01996nas a2200277   4500008004100000022001400041245005900055210005800114260004200172300001000214490000600224520123700230653000901467653001601476653002901492653001501521653001501536653001301551653002001564653001501584653002101599100001901620700002101639700002101660856003701681       2017                        eng d  a1927-032100aTowards Third-Generation Living Lab Networks in Cities0 aTowards ThirdGeneration Living Lab Networks in Cities  aOttawabTalent First Networkc11/2017  a21-350 v73 aMany cities engage in diverse experimentation, innovation, and development activities with a broad variety of environments and stakeholders to the benefit of citizens, companies, municipalities, and other organizations. Hence, this article discusses such engagement in terms of next-generation living lab networks in the city context. In so doing, the study contributes to the discussion on living labs by introducing a framework of collaborative innovation networks in cities and suggesting a typology of third-generation living labs. Our framework is characterized by diverse platforms and participation approaches, resulting in four distinctive modes of collaborative innovation networks where the city is: i) a provider, ii) a neighbourhood participator, iii) a catalyst, or iv) a rapid experimenter. The typology is based on an analysis of 118 interviews with participants in six Finnish cities and reveals various ways to organize innovation activities in the city context. In particular, cities can benefit from innovation networks by simultaneously exploiting multiple platforms such as living labs for innovation. We conclude by discussing implications to theory and practice, and suggesting directions for future research.10acity10aco-creation10acollaborative innovation10ainnovation10aLiving lab10anetworks10aOpen innovation10asmart city10athird-generation1 aLeminen, Seppo1 aRajahonka, Mervi1 aWesterlund, Mika  uhttp://timreview.ca/article/111801853nas a2200241   4500008004100000022001400041245013500055210007100190260004200261300001000303490000600313520102400319653002501343653002401368653002201392653001301414653003301427653002801460653005501488653001401543100001801557856003601575       2015                        eng d  a1927-032100aTechnological Public–Private Innovation Networks: A Conceptual Framework Describing Their Structure and Mechanism of Interaction0 aTechnological Public–Private Innovation Networks A Conceptual Fr  aOttawabTalent First Networkc08/2015  a25-330 v53 aTechnological public–private innovation networks, or TechPPINs, enable cooperation between public and private actors in a complex, dynamic, social, and interactive network structure. In this article, the literature on innovation networks is used to construct a conceptual framework that describes the structure and mechanism of interaction in technological public–private innovation networks. In the framework, innovation is created through a dynamic process of interaction between the public and private actors along the network lifecycle. In each stage of network lifecycle, social capital enables various interactions to occur and different modes and quantities of knowledge and technological resources to be exchanged and reinforced. Through a combination of the product lifecycle model and social network analysis, the structure of technological public-private innovation networks are examined at each stage of the lifecycle to reveal information about how the roles of public and private actors are embodied. 10aconceptual framework10ainnovation networks10anetwork lifecycle10anetworks10apublic–private partnership10asocial network analysis10atechnological public–private innovation networks10aTechPPINs1 aMorrar, Rabeh  uhttp://timreview.ca/article/92001801nas a2200217   4500008004100000022001400041245008300055210006900138260004200207300001000249490000600259520114400265653001501409653002501424653001301449653002501462653002201487100002101509700001701530856003601547       2013                        eng d  a1927-032100aActor Roles in an Urban Living Lab: What Can We Learn from Suurpelto, Finland?0 aActor Roles in an Urban Living Lab What Can We Learn from Suurpe  aOttawabTalent First Networkc11/2013  a22-270 v33 aThere is a growing trend to involve citizens in city development to make urban areas more suitable to their needs and prevent social problems. City centres and neighbourhoods have increasingly been serving as regional living labs, which are ideal platforms to explore the needs of users as residents and citizens. This article examines the characteristics and success factors of urban living labs based on a case study of Suurpelto, Finland. Urban living lab activity is characterized by a practice-based innovation process with diffuse and heterogeneous knowledge production that aims to address urban problems of varying complexity. User involvement is critical for co-creating value, but equally important is collaboration between other living lab actors: enablers, providers, and utilizers. Enabler-driven labs can be successful in creating common goals but they need providers, such as development organizations, to boost development. Proactive networking, experimentation as a bottom-up process, using student innovators as resources, as well as commitment and longevity in development work are success factors for urban living labs.10ainnovation10aknowledge production10anetworks10aregional development10aurban living labs1 aJuujärvi, Soile1 aPesso, Kaija  uhttp://timreview.ca/article/74200616nas a2200229   4500008004100000022001400041245004300055210004000098260004200138300000800180490000600188653001100194653001600205653001300221653002000234653002500254653001300279100001800292700001900310700002100329856003600350       2013                        eng d  a1927-032100aEditorial: Living Labs (November 2013)0 aEditorial Living Labs November 2013  aOttawabTalent First Networkc11/2013  a3-40 v310adesign10aliving labs10anetworks10aOpen innovation10aregional development10aservices1 aMcPhee, Chris1 aLeminen, Seppo1 aWesterlund, Mika  uhttp://timreview.ca/article/73901498nas a2200229   4500008003900000022001400039245004400053210004300097260004200140300000900182490000600191520089000197653001601087653001501103653001601118653001301134653002001147100001901167700002101186700002501207856003601232       2012                          d  a1927-032100aLiving Labs as Open-Innovation Networks0 aLiving Labs as OpenInnovation Networks  aOttawabTalent First Networkc09/2012  a6-110 v23 aLiving labs bring experimentation out of companies’ R&D departments to real-life environments with the participation and co-creation of users, partners, and other parties. This study discusses living labs as four different types of networks characterized by open innovation: utilizer-driven, enabler-driven, provider-driven, and user-driven. The typology is based on interviews with the participants of 26 living labs in Finland, Sweden, Spain, and South Africa. Companies can benefit from knowing the characteristics of each type of living lab; this knowledge will help them to identify which actor drives the innovation, to anticipate likely outcomes, and to decide what kind of role they should play while "living labbing". Living labs are networks that can help them create innovations that have a superior match with user needs and can be upscaled promptly to the global market.10aco-creation10ainnovation10aliving labs10anetworks10aOpen innovation1 aLeminen, Seppo1 aWesterlund, Mika1 aNyström, Anna-Greta  uhttp://timreview.ca/article/60201691nas a2200217   4500008003900000022001400039245005300053210005200106260004200158300001000200490000600210520110700216653001801323653001501341653001601356653001301372653001301385100002001398700001901418856003601437       2012                          d  a1927-032100aLiving Labs for Cross-Border Systemic Innovation0 aLiving Labs for CrossBorder Systemic Innovation  aOttawabTalent First Networkc09/2012  a25-300 v23 aInnovation is increasingly taking place in cross-border collaborative networks, which are shaped by the characteristics of systemic innovation, the strategies and objectives of main actors, and the dynamics of the innovation process. Participation in such networks is of high importance for small firms, but requires long-term investments and a diverse range of collaboration and innovation capabilities. This article explores how living labs, understood as innovation projects based on open and user-centric innovation methodologies, can form collaboration networks to support small firms and other actors to engage in cross-border collaboration and to accelerate the development and acceptance of innovations. Based on the lessons learned from a major living lab project, APOLLON, we conclude that adopting the living labs networking approach requires thorough understanding of each party’s objectives and drivers, the alignment of operational processes, establishment of open and collaborative culture, as well as competences, methods, and tools for supporting cooperation and community building. 10acollaboration10ainnovation10aliving labs10anetworks10asystemic1 aSchaffers, Hans1 aTurkama, Petra  uhttp://timreview.ca/article/60501455nas a2200217   4500008003900000022001400039245008500053210006900138260004200207300001000249490000600259520082500265653001201090653001301102653001701115653001801132653001301150653002001163100001801183856003601201       2011                          d  a1927-032100aThe Impact of External Relationships on the Growth of Young Technology Companies0 aImpact of External Relationships on the Growth of Young Technolo  aOttawabTalent First Networkc11/2011  a26-300 v13 aMost management teams in young technology companies are aware that their success may depend on strong relationships with external organizations. However, it may not be clear to them which types of relationships are most likely to impact their growth. This article describes the author’s recent research to examine the relationship between the number and diversity of business relationships and the revenue growth of young companies. By examining data collected from 80 technology firms, and the 1943 relationships they established over a two-year period, certain types of relationships were found to have measurable impacts on growth. The article focuses on the managerial implications of these findings, which include the importance of early funding, niche identification, and building relationships with large firms.10afunding10anetworks10apartnerships10arelationships10astartups10ayoung companies1 aJustus, Chris  uhttp://timreview.ca/article/498