User generated brands and their contribution to the diffusion of user innovations

Abstract

It has been argued that users can create innovations and also diffuse them peer-to-peer independent of support or involvement by producers: that "user-only" innovation systems can exist. It is known that users can be incented to innovate via benefits from in-house use. But users' incentives to invest in diffusion are much less clear: benefits that others might obtain from their innovation can be largely or entirely an externality for user innovators.Of course, effective distribution of information products can be done near-costlessly via posting downloadable content -for example, software -on the Internet. However, potential adopters must still learn about the product and trust its qualities. In producer systems, this aspect of diffusion is heavily supported via the creation of trusted brands. It has been shown that brands help to increase awareness, to communicate a product's benefits, and to reduce perceived risks of adoption. The development of brands by producers is traditionally seen as a very costly exercise -unlikely to be thought of as worthwhile by users who expect little or no benefits from the diffusion of their innovations to others. In this paper, we explore the creation of a strong and trusted brand by the Apache software community -and find it was created costlessly, as a side effect of normal community functioning. We think the costless creation of strong brands is an option that is generally available to user innovation communities. It supports, we propose, the existence of robust, user-only innovation systems by helping to solve the problem of low-cost diffusion of trusted user-developed innovations.

A communication perspective on open strategy and open innovation

“…A good example of cases that combine open innovation and open strategy is user innovation, where focal organizations pick up and build upon innovations that have emerged in a user community (Füller et al 2013;Piller and Walcher 2006;von Hippel 2005). If open innovation becomes part of the strategy process, joint sensemaking will become important.…”

“…The exemplary studies included in our analysis show that organizations strive to increase the receptiveness and connectivity of their innovation processes to a wide range of topics via such measures as partnering and contracting (Chesbrough and Crowther 2006;Christensen et al 2005;Fey and Birkinshaw 2005;Laursen and Salter 2006), sharing the source code of the programs they develop (Henkel 2006;Henkel et al 2014;West 2003), collaborating informally with innovation communities (Fichter 2009), discussing strategic innovations in workshops that involve several companies and industries (Rohrbeck et al 2009), collecting ideas via online crowdsourcing platforms (Füller et al 2013;Piller and Walcher 2006), engaging in the commercialization of external technology by out-licensing agreements, striking alliances, generating spin-offs and promoting sales in the area of technology (Lichtenthaler and Ernst 2007).…”

Are Patients and Relatives the Better Innovators? The Case of Medical Smartphone Applications

“…Adams et al (2013) Studies that analyze the diffusion of user innovations show that users often reveal their innovations freely as they benefit from using the innovation rather than from selling it (Harhoff et al 2003). Free revealing of user innovations has been shown in several industries, such as sports equipment (Franke and Shah 2003), library information systems (Morrison et al 2000), semiconductor production (Harhoff et al 2003), and open source software (Füller et al 2013;Balka et al 2010;. Not only user innovators, but also manufacturers might have reasons to reveal some -carefully selected -innovations freely (Henkel 2006).…”

Confidential Areas In Innovation Communities: An Agent-Based Model Using Fuzzy Logic and Qualitative Empirical Data

“…Innovation communities are a highly relevant topic in the area of innovation management. They provide a source for several kinds of input for companies and fulfill multiple functions, for instance, they are a source for innovations (Baldwin, Hienerth & von Hippel 2006), development of brands (Füller, Schroll & von Hippel 2013), and as test environment for new products (Matzler, Grabher, Huber & Füller 2013). On several occasions communities even substitute companies completely, for instance in the case of Wikipedia and the Encyclopedia Britannica.…”