Exploring the benefits of integrating business model research within living lab projects

Business model and living lab research both have similar objectives – to maximize the probability of successful market introduction of innovative solutions – be it through different means. Yet, there are still only few studies or reports discussing both, with those studies that do touch the subject staying at a high level. iMinds Living Labs has gained a lot of experience in combined living lab and business model innovation projects and, rather than being competing approaches, our results have shown that these two research methodologies can be complementary, where the combined approach turns out to be more powerful than each individual approach used alone. The goal of this article is to promote the inclusion of business model research in a model of "a living lab as a service" (and vice versa) by explaining the benefits and by introducing a practical framework to implement such combined research tracks based on the experience at iMinds Living Labs over the past few years

Transfer Scenarios: Grounding Innovation with Marginal Practices

Transfer scenarios is a method developed to support the design of innovative interactive technology. Such a method should help the designer to come up with inventive ideas, and at the same time provide grounding in real human needs. In transfer scenarios, we use marginal practices to encourage a changed mindset throughout the design process. A marginal practice consists of individuals who share an activity that they find meaningful. We regard these individuals not as end-users, but as valuable input in the design process. We applied this method when designing novel applications for autonomous embodied agents, e.g. robots. Owners of unusual pets, such as snakes and spiders, were interviewed - not with the intention to design robot pets, but to determine underlying needs and interests of their practice. The results were then used to design a set of applications for more general users, including a dynamic living-room wall and a set of communicating hobby robots

Getting personal: exploring the usage of persona in order to optimize the involvement of a living lab panel

iMinds Living Labs started with living lab research in 2009. Living lab research involves gathering user feedback on innovations implemented in a real-life context (Eriksson et al., 2005). This can be facilitated by means of a panel-based approach (Schuurman et al., 2012). In order to keep a panel motivated for participating in living lab research it can be beneficial to generate a sense of belonging to a community. Logghe et al. (2014) examined the motivations and behavior of the panel members and concluded that there are four groups of panel member types, each with their own motivations and behavior patterns. But how can a living lab get to know its panel members better? How can every panel member be approached in their preferred way? How can every panel member be stimulated to keep on participating in living lab research? How can a community feeling be created? In order to gather more information about each panel member type, we developed a four way segmentation of the panel which we translated into four distinct persona. These persona will be used as a basis for community building, a future panel kit, experimenting with research approaches,… supplemented with other methodologies

Living Labs as Tools for Open Innovation

This paper presents a Living Lab in Stockholm as a focal point for discussing how the Living Lab concept can be extended and used for engaging in multiorganizational open innovation. Although Living Labs have been found to have potential for driving innovation through collaboration, more research is necessary to find tangible ways of organizing this kind of collaboration. The paper is explorative and empirically induced from an ongoing development and practical implementation of a Living Lab at Stockholm-Arlanda Airport - Sweden's largest airport situated outside Stockholm. This Airport Living Lab involves a number of large industrial and academic stakeholders aiming at ensuring multi-organizational innovation delivery. Of special interest is how the Living Lab concept should evolve to continue creating conditions for user-oriented innovations through multi-organizational collaboration which would not necessarily take place otherwise. Congruent with the explorative aim of the paper it ends up in a discussion about five propositions that should be on the agenda of research and implementation for Living Lab founders in the coming years.Living Labs, Open innovation, Electronic Collaboration Tools

Analogue switch-off vs digital switch-on: rethinking policy strategies in the digital television era

In the last few decades, the traditional television landscape has come under pressure and the diffusion of digital television (DTV) services emerged as a hot issue. Especially for policy makers, access to DTV is considered a key element in the further development of the information society. Facilitating equal access for all to the new possibilities offered by digital television should be the central objective. In this context, policy makers are confronted with various challenges: How can they facilitate a smooth transition from analogue to digital terrestrial television? How should they handle digital dividend issues? In dealing with these topics, this article stresses the importance of a user-oriented approach

Co-production for innovation: the urban living lab experience

Urban Living Labs (ULLs) are public spaces where local authorities engage citizens to develop innovative urban services. Their strength and popularity stem from a methodology based on open innovation, experimentation, and citizen engagement. Although the ULL methodology is supposed to largely adopt a co-production approach, connections between the two have not yet been thoroughly investigated. The paper seeks to fill this gap by examining through a qualitative analysis three experiences of ULLs made in Amsterdam, Boston and Turin. Specifically, the paper aims to assess whether ULLs can be really conceptualised as a form of co-production and, if so, which elements characterised them as innovative in comparison to \u2018mainstreaming\u2019 co-production; Then it analyses benefits and drawbacks related to their implementation

Guidelines Towards Better Participation of Older Adults in Software Development Processes using a new SPIRAL Method and Participatory Approach

This paper presents a new method of engaging older participants in the process of application and IT solutions development for older adults for emerging IT and tech startups. A new method called SPIRAL (Support for Participant Involvement in Rapid and Agile software development Labs) is proposed which adds both sustainability and flexibility to the development process with older adults. This method is based on the participatory approach and user empowerment of older adults with the aid of a bootstrapped Living Lab concept and it goes beyond well established user-centered and empathic design. SPIRAL provides strategies for direct involvement of older participants in the software development processes from the very early stage to support the agile approach with rapid prototyping, in particular in new and emerging startup environments with limited capabilities, including time, team and resources

Living Labs as a navigation system for innovative business models in the music industry

Media industries and other rapidly evolving, complex, uncertain markets have a hard time to survive if they do not optimize or radically change their business models. This paper analyses the potential of involving all relevant stakeholders of the value network in the development of a business model by means of a panel based multi-method Living Lab approach. Using an in-depth case study analysis, a critical analysis of both the potential value and the weaknesses of such an approach are being assessed. Although some difficulties exist, opening this innovation process and involving external actors in a structural way has the potential to increase the value creation and sustainability of the business model. This paper also stresses the importance of multidisciplinary research on multi-stakeholder involvement in business model innovation

Interfaces of the Agriculture 4.0

The introduction of information technologies in the environmental field is impacting and changing even a traditional sector like agriculture. Nevertheless, Agriculture 4.0 and data-driven decisions should meet user needs and expectations. The paper presents a broad theoretical overview, discussing both the strategic role of design applied to Agri-tech and the issue of User Interface and Interaction as enabling tools in the field. In particular, the paper suggests to rethink the HCD approach, moving on a Human-Decentered Design approach that put together user-technology-environment and the importance of the role of calm technologies as a way to place the farmer, not as a final target and passive spectator, but as an active part of the process to aim the process of mitigation, appropriation from a traditional cultivation method to the 4.0 one