Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Finding the future: Crowdsourcing versus the Delphi technique
Luleå University of Technology, Department of Business Administration, Technology and Social Sciences, Business Administration and Industrial Engineering.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-8155-6873
Number of Authors: 1
2017 (English)In: Business Horizons, ISSN 0007-6813, E-ISSN 1873-6068, Vol. 60, no 2, 229-236 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

When managers are unable to use quantifiable time series data to make forecasts or decide on uncertainties, they can either rely on their own intuition and judgment or resort to the insights of others. The Delphi technique is a well-known forecasting technique that relies on the pooled perspectives of experts to predict uncertain quantities or the outcomes of events. This relies on polling the opinions of experts, aggregating these opinions, feeding them back to the responding experts along with their own estimates, and having them repeat their judgment calls until some level of consensus is reached. More recently, however, the opinions of many others who are not experts have been sought on a range of topics in a loose assembly of similar techniques bundled under the title of crowdsourcing. This article compares Delphi and crowdsourcing as prediction and estimation tools for managers. It notes their differences and similarities, and provides a simple tool for executives to use in deciding whether or not to use these tools, and if so, which tool or combination of them will work best in a given situation.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2017. Vol. 60, no 2, 229-236 p.
National Category
Business Administration
Research subject
Industrial Marketing
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:ltu:diva-61338DOI: 10.1016/j.bushor.2016.11.007ISI: 000398009000009Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85009454848OAI: oai:DiVA.org:ltu-61338DiVA: diva2:1063114
Note

Validerad; 2017; Nivå 2; 2017-03-07 (rokbeg)

Available from: 2017-01-09 Created: 2017-01-09 Last updated: 2017-04-18Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Flostrand, Andrew
By organisation
Business Administration and Industrial Engineering
In the same journal
Business Horizons
Business Administration

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

Altmetric score

Total: 207 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf