Methods and Techniques for User Contribution : Challenges from a Living Lab Perspective

This paper discusses user contribution in innovation processes from a Living Labperspective. We view Living Lab as a milieu in which specific methods are used to involvedifferent stakeholders in open innovation processes to create and validate IT-products andservices in a real world setting. The involvement of different stakeholders is of particular importance in a Living Lab to secure the development of usable products and services. In thispaper we focus on methods and techniques for user contribution in innovation processes by discussing our own experiences based on 100 activities conducted within four differentresearch projects. The purpose of this paper is to discuss our experiences of methods andtechniques for user contribution in relation to three different aspects: a) phase in the innovation process, b) kind of user contribution and c) type of users, all in relation to a Living Lab perspective. We conclude that there is a need to translate face to face methods and techniques to distributed user involvement activities to be able to scale up and use these in a Living Lab setting.

[1]  Jonathan Grudin,et al.  Personas, Participatory Design and Product Development: An Infrastructure for Engagement , 2002 .

[2]  Sri Hastuti Kurniawan,et al.  Review of Interaction design , 2003 .

[3]  Austin Henderson,et al.  Interaction design: beyond human-computer interaction , 2002, UBIQ.

[4]  Karl A. Hribernik,et al.  State-of-the-art and good practice in the field of living labs , 2006, 2006 IEEE International Technology Management Conference (ICE).

[5]  K. Eason.  Information Technology and Organizational Change , 1989 .

[6]  A. Schumacher,et al.  Living Labs - a new multi-stakeholder approach to user integration , 2007, IESA.

[7]  Nathan Rosenberg,et al.  An Overview of Innovation , 2009 .

[8]  E. von Hippel,et al.  Sources of Innovation , 2016 .

[9]  Morten Kyng,et al.  Cardboard Computers: Mocking-it-up or Hands-on the Future , 1992 .

[10]  Ralf Reichwald,et al.  Customers as part of value Webs: towards a framework for webbed customer innovation tools , 2004 .

[11]  Susanne Bødker,et al.  Creating Conditions for Participation: Conflicts and Resources in Systems Development , 1996, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[12]  Alan Cooper,et al.  The Inmates are Running the Asylum , 1999, Software-Ergonomie.

[13]  Klaus-Dieter Thoben,et al.  Innovative Products and Services through Collaborative Networks , 2006 .

[14]  Andrew Kusiak,et al.  Innovation: The Living Laboratory Perspective , 2007 .

[15]  Brendan Walker,et al.  Cultural probes and the value of uncertainty , 2004, INTR.

[16]  Peter J. Denning,et al.  Innovation as language action , 2006, CACM.

[17]  M. Kyng,et al.  Introduction: Situated Design , 1992 .

[18]  E. Hippel,et al.  Customers As Innovators: A New Way to Create Value , 2002 .

[19]  Finn Kensing,et al.  Generating visions: future workshops and metaphorical design , 1992 .

[20]  J. Marshall.  Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology , 2004 .

[21]  John M. Carroll,et al.  Five reasons for scenario-based design , 2000, Interact. Comput..

[22]  D. Norman,et al.  User Centered System Design: New Perspectives on Human-Computer Interaction , 1988 .

[23]  Susanne Bødker,et al.  Creating conditions for participation: Conflicts and resources in systems design , 1994 .

[24]  Bruce Hanington,et al.  Methods in the Making: A Perspective on the State of Human Research in Design , 2003, Design Issues.