Revolution or inflated expectations? Exploring the impact of generative AI on ideation in a practical sustainability context

IF 11.1 1区 管理学 Q1 ENGINEERING, INDUSTRIAL Technovation Pub Date : 2024-10-17 DOI:10.1016/j.technovation.2024.103123
Anja Eisenreich , Julian Just , Daniela Gimenez-Jimenez , Johann Füller
{"title":"Revolution or inflated expectations? Exploring the impact of generative AI on ideation in a practical sustainability context","authors":"Anja Eisenreich ,&nbsp;Julian Just ,&nbsp;Daniela Gimenez-Jimenez ,&nbsp;Johann Füller","doi":"10.1016/j.technovation.2024.103123","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The integration of generative AI (GenAI) into corporate innovation processes represents a significant shift in ideation methodologies. This study examines the comparative effectiveness of AI-generated ideation and traditional expert workshops. In collaboration with BSH Home Appliances Group (BSH), ideas were generated and evaluated using both expert-based and AI-based methods in the context of sustainable packaging. The main quantitative analysis focuses on the quality dimensions of novelty, value, and feasibility. The results indicate that GenAI models such as ChatGPT not only match, but also occasionally outperform, those generated by expert sessions in terms of generating highly novel ideas. However, this increased novelty comes with a trade-off in perceived feasibility, highlighting a critical balance that must be managed in innovation efforts. A complementary qualitative analysis provides insights into potential barriers to integrating AI into ideation at the personal and organizational levels. Depending on the innovation setting, AI-based idea stimulation may limit the creativity and motivation of experts. Therefore, the form of AI integration should be adapted to the company's innovation context and should contribute to organizational learning. On the basis of these findings, guidelines are provided on how to effectively apply, and benefit from the use of, AI as a non-human intermediary to enhance the ideation process.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49444,"journal":{"name":"Technovation","volume":"138 ","pages":"Article 103123"},"PeriodicalIF":11.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Technovation","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166497224001731","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, INDUSTRIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The integration of generative AI (GenAI) into corporate innovation processes represents a significant shift in ideation methodologies. This study examines the comparative effectiveness of AI-generated ideation and traditional expert workshops. In collaboration with BSH Home Appliances Group (BSH), ideas were generated and evaluated using both expert-based and AI-based methods in the context of sustainable packaging. The main quantitative analysis focuses on the quality dimensions of novelty, value, and feasibility. The results indicate that GenAI models such as ChatGPT not only match, but also occasionally outperform, those generated by expert sessions in terms of generating highly novel ideas. However, this increased novelty comes with a trade-off in perceived feasibility, highlighting a critical balance that must be managed in innovation efforts. A complementary qualitative analysis provides insights into potential barriers to integrating AI into ideation at the personal and organizational levels. Depending on the innovation setting, AI-based idea stimulation may limit the creativity and motivation of experts. Therefore, the form of AI integration should be adapted to the company's innovation context and should contribute to organizational learning. On the basis of these findings, guidelines are provided on how to effectively apply, and benefit from the use of, AI as a non-human intermediary to enhance the ideation process.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
革命还是期望过高?探索生成式人工智能在实际可持续发展背景下对构思的影响
将人工智能生成技术(GenAI)融入企业创新流程代表着构思方法的重大转变。本研究探讨了人工智能生成式构思与传统专家研讨会的比较效果。通过与 BSH 家电集团(BSH)合作,以可持续包装为背景,使用基于专家和基于人工智能的方法生成并评估了创意。主要的定量分析侧重于新颖性、价值和可行性等质量维度。结果表明,ChatGPT 等 GenAI 模型在产生高度新颖的想法方面不仅能与专家会议产生的想法相媲美,有时甚至还优于专家会议产生的想法。然而,这种新颖性的提高伴随着可感知可行性的降低,突出了创新工作中必须把握的关键平衡。一项补充性定性分析深入揭示了在个人和组织层面将人工智能融入构思的潜在障碍。根据创新环境的不同,基于人工智能的创意激发可能会限制专家的创造力和积极性。因此,人工智能的整合形式应适应公司的创新环境,并应有助于组织学习。在这些研究结果的基础上,本文就如何有效应用人工智能作为非人类中介来加强构思过程并从中获益提供了指导。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Technovation
Technovation 管理科学-工程:工业
CiteScore
15.10
自引率
11.20%
发文量
208
审稿时长
91 days
期刊介绍: The interdisciplinary journal Technovation covers various aspects of technological innovation, exploring processes, products, and social impacts. It examines innovation in both process and product realms, including social innovations like regulatory frameworks and non-economic benefits. Topics range from emerging trends and capital for development to managing technology-intensive ventures and innovation in organizations of different sizes. It also discusses organizational structures, investment strategies for science and technology enterprises, and the roles of technological innovators. Additionally, it addresses technology transfer between developing countries and innovation across enterprise, political, and economic systems.
期刊最新文献
Capturing the breadth of value creation with science fiction storytelling: Evidence from smart service design workshops A classification framework for generative artificial intelligence for social good Digital technology and innovation:The impact of blockchain application on enterprise innovation Exploring and investigating the complementarity and multidimensionality of innovation for sustainability research: Past present and future Facilitator or figurehead? The impact of academician shareholder on corporate innovation: Evidence from China
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1