Testing the Limits of Co-creation


The creative ability of a collection of distant and disaggregated individuals is clearly evident across a number of open-source offerings, including Linux, Mozilla Firefox, and Wikipedia, among others. In recent years, the power of co-creation has been harnessed by a number of corporations, including Ducati, General Mills, and Procter & Gamble and is being widely advocated by a number of recent business tomes, including Democratizing Innovation, Outside Innovation, and The New Age of Innovation. Clearly, customer co-creation is a hot topic and one that will likely attract increasing interest in the near future. Given its recency and the exhuberence expressed by its proponents, it is difficult to decipher the limits of this new innovation technique. Are there any realms where co-creation can't work or shouldn't be applied?

An initial look into the limits of co-creation is provided by Penguin Publishing's recently failed wiki-experiment, A Million Penguins. Essentially, Penguin experimented with the idea of co-creating a novel by applying the logic, principles, and techniques of open-source software. Penguin launched this initiative on its corporate website in early February 2007 and shut it down (due to the overwhelming volume of contributions) approximately one month later. During this brief period, nearly 1,500 authors contributed approximately 11,000 edits. Thus, from a contribution standpoint, this experiment might be considered a success. However, The finished product is a collection of 1,030 pages of chaotic and inchoate prose laden with disjointed paragraphs and a direction-less plot. Those interested in exploring what when wrong (as well as right) should check out both the brief post-mortem provided in Penguin's blog as well as a recent academic investigation of this experiment by Bruce Mason and Sue Thomas of the Institute for Creative Technologies at De Montfort University (UK). Both reports identify a number of problems with this experiment, including creative divergence among its contributors, the technological limits of the wiki-platform, and vandalism, among others. If nothing else, Penguin's experiment presents the co-creation movement with a bit of irony: Although we can write books about co-creation, co-creating a book seems beyond our limits.

1 comments:

  1. Adam B. Needles said...

    So I've really found myself questioning what 'co-creation' really means over the last few weeks. How do we know co-creation when we see it?

    This is a term that is bandied about to rediculous levels, and it seems that there are many marketers embracing co-creation in a cursory way just so that they can say, "Look, we're using co-creation. Aren't we innovative?"

    For what? To help develop a Super Bowl commercial? To decide the next label for a soda bottle? To evolve the next generation of a CRM software platform?

    Does any of this count? Where do we draw lines? What is co-creation, and what isn't?

    I propose two guidelines to use in thinking about co-creation. For something to be real co-creation, I think it must be:

    -- Substantive: Something that merely impacts a promotional campaign in a cursory way probably is not co-creation, but something that helps to take a product or service to its next level probably is co-creation. At it's core, I believe that valuable co-creation has to create new customer value, which means that it must be substantive.

    -- Collaborative: As a marketer of 10+ years, I really believe that the true value of co-creation lies in strengthening the relationship between customer and vendor. So-called co-creation that is really just customers submitting ideas doesn't really raise to this level, but interactions that create new and improved products and services that could not have occurred without both parties engaging are truly co-creation in my mind.

    Just a way to think of the world, but I think it is worthwhile asking the question about whether the next thing we label as co-creation really raises to the level and meets these two tests.

    Is it substantive and collaborative? If so, it probably IS co-creation.  


 

Est. 2008 | Aric Rindfleisch | Wisconsin School of Business | Banner Image by Bruce Fritz