01561nas a2200241   4500008004100000022001400041245006600055210006200121260004200183300000900225490000600234520088300240653001501123653001501138653002301153653001501176653002001191653001301211100001901224700001901243700002101262856003601283       2015                        eng d  a1927-032100aThe Grey Areas Between Open and Closed in Innovation Networks0 aGrey Areas Between Open and Closed in Innovation Networks  aOttawabTalent First Networkc12/2015  a6-180 v53 aThis study argues that there are different degrees of openness and closedness in innovation activity, and it highlights the need for more research on the "grey areas" between totally open and totally closed innovation, particularly in innovation networks where multiple stakeholders collaborate for innovation. Here, we focus on four key aspects of innovation networks, as characterized by their degrees of openness or closedness: governance, motivation, interaction, and innovation practices. The categorization is based on a review of theory and an empirical analysis of three distinct innovation networks, two of which represent the open living lab model, and one of which exemplifies the traditional closed innovation model. Our results can help managers improve efficiency in innovation networks by better understanding the grey areas between open and closed in innovation.10aclosedness10ainnovation10ainnovation network10aLiving lab10aOpen innovation10aopenness1 aLeminen, Seppo1 aTurunen, Taija1 aWesterlund, Mika  uhttp://timreview.ca/article/94801389nas a2200241   4500008004100000022001400041245004100055210004100096260004200137300001000179490000600189520075500195653001400950653001500964653001300979653001000992653001201002653001001014100003301024700003101057700002301088856003601111       2015                        eng d  a1927-032100aPlaces and Spaces within Living Labs0 aPlaces and Spaces within Living Labs  aOttawabTalent First Networkc12/2015  a37-470 v53 aIn this article, we propose the concepts of places and spaces as conceptual tools to facilitate the organization of innovation activities within living labs. We have taken a pragmatic perspective on these concepts regarding how they are integrated in design situations, and how different types of places and spaces can facilitate or hinder innovation. We have found that, by applying openness, realism, and influence in the different spaces of our living lab milieus, they have transformed into many different places depending on the stakeholders involved, the methods chosen, and the facilitation of activities. Hence, by understanding this line of reasoning, living lab managers can make more informed decisions and plans for innovation activities.10ainfluence10aLiving lab10aopenness10aplace10arealism10aspace1 aBergvall-Kåreborn, Birgitta1 aIhlström Eriksson, Carina1 aStåhlbröst, Anna  uhttp://timreview.ca/article/951