Participatory Innovation

Abstract

An increasing number of corporations engage with users in co-innovation of products and services. But there are a number of competing perspectives on how best to integrate these understandings into existing corporate innovation development processes. This paper maps out three of the dominant approaches, compares them in terms of goals, methods and basic philosophy, and shows how they may beneficially enrich one another. We will present an industrial innovation case that has been instrumental to the development of what we have termed "Participatory Innovation". Based on this, we will list the challenges such an approach sets to innovation management, and discuss research directions of what we see as fundamental to the development of the field of user-driven innovation.

3D heritage visualisation and the negotiation of authenticity: the ACCORD project

“…The aim was to examine the opportunities and implications of digital visualization technologies for community heritage practice using co-design and co-production of 3D models of historic monuments. Popular in a range of design, planning and healthcare environments, co-design and co-production methodologies are intended to decentre traditional relationships of power, control and expertise between researchers and volunteers, or 'professionals' and 'non-professionals' (Burr and Matthews 2008;Conroy et al 2012;Cottam and Leadbeater 2006;Davies 2010). Whilst not without their challenges and shortcomings, these methodologies produce more symmetrical relationships between participants at the same time as facilitating critical reflection on the power relationships involved (see for further discussion in the context of ACCORD; also Lynch and Alberti [2010]).…”

Social change through place innovation

“…This occurs primarily within the framework of 'dialogue seminars' and 'design seminars', which are proven methods in participatory research and participatory design, but also by means of continuous communication at smaller meetings and via digital channels (cf. Buur and Matthews, 2008;Ericson and Wenngren, 2012;Jé-gou and Manzini, 2008;Lindberg, 2014). Because the project has just begun, the material for this article is drawn from the two preliminary stages: problem formulation and stakeholder mobilisation.…”

“…User-driven design originated in what is called 'participatory design', which previously focused mainly on the involvement of employees in the development of their workplaces. In recent years this type of design has increasingly been used as a method of including diverse groups of people in innovation development (Björgvinsson et al, 2010;Buur and Matthews, 2008;Ericson and Wenngren, 2012). …”

Gendered Potentials and Delimitations in the Church of Sweden’s Social Innovation

“…Recently, an increasing number of innovation studies have specifically focused on inclusive perspectives on innovation, relying on concepts such as open innovation (Chesbrough et al, 2006), user-based innovation (Sundbo & Toivonen, 2011), participatory innovation (Buur & Matthews, 2008), democratization of innovation (von Hippel, 2006), and social innovation (European Commission, 2013b). This paper draws on the last conceptsocial innovation -with reference to innovation processes intended to improve the well-being, life quality, relations, and empowerment of individuals and communities (cf.…”