Posted on January 20, 2011 - by Team blur

Crowdsourcing Myths: Many Heads Aren’t Better….

The old saying goes: ‘two heads are better than one’. So lots and lots of heads must be even better? Right?

Some would say otherwise, that utilising Crowdsourcing for things like testing and improving open source software or gathering data is risky and will  lead to poor results and unreliable data. That the wisdom of many leads to confusion of many. This is a myth.

There are different types of Crowdsourcing for different tasks. Bounded Crowdsourcing, the type used at blur Group, is where a network of experts are assigned a task. The wisdom of the crowd isn’t in doubt as the crowd is made up of professional people that are experts in their fields. The results delivered are second to none as we only have the best people in our Crowds. This is also the case with many open sourced software packages. The people having input into the software are developers. These people know computers and software inside out. Literally. It is what they do and they are experts in doing it.

The only time that Crowdsourcing carries a risk of becoming innacurate or unreliable is when we deal with unbounded Crowdsourcing. This is the opposite of bounded Crowdsourcing, meaning that the crowd is more open and not populated by experts. This is an advantage when trying to find out the opinion of a group ‘layman’, people not educated in a particular field. Both these types of Crowdsourcing have their own strengths and appropriate uses. As long as each is used in the correct context, the correct data will be collected or the end product will be produced.

If utilised in the right way, Crowdsourcing has the potential to change the way all manner of businesses operate for the better.

Welcome to the future of business as we know it.