<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><xml><records><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Dimitri Schuurman</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Sonja M. Protic</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Living Labs versus Lean Startups: An Empirical Investigation</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Technology Innovation Management Review</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">entrepreneurs</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">impact</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Innovation management</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">lean startup</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Living lab</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Open innovation</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">testing</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">user innovation</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2018</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">12/2018</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">https://timreview.ca/article/1201</style></url></web-urls></urls><publisher><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Talent First Network</style></publisher><pub-location><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ottawa</style></pub-location><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">8</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">7-16</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Although we seem to be living in an era where founding a startup has never been easier, studies point to the high mortality rates of these organizations. This “startup hype” has also induced many practitioner-based innovation management approaches that lack empirical studies and validation. Moreover, a lot of these approaches have rather similar angles, but use different wordings. Therefore, in this article, we look into two of these “hyped” concepts: the lean startup and living labs. We review the academic studies on these topics and explore a sample of 86 entrepreneurial projects based on project characteristics and outcomes. Our main finding is that the two approaches appear to be complementary. Living labs are powerful instruments to implement the principles of the lean startup, as the real-life testing and multi-disciplinary approach of living labs seem to generate more actionable outcomes. However, living labs also require the flexibility of a startup – ideally a lean one – to actually deliver this promise. Thus, rather than picking a winner in this comparison, we argue that combining the concepts’ different strengths can bring clear benefits.</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">12</style></issue><custom1><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">imec.livinglabs
Dimitri Schuurman is the Team Lead of the Business Model and User Research Team at imec.livinglabs. He holds a PhD and a Master’s degree in Communication Sciences from Ghent University in Belgium. Together with his imec colleagues, Dimitri developed a specific living lab offering targeted at entrepreneurs in which he has managed over 100 innovation projects. He is also active in the International Society for Professional Innovation Management (ISPIM) and in the European Network of Living Labs (ENoLL) as a living labs specialist. His main interests and research topics are situated in the domains of open innovation, user innovation, and innovation management.</style></custom1><custom2><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna
Sonja M. Protic is a Researcher at the Institute of Production and Logistics at the University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences in Vienna. She finished her Master’s studies in Environmental Science and her Bachelor studies in Business Administration. She has several years of work experience in national and European research projects and in international project development for a multilateral organization. Her research interests include sustainable freight transport, innovation management, and living labs. She is enrolled as a doctoral student, writing her doctoral thesis in the field of innovation systems at multimodal inland terminals.</style></custom2></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Abdolrasoul Habibipour</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Annabel Georges</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Anna Ståhlbröst</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Dimitri Schuurman</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Birgitta Bergvall-Kåreborn</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">A Taxonomy of Factors Influencing Drop-Out Behaviour in Living Lab Field Tests</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Technology Innovation Management Review</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">drop-out</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">field test</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Living lab</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">taxonomy</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">user engagement</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">user motivation</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2018</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">05/2018</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://timreview.ca/article/1155</style></url></web-urls></urls><publisher><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Talent First Network</style></publisher><pub-location><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ottawa</style></pub-location><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">8</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">5-21</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">The concept of a “living lab” is a relatively new research area and phenomenon that facilitates user engagement in open innovation activities. Studies on living labs show that the users’ motivation to participate in a field test is higher at the beginning of the project than during the rest of the test, and that participants have a tendency to drop out before completing the assigned tasks. However, the literature still lacks theories describing the phenomenon of drop-out within the area of field tests in general and living lab field tests in particular. As the first step in constructing a theoretical discourse, the aims of this study are to present an empirically derived taxonomy for the various factors that influence drop-out behaviour; to provide a definition of “drop-out” in living lab field tests; and to understand the extent to which each of the identified items influence participant drop-out behaviour. To achieve these aims, we first extracted factors influencing drop-out behaviour in the field test from our previous studies on the topic, and then we validated the extracted results across 14 semi-structured interviews with experts in living lab field tests. Our findings show that identified reasons for dropping out can be grouped into three themes: innovation-related, process-related, and participant-related. Each theme consists of three categories with a total of 44 items. In this study, we also propose a unified definition of “drop-out” in living lab field tests.</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">5</style></issue><custom1><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Luleå University of Technology
Abdolrasoul Habibipour is a PhD student in Information Systems at Luleå University of Technology in Sweden and is a User Engagement Expert at Botnia Living Lab, Sweden. His research focuses on user engagement in living lab research, with a particular emphasis on users’ motivations and needs. Abdolrasoul has previously worked in information technology (IT) projects for more than 13 years as a project leader and project manager as well as software designer and developer. He is currently involved in international innovation and research projects such as UNaLab project, U4IoT project, as well as Privacy Flag project, all of which are financed by the European Commission.</style></custom1><custom2><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">imec.livinglabs
Annabel Georges is a User Specialist at imec.livinglabs in Belgium. Annabel holds a Master’s degree in Communication Sciences from Ghent University, with a specialization in New Media and Society. Since 2013, she has worked at imec.livinglabs, where she has conducted research for more than 15 innovation projects. Her main interests are contextual research, field tests, and working on improvements on current living lab practices.</style></custom2><custom3><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Luleå University of Technology
Anna Ståhlbröst is a Professor of Information Systems at Luleå University of Technology, Sweden, and Managing Director of Botnia Living Lab in Sweden. Her research is focused on the phenomena of living labs and open, user-driven innovation processes, with special interest in end-user needs and motivations. Anna’s research is related to different application areas such as smart cities, domestic IT use, and online privacy. She has participated in several international and national innovation and research projects, and she is currently involved in the UNaLab project, U4IoT project, as well as Privacy Flag project, all of which are financed by the European Commission.</style></custom3><custom4><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">imec.livinglabs
Dimitri Schuurman is the Team Lead of the Business Model and User Research Team at imec.livinglabs. He holds a PhD and a Master’s degree in Communication Sciences from Ghent University in Belgium. Together with his imec colleagues, Dimitri developed a specific living lab offering targeted at entrepreneurs in which he has managed over 100 innovation projects. He is also active in the International Society for Professional Innovation Management (ISPIM) and in the European Network of Living Labs (ENoLL) as a living labs specialist. His main interests and research topics are situated in the domains of open innovation, user innovation, and innovation management. </style></custom4><custom5><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Luleå University of Technology
Birgitta Bergvall-Kåreborn is Vice Chancellor and Professor in Information Systems at Luleå University of Technology, Sweden. Birgitta’s research interests concern design-oriented research focused on participatory design in distributed and open environments; human-centric and appreciative methodologies for design and learning; value-based information systems development; the increasing overlap between stakeholder participation and labour sourcing; and its consequences for value creation and value capture. She has published several articles within these areas, and she has participated in a large number of national and international research projects.</style></custom5></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Sara Logghe</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Dimitri Schuurman</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Action Research as a Framework to Evaluate the Operations of a Living Lab</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Technology Innovation Management Review</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">action research</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Living lab</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">panel management</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">participatory action research</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">user research</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2017</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">02/2017</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://timreview.ca/article/1056</style></url></web-urls></urls><publisher><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Talent First Network</style></publisher><pub-location><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ottawa</style></pub-location><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">7</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">35-41</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">In this article, we propose an action research approach to capture and act upon the delights and frustrations of panel members who participate in living lab research in order to optimize the operations of the living lab itself. We used this approach to test the effectiveness of action research in providing guidelines to practitioners to evaluate and design effective and sustainable user involvement processes in living labs. We conducted a focused literature review and an in-depth case study of both the integration of a researcher within the community and the implementation of an action research project within an existing living lab. This living lab is regarded as both a forerunner and a best-practice example in Europe. Based on our findings, we recommend co-creating the “operations” of a living lab with the users themselves following a combined action research and living lab approach.</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2</style></issue><custom1><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">imec – MICT – Ghent University
Sara Logghe is a Living Lab Researcher at imec – MICT – Ghent University in Belgium. She holds master’s degrees in History and Communication Sciences from Ghent University, and her research interests include the potential of social media for cultural institutions, the changing library landscape, and living labs. </style></custom1><custom2><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">imec – MICT – Ghent University
Dimitri Schuurman is the Team Lead in User Research at imec.livinglabs and a Senior Researcher at imec – MICT – Ghent University in Belgium. He holds a PhD and a Master’s degree in Communication Sciences from Ghent University. Together with his imec colleagues, Dimitri developed a specific living lab offering targeted at entrepreneurs in which he has managed over 100 innovation projects. Dimitri is responsible for the methodology and academic valorization of these living lab projects and coordinates a dynamic team of living lab researchers. His main interests and research topics are situated in the domains of open innovation, user innovation, and innovation management. His PhD thesis was entitled &lt;em&gt;Bridging the Gap between Open and User Innovation? Exploring the Value of Living Labs as a Means to Structure User Contribution and Manage Distributed Innovation.&lt;/em&gt;</style></custom2></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Annabel Georges</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Dimitri Schuurman</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Koen Vervoort</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Factors Affecting the Attrition of Test Users During Living Lab Field Trials</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Technology Innovation Management Review</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">attrition</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">drop-out</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">field trial</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Living lab</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Open innovation</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">user engagement</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">user involvement</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2016</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">01/2016</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://timreview.ca/article/959</style></url></web-urls></urls><publisher><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Talent First Network</style></publisher><pub-location><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ottawa</style></pub-location><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">6</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">35-44</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Next to active user involvement and a multi-method approach, a third major principle within living lab research consists of capturing the real-life context in which an innovation is used by end users. Field trials are a method to study the interaction of test users with an innovation in the context of use. However, when conducting field trials, there are several reasons why users stop participating in research activities, a phenomenon labelled as attrition. In this article, we elaborate on drop-outs during field trials by analyzing three post-trial surveys of living lab field trials. Our results show that several factors related to the innovation, as well as related to the field trial setup, play a role in attrition, including the lack of added value of the innovation and the extent to which the innovation satisfies the needs and time restrictions of test users. Based on our findings, we provide practical guidelines for managers to reduce attrition during field trials.</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">1</style></issue><custom1><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">iMinds – MICT – Ghent University
Annabel Georges is a Junior Researcher in the research group iMinds – MICT – Ghent University in Belgium. She holds a Master's degree in Communication Sciences from Ghent University, with a specialization in New Media and Society. In her master's thesis, &lt;em&gt;Social Media from A to Z: The Role of Media Coaches in the Diffusion of Social Media Literacy within the Library as an Organization,&lt;/em&gt; she used social network analysis to study the diffusion of social media literacy with library staff. At iMinds, her main interests are social innovation and the factors that motivate test users to participate in field trials.</style></custom1><custom2><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">iMinds – MICT – Ghent University
Dimitri Schuurman holds a PhD (2015) and Master's degree in Communication Sciences (2003) from Ghent University in Belgium. He joined the research group iMinds – MICT – Ghent University in Belgium in 2005 and started working at iMinds Living Labs in 2009. Together with his iMinds colleagues, Dimitri developed a specific living lab offering targeted at startups and SMEs, in which he has managed over 50 innovation projects. As a senior researcher, Dimitri is currently responsible for the methodology and academic valorization of living lab projects. He also coordinates a dynamic team of living lab researchers from iMinds – MICT – Ghent University. His main interests and research topics are situated in the domains of open innovation, user innovation, and innovation management. In early 2015, he finished his PhD entitled &lt;em&gt;Bridging the Gap between Open and User Innovation? Exploring the Value of Living Labs as a Means to Structure User Contribution and Manage Distributed Innovation&lt;/em&gt;. </style></custom2><custom3><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">iMinds – MICT – Ghent University
Koen Vervoort manages and coordinates panels within living lab settings within one of the first living lab organizations in Europe: iMinds Living Labs in Belgium. He also represents iMinds within large Flemish and European living lab projects, hosts workshops, benchmarks internal processes within the entire living lab community (and beyond), oversees an internal quality survey, and organizes fieldwork for iMinds' flagship, &lt;a href=&quot;http://digimeter.be&quot; target=_blank&quot;&gt;Digimeter&lt;/a&gt;, a report that tracks the ownership and use of media (technology) among the Flemish population.</style></custom3></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Carina Veeckman</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Dimitri Schuurman</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Seppo Leminen</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Mika Westerlund</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Linking Living Lab Characteristics and Their Outcomes: Towards a Conceptual Framework</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Technology Innovation Management Review</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">co-creation</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">innovation ecosystem</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Living lab</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Open innovation</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">user involvement</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2013</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">12/2013</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://timreview.ca/article/748</style></url></web-urls></urls><publisher><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Talent First Network</style></publisher><pub-location><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ottawa</style></pub-location><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">3</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">6-15</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Despite almost a decade of living lab activity all over Europe, there still is a lack of empirical research into the practical implementation and the related outcomes of living labs. Therefore, this article proposes a framework to create a better understanding of the characteristics and outcomes of living labs. We investigate three living labs in Belgium and one in Finland to learn how the different building blocks of living lab environments contribute to the outputs of innovation projects launched within the lab. The findings imply that managers and researchers contemplating innovation in living labs need to consider the intended inputs and outcomes, and reframe their innovation activities accordingly. We formulate practical guidelines on how living labs should be managed on the levels of community interaction, stakeholder engagement, and methodological setup to succeed in implementing living lab projects and to create user-centred innovations. That way, living lab practitioners can work towards a more sustainable way of setting up living labs that can run innovation projects over a longer period of time. </style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">12</style></issue><custom1><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">iMinds
Carina Veeckman is a researcher at the Vrije Universiteit Brussel in Belgium, where she started working for the iMinds-SMIT research group in 2011. Until March 2013, Carina was responsible for the living lab methodology within the Flemish Living Lab Platform (FLELLAP), which included numerous projects within the smart grids, smart media, and smart cities domains with a test panel of 2,000 users. Her current research and interests are related to open data and the co-creation of mobile applications within a smart city context, and the willingness to share location information when using these applications. </style></custom1><custom2><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">iMinds
Dimitri Schuurman is a Senior Researcher at the iMinds Media &amp; ICT (MICT) research group and is responsible for the methodology of living lab projects facilitated by iMinds iLab.o. His involvement in living labs started in 2010 with the Mediatuin and LeYLab living labs. To date, he has managed over 30 concrete living lab projects that deal with new media and innovative use of ICT. He is currently finishing his PhD on living labs at Ghent University in Belgium. </style></custom2><custom3><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Laurea University of Applied Sciences
Seppo Leminen holds positions as Principal Lecturer at the Laurea University of Applied Sciences and Adjunct Professor in the School of Business at Aalto University in Finland. He holds a doctoral degree in Marketing from the Hanken School of Economics and a licentiate degree in Information Technology from the Helsinki University of Technology (now the School of Electrical Engineering at Aalto University). His doctoral research focused on perceived differences and gaps in buyer-seller relationships in the telecommunication industry. His research and consulting interests include living labs, open innovation, value co-creation and capture with users, neuromarketing, relationships, services, and business models in marketing as well as management models in high-tech and service-intensive industries. </style></custom3><custom4><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Carleton University
Mika Westerlund, D. Sc. (Econ.) is an Assistant Professor at Carleton University’s Sprott School of Business in Ottawa, Canada. He previously held positions as a Postdoctoral Scholar in the Haas School of Business at the University of California Berkeley and in the School of Economics at Aalto University. Mika earned his doctoral degree in Marketing from the Helsinki School of Economics. His current research interests include open innovation, business strategy, and management models in high-tech and service-intensive industries. </style></custom4></record></records></xml>