Social Product Development: Introduction, Overview, and Current Status

Peterson, Anna K.; Schaefer, Dirk

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-07404-7_1

Cited by 19 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Other authors used the terms 'open source development' or 'open source design' in a meaning which is close to the definition given to OSPD in this paper (Buitenhuis & Pearce 2012;Fjeldsted et al 2012;Zhang & Li 2017). OSPD differs clearly from crowdsourcing (also referred to as 'social product development' in Peterson &Schaefer 2014 andin Wu et al 2015), in the context of which the outcome of the collaborative product development process is protected and the process is per definition centralized around a formal organization (company or institution) Crowdsourcing implements a certain form of limited process openness but not product openness. OSPD also differs from what Huizingh (2011) calls public innovation and Boisseau et al (2018) call downloadable design and which is characterized by the free revealing of product-related information at the end of a closed product development process.…”

Section: Ospd In the Field Of Open Innovationmentioning

confidence: 94%

How participative is open source hardware? Insights from online repository mining

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Open Source Hardware (OSH) is an increasingly viable approach to intellectual property management extending the principles of Open Source Software (OSS) to the domain of physical products. These principles support the development of products in transparent processes allowing the participation of any interested person. While increasing numbers of products have been released as OSH, little is known on the prevalence of participative development practices in this emerging field. It remains unclear to which extent the transparent and participatory processes known from software reached hardware product development. To fill this gap, this paper applies repository mining techniques to investigate the transparency and workload distribution of 105 OSH product development projects. The results highlight a certain heterogeneity of practices filling a continuum between public and private development settings. They reveal different organizational patterns with different levels of centralization and distribution. Nonetheless, they clearly indicate the expansion of the open source development model from software into the realms of physical products and provide the first large-scale empirical evidence of this recent evolution. Therewith, this article gives body to an emerging phenomenon and contributes to give it a place in the scientific debate. It delivers categories to delineate practices, techniques to investigate them in further detail as well as a large dataset of exemplary OSH projects. The discussion of first results signposts avenues for a stream of research aiming at understanding stakeholder interactions at work in new product innovation practices in order to enable institutions and industry in providing appropriate responses.

show abstract

Section: Ospd In the Field Of Open Innovationmentioning

confidence: 94%

How participative is open source hardware? Insights from online repository mining

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The popularity of emerging social technology has helped businesses take this participatory approach to the next level beyond the customer base [42]. For example, SPD models heavily rely on social technologies and social mechanisms to facilitate new product development [52]. While the SPD model bears some resemblance to virtual customer networks sponsored by a firm to engage its own customers in innovation activities [65], the owner of an SPD platform acts primarily as an innovation intermediary rather than as a corporation seeking to improve its own product portfolio.…”

Section: Spd Platform Business Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Classifying Motivations in Social Product Development Networks: a Discriminant Analysis of Actor Profiles

Abhari

Davidson

Xiao

2018

Proceedings of the 51st Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study develops a classification model to predict social actors' co-innovation behavior in social product development (SPD) networks based on motivational differences. The study first identifies motivations for actors to continuously participate in co-innovation activities. Then, three discriminant functions are developed and cross-validated to classify actor groups, based on their level of willingness to participate in three types of behaviors: ideation, collaboration, and socialization. The results indicate that financial gains, entrepreneurship, and learning are significant predictors of ideation behaviors. Enjoyment and learning are strong indicators of collaboration, whereas networking, enjoyment, and altruism are most strongly related to socialization behaviors. These findings highlight three classes of SPD actors (Ideators, Collaborators, and Networkers) based on motivational differences. These classes provide a theoretically parsimonious model to predict the co-innovation behaviors in SPD and highlight the importance of platform design to appeal to different classes of potential contributors.

show abstract

“…Technologies, social tools and media are used to this purpose, thanks to which users can have an impact on the product life cycle at every stage of its design. Such a new product launched on the market, has a shorter development time and needs less investment than in similar projects based solely on traditional design (Peterson & Schaefer, 2014). The idea of the fourth industrial revolution -Industry 4.0 concept (Rojko, 2017) promotes the levelling of the implementation of intelligent technologies in enterprises regardless of their branch and size.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cloud Computing as a Prospect for the Sector of Small – and Medium-Size Companies in the Polish Market

Krakowiak

Bajor

2019

New Trends in Production Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Efficient functioning in the contemporary market is a fundamental need of every organization. In times of globalization and an intensive technological and engineering progress, attaining a proper position and retaining it is a big challenge in almost every branch of industry. This is especially difficult for the SME sector, as it requires financial expenditures on system solutions and the IT base, among other things. This is where “Cloud Computing” comes in. Cloud computing services consist in providing and making available IT resources (efficient, scalable and tailored to the customer’s needs) through the Web. Thanks to wide access to intensively developing mobile systems, the low costs of computer components and the associated increasingly common use of Internet of Things (IoT) in numerous devices connected to the Internet, data processing is being gradually moved onto the Web peripheries. The purpose of the study is to highlight advantages and possible threats associated with the use of Cloud Computing-based solutions for aiding the activity of enterprises at a varying organizational level following the 4th industrial revolution.

show abstract

Social Product Development: Introduction, Overview, and Current Status

Cited by 19 publications

References 37 publications

How participative is open source hardware? Insights from online repository mining

How participative is open source hardware? Insights from online repository mining

Classifying Motivations in Social Product Development Networks: a Discriminant Analysis of Actor Profiles

Cloud Computing as a Prospect for the Sector of Small – and Medium-Size Companies in the Polish Market

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About