Why not get internal crowd sourcing going first?
Some of us may think that internal crowd sourcing can be a good idea, as by this we could gather an immediate response for the software quality and most preferable for saving the annual budget. It is possible that all external crowd may not have all professional testers but when it comes to in-house  the whole crowd will consist software professionals, which will result in a faster and specified response to the end product in terms of quality. But I would personally prefer for an external crowd sourcing as all in-house testers may not have that much time to explore the application to be tested, moreover they might be already engaged in other different projects. External crowd is the one asked for that single application and could get a better end result. Also external crowd can think beyond the normal ongoing test scenarios and can explore the undiscovered part of application. So it is a better idea to get directly to external crowd sourcing.
 Crowd sourcing internally actually refers to the organization extending its problem  to a large and diverse group of self-selected contributors beyond the formal internal boundaries of a large firm; across business divisions.
Any organization can use the internal crowd source testing at the beginning based on the following points:
1. The crowd can e.g. be all employees of the company, a certain division of the company, or extended to include partners and suppliers. The crowd is specifically used for e.g. problem solving or aggregating ideas for innovation purposes 2. Good ideas that had been rejected by a traditional top-down investment review could come to fruition through internal crowd funding 3. As âinternal investorsâ would be using a âcentral poolâ of money rather than having own resources, where there is always an uncertainty if they would take the task seriously enough have the same ownership, responsibility, and the other aspect is how the incentives would work out
However, the major problem behind internal crowdsourcing is that it is not necessary that what might get popular in between the employees of the company may not be so popular in the market.
 This article intends to discuss the ill-effects of internal crowdsourcing. These are not easy to set up as they binds an engineering talent in a single domain and blocks much needed skill set. Decoding a business problem into a data problem requires setting up clear boundaries for the competition and defining the success criteria for a sustainable product.Â
Also not everything is crowd source-worthy. Issues that were more strategy-oriented are better suited for a consultant to solve. One should avoid system-level problems and challenges that require domain expertise. Both are bound to fail. Expertise is required in how you manage a project, which effectively minimizes the number of people who can join, which in many ways contradicts the actual motive for running the challenge in the first place. There is vulnerability to faulty results caused by targeted, malevolent work efforts. Since crowd workers completing micro tasks are rewarded as per task, in most cases there is a monetary incentive to complete tasks quickly rather than efficiently. Validating responses is time-taking process, and most often requesters rely on having multiple workers complete the same task to rectify errors. However, having respectively work or task completed multiple times intensifies both time and monetary costs.
