@article {1204, title = {A Framework for Field Testing in Living Lab Innovation Projects}, journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review}, volume = {8}, year = {2018}, month = {12/2018}, pages = {40-50}, publisher = {Talent First Network}, address = {Ottawa}, abstract = {Within innovation research and, more specifically, living lab projects, a crucial component is to test an innovation in a real-life context with potential end users. Such a field test can validate assumptions by combining insights on behaviour and attitudes towards the innovation. This allows for iterative tailoring of the innovation to the needs and wants of the potential end users. Moreover, relevant insights can be gathered to stop or rescope the innovation project before big investments are made. Although studies indicate that testing innovations (or prototypes) in real-life contexts improves the innovation process, there is no specific framework on how to conduct a field test for an innovation. This is important because, in living lab field tests, users are actively involved in co-creating the solutions, which impacts the operational side of setting up living lab projects. Therefore, within this article, we propose a framework for field testing based on the degree to which it reflects reality and the stage within the living lab process. We distinguish four types of field tests: concept, mock-up, pilot, and go2market field test. Based on this framework, we propose some practical guidelines for setting up living lab field tests.}, keywords = {context research, field test, living labs, testing, user innovation}, issn = {1927-0321}, doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1204}, url = {https://timreview.ca/article/1204}, author = {Lynn Coorevits and Annabel Georges and Dimitri Schuurman} } @article {1054, title = {Overcoming Barriers to Experimentation in Business-to-Business Living Labs}, journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review}, volume = {7}, year = {2017}, month = {02/2017}, pages = {20-26}, publisher = {Talent First Network}, address = {Ottawa}, abstract = {Business-to-business (B2B) living lab projects have been mentioned in different areas of academic research, but the innovation management literature requires deeper analysis of their potential opportunities and challenges. Real-life experimentation is a key requirement for living labs as it enables deeper insights in the potential success of innovations. However, the literature has not provided insights on how living lab projects can implement real-life experimentation in B2B innovation projects and does not describe appropriate conditions for experimentation in these settings. In this study, we identified three main barriers preventing real-life experimentation in B2B living lab projects: the technological complexity, the need for integration, and the difficulty in identifying testers. The barriers are discussed in detailed and potential solutions are provided to help overcome these barriers and stimulate the adoption of real-life experimentation in B2B innovation projects.}, keywords = {B2B, experimentation, living labs, testing, user research}, issn = {1927-0321}, doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1054}, url = {http://timreview.ca/article/1054}, author = {Ruben D{\textquoteright}Hauwers and Aron-Levi Herregodts and Annabel Georges and Lynn Coorevits and Dimitri Schuurman and Olivier Rits and Pieter Ballon} }