@article {1044, title = {Editorial: Innovation in Living Labs (January 2017)}, journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review}, volume = {7}, year = {2017}, month = {01/2017}, pages = {3-6}, publisher = {Talent First Network}, address = {Ottawa}, keywords = {agile methods, conceptualizations, innovation labs, Innovation management, innovation tool, living labs, Open innovation, user innovation}, issn = {1927-0321}, doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1044}, url = {http://timreview.ca/article/1044}, author = {Chris McPhee and Dimitri Schuurman and Pieter Ballon and Seppo Leminen and Mika Westerlund} } @article {956, title = {The Impact of Living Lab Methodology on Open Innovation Contributions and Outcomes}, journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review}, volume = {6}, year = {2016}, month = {01/2016}, pages = {7-16}, publisher = {Talent First Network}, address = {Ottawa}, abstract = {Open innovation scholars as well as practitioners are still struggling with the practical implementation of open innovation principles in different contexts. In this article, we explore the value of a living lab approach for open innovation in small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). Using a case study approach, we compared 27 SME projects conducted by iMinds Living Labs from 2011 to 2015. The results suggest that a real-life intervention and a multi-method approach {\textendash} both of which are methodological characteristics of living lab projects {\textendash} increase the chance of generating actionable user contributions for the innovation under development. Moreover, the results also suggest that a living lab project yields maximal value when evolving from concept towards prototype. Besides these exploratory findings, this article also demonstrates that living lab projects are a perfect "playground" to test and validate assumptions from the open innovation literature.}, keywords = {collaboration, distributed innovation, entrepreneur, Innovation management, living labs, Open innovation, SME, startup, user innovation, user involvement}, issn = {1927-0321}, doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/956}, url = {http://timreview.ca/article/956}, author = {Dimitri Schuurman and Lieven De Marez and Pieter Ballon} } @article {743, title = {Open Innovation Processes in Living Lab Innovation Systems: Insights from the LeYLab}, journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review}, volume = {3}, year = {2013}, month = {11/2013}, pages = {28-36}, publisher = {Talent First Network}, address = {Ottawa}, abstract = {Living labs have emerged on the crossroads of the open innovation and user innovation frameworks. As open innovation systems, living labs consist of various actors with each playing their specific role. Within this article, we will take an open innovation perspective by analyzing the knowledge spill-overs between living lab actors through three in-depth innovation case studies taking place within the LeYLab living lab in Kortrijk, Belgium. The results illustrate how living labs foster the three open innovation processes of exploration, exploitation, and retention. From our analysis, we conclude that living labs are particularly useful for exploration and, to a lesser extent, exploitation. In terms of retention, living labs seem to hold a large potential; however, the success and the nature of the innovation processes depend on the sustainability of living labs, the number of innovation cases, and the alignment of these cases with the living lab infrastructure. Based on these findings, a concrete set of guidelines is proposed for innovating in living labs and for setting up a living lab constellation.}, keywords = {knowledge exchange, living labs, Open innovation, open innovation networks, user innovation}, issn = {1927-0321}, doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/743}, url = {http://timreview.ca/article/743}, author = {Dimitri Schuurman and Lieven De Marez and Pieter Ballon} }