Crowdsourcing Landscape

Crowdsourcing Landscape - Version 2

Click on the image to Download in PDF

This is our second, updated version of our Crowdsourcing Landscape, covering 22 categories within 8 business models (including non-profit). See the Crowd Business Models framework for details.

Note that the logos are examples only. See our Crowdsourcing services page for a more complete view of crowdsourcing examples.

What are your thoughts on the landscape, and in particular any suggestions for improvements?

  • Enrique Estellés

    Congratulations for the landscape!!

    About my thoughts, I have to say that not everyone will be in agreement about the platforms you have placed in the landscape. Although there are many clear crowdsourcing platforms examples, like microtask or AMT, there are other platforms, like Wikipedia, that not everybody thinks is crowdsourcing.

    An explanation of why wikipedia is not crowdsourcing from D.C. Brabham (one of the most crowdsourcing researchers):

    • Ross Dawson

      Hi Enrique, there is no question that people will disagree on many aspects of the landscape! Multiple perspectives are valuable :-)

      Without going into making an extended case, I disagree regarding Wikipedia – I believe it is a good example of crowdsourcing, in bringing many people to bear to create something of value.

  • Patrick Savalle

    Some of the best platforms out there are missing, such as Stackexchange and Github.

    Also it could be worth a try to redesign the landscape and base it on types of crowdsourcing. Types like microtasking, social collaboration, markets, etc.

    • Ross Dawson

      Thanks Patrick!

      StackExchange belongs in the Knowledge Sharing section. There is only space for 5 in each section on the landscape and all of the ones currently there are also very large, though StackExchange has a fair claim to be included.

      My perspective has been that GitHub is not a collaboration platform, not a crowdsourcing platform. However that could be debated; I’ll think about it.

      This is the second version of the landscape and it is time to review it including the categories. There are any number of ways to slice it and I’m not saying my version is definitive, so would be great if you created an alternative slice.

  • Jeff Cohn
  • CrowdComputing Systems

    Very interesting. I agree with Patrick. It’s a complex landscape and could be segmented a few different ways. Elance, for example, is both a marketplace and a labor pool. CCS would fit into ‘platform’, ‘microtasks,” and ‘crowd process’ as enterprise customers use our platform to manage microtasked work done by crowd talent from MTurk, Elance, oDesk and others. It’d be interesting to see the results of a survey distributed to all of the businesses on this landscape, asking them to indicate their capabilities and how they define themselves.

    • Ross Dawson

      No question there are plenty of ways to slice this, and having done this quite a while ago I now see gaping holes in the model. Not sure how useful it would be to ask businesses about how they see themselves as it would be hard to have a common language and frame, though it would be an interesting exercise. To your point, the most realistic view is that many companies are in more than one place on the landscape, but that’s a little hard to represent visually :-)

Web Analytics