Mapping knowledge assets categories for successful crowdfunding strategies

Abstract

Purpose

Crowdfunding models recently emerged as relevant enhancing systems aimed at fostering innovation and entrepreneurial dynamics. Accordingly, great attention has been paid to seeker firms' characteristics and platforms. For this reason, adopting a holistic knowledge-based perspective on crowdfunding is essential. This paper first identifies and categorizes the potential knowledge-based dimensions grounding crowdfunding and technological scouting strategies to provide a theoretically-grounded framework potentially useful for driving decision-making processes. Then, it is applied to interpret a real crowdfunding strategy developed by an Italian platform in the field of the real estate sector.

Design/methodology/approach

The paper combines deductive and inductive approaches. After elaborating a conceptual framework identifying the potential knowledge-based dimensions for a crowdfunding strategy, it is tested and applied by re-interpreting a real crowdfunding strategy.

Findings

The study identifies the potential knowledge assets dimensions grounding a crowdfunding strategy through elaborating a dedicated conceptual framework. Then, the case study enriches the proposed conceptual arguments with a set of empirical evidence.

Research limitations/implications

The paper provides a conceptual framework capable of fostering a specific research stream and carrying out a first holistic and systematic knowledge-based perspective. The authors believe that their research may provide a relevant contribution to the existing literature, depicting a comprehensive picture of the intellectual capital components that seekers have to identify and manage in crowdfunding. While doing so, the study significantly addresses the challenge launched by Troise et al. (2021) in order to enrich prior but highly fragmented studies on the role of intellectual capital components in crowdfunding.

Practical implications

The analysis of the models and tools developed and discussed can be useful to support the elaboration and the application of practical knowledge-based approaches, protocols and routines for the value generation in the crowdfunding field and to drive the designer of crowdfunding platforms and strategies to develop more effective and impactful initiatives and campaigns. Accordingly, when elaborating a crowdfunding strategy, it should be effectively highlighted that seekers have and are capable of managing intellectual capital in different manners. This is particularly true for new ventures that are generally challenged to provide information about their quality, in particular about founders, their previous experiences, potential and real networks and partnerships, innovation capacity.

Originality/value

This paper contributes to the further development of the crowdfunding literature according to a knowledge-based perspective.

Citation

Lerro, A., Santarsiero, F., Schiuma, G. and Bartuseviciene, I. (2024), "Mapping knowledge assets categories for successful crowdfunding strategies", European Journal of Innovation Management, Vol. 27 No. 7, pp. 2302-2325. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJIM-03-2022-0138

1. Introduction

In the current VUCA context (Bennett and Lemoine, 2014; Troise et al., 2022a), recently exasperated by the COVID-19 pandemic and the related socio-economic changes (Ammirato et al., 2020), the importance of creating and stimulating opportunities and challenges and their consequent transformation into innovation projects and new firms becomes essential (O'Connor, 2013; Solomon, 2007; Santarsiero et al., 2021). To provide concrete systems for financing startups and innovation programming in SMEs, crowdfunding emerges as a growing phenomenon for entrepreneurs seeking funding from a potentially large audience of interested individuals (Short et al., 2017, p. 149). Crowdfunding is extensively defined as a money-raising method for individuals, small and medium organisations and start-ups using the internet (Alhammad et al., 2021; Gabison, 2015). Accordingly, scholars and practitioners have paid in the last decade a growing attention to the crowdfunding models (Belleflamme et al., 2015; Bradford, 2012; Cumming et al., 2019; Vrontis et al., 2020) and crowdfunding types generally distinguishing them into donation-based, reward-based, lending-based and equity-based (Alhammad et al., 2021; Belleflamme et al., 2015). More recently, these issues have effectively declined in innovation (Drover et al., 2017; Hervè and Schwienbacher, 2018; Mochkabadi and Volkmann, 2020; Troise and Tani, 2020), also related to sustainability-oriented and open innovation approaches (Troise et al., 2021b).

This has increasingly determined that crowdfunding strategies and related campaigns have been considered powerful tools for the creation of start-up companies thanks to their capacity to satisfy their funding needs (Belleflamme et al., 2014), in particular related to actions and investments in R&D, internationalization, identification and exploitation of new business (Troise et al., 2020) and even for the definition and the implementation of the business strategy.

Eldridge et al. (2019) explored the impact of crowdfunding campaigns on SMEs. In this vein, authors have argued how collaborating with investors networks generated in the course of equity-based crowdfunding campaigns can contribute to the success of start-up firms (Di Pietro et al., 2018). Other scholars have analyzed the connection among crowdfunding, shareholders structure and firm performance (Wiathoff-Borm et al., 2018) as well as determinants of follow-up financing and ultimate firm failure. Great attention has also been paid to examining the factors and potential predictive variables related to funding success (Block et al., 2018; Rabbia, 2018) and funding regulations (Hornuf and Schwienbacher, 2018) on crowdfunding platforms.

Despite these efforts, surprisingly managerial research and practice have not paid a comprehensive and systematic attention to identifying and assessing the critical knowledge-based dimensions affecting and characterizing successful crowdfunding strategies and campaigns. Some contributions to the general topic of intellectual capital - as a group of knowledge assets that significantly contribute to the organizational value creation dynamics (Lerro and Schiuma, 2009; Schiuma et al., 2008) - related to crowdfunding have recently emerged in the literature: according to the consolidated conceptual categories of the intellectual capital distinguishing human, structural and relational/social capital (see, for effectively reviewing the notions, Subramaniam and Youndt, 2005; Elia et al., 2017; Lerro et al., 2014; Lerro and Schiuma, 2013; Schiuma et al., 2008; Schiuma and Lerro, 2008), the contributions of Piva and Rossi-Lamastra (2018) and Barbi and Mattioli (2019) have focused the attention on the role of the human capital as a significant signal of a venture’ quality, while Troise et al. (2020) and (2021a) have analysed the role of intellectual capital in the growth of equity-crowdfunded companies as well as in the investment decisions. However, the need for a common framework based on identifying and analysing the knowledge assets capable of providing theoretical and practical recommendations on designing, managing and assessing crowdfunding strategies and campaigns through knowledge assets is felt.

A structured and rigorous approach is still lacking to holistically identify and assess the knowledge-based dimensions and tools in crowdfunding strategies and campaigns. This is amazing since it appears not aligned with the great emphasis and attention that academia and local, national and international firms, organizations and institutions have recently provided about the role of knowledge resources and assets to guarantee innovation dynamics and performance improvement. Moreover, the fundamental role that knowledge-based dimensions may structurally play in elaborating crowdfunding strategies and campaign programming and their contribution to the successful implementation makes this topic very relevant. Consequently, this paper is timely at this critical juncture, given the paucity of research about the crowdfunding concepts within the knowledge-based research stream.

Accordingly, the paper attempts to answer the following Research Question (RQ): what are the knowledge dimensions of a crowdfunding strategy? To answer this RQ, the research extends and tests an established conceptual framework - the Knoware Tree (Schiuma et al., 2008) - by applying it to a new, theoretically applicable setting such as crowdfunding. In particular, the study sheds more light on how to design, implement and improve a crowdfunding strategy by leveraging several knowledge assets related to human, relational, tangible and intangible factors affecting the success of the funding processes.

The paper is organized as follows. The next section first briefly frames the crowdfunding literature and then provides a synthetic analysis of the role and relevance of crowdfunding as a new financial instrument for supporting innovation and entrepreneurship. Then, inspired by the Knoware Tree (Schiuma et al., 2008) and triangulating the framework's theoretical assumptions with evidence gathered from a literature review on crowdfunding, the compelling crowdfunding's knowledge assets categories are pointed out and described. Then, the third section describes the conducted case study and discusses the results. Finally, theoretical and practical implications and future research directions are illustrated.

2. Role and relevance of crowdfunding for innovation and entrepreneurial dynamics

2.1 The crowdfunding literature: overview and organizational and business ecosystem of crowdfunding

Crowdfunding is traditionally considered as part of the broader concept of crowdsourcing (Lambert and Schwienbacher, 2010). These latter use the “crowd” to gain ideas, feedback and solutions aimed to support commercial and business activities. More specifically, Kleeman et al. (2008, p. 5) state that “crowdsourcing takes place when a profit oriented firm outsources specific tasks essential for the making or sale of its product to the general public (the crowd) in the form of an open call over the Internet, with the intention of animating individuals to make a (voluntary) contribution to the firm's production process for free or for significantly less than that contribution is worth to the firm”.

Following different contributions of research highlighting valid caveats and clarifications needed to transpose the definition of crowdsourcing to crowdfunding (Brabham, 2008; Larralde and Schwienbacher, 2010; Lee et al., 2008), currently crowdfunding is widely seen as an open call to provide financial resources, mostly taking place on crowdfunding platforms (CFPs), i.e. internet-based platforms linking fundraisers to funders to fund a particular campaign by typically many funders (Belleflamme et al., 2015; Lambert and Schwienbacher, 2010). More specifically, the aims of the crowdfunding initiative can be related to non-profit (collection of funds for social initiatives, i.e. public health, charity), profit (collection of funds for commercial purposes, i.e. launch of new products, services, research activity) and intermediate (funding does not have a well-defined purpose at the beginning).

In this vein, CFPs belong to the class of multisided and precisely two-sided platforms, which provide a matching service between two sides of a “market”, even if not still existing. This model sees three actors: fundraiser or seeker, funder and digital intermediary (platform owner company) (Belleflamme et al., 2016).

In particular, the “business” structure of the fundraiser or seeker may be related to three main typizations: (1) individual and independent: in this case, the creator of the project is a person not belonging to a company or institution; (2) organization: in this case, it is possible to find all that projects which are born and continue to stay within a private or public organization already active; (3) start-up: in this case, the projects are born by an individual initiative but they are addressed to a future creation of an organization once gained the necessary funds successfully (Rabbia, 2018).

Following Belleflamme et al. (2015, pp. 1–10), crowdfunding comes in a variety of fundraising activities and what is offered in return for the funds and, according to the capacity of attraction of different typologies of participants, it is possible to identify different forms of crowdfunding and (business) models of the crowdfunding platforms. They can be traditionally referred to as the equity-based and royalty-based CFPs, lending-based CFPs, reward-based CFPs and donation-based CFPs.

In the first modeling, funders act as investors or lenders. On equity-based CFPs fundraisers offer equity stakes for the funding of a campaign, while, on royalty-based CFPs, a fraction of revenues or profits is offered. Fundraisers typically specify a target to be reached. They often may serve as a substitute for early day funding through other channels. Good examples in these actions may be the UK-based Crowdcube and the French Smart Angels.

On lending-based CFPs, funders are offered a certain interest rate of successful projects if the project pays out. Different from traditional banking, the CFP let’s funders decide for themselves if a particular project should be funded (peer-to-peer lending – P2P). Meaningful examples of CFPs in this modeling are Prosper.com, Spear and Babyloan.

Contrary to the previous modellings, on reward-based CFPs funders mainly act as “prosumers”. In this case, the platform allows fundraisers to attract a group of funders who fundamentally pre-purchase the product: this reduces the risk of losses from the viewpoint of the fundraiser. As especially experienced for artistic ventures, reward-based CFPs funders often receive motivational and even tangible but not-financial benefits for their contributions (Gerber et al., 2012; Kuppuswamy and Bayus, 2013). Kickstarters, Ulule and Kisskissbankbank represent good examples of this modelling. Finally, on donation-based CFPs, funders can be considered philanthropists. This kind of campaigns are traditionally based on voluntary contributions to a public good, charities and NGO and fundraisers do not offer monetary returns on in-kind payments apart from recognition within a community. Examples of donation-based CFPs are very numerous throughout the world. Related to these typizations, the transfer to capital may assume different forms of micro-investments more or less complex; they are identified in donation, sponsorship, pre-selling, lending and equity (Rabbia, 2018).

2.2 Crowdfunding: actors and perspectives for innovation management

The critical role of innovative and entrepreneurial dynamics is widely and traditionally acknowledged as relevant to the development and well-being of societies (Sousa et al., 2019). They stimulate a wave of positive impacts on fields such as higher employment and increasing productivity. They also play an important role in economic, social development and sustainable growth, particularly in the current digital age (Maritz and Brown, 2013; Brynjolfsson and McAfee, 2014). In particular, entrepreneurship is considered one of the most important economic forces and a dynamic process of vision, change and creation (Raposo and Do Paço, 2011).

Accordingly, in recent times, the ability of innovators and entrepreneurs to gain capital differently from the past has emerged as a new fundamental factor in fostering entrepreneurial dynamics and developing entrepreneurial culture (Del Giudice and Straub, 2011; Troise et al., 2020; Vrontis et al., 2020). Indeed, new financing alternatives such as crowdfunding (Belleflamme et al., 2014; Block et al., 2018) and microfinance (Khavul, 2010) have rapidly expanded as new financial tools addressed both for-profit and social or cultural projects. In this perspective, internet-based platforms are intermediaries or network orchestrators connecting entrepreneurs with possible funders, often uncommon professional investors (Vrontis et al., 2020).

Accordingly, although born as a financing model for seeding new ventures and business initiatives, crowdfunding actually catalyses business ideas and creativity, and, more generally, innovation and improvement strategies. In this vein, some scholars have recently highlighted that crowdfunding is emerging as one of the most popular approaches to implement Open Innovation (Testa et al., 2019, 2020; Troise and Tani, 2020; Bogers and Jensen, 2017; Cillo et al., 2019; West and Bogers, 2014); to support SMEs to internationalize (Troise et al., 2022b); as tool to get new ideas and to study recent demands trends to be incorporated in new products and services (Stanko and Henard, 2017; Callaghan, 2014; Walthoff-Borm et al., 2018; Joshi and Sharma, 2004), also in terms of sustainability (Jovanović, 2019; Lam and Law, 2016; Wehnert et al., 2019; Calic and Mosakowski, 2016; Hörisch and Tenner, 2020; Testa et al., 2020; Chaney, 2019); as relevant alternative form of co-participation in businesses' development (Pronti and Pagliarino, 2019; Mollick and Robb, 2016; Hervé and Schwienbacher, 2018), allowing companies to leverage external crowd inputs (Brem et al., 2019; Di Pietro et al., 2018, 2021; Schenk et al., 2019; Stanko and Henard, 2017) and particularly knowledge and networks (Belleflamme et al., 2014; Polzin et al., 2018; Troise and Tani, 2020; Di Pietro et al., 2018).

More specifically, focused on the main aim of the paper, on the basis of the insights of the literature review, the role and the relevance of crowdfunding to support innovation and entrepreneurial dynamics seem to be related to two main elements: the firm using crowdfunding campaigns and platforms (the seeker); and the platforms. They are analysed in detail in the following sub-sections.

2.2.1 The seeker firms

Focusing on innovation and profit-oriented crowdfunding initiatives, Alhammad et al. (2021, p. 2) argue that crowdfunding “involves three actors, namely funding portals (intermediaries), contributors (funders/investors) and crowdfunding campaign creators (fund seekers/entrepreneurs)” (Hofmann, 2018). Fund seeker/entrepreneurs, or extensively, seeker firms, are defined as “individual or business entity seeking funds to finance project” (Ziobrowska, 2022, p. 877) and capable to “benefit by raising funds to launch the project and by earning profit the project generates” (Ziobrowska, 2022, p. 877) as well as to “provide their identity information or prior information on the funding portal during the registration process” (Alhammad et al., 2021, p. 2, reviewing Estrin et al., 2016; Lukstins, 2017).

About the seeker firms, a relatively vast literature highlights the success factors and the concerns about their crowdfunding strategies and technology scouting supporting innovation and entrepreneurial dynamics (Stevenson et al., 2022). In particular, regarding the success factors, emerging themes are related to (1) the modalities of involvement of the users of the platform, (2) the choice of the innovative problems, (3) the role of the internal capabilities and (4) the performance assessment.

Regarding the first theme, it emerges that the involvement of the users is fundamental to leading to the selection of valuable ideas for the seeker firms. To stimulate the participation of the users, the seeker firms may propose some rewards for the better ideas, able to satisfy both intrinsic motivations (i.e. leisure, status, identity) and extrinsic ones (i.e. monetary premium, public acknowledgement, career development) (Sarmah and Rahman, 2017; Battistella and Nonino, 2012; Acar, 2019). However, it could be not enough for the seeker firms to have many registered users on the platform, but they act as active people to suggest ideas. Accordingly, different modalities can be considered and adopted to stimulate participation, such as fees and incentives (Camacho et al., 2019; Majchrzak and Malhotra, 2013).

About the second theme, the scientific literature highlights that the choice to adopt platforms of crowdfunding and technology scouting is particularly fitted to the solution of innovative problems requiring experimentations and/or multiple solutions (Garcia Martinez and Walton, 2014), i.e. the case of the design of a new product (Jiao et al., 2021; Sarmah and Rahman, 2017) and the attempts to enhance the collaboration among the employees aimed to support creative activities (Elerud-Tryde and Hooge, 2014). A different approach is, instead, used to face complicated problems.

To elaborate and apply a practical solution, Assis Neto and Santos (2018) suggest dividing the whole problem into sub-problems that are more limited and straightforward with a crowdfunding workflow able to lead to the solution of the innovative problem as a whole.

As a third theme, different scholars argue that the role of the firms in adopting effective crowdfunding and technology scouting strategies is significantly related to specific capabilities that such firms must have (Blohm et al., 2014). They are identified in (1) the capability to design and implement platform autonomously as well as to develop filtering processes to delete in advance not valuable ideas, avoiding time-consuming activities related to their evaluation; (2) the capability to manage the exchange of information with the owners, also increasing the informative flows between firm and external environment (Zhang et al., 2020); (3) the capability to attract a critical mass of user and to create an active community; and, finally, (4) the capability to combine solutions developed on the base of different perspectives (Malhotra et al., 2017).

Concerning these general criteria, great relevance is played by using internal platforms or managed by third parties. Accordingly, literature has identified different factors to help firms decide on this. For example, the internal platform is suggested in case the firm aims to involve the employees in the process of elaboration of ideas to reach long-term objectives of innovation, or, in case of crowdfunding and technology scouting campaigns adopted to change the organizational culture about innovation, or, when the firm wants to highlight the interest about innovation to internal and external stakeholders (Beretta et al., 2021; Malhotra et al., 2020). In case of missing of the above-cited specific capabilities or conditions supporting the management of the crowdfunding and technology scouting campaigns, the seeker firm may find it more helpful to address a platform managed by third parties (Schenk et al., 2019). For example, whether the firm has not had a recognized and attractive brand or it is not able to collect a great community of active users, it could be better to choose platforms managed by third parties (Schenk et al., 2019), when the firm is not familiar with a specific solution to solve complex problems or the problem is quickly broken into innovative problems simpler and closer to the capabilities of the seeker (Piazza et al., 2019), when the firms occasionally use crowdfunding and technology scouting strategies and when the firm needs support in defining agreements related to the exploitation of the intellectual properties of the ideas (Schenk et al., 2019). In all cases, the seeker firms need to develop and implement dedicated mechanisms able to facilitate the process of evaluation, selection and adoption of the ideas (Bogers et al., 2017), for example through the standardization of processes and structures (Mergel and Desouza, 2013; Sarmah and Rahman, 2017), or in function of the number of the owners (Deng et al., 2019; Ales et al., 2020).

Finally, regarding the fourth theme, the seeker firms need to elaborate a set of metrics in order to evaluate the performance of the activities related to crowdfunding and technology scouting (Gustetic et al., 2015). In particular, some indicators that could be used are identified in the number of participants, the number and difference of the proposed solutions, the number of solutions proposed by people not interacting before with the seeker firm, the level of awareness concerning the themes of the campaigns, quality of the owners suggesting ideas (Mergel and Desouza, 2013; Habib et al., 2019).

The concerns related to how seeker firms use platforms to propose crowdfunding and technology scouting campaigns may be grouped into three main areas: the formalization of the innovative problem for the owners, the management of the ideas and the characteristics of the seeker firms potential source of concern. The first one is related to the risk of presenting a problem clear enough, also at the language level, or not specific and capable of creating confusion among the owners (Mergel and Desouza, 2013) or, even, not differentiated respect to the target (Massa and Testa, 2017). Another problem is related to the risk that the ideas generated are not particularly innovative (Schuurman et al., 2012), in terms of ideas with a bit of potential in the market (Huang et al., 2014), not applicability for the seeker (Huang et al., 2014), presence of tacit knowledge challenging to share with the users of the platforms as well as of confidential information capable of representing a commercial threat for the seeker firm (Gruner and Power, 2017). The second concern is related to the difficulty for the firms that gain a high volume or a wide variety of solutions through the crowdfunding campaign to manage and evaluate them (Blohm et al., 2014). Accordingly, appropriate mechanisms should be applied to avoid such criticism (Elerud-Tryde and Hooge, 2014; Sarmah and Rahman, 2017) and in particular the loss of the intellectual property of the selected ideas (Mazzola et al., 2018). Finally, concerns could also be to the endowment of an adequate level of absorptive capacity by the seeker firm (Gruner and Power, 2017), to the missed alignment of the crowdfunding strategies with the higher business and corporate strategies (Malhotra et al., 2017) and the role of the top management (Gruner and Power, 2017; Beretta et al., 2021).

2.2.2 The platforms

Platforms play a fundamental role in guaranteeing the success of crowdfunding strategies and related campaigns (Kohler, 2015; Blohm et al., 2014; Vignieri, 2021).

Schenk et al. (2019) distinguish platforms to access the crowd in proprietary platforms and open external platforms and effectively analyze the conditions under which it is more appropriate to use the first model rather than the second one, discussing the role played by the transaction costs, network externalities and internal resources and competencies.

In both cases, the value dimension can be usefully grouped according to three main areas: tasks, users' management and value of the solutions. Regarding the first area, the value of the platforms resides in their capacity to effectively execute a set of tasks, such as managing the campaigns (Assis Neto and Santos, 2018). Moreover, they generally have a pre-existing community of users and experiences in the creation and diffusion of campaigns to collect ideas by the users (Faullant and Dolfus, 2017) as well as they can be very beneficial for the correct management and acquisition of the intellectual property of the ideas presented and selected (Mazzola et al., 2018; Füller et al., 2021). The second value dimension is related to the capacity to classify the users operating as owners (Hutter et al., 2011), and, then, to their rationally bounded (Natalicchio et al., 2017) and connected system of incentives (Ye and Kankanhalli, 2017; Hossain, 2018; Hutter et al., 2011; Boons et al., 2015; Yang et al., 2020; Yang and Qi, 2021; Soliman and Tuunainen, 2015; Garcia Martinez, 2017). Platforms should provide tools for interaction among the users to stimulate a collaborative approach to problem-solving (Frey et al., 2011; Palacios et al., 2016; Park and Kohler, 2019), to enhance the development of high-value ideas for the seeker firms (Füller et al., 2014) and reduce the adverse effects of the competition (Renard and Davis, 2019; Kathan et al., 2015).

Finally, the third dimension is related to the value of the solutions. The quantity of the solutions provided and their difference significantly affect the quality of the better solution to the innovative problem presented (Zheng et al., 2014). However, the platforms can apply a set of criteria for selection to reduce the weight of the process of manual selection to avoid a significant amount of ideas not appropriate for the innovative problem object of the campaign (Acar, 2019), also through the offer of templates (Kokshagina et al., 2017), recommendation systems (Mo et al., 2018). The value-added solution can also be gained through the cross-fertilization of ideas developed by users with different backgrounds (Gimpel et al., 2020). Regarding criticism of the platforms, they have identified three areas: the importance of elaborating and applying a business model, the loss of engagement of the users and the relationships with the seeker firms.

Regarding the first area, various scholars highlight the need for the platforms to have a business model capable of making it attractive both for seeker firms and users (Kohler, 2015) and to create a system of reputation to assess the behaviours of the participants (Liu et al., 2021). In the second area, the loss of engagement can be determined by different factors, such as the presence of disruptive behaviours within the platform (Hutter et al., 2011; Lee and Seo, 2016), a non-optimal structure of the system of rewarding (Frey et al., 2011; Garcia Martinez and Walton, 2014; Soliman and Tuunainen, 2015), cultural and socio-economic differences among the users (Bockstedt et al., 2015), the missing of a system of evaluation capable of ensuring impartiality to the users (Lee and Seo, 2016). As a third area, the platforms can have difficulties intercepting seekers to populate the platform. In this vein, it is fundamental to define a reasonable fee that the seeker firms have to pay to the platforms to exploit their competences and infrastructures and spread the campaign (Wen and Lin, 2016).

Despite the growing scientific and business media debate, until now, scholarship on crowdfunding has shown at least three significant limitations. The first refers to theoretical issues, particularly the failure to incorporate comprehensive approaches beyond the finance and technology-related streams and adopt a more interdisciplinary view of management fields. The second limitation is connected to the issue that limited studies have explored what and how the specific characteristics and knowledge expertise at the seeker firm and platform level may have effects on the launch and the success of crowdfunding strategies and campaigns, thus confirming that research on the antecedents of the crowdfunding strategies is still evolving (Troise et al., 2020). The third limitation is that most research on crowdfunding has been developed about large companies, organizations and specific industries. In such a domain, little attention has been paid to effectively implement and use crowdfunding by leveraging the knowledge-based foundations of the seeker firms and the platforms.

In contrast, limited studies have paid a rigorous way to the vast but often fragmented world of the Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) (Eldridge et al., 2019). In particular, existing research has not yet developed till now a more nuanced understanding of the trends, opportunities and challenges emerging in terms of crowdfunding strategies and campaigns in SMEs. Consequently, at this critical juncture, this paper was initiated to stimulate research capable of addressing the above limitations and explicitly identify and analyse the spectrum of knowledge-based resources, assets and competencies grounding successful crowdfunding strategies and campaigns.

3. Crowdfunding strategies: a knowledge-based perspective

According to the idea that the ultimate aim of crowdfunding is to support long-term business performance and on the base of the fundamental and recognized role that the knowledge-based dimension can play in elaborating and implementing innovative processes and activities capable of improving performance and business continuity (Schiuma et al., 2008), the identification and the management of the knowledge-based resources and assets and related knowledge management processes grounding crowdfunding strategies and campaigns emerge as a relevant research topic to be addressed.

In the field of crowdfunding, some insights about the impact of intellectual capital and knowledge sharing on the success rate of equity crowdfunding campaigns are provided by Vrontis et al. (2020). Troise et al. (2020) explore the post-campaign growth of equity-crowdfunded companies and analyse the impact of intellectual capital on their growth. Other scholars have focused their attention specifically on the human capital (Piva and Rossi-Lamastra, 2018; Belleflamme et al., 2014; Hsu, 2007), in particular highlighting its role as a credible signal of a venture's quality in equity crowdfunding (Barbi and Mattioli, 2019; Busenitz et al., 2005). In the same vein of the quality signals, Hoening and Henkel (2015) analyse the role of patents, alliance and team experience in venture capital funding. Moreover, various but often jeopardized research has highlighted the role of the social capital in attracting early contributions in crowdfunding (Colombo et al., 2015) or as a determinant of outcome in reward-based campaigns and how social dynamics can affect crowdfunding project success (Leone and Schiavone, 2018). Finally, in different terms, other research contributions have considered the use of crowdfunding as a source of knowledge to obtain benefits, such as improved market knowledge, enhanced promotional capabilities and connections with key stakeholders (Di Pietro et al., 2018; Estrin et al., 2018; Troise and Tani, 2020): accordingly, the crowd has been seen as a provider of knowledge-based inputs – such as products, strategies and market knowledge – helping companies to improve their performance and to become more effective at innovation.

Despite this relevant analysis, there is a lack of structured and rigorous approaches to holistically identify and assess the knowledge-based dimensions involved in crowdfunding strategies (Troise et al., 2021a, b). In this regard, the lack of a common framework or agreed good practices for identifying, implementing and assessing knowledge-based dimensions in crowdfunding strategies and related campaigns seems to emerge.

To fill these gaps, this study aims to shed more light on what are the knowledge-based dimensions involved in crowdfunding strategies and then to design and implement a crowdfunding campaign according to a knowledge-based perspective by leveraging human, relational, tangible and intangible factors affecting them. The Knoware Tree, conceived initially as an interpretative and normative framework identifying and analyzing the knowledge assets categories affecting organizational and territorial systems (Schiuma et al., 2008) is extended and re-adapted concerning the crowdfunding strategies. In this vein, the architecture of the original framework has been modified drawing from the literature on crowdfunding to rename, modify and extend its four knowledge assets categories and sub categories to fit them with the crowdfunding research context. Theoretically, the revised framework is then built on the assumption that the elaboration, the management and the effectiveness of a crowdfunding strategy strictly depend on: 1) the quality and prior experience of the human capital; 2) the creation of multi-level relationships; 3) the quality and use of tangible and intangible assets in terms of tools, technologies and methodologies. The resulting “Knoware Tree for crowdfunding strategies” identifies and describes interrelated knowledge assets from a systematic and holistic perspective. Specifically, the revised framework comprises two main pillars: the stakeholder knoware and the structural knoware. The first pillar refers to the human capital, in the form of actors involved in the crowdfunding projects and activities, namely founders, technicians and related competencies. Moreover, it refers to the relational capital required to foster and promote the knowledge transfer and acquisition in crowdfunding strategies. The second pillar includes all the tangible and intangible assets relevant to developing, acquiring, managing and disseminating knowledge. Moreover, it refers to the relational capital required to foster and promote knowledge transfer and acquisition in crowdfunding strategies. The identified pillars and related sub-dimensions are discussed below in detail (see Figure 1).

3.1 Stakeholder knoware

The first pillar of the “Knoware Tree for crowdfunding strategies” refers to the human capital of the actors involved in the projects and activities and related competencies and relationships.

3.1.1 Human capital

The “Human capital” dimension refers to all the knowledge influencing human behaviour, namely the know-how, abilities and competencies. In general terms, human capital pertains to the individual's knowledge and abilities that allow for changes in action and economic growth (Coleman, 1988). According to a crowdfunding-related perspective, the human capital dimension of the seekers can be analyzed by considering prior industry experience and prior start-up experience (Troise et al., 2020, pp. 4–5). The first is related to the years spent by the founders/s of the company in a specific industry and it is considered a significant success factor for the firm's growth (Song et al., 2008; Colombo and Grilli, 2005; Bosma et al., 2004; Rauch et al., 2005). Also prior start-up experience is considered a relevant factor in leading entrepreneurial decision-making processes and company development (Gimeno et al., 1997; Omri and Boujelbene, 2015), since it affects the quantity of identified opportunities, the capacity to avoid or prevent mistakes and the mobilization of external resources (Colombo and Grilli, 2005; Kelley et al., 2011; Hsu, 2007). The quality of the human capital of the founders is also related to their soft entrepreneurial skills, such as motivation, self-regulation, self-awareness, self-efficacy and social skills (Bager, 2011) as well as their capacity to inspire trust and reputation to the potential investors. The users, instead, can be composed of people belonging to heterogeneous groups. They may have different motivations to invest and belong to different categories, according to a classification based on different criteria. Understanding the composition of the users means addressing the different needs and engaging all the stakeholders in the process.

3.1.2 Relational capital

The “Relational capital” dimension refers to the knowledge assets linked to internal and external, formal and informal relationships among all the stakeholders involved in the organizational and business dynamics both at a micro-level and macro-level (Lerro and Schiuma, 2009; Schiuma et al., 2008). In crowdfunding, it is widely acknowledged that relational capital positively impacts the new companies' performance and enhances the access to financial resources (Troise et al., 2020). Accordingly, managing the system of relationships with the stakeholders in effective way is fundamental for the successful development of a crowdfunding strategy (Hsu and Fang, 2009; Wu et al., 2008); in particular the networking capability is considered a fundamental founder's ability to establish and manage relationships with third parties potentially playing the role of endorsers (Green and Ryan, 2005; Hormiga et al., 2011a, b; Stuart et al., 1999).

3.2 Structural knoware

The second pillar characterizing the “Knoware Tree for crowdfunding strategies”, includes tangible and intangible assets relevant for the development, acquisition, management and diffusion of knowledge in crowdfunding strategies and campaigns.

3.2.1 Tangible assets embodying knowledge

The dimension “Tangible assets embodying knowledge” includes all the tangible organizational and structural assets grouping know-how essential for knowledge management, transfer, or application (Lerro and Schiuma, 2009). In particular, from the crowdfunding perspective, this dimension includes two sub-categories of knowledge artifacts: the knowledge repositories and the technological infrastructures. The knowledge repositories are the physical infrastructures representing a precondition of the transfer of tangible and intangible knowledge assets in the specific contexts where they arise. Some examples of knowledge repositories may be research centers, knowledge-intensive companies, business schools, creativity lab for brainstorming, prototyping labs, business incubators and accelerators, innovation centers and co-working spaces, namely labs and structures aimed at enhancing and supporting the learning processes and the development of crowdfunding-oriented mindsets and actions. The technological infrastructure represents the technical assets and tools supporting knowledge transfer, creation, development processes and includes ICT, digital communication systems, emerging technologies and networks (Lerro and Schiuma, 2009). IT infrastructure has to be stable, functional and advanced. Accordingly, both internal or external endowment and use of platforms are relevant factors to be addressed and effectively managed.

3.2.2 Intangible assets embodying knowledge

The “Intangible assets embodying knowledge” dimension includes all the structural and organizational assets having a soft characterization. Some examples are routines, procedures, processes, task designing, organizational culture, value and leadership and corporate management philosophies (Schiuma et al., 2008). In crowdfunding, these assets are reflected in context and methodologies. The context includes the learning atmosphere and the knowledge dynamics activated in the crowdfunding initiative More recently, it emerges the importance to shift from a top-down to a users-involvement perspective in crowdfunding and, consequently, a renewed approach using innovative methodologies. Several examples of innovative methodologies that may enhance crowdfunding initiatives may be identified in project based-learning, problem based-learning, digital stories and storytelling, collaborative communities, web-based videos, narrated stop-motion animation, modelling, digital video, augmented reality, gamification, simulation, design thinking (Sousa et al., 2019; Sousa and Rocha, 2019; Sarooghi et al., 2019; Fiertler, 2020; Glen et al., 2014; Prashar, 2015; Noraini et al., 2020). These methodologies build stable foundations that enhance active learning, knowledge acquisition, creation and transfer and the empowerment of founders' strategic knowledge and soft-skills.

4. Exploiting knowledge-based dimension in a crowdfunding strategy: the case of Rendimento Etico

4.1 Research design

According to the RQ, a case study (Yin, 2003) has been developed - according to the literature guidelines - to provide the first set of empirical insights supporting the evidence emerging from the above proposed theoretical framework. It is widely acknowledged that case studies contribute to enriching the empirical base through the answer to “why” and “how” questions, especially when the researchers' interpretation is required in addition to simple context observation (Eisenhardt and Graebner, 2007; Glaser and Strauss, 1967a; Pettigrew, 1990; Yin, 2003), or when quantitative or statistical data are difficult to extract (Robinson and Shumar, 2014). In this regard, this research focuses on “how” the above-described knowledge-based dimensions may affect the success of a crowdfunding strategy. Furthermore, following Yin (2003, 2013) the case study aims to gather valuable insights, also through literal replication of real-life situations, by identifying and defining critical learning points related to the fields of analysis that will result in helpful empirical guidelines both for scholars and practitioners. To better empirically investigate the field of crowdfunding from a knowledge-based perspective, this case study has been focused on a crowdfunding strategy designed and managed by an Italian start-up operating in the real estate industry. According to Gustafsson (2017), the choice of a single case study enhances the creation of a high-quality theory allowing a deeper understanding of the explored phenomenon. However, being aware of limitations due to this choice (Hodkinson and Hodkinson, 2001), future research on a broader sample might contribute to extending the rigour and the validity of gathered insights, as well as fostering their generalizability (Donmoyer, 2000). Three main reasons motivated the choice of the start-up as a theoretical and empirical relevant case: (1) it is identified as one of the best practice in the field of crowdfunding strategy implemented by start-ups and SMEs; (2) it is both a start-up that has grown thanks to crowdfunding campaigns and a crowdfunding platform characterized by the proprietary model as defined by Schenk et al. (2019). This allowed to carry out an analysis taking into account both seekers and platforms perspectives and to answer to the need to enrich by empirical evidences this research stream as delineated by Schenk et al. (2019), (3) the availability of a large number of secondary sources like YouTube interviews, blog and press articles, online forums and website, allows proper knowledge of the company and its crowdfunding strategy, enabling a first but high-quality exploration and comprehension of the phenomenon. In other words, the start-up selected as a case study was chosen because of its capacity to be declined and interpreted according to the concepts under investigation (Siggelkow, 2007). The aim, then, was not to report on an inductive study; but to use this example to contribute to the underexplored theory and show how the various conceptual issues may be operatively applied and provide more contextual insights (Piekkari et al., 2009; Dubois and Gadde, 2002; Yin, 2003; Eisenhardt, 1989). Moreover, this approach is in line with the issue postulated by Glaser and Strauss (1967a, b) about the correspondence between theory and data. The sampling of the case study was driven by theoretical motivations and finalized, once theoretical consistency was secured, by methodological and convenience motivations related to the practical development of the research activities.

4.2 Research context

Rendimento Etico is a real estate crowdfunding proprietary platform with an innovative value proposition: to earn with houses ethically, while protecting lenders.

The start-up team comprises real estate professionals and experts in various areas: lawyers, notaries, accountants, architects and engineers. They work in synergy on several fronts, to deliver the best opportunities offered by the market and create a bridge between creditors, debtors and lenders. In particular, over the years, they have helped many people and families who risk losing their homes, while allowing the platform's lenders and partners to make attractive profits. The company enters into negotiations with creditors before a house is auctioned. The main goal is then to eliminate the debt of people living in a difficult economic situation, thus allowing them to start a new life. It all started from the vision of the two founders, already experts in the sector and active in previous entrepreneurial experiences, including a blog and an e-learning platform that helped create a community and raise awareness on the topic. With the courses provided the founders have demonstrated that it is possible to make profits in an ethical and sustainable way, helping people in difficulty. Through Rendimento Etico, therefore, it is possible to give everyone the opportunity to get engaged in start-up activities and share their goals. Thanks to crowdfunding it is possible to access an interesting sector such as real estate even without having a large amount of capital to lend and help more and more people avoid losing their homes at auction. RE, definitively, is a real estate crowdfunding platform that looks to the future and proposes a new way to face the challenges of the market.

4.3 Data collection and analysis

Authors, being enabled to access secondary data, were informed about the company's business activity along the time. The secondary data collection followed an inductive and iterative process (Strauss and Corbin, 1998). The process was mainly oriented towards observing, clustering, codifying and reporting critical insights related to each considered knowledge dimension. Secondary available data were collected through various methods, but mainly through: 1) document analysis to gain a first comprehensive understanding of the initiatives (Bowen, 2009); 2) listening, coding and analysis of online pre-recorded semi-structured interviews (Spradley, 2016) with founders and project managers.

4.4 Validity and reliability

Validity and reliability were secured by following the guidelines proposed by Yin (2003). In particular, adopting multiple methods to investigate the phenomenon and collect data allowed construct validity. Moreover, validity is also increased by the awareness that the choice of analysing a single case study may limit an exhaustive generalization of results. On the other hand, reliability can be supported by storing all the data collected. In this regard, the following triangulation of gathered insights and the possibility of their generalization to other crowdfunding strategies improved the validity of the results.

4.5 Research findings

According to the purpose of this study, findings are described below based on the knowledge assets for crowdfunding strategy identified towards the proposed conceptual framework. In particular, the case study is analysed by paying attention to the management and exploitation of the knowledge assets considering both seekers and platform perspectives.

1. Stakeholder Knoware

The first block of the Knoware Tree is central to the successful strategies of the crowdfunding sector in general. This is because crowdfunding is essentially based on shared interactions and investments with the goal of funding and implementing projects. Similarly, these components are focal points for the startup, considering both human and relational capital. In particular, human capital proved to be fundamental to the startup's growth and success. Thanks to the know-how and previous industry and startup experience of the founders, who were already entrepreneurs in the same field and in other sectors such as hospitality, it was possible to create a community sensitive to real estate and to convince and instil confidence in the investors who supported the realization of the business idea and the platform. The platform also relies heavily on human capital, as the selection of projects to be funded is rigorous and takes into account to a large extent the skills and reputation of the applicants. This is because the credibility and success of candidate projects inevitably affect the brand's reputation. Relational capital has also proven to be a crucial dimension of the platform's success. To quote one of the two founders in a YouTube interview, “Rendimento Etico aims to promote the creation of a network of companies that propose projects on the platform, that have low fixed costs, that can invest in human capital and develop their own business within the platform, benefiting from the services and skills that Rendimento Etico can offer them.” In addition to the network of companies, Rendimento Etico contributes to creating an extensive network composed of professional and private investors who want to invest ethically, as well as citizens with houses to be auctioned who hope to support Rendimento Etico. This creates a cycle of win-win relationships in which all the actors create and capture value.

1. Structural Knoware

In terms of the structural dimensions that embody the knowledge characteristic of Rendimento Etico, both tangible and intangible components can be identified. In particular, regarding knowledge repositories, the start-up has always focused on approaches aimed at codifying knowledge and ensuring learning processes for all employees and stakeholders engaged. In particular, protocols were created to instruct the different activities of a crowdfunding campaign promoted by the platform. A school was also created to train employees and anyone who wanted to learn how to take advantage of opportunities in the real estate sector on the internet. This has helped create a community housed in a blog that has also become a place for learning and virtual knowledge sharing. In addition, every crowdfunding campaign promoted on the platform features rigorous knowledge repositories that build the confidence of investors and applicants. The statement of one of the two founders from an interview published in an online article underlines this issue: “All projects published on the platform include legal opinions, techniques and an executive summary. We also provide lenders with three assessments in the special financing terms: Project, Project Profitability and Applicant. Everything can be viewed several days before the loan is granted. This makes all the difference because it shows transparency from the beginning”. The dimensions described above also show the impact on the core activities of the technological infrastructure component, which is characterized by the crowdfunding platform, blog and e-learning platform and software that facilitates teamwork and communication.

Finally, the critical intangible components of Rendimento Etico can be identified from the collected data. The context is strongly focused on value creation and the adopted methodologies. Indeed, the start-up's goal is to adopt user-centric approaches that aim to create value for all stakeholders. Through these approaches, which are also taught in schools, it is possible to understand the opportunities offered by the context, grasp the challenges and needs of users to design the offer and maximize results. Although the investments are ethical, the startup does not engage in charity but rather, starting from a charitable goal, aims to create value and redistribute profits and proceeds to all links in the value chain.

5. Conclusions and future research

From a knowledge-based perspective, crowdfunding strategies and campaigns have been read and interpreted according to the availability and use of specific knowledge assets and resources to be managed by effective crowdfunding initiatives. This paper contributes to identifying and analyzing the knowledge-based dimensions grounding effective crowdfunding strategies and campaigns in a structured and holistic manner.

The findings derived from the practical application supported the theoretical assumptions. In particular, the case study contributed to supporting managers and other stakeholders of crowdfunding platforms or initiatives in identifying and categorizing the critical knowledge-based dimensions and their interdependence, fostering the identification and definition of avenues and strategies for improving the processes.

The research provides theoretical and practical implications. In terms of theoretical implications, the paper provides a conceptual framework capable of fostering a specific research stream and carrying out a first holistic and systematic knowledge-based perspective. We believe our research may contribute to the existing literature, depicting a comprehensive picture of the intellectual capital components that seekers have to identify and manage in crowdfunding. While doing so, the study significantly addresses the challenge launched by Troise et al. (2021a, b) to enrich prior but highly fragmented studies on the role of intellectual capital components in crowdfunding. On the other hand, in terms of managerial and practical implications, the analysis of the models and tools developed and discussed can be useful to support the elaboration and the application of practical knowledge-based approaches, protocols and routines for the value generation in the crowdfunding field and to drive the designer of crowdfunding platforms and strategies to develop more effective and impactful initiatives and campaigns. Accordingly, when elaborating a crowdfunding strategy, it should be effectively highlighted that seekers have and are capable of managing intellectual capital differently. This is particularly true for new ventures that are generally challenged to provide information about their quality, particularly about founders, their previous experiences, potential and real networks and partnerships and innovation capacity. Moreover, the paper also contributes to the enrichment of the debate launched recently by Schenk et al. (2019) about the second- order problem of crowdfunding about the decision of the seeker to proceed internally with a proprietary platform, or to rely on the use of an open, external platform.

This study highlights limitations before closing to be hopefully faced in future research. The first limitation of the study resides in the analysis of a single case study which may hinder the generalizability of the results. Therefore, the analysis should be continuously improved and extended with empirical works based on a broader set of case studies – also related to open platforms - to foster the findings' generalizability, collecting evidence and rigorous and valid insights and derive guidelines to implement, manage, improve and assess crowdfunding strategies and campaigns. The second limitation regards the coverage of the literature about intellectual capital and its declination to crowdfunding. Accordingly, other relevant knowledge assets could be used, read and interpreted for the same objectives and may matter in the specific context. The third limitation, connected to the second one, is the need to quantitatively identify and assess the endowment and the use of the knowledge assets and to better frame cause-and-effect dynamics for the success of the initiatives, as well as to take into account the time variable.

Figures

Figure 1

The Knoware Tree for crowdfunding strategies