What Makes Crowdfunding Projects Successful ‘Before’ and ‘During’ the Campaign?

  • Alessandro Marelli
  • Andrea OrdaniniEmail author
Part of the FGF Studies in Small Business and Entrepreneurship book series (FGFS)


This paper sets out to deepen the understanding of crowdfunding campaigns, and investigates a hand-collected database of 500 projects taken from, the biggest crowdfunding website in terms of revenue. Through a logistic regression and mediation model, our study tries to explain which are the predictors that can help reaching the funding goal of a crowdfunding initiative.

The first part of the study aims at predicting the chances of projects being successful based on a pool of ex-ante predictors. The results revealed that the presence of a video explaining the product’s features and adding special offers for early backers are highly correlated with a higher probability of success. In contrast, displaying a Facebook profile with less than 500 friends, having the time to market too long and setting the funding goal too high will lower the odds of success.

The second part of the study consists of a mediation model carried out in order to understand the relationship between the ex-ante predictors, a list of proposed mediators that change during the campaign, and the rate of funding. We were able to discover two important effects: the presence of special offers for early backers and showing commitment in the platform by helping other projects are two good mediators influencing the relationship between the number of purchases of the product and the rate of funding.


Crowdfunding Success Predictors Mediation 


  1. Agrawal, A., Catalini, C., & Goldfarb, A. (2011). The geography of crowdfunding (NBER Working Paper No. 16820). Retrieved from
  2. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research—Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173–1182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Belleflamme, P., Lambert, T., & Schwienbacher, A. (2013). Individual crowdfunding practices. Venture Capital, 14(4), 313–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Belleflamme, P., Lambert, T., & Schwienbacher, A. (2014). Crowdfunding: Tapping the right crowd. Manuscript submitted for publication.Google Scholar
  5. Brabham, D. C. (2008). Crowdsourcing as a model for problem solving: An introduction and cases. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, 14, 75–90.Google Scholar
  6. Burtch, G., Ghose, A., & Wattal, S. (2011). An empirical examination of the antecedents and consequences of investment patterns in crowd-funded markets. SSRN Electronic Journal, 24, 499–519. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.1928168 Google Scholar
  7. Chitika. (2003). The value of Google result positioning. Retrieved from
  8. Gravitate Online. (2011). 2nd page rankings: You’re the #1 loser. Retrieved from
  9. Iyengar, S. S., & Lepper, M. R. (2000). When choice is demotivating: Can one desire too much of a good thing? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(6), 995–1006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Jennings, P. (2000). New media arts, new funding models. Creativity and Culture, The Rockefeller Foundation. Retrieved from
  11. Kaplan, S. N., & Stromberg, P. (2000). Financial contracting theory meets the real world: An empirical analysis of venture capital contract (NBER Working Paper No. 7660). Retrieved from
  12. Kappel, T. (2009). Ex ante crowdfunding and the recording industry: A model for the U.S.? Loyola of Los Angeles Entertainment Law Review, 29(3), 375–385.Google Scholar
  13. Kickstarter. (2015). Retrieved from
  14. Massolution. (2013). Crowdfunding industry report 2013. Retrieved from
  15. Mollick, E. (2014). The dynamics of crowdfunding: An exploratory study. Journal of Business Venturing, 29(1), 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ordanini, A., Miceli, L., Pizzetti, M., & Parasuraman, A. (2011). Crowd-funding: Transforming customers into investors through innovative service platforms. Journal of Service Management, 22(4), 443–470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 36(4), 717–731.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Wadhwa, V., Aggarwal, R., Holly, K. Z., & Salkever, A. (2009). Anatomy of an entrepreneur: Family background and motivation. Retrieved from Google Scholar
  19. Ward, C., & Ramachandran, V. (2011). Crowdfunding the next hit: Microfunding online experience goods. Paper presented at annual meeting of INFORMS, Austin, TX.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Bocconi UniversityMilanItaly
  2. 2.Department of MarketingBocconi UniversityMilanItaly

Personalised recommendations