Purpose: Crowdfunding is a global phenomenon of rising significance and impact on different areas of business and social life, investigated across many academic disciplines. The goal of the article is to present the variety of methods applied in crowdfunding research, assess their strengths and weaknesses, offer the typology of methodological approaches, and suggest the most promising direction for further studies.
Design/methodology: The paper is based on the review of the most recent academic and industry literature on crowdfunding and own analysis of data presented by crowdfunding platforms’ operators.
Findings: The article incorporates interrelations of methods, goals of inquiries, and types of results propose a typology of methodological approaches that researchers currently apply to crowdfunding: from platform-centred to multi-sited. The authors discuss the advantages and limitations of the identified approaches with the use of multiple examples of recent and most influential studies from the field and propose the most urgent direction of future inquiries.
Research limitations/implications: The overview renders crowdfunding studies more accessible for potential newcomers to the field and strengthens transdisciplinary discussion on crowdfunding. Despite the broad variety of the analyzed articles that reflect the newest trends, the sample is not representative in the statistical meanings of the term.
Originality/value: The article offers the first review of methodologies applied in the transdisciplinary area of crowdfunding studies and connects it to broader methodological discussions about transdisciplinary research on the digital phenomena. The review strengthens the transdisciplinary dialog on crowdfunding.
If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.
Agrawal, A., Catalini, C. and Goldfarb, A. (2011). Friends, Family, and the Flat World: The Geography of Crowdfunding. NET Institute Working Paper No. 10-08, No. 16820: 1–70, http://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1692661
Agrawal, A., Catalini, C. and Goldfarb, A. (2015). Crowdfunding: Geography, Social Networks, and the Timing of Investment Decisions. Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, 24(2): 253–274, http://doi.org/10.1111/jems.12093
Brown, N. and Michael, M. (2003). A Sociology of Expectations: Retrospecting Prospects and Prospecting Retrospects. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 15(1): 3–18, http://doi.org/10.1080/0953732032000046024
Bruton, G., Khavul, S., Siegel, D. and Wright, M. (2015). New financial alternatives in seeding entrepreneurship: Microfinance, crowdfunding, and peer-to-peer innovations. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 39(1): 9–26, http://doi.org/10.1111/etap.12143
Calic, G. and Mosakowski, E. (2016). Kicking Off Social Entrepreneurship: How A Sustainability Orientation Influences Crowdfunding Success. Journal of Management Studies, 53(5): 738–767, http://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12201
Chen, S., Thomas, S., and Kohli, C. (2016). What really makes a promotional campaign succeed on a crowdfunding platform? Journal of Advertising Research, 56(1): 81–94, http://doi.org/10.2501/JAR-2016-002
Chen, X., Yao, X., and Kotha, S. (2009). Entrepreneur Passion And Preparedness In Business Plan Presentations: A Persuasion Analysis Of Venture Capitalists’ Funding Decisions. Academy of Management Journal, 52(1): 199–214, http://doi.org/amj.2009.36462018
Cordova, A., Dolci, J. and Gianfrate, G. (2015). The determinants of crowdfunding success: evidence from technology projects. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 181: 115–124, http://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.04.872
Dapp, T. (2014). Fintech – The digital (r)evolution in the financial sector. Obtained from: http://www.dbresearch.com (14.06.2017).
Dushnitsky, G., Guerini, M., Piva, E. and Rossi-Lamastra, C. (2016). Crowdfunding in Europe: Determinants of Platform Creation across Countries. California Management Review, 58(2): 44–71. http://doi.org/10.1525/cmr.2016.58.2.44
European Commission (2016). Commission staff working document – Report on Crowdfunding in the EU Capital Markets Union. Brussels: European Commission. Obtained from: https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regdoc/rep/10102/2016/EN/10102-2016-154-EN-F1-1.PDF (05.02.2017).
Fleming, L. and Sorenson, O. (2016). Financing by and for the Masses: an introduction to the special issue on crowdfunding. California Management Review, 58(2): 5–19.
Felin, T., Lakhani, K.R. and Tushman, M. (2014). Special issue of Strategic Organization: “Organizing Crowds and Innovation”. Strategic Organization, 12(3): 220–221, http://doi.org/10.1177/1476127014537145
Geels, F.W. (2004). From sectoral systems of innovation to socio-technical systems: Insights about dynamics and change from sociology and institutional theory. Research Policy, 33(6–7): 897–920, http://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2004.01.015
Gillespier, T. (2010). The Politics of ‘Platform’. New Media & Society, 12(3): 347–364.
Gleasure, R. and Feller, J. (2016). Emerging technologies and the democratisation of financial services: A metatriangulation of crowdfunding research. Information and Organization, 26(4): 101–115, http://doi.org/10.1016/j.infoandorg.2016.09.001
Golić, Z. (2014). Advantages of crowdfunding as an alternative source of financing of small and medium-sized enterprises. Proceedings of the Faculty of Economics in East Sarajevo, 8: 39–48, http://doi.org/10.7251/ZREFIS1408039G
Guilliatt, R. (1988). Australian Dealmaker: John Cornell The Man Who Sold Hollywood on “Crocodile Dundee”. The New York Times, August 21.
Gryczka, M. (2013). Imperatyw zaufania i współpracy w procesie budowania otwartego ekosystemu wiedzy w Polsce. Management and Business Administration. Central Europe, 21(1): 85–97, http://doi.org/10.7206/mba.ce.2084-3356.48
Hauge, J.A. and Chimahusky, S. (2016). Are promises meaningless in an uncertain crowdfunding environment? Economic Inquiry, 54(3): 1621–1630, http://doi.org/10.1111/ecin.12319
Hörisch, J. (2015). Crowdfunding for environmental ventures: An empirical analysis of the influence of environmental orientation on the success of crowdfunding initiatives. Journal of Cleaner Production, 107: 636–645, http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.05.046
Johnson, P.E., Grazioli, S., Jamal, K. and Berryman, R.G. (2001). Detecting deception:adversarial problem solving in a low base-rate world. Cognitive Science, 25: 355–392, http://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog2503_2
Lukkarinen, A., Teich, J. E., Wallenius, H. and Wallenius, J. (2016). Success drivers of online equity crowdfunding campaigns. Decision Support Systems, 87: 26–38, http://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2016.04.006
Macht, S.A. and Weatherston, J. (2015). Academic Research on Crowdfunders: What’s Been Done and What’s To Come? Strategic Change, 24(3): 191–205, http://doi.org/10.1002/jsc.2010
Moritz, A. and Block, J.H. (2016). Crowdfunding: A Literature Review and Research Directions. In: D. Brüntje and O. Gajda (eds.), Crowdfunding in Europe State of the Art in Theory and Practice (pp. 25–53). Springer, http://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18017-5_3
Ordanini, A., Miceli, L., Pizzetti, M. and Parasuraman, A. (2011). Crowd-funding: transforming customers into investors through innovative service platforms. Journal of Service Management, 22(4), 443–470, http://doi.org/10.1108/09564231111155079
Rodak, O. (2017). Twitter jako przedmiot badań socjologicznych i źródło danych społecznych: perspektywa konstruktywistyczna. Studia Socjologiczne, 226(3): 209–236.
Royal, C., Sampath, S. and Windsor, G. (2014). Microfinance, Crowdfunding and Sustainability: A Case Study of Telecenters in a South Asian Developing Country. Strategic Change, 23: 425–438, http://doi.org/10.1002/jsc.1987
Schwartz, A.A. (2015). Inclusive Crowdfunding. Utah Law Review, 516(2014): 661–675.
Siering, M., Koch, J.-A. and Deokar, A.V. (2016). Detecting Fraudulent Behavior on Crowdfunding Platforms: The Role of Linguistic and Content-Based Cues in Static and Dynamic Contexts. Journal of Management Information Systems, 33(2): 1–35. http://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2016.1205930
Sigar, K. (2012). Fret no more: Inapplicability of crowdfunding concerns in the internet age and the jobs act’s safeguards. Administrative Law Review, 64(2): 473–506.
Silver, E. and Khatri, A. (2016). Endowed by the Crowd? Insights Into the New Wave of Crowdfunding and Its Viability. Journal of Taxation & Regulation of Financial Institutions, 29(3): 33–44.
Torkanovskiy, E. (2016). Non-equity Crowdfunding as a National Phenomenon in a Global Industry: The Case of Russia. In: D. Brüntje and O. Gajda (eds.), Crowdfunding in Europe State of the Art in Theory and Practice (pp. 115–123). Springer, http://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18017-5_8
Vasileiadou, E., Huijben, J.C.C.M. and Raven, R.P.J.M. (2016). Three is a crowd? Exploring the potential of crowdfunding for renewable energy in the Netherlands. Journal of Cleaner Production, 128: 142–155, http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.06.028
Wheat, R.E., Wang, Y., Byrnes, J.E. and Ranganathan, J. (2013). Raising money for scientific research through crowdfunding. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 28(2): 71–72, http://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2012.11.001
Zheng, H., Li, D., Wu, J. and Xu, Y. (2014). The role of multidimensional social capital in crowdfunding: A comparative study in China and US. Information and Management, 51(4), 488–496, http://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2014.03.003