While Google Maps is the prevalent navigation tool for over a billion people around the world, OpenStreetMap presents a free and open alternative. Many firms including Uber, Apple Maps and Grab rely on OpenStreetMap to power their platforms. Launched globally in 2004, the open-source platform – touted as the free wiki world map – enjoyed at least a year of monopoly before Google Maps was introduced in a handful of countries in 2005. The proprietary mapping platform was first launched in the United States and the United Kingdom before expanding progressively to other countries. How would the entry of a new competitor affect the viability of OpenStreetMap?When a crowdsourced platform meets competitionOpenStreetMap is based on a crowdsourced mode of knowledge production, where volunteers contribute to online knowledge platforms through a self-selection process. Such models, where users share their knowledge and even socialise or form communities, are increasingly popular. Platforms like these not only co-exist with those founded on a traditional model (which derive their knowledge from paid professionals), but also compete with them. Think Yelp vs. the Michelin Guide, Wikipedia vs. Encyclopaedia Britannica and Linux vs. Windows. This raises the question, not just of how they compare, but of how they affect one another.In a recent study, we analysed how competition affects volunteers’ tendency to contribute to crowdsourced platforms. We leveraged a dataset that captured millions of contributions made by OpenStreetMap communities in 87 countries (including African nations) between 2004 and 2015, paired with the phased entry of Google Maps in these countries. The data provided insights into a specific condition – the arrival of Google Maps as an exogenous shock to OpenStreetMap – and allowed us to analyse contributions to OpenStreetMap before and after the entry.Divergent effect: Deterring recruits, motivating convertsTo understand the effect of competition on contribution to crowdsourced platforms, it’s important to differentiate the mechanisms driving the responses of different groups: attachment and awareness. Before people become contributors to a platform, they first become aware of it and start out as consumers of the knowledge it provides. Once they see the potential to improve that knowledge, they may start to chip in and become more likely to continue contributing as they become more attached to the platform. Our findings show that the effect of competition was divergent between two types of contributors. Volunteers who were active contributors before the entry of Google Map increased their individual contributions. Despite the absence of monetary rewards, these existing contributors volunteered actively due to an ideological attachment to the platform – a strong belief in the core tenets of open source, such as inclusivity. They were therefore motivated to contribute more when a threat (i.e. competitor) was introduced.On the other hand, total contributions from those who were new to the platform decreased. Because existing users and new volunteers may not have had the opportunity to get to know the existing platform before the introduction of the new entrant, they were less likely to be converted to active volunteers. Overall, the impact of the new entrant on volunteers’ level of contributions was negative; total contribution fell after the arrival of Google Map. This means that organisations that depend on crowdsourcing can face significant challenges in recruiting new contributors and maintaining the level of contribution when competition is introduced. Competition effects beyond online platformsOur observation can explain the general effects of increased competition due to a new entrant – be it at the platform, industry or organisational level. At the intra-organisational level, companies are incorporating crowdsourcing as a novel organisational design across various domains, ranging from funding to recruitment, forecasting, peer evaluation, innovation and strategic decision-making. Although crowdsourcing has great potential, our study raises questions about the conditions under which such designs are strategically feasible, particularly in the face of competition. In fact, the divergent effect at the heart of this study also speaks to research on the effect of interorganisational competition on individual behaviour. In other words, competition may motivate current employees but hinder the recruitment of new employees. Recruiters and managers need to understand the effects of competition on workers and what motivates them in the long term.Looking at the wider implications of competition beyond the viability of crowdsourced platforms brings us back to the more ideological perspective: “open ideology” as opposed to the dominance of closed traditional platforms. Specifically, studies show that crowdsourced platforms like Wikipedia tend to be more inclusive and cover a wider range of entities than Encyclopaedia Britannica. Moreover, crowdsourced forms of evaluation often fund projects that are more creative than those by professional evaluators. Knowledge-based platforms such as maps have the power to shape the fortunes of those they include – and exclude. Given their outsized role in guiding market participation, it is crucial to understand and continue to uncover how they are shaped by their environment.
