CrowdResearch is currently tackling two different problems that will change the world:
- Create new crowd market place
- Conduct research with the crowd.
We believe that to succeed it might be easier to tackle each problem separately.
Crowd Market Place
The crowd market place has the potential of changing people's lives throughout the world. We believe that to finish building the platform and be used across the globe it might be more efficient to adopt a more traditional production model:
The crowd Market Place should be a social business. The platform needs paid staff that will have the platform ready for commercial use. We could continue with our system of volunteers while we gather profit to have hired staff. But after the platform starts to have earnings we use that to pay a staff. We could think that the staff of the platform could involve
Software Engineers, User Experience Engineers, Product Manager, Senior UX Designer, Community Engagement, Public Policy Manager, Recruiters etc.
Following a more traditional mode of production could facilitate having the platform ready for worldwide use. We could think of using crowd funding approaches, apply for grants to further fund the platform.
Crowd research has the potential of also changing people's lives, really brining change into the world by transforming who gets to be a creator. That is amazing! We believe crowd research should continue to work on designing the crowd market place of tomorrow. Exploring different aspects of it. However crowd research should focus on producing research not on creating a business.
Crowd research has its own challenges which merit exploring different workflows styles. Some of the challenges we see are:
Fostering Collaborative Environment instead of Competitive Environment
We have witnessed that the environment in Crowd Research has become much more competitive. It felt that the badge system for ordering authors on the poster paper created a somewhat competitive environment where some aspiring researchers stopped sharing and communicating with others to maintain power. We are unsure how to limit the competitiveness that has emerged. Perhaps creating a culture for research could be helpful. The culture could limit doing overtly "evil" competitive behavior that affects the collaboration. The culture could also encourage people to be transparent. Transparency could remove smokey room effect
Fast Execution of Quality Research
Here we need to tackle: how do we make rapid decisions and progress while still engaging with new and exciting ideas and letting new people contribute?
We have thought that having a leadership board could help to execute quality research more rapidly. However, here we believe it is important to make the process of joining the leadership board (i.e., how do you get selected to join the board), and the actions of the board more transparent. This would remove shady smokey room effects,The leadership board if not transparent can feel like an elite that selects who becomes a researcher, discrimination problems could occur. We believe that the leadership board should not have a limit on the number of people who can join. This might limit competition.
- Add name here