User‐led, citizen innovation at the interface of services

Abstract

PurposeThe paper attempts to reflect on user empowerment enabled by three contemporary approaches, namely living labs, open innovation and social computing, as innovation instruments for innovating products and services based on next generation networks (NGNs).Design/methodology/approachThe paper takes the form of a literature review, with limited environmental scanning of web sources, industry news, etc.FindingsUser‐centric services can be a catalyst for promoting future service ecosystems over NGN. Open strategies may prove to be profitable avenues for incumbents who may consider the extension of the market from access services into value added services. The living lab perspective, used as an approach of developing NGNs, introduces the opportunity to open new markets in new regions where new products and services can be tested and deployed. Living labs can also be used to go beyond the current “launch‐and‐learn” approach in online social communities to active end‐user participation in the online communities' development process. NGNs may be particularly useful for social computing, by offering incentives to create novel services that are fully created, developed and deployed by users.Originality/valueThis paper argues that user‐led innovation could be a significant paradigm shift for innovating products and services, particularly in the specific context of NGNs. It argues that this focus is lacking today, with most of the attention on specific NGN technology and infrastructure issues.

The Entrepreneurial Rise in Southeast Asia

“…There are three different concepts of user innovation: living labs, open innovation, and social computing (Arnkil et al 2010, Pascu andvan Lieshout 2009). Looking forward, ASTRI should investigate the possibilities in these three directions to further their innovation activities with the user (user community of the industry and public sector such as non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and citizen groups).…”

Contextuality and Co-Creation Matter: A Qualitative Case Study Comparison of Living Lab Concepts in Urban Research

“…The living lab concept originally emerged almost ten years ago during the European repositioning aimed at (again) becoming a competitive, innovation-based economy (Pascu & Van Lieshout, 2009). According to the European Commission, four "P's" became the focus of collaboration: public-private-people-partnership (Schuurman, 2015).…”

“…Both authors demonstrate the evolution of the living lab debate from a technologically-centred approach that focuses on innovation research. Emphasis lies in the innovationbased economy, where co-creation processes with users are implemented in real-life test environments (Pascu & Van Lieshout, 2009;Mulder, 2012;Schumacher & Feurstein, 2007). As Franz (2015) points out, "innovation" mainly refers to open innovation processes, including testing and validating a reactive integration of citizens, and developing and co-creating processes for an active integration of citizens (Pascu & Van Lieshout, 2009).…”

“…Emphasis lies in the innovationbased economy, where co-creation processes with users are implemented in real-life test environments (Pascu & Van Lieshout, 2009;Mulder, 2012;Schumacher & Feurstein, 2007). As Franz (2015) points out, "innovation" mainly refers to open innovation processes, including testing and validating a reactive integration of citizens, and developing and co-creating processes for an active integration of citizens (Pascu & Van Lieshout, 2009). Although the starting point of co-creation can be traced back to precise scopes in architecture or participatory design projects (see Sanders & Stappers, 2008), the definition of co-creation became fuzzy over time (see Schuurman, 2015;Winthereik et al, 2009;Ståhlbröst & Bergvall-Kåreborn, 2008;Veeckman, 2013).…”

“…They were also introduced into urban research agendas by the Finnish European Union Presidency in 2006. Since then, research programmes have been using living labs as a methodological tool to connect research to public and private stakeholders with citizens in order to co-create and co-design products and services to improve the quality of life in cities (Edwards-Schachter et al, 2012;Pascu & Van Lieshout, 2009). Although projects and approaches to urban living labs differ widely, the benefits lie in user integration and the use of results to develop need-based products and services that can be implemented into the living environments of citizens.…”