Welcome to the December 2015 issue of the Technology Innovation Management Review – the first of two issues on the theme of Living Labs and User Innovation. It is my pleasure introduce our guest editors for December and January: Seppo Leminen (Laurea University of Applied Sciences and Aalto University, Finland), Dimitri Schuurman (iMinds and Ghent University, Belgium), Mika Westerlund (Carleton University, Canada), and Eelko Huizingh (University of Groningen, Netherlands)

Huizingh, Eelko

Leminen, Seppo

McPhee, Chris

Schuurman, Dimitri

Westerlund, Mika

Theseus  theses and publications of the Universities of Applied Sciences

         Laurea University of Applied Sciences   Ratatie 22, 01300 Vantaa, Finland Phone +358 (0)9 8868 7150 Fax +358 (0)9 8868 7200 firstname.surname@laurea.fi       www.laurea.fi Business ID       1046216-1 Domicile           Vantaa         PLEASE NOTE! THIS IS SELF-ARCHIVED VERSION OF THE ORIGINAL ARTICLE   To cite this Article: McPhee, C., Leminen, S., Schuurman, D., Westerlund, M., & Huizingh, E. (2015) Editorial: Living  Labs and User Innovation (December 2015). Technology Innovation Management Review, 5(12) 3–5.   URL: http://timreview.ca/article/947 CC BY 3.0            Technology Innovation Management Review December 2015 (Volume 5, Issue 12)3www.timreview.caEditorial: Living Labs and User InnovationChris McPhee, Editor-in-ChiefSeppo Leminen, Dimitri Schuurman,Mika Westerlund, and Eelko Huizingh, Guest EditorsFrom the Editor-in-ChiefWelcome to the December 2015 issue of the Technology Innovation Management Review – the first of two issues on the theme of Living Labs and User Innovation. It is my pleasure introduce our guest editors for December and January: Seppo Leminen (Laurea University of Ap-plied Sciences and Aalto University, Finland), Dimitri Schuurman (iMinds and Ghent University, Belgium), Mika Westerlund (Carleton University, Canada), and Eelko Huizingh (University of Groningen, Netherlands).Also on the topic of living labs, I am also pleased to an-nounce the publication of a new title in our Best of TIM Review book series. Edited by Mika Westerlund and Seppo Leminen, Living Labs: Best of TIM Review is now available as a Kindle ebook from Amazon (amzn.to/1T7obql). With a foreword contributed by Bror Salmelin, Advisor on Innovation Systems for the European Com-mission, the book commemorates the 10th anniversary of the birth of the living labs movement in Europe. Note that all of the net proceeds from the sales of our Best of TIM Review ebooks will be used to offset the operation-al costs of publishing future issues of the TIM Review.This current issue features five new articles on living labs. It also includes a summary of a recent TIM Lecture given by Chris Hobbs, entitled "When Are Software Sys-tems Safe Enough?" The lecture covered the changing nature of safety-critical software over the last 20 years, including a brief discussion of the standards that are dir-ecting development in the medical, industrial, and auto-motive fields.We hope you enjoy this issue of the TIM Review and will share your comments online. We welcome your submis-sions of articles on technology entrepreneurship, innov-ation management, and other topics relevant to launching and growing technology companies and solv-ing practical problems in emerging domains. Please contact us (timreview.ca/contact) with potential article top-ics and submissions.Chris McPheeEditor-in-ChiefFrom the Guest EditorsWe are glad to introduce the December issue of the Technology Innovation Management Review on the theme of Living Labs and User Innovation. Due to the large number of high-quality proposals for this special issue, we are also proud to announce that the next issue of the TIM Review (January 2016) will also offer articles on Living Labs and User Innovation. Continuing the TIM Review's history of productive col-laborations with the International Society for Profes-sional Innovation Management (ISPIM; ispim.org), the selected articles in the December and January issues were mainly developed from papers submitted to the living lab track in ISPIM 2015 Innovation Conference held in Budapest from June 19–22, 2015. In recent years, the TIM Review has played an import-ant role in developing and catalyzing research on living labs. This is the fourth thematic issue on Living Labs since the first issue on this theme was published in September 2012. With the publication of the December and January issues on this theme, the journal will have published nearly 30 articles in this area. This body of work is a clear example of the further academic develop-ment and adolescence of the field of living lab research.Prior literature proposes living labs as the latest stage on a continuum of versatile forms of open and user in-novation (cf. Leminen et al., 2012; Schuurman, 2015), with three distinctive principles that sets them apart from other forms of open innovation and collaborative innovation: the active involvement of users in innova-tion activities, public–private–people partnerships and real-life environments (cf. Leminen, 2015; Schuurman et al., 2012). This "European school" of living lab think-ing is beneficial to involve users in innovation activities (McPhee et al., 2015). This issue of TIM Review provides five theoretically and practically oriented articles for managers and innova-tion developers as well as researchers and other parties of interest. The five selected articles offer insights into living labs activities in different European countries and Technology Innovation Management Review December 2015 (Volume 5, Issue 12)4 www.timreview.caEditorial: Living Labs and User InnovationChris McPhee, Seppo Leminen, Dimitri Schuurman, Mika Westerlund, and Eelko Huizinghoffers various perspectives on living lab phenomena: openness versus closedness, business models, actor roles, spaces, and context.The first article is by Seppo Leminen, Taija Turunen, and Mika Westerlund, from Laurea University of Ap-plied Sciences in Finland, Aalto University in Finland, and Carleton University in Canada. The article sug-gests different degrees of openness in versatile innova-tion networks. The authors identified four key areas characterized by openness or closedness in innovation networks: governance, motivation, interaction, and in-novation practices. The article concludes that such key characteristics of openness can be applied to innova-tion networks to better understand their operation and management.The second article is by Olivier Rits, Dimitri Schuur-man, and Pieter Ballon from iMinds, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, and Ghent University in Belgium, who take a business model perspective on user involvement with-in living lab projects. The authors introduce a practical framework to design and implement business models for innovations developed in living labs, based on the experience of projects at iMinds Living Labs with small and medium-sized enterprises over the past few years. Such a framework makes a significant contribution to the literature of living labs given that business models are an under-researched topic in the context of living labs.In the third article, Anna Ståhlbröst and Josefin Lassinantti, from Luleå University of Technology in Sweden, adopt crowdsourcing to analyze living lab in-novation processes. The article introduces stages with-in the innovation process in living labs and couples the core role of facilitators to these stages. The article con-tributes to the literature of living labs by proposing four roles of crowd engagement. The authors emphas-ize that, to reap the benefits of crowdsourcing in living labs, managers must maintain an ethical and inclusive innovation process.The fourth article is by Birgitta Bergvall-Kåreborn, Carina Ihlström Eriksson, and Anna Ståhlbröst from Luleå University of Technology and Halmstad Uni-versity in Sweden, who propose a conceptual tool – places and spaces – to facilitate the organization of in-novation activities within living labs. The authors offer a pragmatic perspective to the literature of living labs to study how the concepts of place and space are integ-rated in design situations and how different types of places and spaces can facilitate or hinder innovation.Finally, the fifth article, contributed by Yvonne Franz, Karin Tausz, and Sarah-Kristin Thiel from Austrian Academy of Sciences, Austriatech, and the University of Salzburg, discusses contextuality and co-creation within urban living labs. By means of three case studies, the au-thors argue that urban living labs have the capability to go beyond testing and improving new products. The cases illustrate that innovation in an urban living lab context is embedded in appropriate social, structural, and institutional frameworks, which facilitate civil soci-ety involvement. Therefore, the authors propose living labs as an instrument to support urban studies within the domains of socio-spatial environment, living togeth-er, and urban policies.To sum up, we have gathered five articles that introduce diverse perspectives that will help managers and re-searchers to understand and develop living lab organizations and projects, and to apply living lab principles in their daily practice.Seppo Leminen, Dimitri Schuurman, Mika Westerlund, and Eelko HuizinghGuest editorsReferencesLeminen, S. 2015. Living Labs as Open Innovation Networks – Net-works, Roles and Innovation Outcomes. Doctoral dissertation. Hel-sinki, Finland: Aalto University. Leminen, S., Westerlund, M. & Nyström, A.-G. 2012. Living Labs as Open-Innovation Networks. Technology Innovation Management Review, 2(9): 6–11.http://timreview.ca/article/602McPhee, C., Leminen, S., & Westerlund, M. 2013. Editorial: Living Labs. Technology Innovation Management Review, 3(11): 3–4.http://timreview.ca/article/739Schuurman, D. 2015. Bridging the Gap between Open and User Innov-ation? Exploring the Value of Living Labs as a Means to Structure User Contribution and Manage Distributed Innovation. Doctoral Dissertation. Ghent University and Vrije Universiteit Brussel VUB.Schuurman, D., & Marez, L. D. 2012. Structuring User Involvement in Panel-Based Living Labs. Technology Innovation Management Re-view, 2(9): 31–38. http://timreview.ca/article/606Technology Innovation Management Review December 2015 (Volume 5, Issue 12)5 www.timreview.camain interests and research topics are situated in the domains of open innovation, user innovation, and innovation management. In early 2015, he fin-ished his PhD entitled Bridging the Gap between Open and User Innovation? Exploring the Value of Living Labs as a Means to Structure User Contribu-tion and Manage Distributed Innovation.Mika Westerlund, DSc (Econ), is an Associate Pro-fessor at Carleton University in Ottawa, Canada. He previously held positions as a Postdoctoral Scholar in the Haas School of Business at the University of California Berkeley and in the School of Economics at Aalto University in Helsinki, Finland. Mika earned his doctoral degree in Marketing from the Helsinki School of Economics in Finland. His current re-search interests include open and user innovation, the Internet of Things, business strategy, and man-agement models in high-tech and service-intensive industries.Eelko Huizingh is an Associate Professor of Innova-tion Management at the Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Groningen in the Nether-lands. His academic research focuses on the inter-section of innovation and entrepreneurship, marketing, and information technology. He has au-thored over 300 articles, has edited more than 20 special issues of journals, and has published several textbooks. His consulting activities include support of companies in their strategy and innovation ef-forts. He is also the Director of Scientific Affairs for the International Society for Professional Innovation Management (ISPIM; ispim.org) and the Director of Huizingh Academic Development (HAcademic.com), through which he has run more than 50 workshops around the world to help both junior and senioracademics to publish for career advancement and to attract funding through improved written commu-nication. About the EditorsChris McPhee is Editor-in-Chief of the Technology Innovation Management Review. He holds an MASc degree in Technology Innovation Management from Carleton University in Ottawa, Canada, and BScH and MSc degrees in Biology from Queen's University in Kingston, Canada. Chris has over 15 years of man-agement, design, and content-development experi-ence in Canada and Scotland, primarily in the science, health, and education sectors. As an advisor and editor, he helps entrepreneurs, executives, and researchers develop and express their ideas.Seppo Leminen holds positions as Principal Lec-turer at the Laurea University of Applied Sciences and Adjunct Professor in the School of Business at Aalto University in Finland. He holds a doctoral de-gree in Marketing from the Hanken School of Eco-nomics and a doctoral degree in Industrial Engineering and management in the School of Sci-ence at Aalto University. His research and consult-ing interests include living labs, open innovation, value co-creation and capture with users, relation-ships, services and business models in marketing, particularly in Internet of Things (IoT), as well as management models in high-tech and service-in-tensive industries. Results from his research have been reported in Industrial Marketing Management, the Journal of Technology and Engineering and Man-agement, Management Decision, the International Journal of Technology Management, the Internation-al Journal of Technology Marketing, the Internation-al Journal of Product Development, and the Technology Innovation Management Review, among many others.Dimitri Schuurman holds a PhD (2015) and Mas-ter's degree in Communication Sciences (2003) from Ghent University in Belgium. He joined the research group iMinds – MICT – Ghent University in 2005 and started working at iMinds Living Labs in 2009. Together with his iMinds colleagues, Dimitri de-veloped a specific living lab offering targeted at star-tups and SMEs, in which he has managed over 50 innovation projects. As a senior researcher, Dimitri is currently responsible for the methodology and academic valorization of living lab projects. He also coordinates a dynamic team of living lab research-ers from iMinds – MICT – Ghent University. His Citation: McPhee, C., Leminen, S., Schuurman, D., Westerlund, M., & Huizingh, E. 2015. Editorial: Living Labs and User Innovation. Technology Innovation Management Review, 5(12) 3–5. http://timreview.ca/article/947Keywords: living labs, user innovation, open innovation, closed innovation, business models, spaces and places, context, innovation networks, crowdsourcing, urban living labs Editorial: Living Labs and User InnovationChris McPhee, Seppo Leminen, Dimitri Schuurman, Mika Westerlund, and Eelko Huizingh

Technology Innovation Management Review

English

Editorial : Living  Labs and User Innovation

http://www.theseus.fi/bitstream/10024/140751/1/McPhee_Leminen_Schuurman_Westerlund_Huizingh.pdf

Editorial : Living Labs and User Innovation

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Theseus theses and publications of the Universities of Applied Sciences