A surreal illustration representing the tension between collaboration and competition in crowdsourcing.

The Dark Side of Crowdsourcing: How Competition Can Sabotage Collaboration

Soraya Malik in Tech & Innovation December 2025 • 4 min read.

"Uncover the surprising ways peer reviews in online communities can backfire, leading to strategic sabotage and undermining the collaborative spirit."

Crowdsourcing has revolutionized problem-solving and innovation, evolving into a powerful tool for businesses and organizations alike. However, as contests and challenges become embedded within online communities, a hidden tension emerges: the conflict between competitive motives and the desire for collaboration. This tension can lead community members to choose between acting in self-interest or upholding the collaborative ideal of the community.

Imagine a scenario where community members are asked to evaluate their rivals' ideas. The competitive motive whispers, urging them to strategically downplay strong contenders to increase their own chances of winning. The collaborative motive, on the other hand, encourages honest and fair evaluations for the benefit of the entire community. How do individuals navigate this challenging landscape? Do they succumb to the allure of self-interest, or do they champion the spirit of collaboration?

Recent research delves into this very question, analyzing peer evaluations in the Threadless online community. With a vast dataset of over 38 million peer evaluations spanning 10 years, the study uncovers the surprising ways competition can undermine collaboration, leading to strategic behavior, including sabotage. This exploration highlights the importance of understanding these dynamics to foster more sustainable and collaborative crowdsourcing environments.

Strategic Sabotage: When Competition Turns Destructive

A surreal illustration representing the tension between collaboration and competition in crowdsourcing.

The study reveals a nuanced picture of how community members resolve the tension between competition and collaboration. As skill level increases, individuals become more strategic, shifting from self-promotion to actively sabotaging their closest competitors. This sabotage takes the form of unfairly negative evaluations, strategically designed to diminish the chances of rivals who pose the greatest threat.

However, the research also uncovers signs of collaborative behavior. High-skilled members sometimes show leniency toward community members who do not directly threaten their chance of winning, suggesting a calculated approach that balances self-interest with a degree of community spirit. This leniency could be interpreted as a form of 'moral licensing,' where individuals justify their strategic evaluations by also showing some collaborative behavior.

Increased Competition: As skill level rises, individuals prioritize competitive strategies.
Strategic Sabotage: Highly skilled members target close competitors with negative evaluations.
Calculated Leniency: Some leniency is extended to non-threatening community members.

These findings highlight the complex interplay between competition and collaboration in crowdsourcing communities. The incentives designed to encourage participation and effort can inadvertently introduce a competitive element that undermines the collaborative ideal. Understanding this dynamic is crucial for designing more effective and sustainable crowdsourcing platforms.

Building a Sustainable Crowdsourcing Community

The research provides valuable insights for fostering more sustainable crowdsourcing communities. By understanding how competition can lead to strategic sabotage, platforms can implement design changes to encourage collaboration and mitigate the negative effects of self-interest. This might involve refining evaluation mechanisms, promoting a stronger sense of community, or finding new ways to reward participation beyond simply winning the contest.

About this Article -

This article was crafted using a human-AI hybrid and collaborative approach. AI assisted our team with initial drafting, research insights, identifying key questions, and image generation. Our human editors guided topic selection, defined the angle, structured the content, ensured factual accuracy and relevance, refined the tone, and conducted thorough editing to deliver helpful, high-quality information.See our About page for more information.

This article is based on research published under:

DOI-LINK: 10.1287/orsc.2021.15163,

Title: Competition And Collaboration In Crowdsourcing Communities: What Happens When Peers Evaluate Each Other?

Subject: econ.gn cs.gt cs.hc q-fin.ec stat.ap

Authors: Christoph Riedl, Tom Grad, Christopher Lettl

Published: 22-04-2024

Everything You Need To Know

What is strategic sabotage in the context of crowdsourcing, and how does it manifest?

Strategic sabotage in crowdsourcing refers to the deliberate actions taken by community members to undermine their competitors, particularly in online communities. The study, using the Threadless online community as a case, found that highly skilled members often engage in strategic sabotage by giving unfairly negative evaluations to their closest rivals. This behavior aims to decrease the rivals' chances of winning contests and competitions within the community, highlighting the tension between competitive motives and the collaborative ideals of crowdsourcing.

How does the level of skill influence the competitive behavior observed within crowdsourcing communities like Threadless?

The research indicates that as skill level increases within a crowdsourcing community, such as the one on Threadless, individuals tend to adopt more competitive strategies. Initially, the study points out, individuals may focus on self-promotion. However, as their skill and experience grow, a shift occurs, and members become more strategic in their actions. This often manifests as strategic sabotage, where high-skilled members target their closest competitors with negative evaluations. The findings suggest that this shift is a direct result of the competitive environment, where success is directly tied to the outcomes of contests and evaluations.

What is meant by 'calculated leniency' in the context of the crowdsourcing study, and why does it occur?

Calculated leniency refers to the behavior where high-skilled members show some degree of leniency toward community members who do not directly threaten their chances of winning. This approach suggests a balancing act between self-interest and a degree of community spirit. The study reveals that this behavior might be a form of 'moral licensing,' where individuals justify their strategic sabotage by also showing some collaborative behavior. They might extend leniency to those less threatening, which helps them appear less malicious while still prioritizing their success in the competition.

What are the implications of the findings on competition and collaboration for the design of crowdsourcing platforms?

The findings underscore the need to understand how competition can lead to strategic sabotage. The study highlights how competitive incentives can inadvertently undermine the collaborative spirit of crowdsourcing platforms. Therefore, platform designers should refine evaluation mechanisms to promote collaboration and mitigate the negative effects of self-interest. Potential design changes include promoting a stronger sense of community and finding new ways to reward participation beyond winning, to foster a more sustainable and collaborative environment.

How does the research on the Threadless community help us understand the interplay between competition and collaboration in crowdsourcing?

The research, analyzing the peer evaluations in the Threadless online community, provides a deep understanding of how competition can undermine collaboration. With over 38 million peer evaluations, the study identifies strategic sabotage, where highly skilled members use negative evaluations to target rivals. It also uncovers calculated leniency as a strategy. These findings underscore the complex interplay between competition and collaboration and highlight the tension between self-interest and the community's collaborative ideal. The research demonstrates the unexpected ways competition can lead to strategic behavior within these crowdsourcing environments, providing valuable insights for creating more sustainable and effective crowdsourcing platforms.