@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 {602, title = {Living Labs as Open-Innovation Networks}, journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review}, volume = {2}, year = {2012}, month = {09/2012}, pages = {6-11}, publisher = {Talent First Network}, address = {Ottawa}, abstract = {Living labs bring experimentation out of companies{\textquoteright} R\&D departments to real-life environments with the participation and co-creation of users, partners, and other parties. This study discusses living labs as four different types of networks characterized by open innovation: utilizer-driven, enabler-driven, provider-driven, and user-driven. The typology is based on interviews with the participants of 26 living labs in Finland, Sweden, Spain, and South Africa. Companies can benefit from knowing the characteristics of each type of living lab; this knowledge will help them to identify which actor drives the innovation, to anticipate likely outcomes, and to decide what kind of role they should play while "living labbing". Living labs are networks that can help them create innovations that have a superior match with user needs and can be upscaled promptly to the global market.}, keywords = {co-creation, innovation, living labs, networks, Open innovation}, issn = {1927-0321}, doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/602}, url = {http://timreview.ca/article/602}, author = {Seppo Leminen and Mika Westerlund and Anna-Greta Nystr{\"o}m} }