报 告 人：崔志坚 教授
崔志坚，博士，华侨，中国科学技术大学管理学院教授、MBA 中心主任， 美国运筹学与管理科学学会 INFORMS 技术、创新管理与创业分会（TIMES ) 主席 （现任），主要研究领域为创新管理，新产品开发，技术战略。近年来，其研究成果先后发表在Production and Operations Management，Decision Sciences， IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management，Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions 等国际高水平杂志上，并出版一本专著。获得“西班牙优秀科研业绩认证”、“英国伦敦商学院跨大西洋博士论坛最佳论文奖”等奖20余项，担任多所欧洲大学、多个国际顶级期刊匿名审稿人。
Using an online experiment, this study examines the efficacy of two idea evaluation processes: scoring vs. ranking in the context of innovation management. In the scoring process, the evaluators are asked to rate the quality of each idea by assigning it a score (e.g., from 0 to 10), while in the ranking process the evaluator simply orders all ideas according to their perceived qualities. Our results suggest that the scoring process strictly outperforms the ranking process in terms of the likelihood of selecting the highest-quality ideas. This result remains robust, irrespective of the possibility of allowing ties in the ranking process. However, when the number of ideas to be evaluated is reduced from eight to three the efficacies of the two idea evaluation processes become similar. Additionally, we find that the efficacy of the ranking process is significantly improved when additional information is provided, yet the efficacy of the scoring process does not change with more information. Based on the observations from the experimental data, we propose and test an explanatory model in which the information becomes a cue that directs the participants’ efforts to evaluate the ideas.