Extant literature suggests that individuals contribute to crowdsourcing programs in various ways but offers few insights about whether participants' creative contributions (original new product submissions) or their evaluative contributions (scoring or commenting on others' submissions) have a greater impact on their ability to create commercializable new products. Using a large‐scale data set obtained from the crowdsourcing website Threadless.com, our study examines the relative impact of participants' creative and evaluative contributions and the effects of different types of evaluative contributions on submission success (i.e., a participant's ability to generate a commercializable new product). Our findings reveal that submission success is enhanced when participants generate both creative and evaluative contributions. In addition, we find that submission success depends not only on the volume of the creative contributions that a participant makes but also on the temporal consistency with which said contributions are made (i.e., adopting a consistent vs. a sporadic submission pattern). Specifically, our findings show that a participant's creative contribution consistency enhances their submission success, especially when creative contribution volume is high. This research extends the existing crowdsourcing literature by offering new insights about how contribution type and contribution consistency in a crowdsourcing program impact submission success.
