Extension usage examples:
Here's how our browser extension sees the article:
Article summary:
1. Innovation contests are becoming increasingly popular among organizations and researchers as a means to realize innovative product or service solutions.
2. This article reviews the growing body of literature on innovation contests, classifying it into five research categories: economic perspective, management perspective, education focus, innovation focus and sustainability focus.
3. The article also presents some design elements of innovation contests that are central for understanding, designing and managing them, as well as identifies current research gaps and suggests future research directions.
Article analysis:
The article is generally reliable in its presentation of the literature on innovation contests. It provides an overview of the existing literature on the topic and offers a comprehensive classification system for categorizing different types of research related to innovation contests. The authors have done a thorough job in summarizing the existing literature and providing insights into potential design elements for innovation contests.
However, there are some areas where the article could be improved upon. For example, while it does provide an overview of existing literature on innovation contests, it does not explore any counterarguments or present both sides equally when discussing certain topics. Additionally, there is no discussion about possible risks associated with running an innovation contest or how to mitigate those risks. Furthermore, there is no mention of any promotional content or partiality in the article which could be seen as a potential bias in its reporting.
In conclusion, while this article provides a comprehensive overview of existing literature on innovation contests and offers useful insights into potential design elements for such initiatives, it could benefit from further exploration into counterarguments and possible risks associated with running an innovation contest as well as more discussion about potential biases in its reporting.