@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 {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} }