Funded byAn Project User Integration in the Development Process of Innovative Communication Products and Services – An Interdisciplinary Approach 15. ITS.

Funded byAn Project

User Integration in the Development Process of Innovative Communication Products and Services – An Interdisciplinary Approach

15. ITS Conference

Berlin, September 6, 2004

Matthias KempfThilo v. Pape

Institute for Information, Organization and ManagementInstitute for Communication Science

Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich

intermedia Projekt LMU München © 2004 20040720 User Integration.ppt 2

DevelopmentCaused by the strong increase in importance of the resource “customer”, new models of innovation have evolved.

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990

Customer not considered

Technology Push

Linear model Seller markets Marketing of minor

importance

1950s – middle 1960s:

s. Coupling Model

Middle 1980er – early 1990er:

Integrated Model

Cooperations, especially integration of suppliers

Parallelized activities

Focus on speed of development

Market in continuous

alignment with R&D

Early 1970s – middle 1980s :

Coupling Model

Phase of consolidation and rationalization

Combination of TP and MP

Innovation as „…complex net of communication paths“1

Innovative approaches of

customer integration

1990s – today:

5th Generation Innovation

Faster cycles of innovation

Increasing customer demands

Individualization Cost pressure Innovation as

„Networking Process“- Systems- Suppliers- Customers

Customer in central role at start

Middle 1960s – early 1970s

Linear model Strategies of

differentiation Rationalization of

R&D comes to the fore

Market Pull


Lead UserThe prominent Lead User model and User Communities respectively have achieved remarkable results in some cases

Lead User

… are users who…- …have high motivation to industrialize

the innovation - …have a high competence - … are not able to conduct production

themselves

Lead User are not representative

Lead User anticipate the market demands previous to the majority (they are not „Early Adopters“)

Lead Users conduct the innovation– function themselves, directed by and with the technological realization of the enterprise.

Examples

pipe suspensions (Hilti)

parlor games (Ravensburger)

Numerous adhesive products (3M)

Also works in User Communities:- Sport communities (surfing, mountain biking,

snowboard,…)- Open Source Software (Apache, Linux)

Products are usually deployed in specific and quite limited technical environment with clearly defined target segments

christoph

Hier ist mir schon im Deutschen der Sinn nicht klar. Wenn man das Komma rausläßt wär die Übersetzung:Products in general in a specific and well-defined technological surrounding with claerly defined target-groups.


User ToolkitsToolkits empower the user find Innovations themselves in a defined solution space

Difficulties for the Lead Users

Information often hardly transferable („sticky information“)

Often user do not have the possibilities and resources to provide information.

Solution:- Manufacturers provide a Toolkit - Solution space limited– inside

these limits there are possibilities of variation by users (pre-defined solution modules)

- Complete trial-and error-cycles- „Design side of mass

customization“

Examples

Nestle: Production of customized foods for restaurant chains

Open Source Software: STATA- Statistics software with standardized

software-modules for multivariate data- analysis

- Market Entry early 1990ies , today market leader

Toolkits make the User innovate – in contrast to the Lead User approach the solution space is limited.


Success StoriesLead User projects at 3M, for example, have achieved great successes

Criteria LU Com. ptools

Novelty relative to competition 3,95 3,14 0,026

Fit with current strategic plan 2,40 3,96 0,001

Time to market 3,58 1,26 0,000

Global marketing potential 3,89 3,02 0,027

people resources required 2,11 1,19 0,005

Regulatory requirements for entry 2,85 0,96 0,000

Capital required 1,68 0,57 0,000

Manufacturing fit / capacity 2,53 3,44 0,047

Probability of success 3,42 4,52 0,002

Quelle: Lilien/Morrison/Searls/von Hippel 2000)


Innovation Management in ServicesIn contrast to the development of physical goods, service innovation seems not to have strong backing of methods and proven concepts

Market for physical goods

fully developed und advanced conceptual approaches of Innovation management

Factors for success empirical researched

Well usable in practice

Innovative approaches of user integration exist in form of the Lead User concept and User Toolkit

Markets for immaterial Goods

Hardly any mature conceptional model for services

Partly empirical dubiously if innovation is performed systematically

Not clear whether user integration / participation is relevant or not


Key Question

Are the concepts approved in the market for physical goods appropriate to successfully assist with the development of

communication products and services?


SocialInstitutions

A Communication Studies-PerspectiveUser Integration in the creation of interactive media

Personal objects/services

Three levels of communication products and services

Technicalartifacts

Three levels of innovation

Social institutionalization Negotiation of social functionsand “roles of the game”

Individual appropriation Highly flexible integration into everyday life

Technical designBased on innovations in microelectronics, software development and transmission technology

time

Technical Design

Social Institutionalization

Personal Appropriation

Three moments of innovation in the diffusion process


Simulation of everyday uses

Selection of Lead Users

Abstraction from limited frame of reference

Rapid Prototyping User Toolkits Lead User Approach

Technical problem: functional fixedness

A Communication Studies-PerspectiveInnovation phases in the course of diffusion

User integration in the diffusion process

User integration is too much considered as a technical Problem. The personal and social levels are neglected.

personal

technical

social?

time

Technical Design



Anticipated Personal Appropriation

Anticipated Social Institutionalization


Empathic Design

„Watching consumers use products or services [...] in the course of normal, everyday routines.“ Leonard & Rayport, 2000

Drawbacks of Abstraction and Simulation

The personal everyday context triggering re-invention through appropriation often cannot be simulated.

personal

technical

social

A Communication Studies-PerspectiveProblems of user integration on the personal level

Integrating users in the innovation process should not mean isolating them from their everyday context.


User-Innovations generated by a small number of Users (e.g. Lead Users) often cannot be scaled to a future market.

The dynamics of social institutionalization

Diffusion of interactive media is unlike diffusion of technical artifacts

Media are changed in the course of their social institutionalization

1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

Mio

. U

sers

Cell phone connections in Germany 1993-2003

Lead User Selection is not representativeLead Users are not representative for the mass of end consumers-Technology-friendly and -competent-Financially well-off

The effects of critical mass

Numerous applications depend on a critical mass of users which cannot be anticipated by small user groups.

personal

technical

social

A Communication Studies-PerspectiveProblems of user integration on the social level


Modeling the personal process of appropriation

Indications can be empirically deducted from existing or already terminated appropriation processes of established media products and services.

Modeling the social processes of institutionalization on different social levels Exploring how social functions are being defined and negotiated among- small groups (families, peer-groups)- fragments of society (generations, professions) as well as- society as a whole, communicating through mass media

personal

technical

social

A Communication Studies-PerspectiveEmpirically modeling appropriation and social institutionalization

Exploring the underlying processes of appropriation and social institutionalization through fundamental research on existing innovations.


Pointing out the limits to existing approaches

Complementing existing approaches

Technical Design



Anticipated Personal Appropriation

Anticipated Social Institutionalization

Technical Design



Past diffusion process

Future diffusion process

personal

technical

social

Better Predicting future appropriation and institutionalization

prediction

Influencing future processes of appropriation and institutionalization through persuasion.

persuasion

An interdisciplinary approach to sensitize user integration for personal and social levels.

An interdisciplinary approachGuidelines for a complementary research

time


www.intermedia.lmu.de

Matthias KempfDepartment für BetriebswirtschaftInstitut für Information, Organisation und ManagementLudwig-Maximilians-Universität München

Ludwigstraße 28 VG IID - 80539 München

Tel. +49 (0)89 / 2180 – 3767

E-Mail: [email protected]: www.iom.bwl.uni-muenchen.de

Veronika KarnowskiInstitut für KommunikationswissenschaftLehrstuhl für Kommunikationswissenschaft und MedienforschungLudwig-Maximilians-Universität München

Oettingenstr. 67 D - 80538 München

Tel.: +49 (0)89 / 2180 – 9495E-Mail: [email protected]: www.ifkw.uni-muenchen.de

Thilo v. PapeInstitut für KommunikationswissenschaftLehrstuhl für Kommunikationswissenschaft und MedienforschungLudwig-Maximilians-Universität München

Oettingenstr. 67 D - 80538 München

E-Mail: [email protected]: www.ifkw.uni-muenchen.de

Gefördert vomEin Projekt im Rahmen der

Prof. Dr. Werner WirthInstitut für Publizistikwissenschaft und Medienforschung der Universität Zürich

Andreasstr. 15 CH - 8050 Zürich

Tel.: +41 (0)1 / 634 – 4661 Fax: +41 (0)1 / 634 – 4934

E-Mail: [email protected]: www.ifkw.uni-muenchen.de

www.ipmz.unizh.ch

Funded byAn Project User Integration in the Development Process of Innovative Communication Products and Services – An Interdisciplinary Approach 15. ITS.

Documents

user communities

user projects

lead user concept

representative lead

user integration participation

prominent lead user

user toolkits toolkits

user toolkit markets