Combining User and Context: Living Labs Innovation in Digital Services

Aalto University, P.O. Box 11000, FI-00076 Aalto www.aalto.fi Author Tingan Tang Name of the doctoral dissertation Combining User and Context: Living Labs Innovation in Digital Services Publisher School of Science Unit Department of Computer Science and Engineering Series Aalto University publication series DOCTORAL DISSERTATIONS 91/2014 Field of research Information Technology and Services Manuscript submitted 13 November 2013 Date of the defence 15 August 2014 Permission to publish granted (date) 11 April 2014 Language English Monograph Article dissertation (summary + original articles) Abstract With the continuous advances of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) such as Ubiquitous Computing, Mobile Computing and the Internet of Things (IoT), users' living contexts and daily life activities are increasingly digitalized. Based on these developments and other enabling factors, an emerging userand context-driven open innovation approach called ''Living Lab" has recently gained rising popularity and momentum in both academia and industry.With the continuous advances of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) such as Ubiquitous Computing, Mobile Computing and the Internet of Things (IoT), users' living contexts and daily life activities are increasingly digitalized. Based on these developments and other enabling factors, an emerging userand context-driven open innovation approach called ''Living Lab" has recently gained rising popularity and momentum in both academia and industry. As an emerging and promising innovation approach, many theoretical and empirical insights are needed to understand the dynamics of Living Labs. This thesis focuses on Living Labs innovation in the digital services domain and it addresses three aspects of Living Labs: Concept, Architecture and Methods. The relative paucity of research on Living Labs advocates an exploratory approach that augments the research status quo with qualitative and quantitative empirical insights. The insights are gained from both a literature review and many years of Living Lab practice experiences from several Living Lab project cases in both academia and industry. The first aspect explores the Living Lab concept. A Living Lab concept framework is proposed by studying the key innovation principles of Living Lab and comparing the Living Lab principles with the corresponding Web 2.0 principles. The second aspect deals with the technical architecture of the Living Lab infrastructure. A ubiquitous Living Lab services platform is proposed and implemented by combining social media and the Web of Things. A common Living Lab technical architecture is generalized based on several Living Lab projects implementation experiences. A Web-based two-layered integration technical framework is proposed to integrate heterogeneous smart devices into business processes, and this framework is evaluated in a real-life elderly care case. The third aspect studies the methods used in Living Lab. A Living Lab process model and methods taxonomy are proposed and evaluated. Two case studies by different Living Lab methods are presented. Finally, a comparison of different Living Lab methods is summarized. The three studied Living Lab aspects are not separated from each other but intertwined in the whole Living Lab context for digital services innovation. Overall, this thesis advances a better understanding of the Living Labs innovation paradigm.

[1]  Matti Hämäläinen,et al.  A web-based two-layered integration framework for smart devices , 2012, EURASIP J. Wirel. Commun. Netw..

[2]  Peter A. Gloor,et al.  TeCFlow – A Temporal Communication Flow Visualizer for Social Network Analysis , 2004 .

[3]  Airi Lampinen,et al.  Everyday favors: a case study of a local online gift exchange system , 2010, GROUP.

[4]  Anna Ståhlbröst,et al.  Concept Design with a Living Lab Approach , 2009 .

[5]  G. Hult,et al.  Innovation, Market Orientation, and Organizational Learning: An Integration and Empirical Examination , 1998 .

[6]  Lieven De Marez,et al.  A living lab research approach for mobile TV , 2009, EuroITV '09.

[7]  Bryn Nelson,et al.  Tapping the wisdom of the crowd: New initiatives are engaging the public as active participants in biomedical research , 2014, Cancer cytopathology.

[8]  M. Eriksson State-ofthe-art in utilizing Living Labs approach to user-centric ICT innovation-a European approach , 2005 .

[9]  Richard Vidgen,et al.  Developing Web information systems : from strategy to implementation , 2002 .

[10]  Matti Hämäläinen,et al.  Gateway as a service: A cloud computing framework for web of things , 2012, 2012 19th International Conference on Telecommunications (ICT).

[11]  Erik Wilde,et al.  A resource oriented architecture for the Web of Things , 2010, 2010 Internet of Things (IOT).

[12]  Salvatore T. March,et al.  Design and natural science research on information technology , 1995, Decis. Support Syst..

[13]  Jacky Swan,et al.  Knowledge, purpose and process: linking knowledge management and innovation , 2001, Proceedings of the 34th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[14]  Ramesh C. Jain Experiential computing , 2003, CACM.

[15]  F. Nachira,et al.  A Network of Digital Business Ecosystems for Europe : Roots , Processes and Perspectives , 2007 .

[16]  Hannu Verkasalo,et al.  Handset-based analysis of mobile service usage , 2009 .

[17]  Anna Ståhlbröst,et al.  Cross Border Living Labs Networks to Support SMEs Accessing New Markets , 2011 .

[18]  Jan Gulliksen,et al.  Key principles for user-centred systems design , 2003, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[19]  Antti Oulasvirta,et al.  All My People Right Here, Right Now: management of group co-presence on a social networking site , 2009, GROUP.

[20]  Stefan Klein,et al.  Introduction to the Living Lab Approach , 2011, Accelerating Global Supply Chains with IT-Innovation.

[21]  Raimar Richers The theory of economic development , 1961 .

[22]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  Luhmann, Habermas and the theory of communication , 2000 .

[23]  K. Cook,et al.  Trust Building via Risk Taking: A Cross-Societal Experiment , 2005 .

[24]  Jonny Holmström,et al.  Consumer co-creation and the ecology of innovation : a living lab approach , 2008 .

[25]  Ruimin Shen,et al.  Why web 2.0 is good for learning and for research: principles and prototypes , 2008, WWW.

[26]  Pieter Jan Stappers,et al.  Designing for other people's strengths and motivations: Three cases using context, visions, and experiential prototypes , 2009, Adv. Eng. Informatics.

[27]  Mervi Hasu,et al.  Critical Transition from Developers to Users : Activity-Theoretical Studies of Interaction and Learning in the Innovation Process , 2001 .

[28]  Julia Klammer,et al.  Participatory Service Innovation in Healthcare: The Case of Videoconsultation for Paraplegics. , 2011 .

[29]  Hans Schaffers,et al.  Smart Cities and the Future Internet: Towards Cooperation Frameworks for Open Innovation , 2011, Future Internet Assembly.

[30]  Andrea Botero,et al.  From closed to open to what?: an exploration on community innovation principles , 2009, MindTrek '09.

[31]  Gregory D. Abowd,et al.  The Aware Home: A Living Laboratory for Ubiquitous Computing Research , 1999, CoBuild.

[32]  Vlad Stirbu,et al.  Towards a RESTful Plug and Play Experience in the Web of Things , 2008, 2008 IEEE International Conference on Semantic Computing.

[33]  H. Chesbrough,et al.  Innovating Business Models with Co-Development Partnerships , 2007 .

[34]  Darin Barney The Morning After: Citizen Engagement in Technological Society , 2006 .

[35]  G. Grossman,et al.  Innovation and growth in the global economy , 1993 .

[36]  Olga De Troyer,et al.  WSDM: A User Centered Design Method for Web Sites , 1998, Comput. Networks.

[37]  Fabio Casati,et al.  Understanding Mashup Development , 2008, IEEE Internet Computing.

[38]  Matti Nelimarkka,et al.  Measuring social relations with multiple datasets , 2011, Int. J. Soc. Comput. Cyber Phys. Syst..

[39]  Mary J. Benner,et al.  Exploitation, Exploration, and Process Management: The Productivity Dilemma Revisited , 2003 .

[40]  Neil A. M. Maiden,et al.  Problem domain categories in requirements engineering , 1998, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[41]  Anna Ståhlbröst,et al.  A milieu for innovation : defining living labs , 2009 .

[42]  S. Hyysalo Some Problems in the Traditional Approaches to Predicting the Use of a Technology-driven Invention , 2003 .

[43]  Maria Powell,et al.  Participatory Paradoxes , 2009 .

[44]  Jin K. Han,et al.  Market Orientation and Organizational Performance: Is Innovation a Missing Link? , 1998 .

[45]  Virpi Kristiina Tuunainen,et al.  Motivations for and barriers to the use of social exchange in online communities: Case Kassi , 2010 .

[46]  Roger Clarke,et al.  Web 2.0 as Syndication , 2008, J. Theor. Appl. Electron. Commer. Res..

[47]  P. Duin,et al.  The evolution of innovation management towards contextual innovation , 2008 .

[48]  M. Westerlund,et al.  Living labs as open-innovation networks , 2012 .

[49]  Anna Ståhlbröst,et al.  Openness in living labs : facilitating innovation , 2010 .

[50]  Monika Hestad Changing assumption for the design process – New roles of the active end user , 2009 .

[51]  D. Fesenmaier,et al.  Towards understanding members’ general participation in and active contribution to an online travel community , 2004 .

[52]  Tim O'Reilly,et al.  What is Web 2.0: Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software , 2007 .

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

[54]  P. Trott The role of market research in the development of discontinuous new products , 2001 .

[55]  Alberto Sanna,et al.  A Living Lab for Internet of Things Vending Machines , 2012, ImViReLL.

[56]  Mohammad Davarpanah Jazi,et al.  Constructing user requirements: a social process for a social context , 1998, Inf. Syst. J..

[57]  Roy Fielding,et al.  Architectural Styles and the Design of Network-based Software Architectures"; Doctoral dissertation , 2000 .

[58]  Gerard Briscoe,et al.  Digital Ecosystems: Evolving Service-Orientated Architectures , 2006, 2006 1st Bio-Inspired Models of Network, Information and Computing Systems.

[59]  Petra Turkama Nordic Network of User-Driven Innovation and Livinglabbing , 2010 .

[60]  Rahul Singh,et al.  From Information-Centric to Experiential Environments , 2006 .

[61]  Guido Baltes,et al.  Living Labs as intermediary in open innovation: On the role of entrepreneurial support , 2010, 2010 IEEE International Technology Management Conference (ICE).

[62]  Jo Pierson,et al.  Configuring Living Labs For A ‘Thick’ Understanding Of Innovation , 2005 .

[63]  Vlad Trifa,et al.  Towards physical mashups in the Web of Things , 2009, 2009 Sixth International Conference on Networked Sensing Systems (INSS).

[64]  Michael J. Muller,et al.  Participatory design , 1993, CACM.

[65]  Ajit Jaokar,et al.  Mobile Web 2.0: The Innovator's Guide to Developing and Marketing Next Generation Wireless/Mobile Applications , 2006 .

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

[67]  P. Ehn,et al.  Design Things and Design Thinking: Contemporary Participatory Design Challenges , 2012, Design Issues.

[68]  Telematica Instituut,et al.  THE LIVING LABS HARMONIZATION CUBE: COMMUNICATING LIVING LABS' ESSENTIALS , 2008 .

[69]  Volker Bilgram,et al.  User-Centric Innovations in New Product Development - Systematic Identification of Lead Users Harnes , 2008 .

[70]  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).

[71]  Elizabeth Chang,et al.  Digital Ecosystems A Next Generation of the Collaborative Environment , 2006, iiWAS.

[72]  Matti Hämäläinen,et al.  An internationally distributed ubiquitous living lab innovation platform for digital ecosystem research , 2010, MEDES.

[73]  William Simpson,et al.  The Quadratic Assignment Procedure (QAP) , 2001 .

[74]  Angèle L. M. Cavaye,et al.  User participation in system development revisited , 1995, Inf. Manag..

[75]  E. Glenn Handbook of Research on Urban Informatics: The Practice and Promise of the Real-Time City , 2009 .

[76]  Marc Pallot,et al.  Living Lab Research Landscape: From User Centred Design and User Experience towards User Cocreation , 2010 .

[77]  Caroline Haythornthwaite,et al.  A Noun Phrase Analysis Tool for Mining Online Community Conversations , 2007 .

[78]  Pieter Jan Stappers,et al.  Co-creating in practice: Results and challenges , 2009, 2009 IEEE International Technology Management Conference (ICE).

[79]  Ilana Gershon,et al.  Seeing like a system , 2005 .

[80]  Michael J. Muller,et al.  Participatory design: the third space in HCI , 2002 .

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

[82]  Anne Marie Kanstrup,et al.  A Living Laboratory Exploring Mobile Support for Everyday Life with Diabetes , 2010, Wirel. Pers. Commun..

[83]  Bryan N. Alexander Web 2.0: A New Wave of Innovation for Teaching and Learning? , 2006 .

[84]  Anna Ståhlbröst,et al.  Forming future IT: the living lab way of user involvement , 2008 .

[85]  Mikael Wiberg,et al.  The Interaction Society: Practice, Theories and Supportive Technologies , 2005 .

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

[87]  Eva Heiskanen,et al.  Constructing innovative users and user-inclusive innovation communities , 2010, Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag..

[88]  Steffen Budweg,et al.  Collaborative Environments to Support Professional Communities: A Living Lab Approach , 2009, PRO-VE.

[89]  Cristian Borcea,et al.  The Urbanet Revolution: Sensor Power to the People! , 2007, IEEE Pervasive Computing.

[90]  Jonathan W. Musser,et al.  Web 2.0 : principles and best practices , 2007 .

[91]  Youngjin Yoo,et al.  Computing in Everyday Life: A Call for Research on Experiential Computing , 2010, MIS Q..

[92]  Pieter Ballon,et al.  Test and Experimentation Platforms for Broadband Innovation: Examining European Practice , 2005 .

[93]  Seppo Leminen,et al.  Coordination and Participation in Living Lab Networks , 2013 .

[94]  Marc van Lieshout,et al.  User‐led, citizen innovation at the interface of services , 2009 .

[95]  Martin Bichler,et al.  Design science in information systems research , 2006, Wirtschaftsinf..

[96]  Jens Schumacher,et al.  Living Labs - the user as co-creator , 2007, 2007 IEEE International Technology Management Conference (ICE).

[97]  Esteve Almirall,et al.  Innovation : A question of Fit – The Living Labs approach , 2009 .

[98]  Asbjørn Følstad,et al.  Living Labs for Innovation and Development of Information and Communication Technology: A Literature Review , 2008 .

[99]  Pirjo Friedrich,et al.  Web-based co-design: Social media tools to enhance user-centred design and innovation processes , 2013 .

[100]  D. Lei,et al.  Collaborative Innovation with Customers: A Review of the Literature and Suggestions for Future Research , 2012 .

[101]  Alex Pentland,et al.  The social fMRI: measuring, understanding, and designing social mechanisms in the real world , 2011, UbiComp '11.

[102]  Asbjørn Følstad,et al.  TOWARDS A LIVING LAB FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF ONLINE COMMUNITY SERVICES , 2008 .

[103]  Stanley Wasserman,et al.  Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications , 1994, Structural analysis in the social sciences.

[104]  M. Cameron Jones,et al.  Web Mash-ups and Patchwork Prototyping: User-driven technological innovation with Web 2.0 and Open Source Software , 2007, 2007 40th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS'07).

[105]  Pertti Järvinen,et al.  Research Questions Guiding Selection of an Appropriate Research Method , 2000, ECIS.

[106]  Kent Larson,et al.  A living laboratory for the design and evaluation of ubiquitous computing technologies , 2005, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[107]  Esteve Almirall,et al.  Mapping Living Labs in the Landscape of Innovation Methodologies , 2012 .

[108]  Esteve Almirall,et al.  Contributions of Living Labs in reducing market based risk , 2009, 2009 IEEE International Technology Management Conference (ICE).

[109]  F. Nachira Towards a Network of Digital Business Ecosystems Fostering the Local Development , 2002 .

[110]  Zhiyi Wang,et al.  An Open Community Approach to Emergency Information Services during a Disaster , 2008, 2008 International Symposium on Information Science and Engineering.

[111]  S. Ghoshal,et al.  Social Capital, Intellectual Capital, and the Organizational Advantage , 1998 .

[112]  Martti Mäntylä,et al.  SizzleLab: Building an Experimentation Platform for Mobile Social Interaction , 2009 .

[113]  Caroline Haythornthwaite,et al.  The analysis of online communities using interactive content-based social , 2008, ASIST.

[114]  Marco Conte,et al.  Living Labs in Open Innovation Functional Regions , 2009, 2009 IEEE International Technology Management Conference (ICE).

[115]  Ken G. Smith,et al.  The interplay between exploration and exploitation. , 2006 .

[116]  Jay F. Nunamaker,et al.  Systems Development in Information Systems Research , 1990, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[117]  Steffen Budweg,et al.  Enhancing collaboration in communities of professionals using a Living Lab approach , 2011 .

[118]  Charles R. Duke Understanding Customer Abilities in Product Concept Tests , 1994 .