@article {1463,
	title = {A Closer Look at Living Labs and Higher Education using a Scoping Review},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {11},
	year = {2021},
	month = {12/2021},
	pages = {30-40},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	chapter = {30},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {As society changes rapidly, there is a need to educate professionals who contribute to innovation and complex adaptations in organizations. As part of this education, companies, governmental bodies and other stakeholders have sought collaboration on complex issues in "living labs". Living labs are recognized as educational environments to prepare students in higher education for future roles. The aim of this article is to explore the nature and extent of the scientific literature about living labs in which actors in higher education actively participate. In total, 21 articles were included in this scoping review. Research into this topic appears to be relatively new. Definitions of living labs are mostly in line with the definition used by the European Network of Living Labs (ENoLL), with its large variation of lab locations. Few results about organization and governance were identified. Different lessons learned regarding processes, interaction and requirements for successful living labs were found. The design of learning is mostly described by learning activities. Learning outcomes are described in generic and specific competences and assessments in living labs are rarely described. The authors recommend more detailed studies into aspects of the successful participation of higher education to gain knowledge about enhancing learning outcomes, and the effects of educational activities within living lab environments.},
	keywords = {approaches, definitions, higher education, key elements, Living lab, scoping review},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1463},
	url = {timreview.ca/article/1463},
	author = {Ren{\'e}e van den Heuvel and Susy Braun and Manon de Bruin and Ramon Dani{\"e}ls}
}
@article {1461,
	title = {Expect the Unexpected: Investigating co-creation projects in a Living Lab},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {11},
	year = {2021},
	month = {12/2021},
	pages = {6-20},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	chapter = {6},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {Living Labs (LLs) are complex multi-stakeholder environments that enable real-life testing and experimentation of products, services, and systems. Despite increasing attention by practitioners as well as policymakers, and growing scholarly interest in the field, the literature exploring congruency between organisational objectives and outcomes when utilising LLs is still scarce. To fill this gap, a qualitative case study is employed to gain an in-depth understanding of objectives and project outcomes of organisations utilising LLs. The LL JOSEPHS{\textregistered} was chosen as this study{\textquoteright}s empirical context, in which 14 different projects were analysed. In-depth interviews revealed eight categories of measurable project outcomes: market acceptance, price acceptability, exposure, product testing, market intelligence, legitimisation, method testing, and networking. This study not only highlights what companies have achieved in comparison to their original project objectives, but also identifies additional unplanned outcomes that they accomplished. The findings offer important project-level insights into the potential and limitations of LLs. The results form a basis upon which to develop a better understanding of how innovation performance can be nurtured in LLs. Insights from the study may also help firms and facilitators by providing a deeper understanding of LLs at an individual project-level, and by articulating potential objectives and outcomes associated with organisations{\textquoteright} involvement in LLs.},
	keywords = {co-creation, innovation, Innovation management, Living lab, Open innovation},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1461},
	url = {timreview.ca/article/1461},
	author = {Katharina De Vita and Riccardo De Vita}
}
@article {1462,
	title = {Human Factors in Living Lab Research},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {11},
	year = {2021},
	month = {12/2021},
	pages = {21-29},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	chapter = {21},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {Human factors research is still in its infancy in healthcare and other fields. Yet it has the potential to allow organisations and living labs to assess and improve innovation quality, while closely involving potential end users. "Human factors" involve a scientific focus on the interaction between individuals and systems with the goal of improving safety, performance, and user acceptability. Studies simulating challenging real-life circumstances in selected samples and using a multi-method approach can provide important insights for organisations and governments and allow for better and safer services for the end user. By combining existing theory and case examples, the current paper aims to situate human factors research and to help researchers determine when and how this methodology could be applied.},
	keywords = {human factors, Living lab, methodology, safety, usability},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1462},
	url = {timreview.ca/article/1462},
	author = {Nele A.J. De Witte and Leen Broeckx and Sascha Vermeylen and Vicky Van Der Auwera and Tom Van Daele}
}
@article {1467,
	title = {A Review of Living Lab Research and Methods for User Involvement},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {11},
	year = {2021},
	month = {12/2021},
	pages = {88-107},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	chapter = {88},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {Living lab initiatives attempt to solve challenges by stimulating innovative collaboration and outcomes, which unfold in multifarious activities. This study investigates the progress of Living lab research over time. It explores its current trends, along with methods and tools used by Living labs for user involvement. By employing a two-step approach, the study first presents a bibliometric analysis of 535 publications, including detection of convergence towards areas like the aging problem of societies, smart cities, Urban Living labs, and overall sustainability. Urban Living lab clusters have been growing rapidly and forming their own research domain. Subsequently, a review of 42 empirical papers explores the methods and tools adopted by Living labs for user involvement during the innovation process. We categorize the methods into the following eight groups: 1) Structured interaction, 2) Flexible interaction, 3) Extended network, 4) Special actors, 5) Learning and engaging, 6) Design approaches; 7) Techniques, 8) Operational guidelines. The study contributes both to theoretical and practice-oriented Living lab research and offers potential support especially to practitioners.},
	keywords = {bibliometric analysis, co-creation, literature review, Living lab, user involvement},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1467},
	url = {timreview.ca/article/1467},
	author = {Judy Hong Huang and Elisa Thomas}
}
@article {1465,
	title = {Rural Living Labs: Inclusive Digital Transformation in the Countryside},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {11},
	year = {2021},
	month = {12/2021},
	pages = {59-72},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	chapter = {59},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {Digital transformation (DT) has received increasing attention in recent years. Up until now, most of the current studies focus on digital transformation in advanced and dense societies, especially urban areas and technologies. Hence, the phenomenon of DT is under-researched in the context of rural and sparsely populated contexts. This study aims at exploring how a rural living lab (RLL) can be shaped and how this approach can be designed to support digital transformation processes in rural contexts. In so doing, following a design science research methodology (DSRM) approach, we have made an artefact (that is, RLL framework) that is an "instantiation" that supports user centric digitalization of rural areas. The designed framework is developed based on the key components of "traditional" and "urban" living labs, as well as empirical data which was collected within the context of the DigiBy project. The DigiBy project aims at conducting DT pilots in rural areas to elevate peoples{\textquoteright} understanding of digitalization and the application of digitalization opportunities for service development in rural areas in the north of Sweden. As a result of these studies, five key components that guide the design of digital transformation pilots in rural areas emerged, namely: 1) rural context, 2) digitalization, 3) governance, control, and business mode, 4) methods facilitating DT processes, and 5) quintuple helix actors. We also offer an empirically derived definition of the rural living lab concept, followed by avenues for future research.},
	keywords = {Components, digital transformation, Living lab, Rural living lab, Rural residents, user engagement},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1465},
	url = {timreview.ca/article/1465},
	author = {Abdolrasoul Habibipour and Johanna Lindberg and Mari Runardotter and Yomn Elmistikawy and Anna St{\r a}hlbr{\"o}st and Diana Chron{\'e}er}
}
@article {1221,
	title = {Applying a Living Lab Approach Within an eHealth Accelerator},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {9},
	year = {2019},
	month = {03/2019},
	pages = {6-19},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {Through this study, we seek to understand the impact of the use of the living lab approach on product and business development in an eHealth accelerator. In the case accelerator, 20 startups developed innovative products atop the European FIWARE Future Internet technology platform. The novel design element of the case accelerator was the use of the living lab approach that was included for the purpose of engaging end users in the development and testing of new product prototypes. Our main result is that the living lab approach provided added value to participating companies and resulted in changes in their product development and marketing strategies. Overall, the case accelerator and the use of the living lab approach had a significant impact on the development, growth, and market success of the companies. Based on the results of the case accelerator, we propose the generic accelerator model presented by Pauwels and co-authors in 2016 to be extended with a new design element, the living lab approach. },
	keywords = {accelerator, case study, ehealth, Living lab, Open innovation, SME, startup},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1221},
	url = {https://timreview.ca/article/1221},
	author = {Lotta Haukipuro and Satu V{\"a}in{\"a}m{\"o} and Leena Arhippainen and Timo Ojala}
}
@article {1270,
	title = {Editorial: Celebrating Innovation in Florence (October 2019)},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {9},
	year = {2019},
	month = {10/2019},
	pages = {3-4},
	chapter = {3},
	keywords = {behavioural economics, behavioural science, bibliometric analysis, business models, Buyer-Supplier Relationships, choice architecture, collaboration, consumer-to-business, Content creator-based business models, content creators, creativity management, digital platforms, digital technologies, digital transformation, Digital user involvement, digitalization, digitization, disruption, e-commerce, human-centered data economy, IIoT, Industry 4.0, innovation, innovation policy, intellectual commerce, Living lab, mission-led science, multisided platforms, personal data, research impact, social commerce, Supplier Integration, taxonomy, user-generated content},
	author = {Stoyan Tanev and Gregory Sandstrom}
}
@article {1223,
	title = {Exploring Participation Needs and Motivational Requirements When Engaging Older Adults in an Emerging Living Lab},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {9},
	year = {2019},
	month = {03/2019},
	pages = {38-49},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {There is a growing body of literature regarding living labs, which are seen as an effective way to develop and evaluate research for novel products and services with the actual end users. With growth in the living labs model, there is an increasing need for guidelines to steer and support the set-up and maintenance of initiatives, and to facilitate relationships and engagement with stakeholders and users in this context. This study seeks to address this need, in part, by exploring the needs, expectations, and motivations that older adults have in relation to research participation in an emerging living lab. This work is part of a wider research project to develop an integrated framework to guide emerging living labs. Eight semi-structured interviews were undertaken with six residents and two family members from two residential settings for older adults that were collaborating to establish a living lab environment. A concept-driven coding frame supported the coding and analysis of the interview transcripts. The results provide insights in relation to participant motivation to take part in research, and they identify some issues of concern for participants, both residents and family members, related to living lab initiatives. As a first step in developing a successful living lab culture of collaborative research, this study has demonstrated that open discussion with residents and their families should continue to guide processes and research design as the emerging living lab initiative continues. },
	keywords = {family views, Living lab, motivation to participate, older adults, research participation, user expectations, user needs},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1223},
	url = {https://timreview.ca/article/1223},
	author = {Tiziana C. Callari and Louise Moody and Janet Saunders and Gill Ward and Nikki Holliday and Julie Woodley}
}
@article {1222,
	title = {The SDG-Check: Guiding Open Innovation towards Sustainable Development Goals},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {9},
	year = {2019},
	month = {03/2019},
	pages = {20-37},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {The {\textquotedblleft}fuzzy front end{\textquotedblright} of innovation is argued to be crucial for the success and sustainability impact of a final product. Indeed, it is a promising area of focus in efforts to achieve the United Nations{\textquoteright} 2015 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), which provide a globally accepted framework for sustainability. However, the usability of the 17 goals and the large number of sub-goals represent barriers to innovation practitioners. Moreover, this early innovation stage proves to be a challenge for corporate practitioners and innovators, largely due to the concept{\textquoteright}s intangible, qualitative nature and the lack of data. To help overcome these barriers, this article proposes a four-stage approach for structuring the innovation process using an online tool called the {\textquotedblleft}SDG-Check{\textquotedblright}, which help assess an innovator{\textquoteright}s sustainability orientation in the early phases of product and service development. It is a semi-quantitative tool to gather and combine assessments by experts involved in innovation processes with implications for the United Nations{\textquoteright} SDGs. Furthermore, this article presents our first experiences in applying the SDG-Check based on three living lab innovation cases. The results indicate that the tools can support and inspire a dialogue with internal and external stakeholders with regards to sustainability considerations in the early design stages of product and service development. },
	keywords = {fuzzy front end of innovation, Living lab, Open innovation, SDG-Check, sustainability assessments, sustainability inspiration, sustainable development goals},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1222},
	url = {https://timreview.ca/article/1222},
	author = {Justus von Geibler and Julius Piwowar and Annika Greven}
}
@article {1224,
	title = {Urban Living Labs: Towards an Integrated Understanding of their Key Components},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {9},
	year = {2019},
	month = {03/2019},
	pages = {50-62},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {In today{\textquoteright}s ongoing urbanization and escalating climate change, there is an increasing demand on cities to be innovative and inclusive to handle these emerging issues. As an answer to these challenges, and in order to generate and adopt sustainable innovations and nature-based solutions in the urban areas, the concept of urban living labs has emerged. However, to date, there is confusion concerning the concept of the urban living lab and its key components. Some interpret the urban living lab as an approach, others as a single project, and some as a specific place {\textendash} and some just do not know. In order to unravel this complexity and better understand this concept, we sought to identify the key components of an urban living lab by discussing the perspective of city representatives in the context of an urban living lab project. To achieve this goal, we reviewed previous literature on this topic and carried out two workshops with city representatives, followed by an open-ended questionnaire. In this article, we identify and discuss seven key components of an urban living lab: governance and management structure; financing models; urban context; nature-based solutions; partners and users (including citizens); approach; and ICT and infrastructure. We also offer an empirically derived definition of the urban living lab concept.},
	keywords = {definition, innovation, key components, Living lab, nature-based solutions, NBS, ULL, UNaLab, urban living lab},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1224},
	url = {https://timreview.ca/article/1224},
	author = {Diana Chron{\'e}er and Anna St{\r a}hlbr{\"o}st and Abdolrasoul Habibipour}
}
@article {1163,
	title = {From Organizations to Organizational Fields: The Evolution of Civic Innovation Ecosystems},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {8},
	year = {2018},
	month = {06/2018},
	pages = {34-47},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {Contemporary approaches to urban technology emphasize local {\textquotedblleft}innovation ecosystems{\textquotedblright}. Two organizational models {\textendash} living labs and innovation integrators {\textendash} are commonly used as hubs to broker these ecosystems. Curiously, both coexist in some cities, allowing a comparison of their impact and an analysis of their development over time and in context. The case studies presented in this article suggest that our analytical frameworks for technology policy may fall short, in that they contemplate only the organizations themselves {\textendash} the living labs or innovation integrators. The dynamics observed in each city are well articulated, however, in the sociotechnical systems literature. The hub can be understood as a {\textquotedblleft}niche{\textquotedblright}, which fosters radical innovations and new processes. As these prototypes are increasingly deployed and accepted, there is a regime shift, ultimately creating an experimentalist culture that fills the role previously held by the hub. This conclusion is neither a challenge to ecosystem theory nor a critique of innovation policy and its implementation. Rather, I suggest that we must extend these theoretical frameworks, drawing on sociotechnical systems literature to better account for institutions and for systems change as we design policy for urban technology. This article therefore makes a contribution by using a sociotechnical systems lens to explain the evolution of local urban innovation ecosystems.},
	keywords = {city, civic technology, innovation policy, innovation systems, Living lab},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = { http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1163},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/1163},
	author = {Matthew Claudel}
}
@article {1156,
	title = {Innovation Instruments to Co-Create Needs-Based Solutions in a Living Lab},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {8},
	year = {2018},
	month = {05/2018},
	pages = {22-35},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {This multiple case study focuses on co-creation facilitated with innovation instruments in three different environments {\textendash} a school, a hospital, and an airport {\textendash} in which 12 SMEs and startups developed solutions based on predefined needs of customer organizations, and where stakeholders actively participated through user involvement methods facilitated by a living lab. The article provides new knowledge regarding the benefits of the co-creation, user involvement, and use of the living lab approach within different contexts. Our findings show concrete benefits of co-creation for stakeholders such as companies, customer organizations, and end users. Based on our results, we propose a new, generic model for using innovation instruments to facilitate co-creation for the development of needs-based products and services in different service domains.},
	keywords = {co-creation, innovation instrument, innovation process, Living lab, SME, startup, user involvement},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1156},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/1156},
	author = {Lotta Haukipuro and Satu V{\"a}in{\"a}m{\"o} and Pauliina Hyrk{\"a}s}
}
@article {1202,
	title = {The Library Living Lab: A Collaborative Innovation Model for Public Libraries},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {8},
	year = {2018},
	month = {12/2018},
	pages = {17-25},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {New models of governance advance towards participatory schemes in which citizens not only play an active role in decision-making processes but also the processes by which new products and services are defined and introduced. In parallel, technological innovations, and the new horizons of creativity that they allow, open a huge range of options to innovation in all areas of society, particularly in the cultural field. Under these two premises {\textendash} participation and innovation {\textendash} the Library Living Lab initiative was born at the Public Library of Miquel Batllori Volpelleres in Sant Cugat del Vall{\`e}s, Barcelona. The Library Living Lab is a space that gathers all stakeholders around the public library with the aim of exploring new methods and tools that allow us to enjoy culture both individually and collectively. This article describes how technology can be an enabling factor in a citizen-initiated grassroots project. The project implements a complete model of inter-institutional collaboration with all relevant actors around the living lab working group. The specific challenges of developing an open, flexible, and inter-connected space are identified, and the interaction dynamics based on a challenge{\textendash}action{\textendash}return methodology definition are described through practical examples. Our conclusions tackle the challenges of a horizon for the implementation of innovation initiatives {\textendash} such as living labs {\textendash} in public spaces. },
	keywords = {cultural spaces, innovation, library, Living lab, participatory, public spaces, technology},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1202},
	url = {https://timreview.ca/article/1202},
	author = {Fernando Vilari{\~n}o and Dimosthenis Karatzas and Alberto Valcarce}
}
@article {1201,
	title = {Living Labs versus Lean Startups: An Empirical Investigation},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {8},
	year = {2018},
	month = {12/2018},
	pages = {7-16},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {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 {\textquotedblleft}startup hype{\textquotedblright} 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 {\textquotedblleft}hyped{\textquotedblright} 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 {\textendash} ideally a lean one {\textendash} to actually deliver this promise. Thus, rather than picking a winner in this comparison, we argue that combining the concepts{\textquoteright} different strengths can bring clear benefits.},
	keywords = {entrepreneurs, impact, Innovation management, lean startup, Living lab, Open innovation, testing, user innovation},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1201},
	url = {https://timreview.ca/article/1201},
	author = {Dimitri Schuurman and Sonja M. Protic}
}
@article {1155,
	title = {A Taxonomy of Factors Influencing Drop-Out Behaviour in Living Lab Field Tests},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {8},
	year = {2018},
	month = {05/2018},
	pages = {5-21},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {The concept of a {\textquotedblleft}living lab{\textquotedblright} is a relatively new research area and phenomenon that facilitates user engagement in open innovation activities. Studies on living labs show that the users{\textquoteright} 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 {\textquotedblleft}drop-out{\textquotedblright} 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 {\textquotedblleft}drop-out{\textquotedblright} in living lab field tests.},
	keywords = {drop-out, field test, Living lab, taxonomy, user engagement, user motivation},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1155},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/1155},
	author = {Abdolrasoul Habibipour and Annabel Georges and Anna St{\r a}hlbr{\"o}st and Dimitri Schuurman and Birgitta Bergvall-K{\r a}reborn}
}
@article {1170,
	title = {A Topic Modelling Analysis of Living Labs Research},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {8},
	year = {2018},
	month = {07/2018},
	pages = {40-51},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {This study applies topic modelling analysis on a corpus of 86 publications in the Technology Innovation Management Review (TIM Review) to understand how the phenomenon of living labs has been approached in the recent innovation management literature. Although the analysis is performed on a corpus collected from only one journal, the TIM Review has published the largest number of special issues on living labs to date, thus it reflects the advancement of the area in the scholarly literature. According to the analysis, research approaches to living labs can be categorized under seven broad topics: 1) Design, 2) Ecosystem, 3) City, 4) University, 5) Innovation, 6) User, and 7) Living lab. Moreover, each topic includes a set of characteristic subtopics. A trend analysis suggests that the emphasis of research on living labs is moving away from a conceptual focus on what living labs are and who is involved in their ecosystems to practical applications of how to design and manage living labs, their processes, and participants, especially users, as key stakeholders and in novel application areas such as the urban city context.},
	keywords = {big data, data mining, innovation, Living lab, living laboratory, research trends, text analytics, topic modeling, topic modelling},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1170},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/1170},
	author = {Mika Westerlund and Seppo Leminen and Mervi Rajahonka}
}
@article {1056,
	title = {Action Research as a Framework to Evaluate the Operations of a Living Lab},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {7},
	year = {2017},
	month = {02/2017},
	pages = {35-41},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {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 {\textquotedblleft}operations{\textquotedblright} of a living lab with the users themselves following a combined action research and living lab approach.},
	keywords = {action research, Living lab, panel management, participatory action research, user research},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1056},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/1056},
	author = {Sara Logghe and Dimitri Schuurman}
}
@article {1046,
	title = {Categorization of Innovation Tools in Living Labs},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {7},
	year = {2017},
	month = {01/2017},
	pages = {15-25},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {This article examines the link between innovation processes and the use of innovation tools in living labs. So doing, it develops a conceptual framework based on the literature to analyze 40 living labs in different countries. The study contributes to the discussion on living labs by introducing a new typology of living labs based on their innovation process characteristics and usage of tools: linearizer, iterator, mass customizer, and tailor. Moreover, it proposes three ways to organize innovation activities in living labs. The article concludes by providing a set of implications to theory and practice, and suggesting directions for future research on living labs.},
	keywords = {innovation tool, Living lab, method, Open innovation, user innovation},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1046},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/1046},
	author = {Seppo Leminen and Mika Westerlund}
}
@article {1049,
	title = {The Design-Driven Living Lab: A New Approach to Exploring Solutions to Complex Societal Challenges},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {7},
	year = {2017},
	month = {01/2017},
	pages = {44-51},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {In this study, we aimed to explore the potential of a design-driven living lab as an innovative approach to addressing societal challenges. This living lab incorporates design qualities such as exploration, open-ended results, and disruption. This approach was applied in three case studies within the context of dementia, each of which explored the impact of Qwiek.up {\textendash} a media system that creates an ambient experience in a room through projection and sound. A cluster analysis of the results in the three case studies showed that the system has considerable potential for people with dementia, and possibly also for other groups. In addition, the design-driven approach led to new applications in care, improved functionality, and a broader design space. Our findings show that design-driven living labs can widen the scope of innovation and improve the value proposition of an innovative solution. },
	keywords = {design, Living lab, societal challenges, technology probe},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1049},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/1049},
	author = {Rens Brankaert and Elke den Ouden}
}
@article {1053,
	title = {Methods for Supporting Older Users in Communicating Their Emotions at Different Phases of a Living Lab Project},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {7},
	year = {2017},
	month = {02/2017},
	pages = {7-19},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {In this article, we focus on living lab methods that support the elicitation of emotions {\textendash} a key success factor in whether a design solution will be accepted and taken up over the long term. We demonstrate the use of emotional goal models to help understand what is relevant for a target user group in the early phases of design. We promote animations and storyboards to envision the context of use and to gain an understanding of how design ideas can integrate into people{\textquoteright}s lives. For the evaluation of ideas and to further understand user needs, we show how technology probes facilitate natural interactions with a suggested solution concept. All methods have in common that they enable older adults without design or development experience to participate in the design process and work towards a meaningful solution by helping to communicate feelings and goals that are often hard to define. Lastly, we present a process model that demonstrates our emotion-led design toolkit at various phases of a living lab process. },
	keywords = {aging well, co-design methods, emotion-led design, expressing emotions, Living lab, personal alarm systems},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1053},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/1053},
	author = {Sonja Pedell and Alen Keirnan and Gareth Priday and Tim Miller and Antonette Mendoza and Antonio Lopez-Lorca and Leon Sterling}
}
@article {1057,
	title = {Needsfinding in Living Labs: A Structured Research Approach},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {7},
	year = {2017},
	month = {02/2017},
	pages = {42-51},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {Living labs enable innovations to be facilitated and implemented quickly and efficiently. A key element of the living lab approach is the active involvement of users. In this article, we examine a structured needsfinding phase of a living lab infrastructure project within the context of bicycle commuting. Given that effectuation costs are high, it is essential for the lab to focus on tackling the right user needs. Thus, the living lab{\textquoteright}s needsfinding phase aims to identify user needs and wants, as measured by bicycle commuting intention. We examined intention in a structured way by following the theory of planned behaviour. The results show that bicycle commuting intention can be explained by the variables of our model (R square=0.808). The specific insights arising from the needsfinding phase are an important focus for the activities and experiments in the later phases of the living lab. The generalized insights are also relevant to innovation experts outside the area of cycling.},
	keywords = {commuting, cycling, intention, Living lab, needsfinding, theory of planned behaviour},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1057},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/1057},
	author = {Louise Savelkoul and Murk Peutz}
}
@article {1055,
	title = {Reflecting on Actions in Living Lab Research},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {7},
	year = {2017},
	month = {02/2017},
	pages = {27-34},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {Living labs deploy contemporary open and user-centred engagement processes in real-world contexts where all relevant stakeholders are involved and engaged with the endeavour to create and experiment with different innovations. The approach is evidently successful and builds on the perspective that people have a democratic right to have influence over changes that might affect them, such as those brought about by an innovation. In this article, we will reflect on and discuss a case in which end users took part in the development of a method that stimulates learning and adoption of digital innovations in their own homes while testing and interacting with it. The results show that, when end users were stimulated to use the implemented innovation through different explicit assignments, they both increased their understanding of the situation as well as changed their behaviour. Living lab processes are complex and dynamic, and we find that it is essential that a living lab have the capability to adjust its roles and actions. We argue that being reflective is beneficial for innovation process managers in living labs because it allows them to adjust processes in response to dynamic circumstances. },
	keywords = {action research, Apollon, context, digital innovations, end users, innovation process, Living lab, research process},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1055},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/1055},
	author = {Anna St{\r a}hlbr{\"o}st and Marita Holst}
}
@article {1047,
	title = {Taking Real-Life Seriously: An Approach to Decomposing Context Beyond {\textquotedblleft}Environment{\textquotedblright} in Living Labs},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {7},
	year = {2017},
	month = {01/2017},
	pages = {26-36},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {The maturity of living labs has grown over the years and researchers have developed a uniform definition by emphasizing the multi-method and real-life, contextual approach. The latter predominantly focuses on the in situ use of a product during field trials where users are observed in their everyday life. Researchers thus recognize the importance of context in living labs, but do not provide adequate insights into how context can be taken into consideration. Therefore, the contribution of this article is twofold. By means of a case study, we show how field trials can be evaluated in a more structural way to cover all dimensions of context and how this same framework can be used to evaluate context in the front end of design. This framework implies that living lab researchers are no longer dependent on the technological readiness level of a product to evaluate all dimensions of context. By using the proposed framework, living lab researchers can improve the overall effectiveness of methods used to gather and analyze data in a living lab project. },
	keywords = {context, innovation process, Living lab, real-life},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1047},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/1047},
	author = {Lynn Coorevits and An Jacobs}
}
@article {1118,
	title = {Towards Third-Generation Living Lab Networks in Cities},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {7},
	year = {2017},
	month = {11/2017},
	pages = {21-35},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {Many 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.},
	keywords = {city, co-creation, collaborative innovation, innovation, Living lab, networks, Open innovation, smart city, third-generation},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1118},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/1118},
	author = {Seppo Leminen and Mervi Rajahonka and Mika Westerlund}
}
@article {960,
	title = {The Evolution of Intermediary Activities: Broadening the Concept of Facilitation in Living Labs},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {6},
	year = {2016},
	month = {01/2016},
	pages = {45-58},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {Innovation intermediaries play an important role in open innovation endeavours. In living lab projects, where different professional identities and organizational cultures are at play, intermediary actors facilitate learning between stakeholders and manage tensions and conflicts of interest. The current living lab literature recognizes the importance and multifacetedness of these actors, but does not shed light on the work they do at a more practical level. Our study seeks to capture the variety and evolution of work tasks of user-side innovation intermediaries during and after a four-year technology project in a living lab. The study explores how these mediating actors tackle the everyday challenges of a living lab project. This article is grounded on a longitudinal qualitative case study of a innovation process for a floor monitoring system for elderly care {\textendash} the "smart floor". },
	keywords = {co-design, elderly care, facilitation, health technology, innovation intermediaries, Living lab},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/960},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/960},
	author = {Louna Hakkarainen and Sampsa Hyysalo}
}
@article {959,
	title = {Factors Affecting the Attrition of Test Users During Living Lab Field Trials},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {6},
	year = {2016},
	month = {01/2016},
	pages = {35-44},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {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.},
	keywords = {attrition, drop-out, field trial, Living lab, Open innovation, user engagement, user involvement},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/959},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/959},
	author = {Annabel Georges and Dimitri Schuurman and Koen Vervoort}
}
@article {958,
	title = {Urban Living Labs for Sustainability in Suburbs in Need of Modernization and Social Uplift},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {6},
	year = {2016},
	month = {01/2016},
	pages = {27-34},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {A number of urban living labs have been set up in recent years, with the aim of developing innovation processes within a multi-stakeholder partnership in an urban context. Several urban living labs focus on sustainable development, which is a visible and urgent issue in less valued suburbs in need of modernization and social uplift. We argue that, when applying the living labs approach in the context of sustainable development in suburbs, the primary focus should be society{\textquoteright}s collective goals, as expressed through municipalities and users. The aim of this article is to show examples of how urban living labs can be applied in less valued suburbs in order to contribute to sustainability based on societal goals. We build on analyses from the research project SubUrbanLab, where urban living labs were set up in Alby and Peltosaari, two suburban areas in Sweden and Finland, respectively. We draw lessons regarding how to use urban living labs for sustainable development in order to create favourable conditions for ongoing engagement with the municipality and users towards long-term sustainability. },
	keywords = {city, Living lab, suburb, sustainability, urban},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/958},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/958},
	author = {Katarina Buhr and Maija Federley and Anja Karlsson}
}
@article {933,
	title = {Cities as Collaborative Innovation Platforms},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {5},
	year = {2015},
	month = {10/2015},
	pages = {16-23},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {In this article, we focus on the role of a city as an orchestrator for innovation. We argue that cities should establish active dialogue with their citizens,  and private and public sectors actors to co-create, develop, test, and offer service innovations that utilize diverse sets of platforms such as living labs. Our research contributes to the discussions of open and user innovations from the perspective of cities as communities that involve and integrate citizens and companies to collaborative innovation activities. While acknowledging that cities are platforms for simultaneous and divergent innovation initiatives, we identify four principal types of collaborative innovation. Cities serve as platforms for: i) improving everyday life; ii) conducting consumer and citizen experiments; iii) experimenting and implementing new technologies and services; and iv) creating new innovations and economies. Finally, we offer guidelines for fostering collaborative innovation activities between the public and private sectors.},
	keywords = {collaborative innovation, creative citizen, industry, Living lab, Open innovation, smart city},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/933},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/933},
	author = {Taina Tukiainen and Seppo Leminen and Mika Westerlund}
}
@article {877,
	title = {The City as Living Laboratory: Empowering Citizens with the Citadel Toolkit},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {5},
	year = {2015},
	month = {03/2015},
	pages = {6-17},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {Lately, the concept of smart cities has been changing from a top-down and mostly technological-driven approach, towards a bottom-up process that facilitates participation and collaboration among city stakeholders. In this latter respect, the city is an ecosystem in which smart applications, open government data, and new modes of participation are fostering innovation. However, detailed analyses on how to manage bottom-up smart city initiatives, as well as descriptions of underlying challenges and barriers, are still scarce. Therefore, this article investigates four collaborative smart city initiatives in Europe to learn how cities can optimize citizen involvement in the context of public sector innovation. The analytical framework focuses on the different stakeholder roles in the ecosystem and the civic capacities to participate in the innovation process. The findings illustrate how more inclusive citizen involvement can be realized by providing different tools that align with the specific capacities and skills of the citizens. Furthermore, through specified workshop formats and peer learning, citizens lacking technical skills were also enabled to participate in the evolution of their cities, and to generate solutions from which both the city and everyday urban life can possibly benefit. },
	keywords = {citizen involvement, Living lab, open government data, smart city, toolkit},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/877},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/877},
	author = {Carina Veeckman and Shenja van der Graaf}
}
@article {948,
	title = {The Grey Areas Between Open and Closed in Innovation Networks},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {5},
	year = {2015},
	month = {12/2015},
	pages = {6-18},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {This 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.},
	keywords = {closedness, innovation, innovation network, Living lab, Open innovation, openness},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/948},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/948},
	author = {Seppo Leminen and Taija Turunen and Mika Westerlund}
}
@article {950,
	title = {Leveraging Living Lab Innovation Processes through Crowdsourcing},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {5},
	year = {2015},
	month = {12/2015},
	pages = {28-36},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {Around the globe, crowdsourcing initiatives are emerging and contributing in a diversity of areas, such as in crisis management and product development and to carry out micro-tasks such as translations and transcriptions. The essence of crowdsourcing is to acknowledge that not all the talented people work for you; hence, crowdsourcing brings more perspectives, insights, and visions to, for instance, an innovation process. In this article, we analyze how crowdsourcing can contribute to the different stages of innovation processes carried out in living labs and thus contribute to living labs by strengthening their core role as innovation process facilitators. We have also identified benefits and challenges that need to be grappled with for managers of living labs to make it possible for the crowd to fully support their cause.},
	keywords = {citizen, crowdsourcing, ICT, innovation process, Living lab, user},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/950},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/950},
	author = {Anna St{\r a}hlbr{\"o}st and Josefin Lassinantti}
}
@article {951,
	title = {Places and Spaces within Living Labs},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {5},
	year = {2015},
	month = {12/2015},
	pages = {37-47},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {In 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.},
	keywords = {influence, Living lab, openness, place, realism, space},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/951},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/951},
	author = {Birgitta Bergvall-K{\r a}reborn and Carina Ihlstr{\"o}m Eriksson and Anna St{\r a}hlbr{\"o}st}
}
@article {740,
	title = {Coordination and Participation in Living Lab Networks},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {3},
	year = {2013},
	month = {11/2013},
	pages = {5-14},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {Previous research on living labs has emphasized the importance of users and a real-life environment. However, the existing scholarly discourse lacks understanding of innovation mechanisms in diverse living lab networks, especially from the perspectives of coordination and participation. This study addresses the research gaps by constructing a framework for analyzing coordination (i.e., top-down versus bottom-up) and participation (i.e., inhalation-dominated versus exhalation-dominated) approaches in living lab networks. The classification is based on a literature review and an analysis of 26 living labs in four countries. Given that inhalation and exhalation dominance have not been discussed previously in the innovation literature, the study provides novel ways for both scholars and managers wishing to exploit or explore innovations in living labs. The framework reveals the opportunities for practitioners of innovation with respect to coordination and participation in living lab networks.},
	keywords = {bottom-up, coordination, enabler-driven, exhalation-dominated, inhalation-dominated, innovation approach, Living lab, living lab network, Open innovation, open innovation network, participation, provider-driver, top-down, User-driven, utilizer-driven},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/740},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/740},
	author = {Seppo Leminen}
}
@article {748,
	title = {Linking Living Lab Characteristics and Their Outcomes: Towards a Conceptual Framework},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {3},
	year = {2013},
	month = {12/2013},
	pages = {6-15},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {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. },
	keywords = {co-creation, innovation ecosystem, Living lab, Open innovation, user involvement},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/748},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/748},
	author = {Carina Veeckman and Dimitri Schuurman and Seppo Leminen and Mika Westerlund}
}
@article {744,
	title = {A Living Lab as a Service: Creating Value for Micro-enterprises through Collaboration and Innovation},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {3},
	year = {2013},
	month = {11/2013},
	pages = {37-42},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {The need to innovate is increasingly important for all types and sizes of organizations, but the opportunities for innovation differ substantially between them. For micro-, small,- and medium-sized enterprises, innovation activities are both crucial and demanding because of limited resources, competencies, or vision to innovate their offerings. To support these organizations, the concept of living labs as a service has started to emerge. This concept refers to living labs offering services such as designing the idea-generation processes, planning or carrying out real-world tests of innovations, and pre-market launch assessments. In this article, we will present the findings from a study of micro-enterprises operating in the information technology development sector, including the experienced value of services provided to the companies by a research-based living lab. We share experiences from Botnia, our own living lab in northern Sweden. In this living lab, our aim of creating value for customers is of key importance. Our study shows that using a living lab as a service can generate three different types of value: improved innovations, the role the living lab can play, and the support the living lab offers.},
	keywords = {experience-based values, innovation intermediary, Living lab, micro-enterprise, value},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/744},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/744},
	author = {Anna St{\r a}hlbr{\"o}st}
}
@article {608,
	title = {A Small-Firm Perspective on the Benefits of Living Labs},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {2},
	year = {2012},
	month = {09/2012},
	pages = {44-49},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {Decreasing energy consumption is a global priority and the energy market is in constant change. The search for energy-saving innovations provides an opportunity to initiate a user-centered approach using the living labs model. This article describes how Process Vision, a small-yet-leading Northern European provider of energy IT systems, applied the livings labs approach to develop novel energy-efficiency management solutions. We discuss the company{\textquoteright}s participation in the APOLLON consortium, a cross-border living labs initiative on energy efficiency. More specifically, we describe the Finland-based company{\textquoteright}s experiences of a pilot project launched in the living lab and report on the perceived managerial challenges of applying the living labs approach from the perspective of a small firm.},
	keywords = {energy efficiency, Innovation management, Living lab, managerial challenges, Open innovation, User-driven},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/608},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/608},
	author = {Veli-Pekka Niitamo and Mika Westerlund and Seppo Leminen}
}
@article {489,
	title = {Managing the Challenges of Becoming an Open Innovation Company: Experiences from Living Labs},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {1},
	year = {2011},
	month = {10/2011},
	pages = {19-25},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {High-technology firms have paved the way for user-driven innovations, but now even traditional industries are becoming increasingly open. This shift is a great challenge for companies with instituted practices, policies, and customer relationships. In this article, we identify four distinct steps in becoming an open innovation company based on our recent research into firms{\textquoteright} experiences with living lab experiments in the information and communication technology (ICT) sector. We describe these phases and illustrate the divergent roles that users play in each one. We conclude with a discussion on the differences between the management challenges of conventional development projects versus the open innovation model. For all firms that wish to become open innovators, we recommend that their managers promote an open organizational mindset and apply groupware that supports increased openness, because traditional project management tools are insufficient for open innovation. },
	keywords = {Innovation management, Living lab, Open innovation, User-driven},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/489},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/489},
	author = {Mika Westerlund and Seppo Leminen}
}
