Finding Commercially Attractive User Innovations: A Test of Lead User Theory

Firms and governments are increasingly interested in learning to exploit the value of lead user innovations for commercial advantage. Improvements to lead user theory are needed to inform and guide these efforts. In this paper we empirically test and confirm the basic tenants of lead user theory. We also discover some new refinements and related practical applications. Using a sample of users and user-innovators drawn from the extreme sport of kite surfing, we analyze the relationship between the commercial attractiveness of innovations developed by users and the intensity of the lead user characteristics those users display. We provide a first empirical analysis of the independent effects of its two key component variables. In our empirical study of user modifications to kite surfing equipment, we find that both components independently contribute to identifying commercially attractive user innovations. Component 1 (the "high expected benefits" dimension) predicts innovation likelihood, and component 2 (the "ahead of the trend" dimension) predicts both the commercial attractiveness of a given set of user-developed innovations and innovation likelihood due to a newly-proposed innovation supply side effect. We conclude that the component variables in the lead user definition are indeed independent dimensions and so neither can be dropped without loss of information - an important matter for lead user theory. We also find that adding measures of users' local resources can improve the ability of the lead user construct to identify commercially-attractive innovations under some conditions. The findings we report have practical as well as theoretical import. Product modification and development has been found to be a relatively common user behavior in many fields. Thus, from 10% to nearly 40% of users report having modified or developed a product for in-house use in the case of industrial products, or for personal use in the case of consumer products, in fields sampled to date. As a practical matter, therefore, it is important to find ways to selectively identify the user innovations that manufacturers will find to be the basis for commercially attractive products in the collectivity of user-developed innovations. We discuss the implications of these findings for theory and also for practical applications of the lead user construct, i.e. how variables used in lead user studies can profitably be adapted to fit specific study contexts and purposes.

[1]  James C. Anderson,et al.  STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELING IN PRACTICE: A REVIEW AND RECOMMENDED TWO-STEP APPROACH , 1988 .

[2]  H. Birch,et al.  The negative effect of previous experience on productive thinking. , 1951, Journal of experimental psychology.

[3]  Barry J. Babin,et al.  Employee Behavior in a Service Environment: A Model and Test of Potential Differences between Men and Women: , 1998 .

[4]  Athanasios Hadjimanolis,et al.  A Resource-based View of Innovativeness in Small Firms , 2000 .

[5]  Youjae Yi,et al.  Assumptions of the Two-Step Approach to Latent Variable Modeling , 1992 .

[6]  S. Ogawa Does sticky information affect the locus of innovation? Evidence from the Japanese convenience-store industry , 1998 .

[7]  C. Fornell,et al.  Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. , 1981 .

[8]  David W. Gerbing,et al.  Assumptions and Comparative Strengths of the Two-Step Approach , 1992 .

[9]  D. Funder,et al.  The Effect of Information on Consensus and Accuracy in Personality Judgment , 1998 .

[10]  Glen L. Urban,et al.  Lead User Analyses for the Development of New Industrial Products , 1988 .

[11]  E. Hippel,et al.  FROM EXPERIENCE: Developing New Product Concepts Via the Lead User Method: A Case Study in a “Low-Tech” Field , 1992 .

[12]  E. Hippel,et al.  THE DOMINANT ROLE OF "LOCAL" INFORMATION IN USER INNOVATION: THE CASE OF MOUNTAIN BIKING , 2003 .

[13]  Richard G. Netemeyer,et al.  Measurement of Consumer Susceptibility to Interpersonal Influence , 1989 .

[14]  Pamela D. Morrison,et al.  Determinants of User Innovation and Innovation Sharing in a Local Market , 2000 .

[15]  Eric von Hippel,et al.  Satisfying Heterogeneous User Needs Via Innovation Toolkits: The Case of Apache Security Software , 2002 .

[16]  D. MacKenzie,et al.  The use of knowledge about society , 2008 .

[17]  Cornelius Herstatt,et al.  The Dominant Role of , 2002 .

[18]  R. Adamson,et al.  Functional fixedness as related to elapsed time and to set. , 1954, Journal of experimental psychology.

[19]  John Roberts,et al.  The nature of lead users and measurement of leading edge status , 2004 .

[20]  A. Gustafsson,et al.  Harnessing the Creative Potential among Users , 2004 .

[21]  Cornelius Herstatt,et al.  The process of user-innovation: a case study in a consumer goods setting , 2005 .

[22]  Gary L. Lilien,et al.  Performance Assessment of the Lead User Idea-Generation Process for New Product Development , 2002, Manag. Sci..

[23]  E. Hippel,et al.  Lead users: a source of novel product concepts , 1986 .

[24]  Jacob Schmookler,et al.  Invention and Economic Growth , 1967 .

[25]  John Cullen,et al.  Democratizing Innovation , 2020, Encyclopedia of Creativity, Invention, Innovation and Entrepreneurship.

[26]  Sonali Shah Sources and Patterns of Innovation in a Consumer Products Field: Innovations in Sporting Equipment , 2000 .

[27]  Christian Lüthje Characteristics of innovating users in a consumer goods field , 2004 .

[28]  Gardner Murphy,et al.  A Simple and Reliable Method of Scoring the Thurstone Attitude Scales , 1934 .

[29]  S. Winter,et al.  Replication as Strategy , 2001 .

[30]  E. Hippel Sticky Information and the Locus of Problem Solving: Implications for Innovation , 1994 .

[31]  Sonali K. Shah,et al.  How Communities Support Innovative Activities: An Exploration of Assistance and Sharing Among End-Users , 2003 .

[32]  Karl G. Jöreskog,et al.  Recent Developments in Structural Equation Modeling , 1982 .

[33]  Edwin Mansfield,et al.  Industrial Research and Technological Innovation: An Econometric Analysis , 1968 .

[34]  H. Winklhofer,et al.  Index Construction with Formative Indicators: An Alternative to Scale Development , 2001 .

[35]  Gilbert A. Churchill A Paradigm for Developing Better Measures of Marketing Constructs , 1979 .

[36]  Cornelius Herstatt,et al.  The process of user-innovation: A case study on user innovation in a consumer goods setting , 2004 .

[37]  R. Adamson Functional fixedness as related to problem solving; a repetition of three experiments. , 1952, Journal of experimental psychology.

[38]  W. Lyddon Creativity in Context: Update to "The Social Psychology of Creativity" , 1998 .

[39]  Christian Lüthje Characteristics of Innovating Users in a Consumer Goods Field: An Empirical Study of Sport-Related Product Consumers , 2002 .

[40]  L. L. Thurstone,et al.  The Measurement Of Attitude , 1929 .

[41]  B. Wrenn The Market Orientation Construct: Measurement and Scaling Issues , 1997 .

[42]  Erik L. Olson,et al.  Implementing the lead user method in a high technology firm: A longitudinal study of intentions versus actions , 2001 .

[43]  James E. Burroughs,et al.  Exploring Antecedents and Consequences of Consumer Creativity in a Problem-Solving Context , 2004 .

[44]  E. Higgins Personality, social psychology, and person-situation relations: Standards and knowledge activation as a common language. , 1990 .

[45]  M. Scheerer,et al.  Problem Solving , 1967, Nature.