, these communities are directly focused on the products and services of the individual companies, and members contribute by suggesting innovative ideas or simply by sharing their preferences and needs [ 3 , 4 , 5 ].…”

“…However, there may be a perceptual gap below the expected reference point due to disparities between their expectations and the enterprise’s practice elements, which leads to the perception that the enterprise has failed to fulfill its obligations. This breach of the psychological contract can lead to the cessation of knowledge and creative contributions, resulting in value co-destruction [ 4 , 12 , 13 , 14 ].…”

Why lurk, why join, and why post? The uses and gratifications of lurkers, infrequent posters, and frequent posters in the brand community context.

“…Overall, lurkers' and posters' behavior within the community seems different-but these groups are similar in many other ways. For example, Daradkeh (2022) found that lurkers and posters were likelier to post when they expected positive outcomes due to their participation and felt they had the necessary knowledge to contribute effectively. Perhaps posters are more likely to think they possess the skills needed to gain positive reinforcement for their behavior.…”