01606nas a2200229   4500008004100000022001400041245010000055210006900155260004200224300001000266490000600276520090000282653001401182653001701196653001701213653002201230653003001252653001501282100002301297700002001320856003601340       2016                        eng d  a1927-032100aThe Evolution of Intermediary Activities: Broadening the Concept of Facilitation in Living Labs0 aEvolution of Intermediary Activities Broadening the Concept of F  aOttawabTalent First Networkc01/2016  a45-580 v63 aInnovation intermediaries play an important role in open innovation endeavours. In living lab projects, where different professional identities and organizational cultures are at play, intermediary actors facilitate learning between stakeholders and manage tensions and conflicts of interest. The current living lab literature recognizes the importance and multifacetedness of these actors, but does not shed light on the work they do at a more practical level. Our study seeks to capture the variety and evolution of work tasks of user-side innovation intermediaries during and after a four-year technology project in a living lab. The study explores how these mediating actors tackle the everyday challenges of a living lab project. This article is grounded on a longitudinal qualitative case study of a innovation process for a floor monitoring system for elderly care – the "smart floor". 10aco-design10aelderly care10afacilitation10ahealth technology10ainnovation intermediaries10aLiving lab1 aHakkarainen, Louna1 aHyysalo, Sampsa  uhttp://timreview.ca/article/96001733nas a2200229   4500008004100000022001400041245009900055210006900154260004200223300001000265490000600275520104600281653001801327653001401345653002001359653001601379653001301395653001601408100002301424700002001447856003601467       2013                        eng d  a1927-032100aHow Do We Keep the Living Laboratory Alive? Learning and Conflicts in Living Lab Collaboration0 aHow Do We Keep the Living Laboratory Alive Learning and Conflict  aOttawabTalent First Networkc12/2013  a16-220 v33 aLiving lab environments are often promoted as a way to engage private companies, citizens, researchers, and public organizations in mutually beneficial learning. Based on an in-depth case study of a four-year living lab collaboration in gerontechnology, we agree that successful living lab development hinges on learning between the parties, yet its emergence cannot be presumed or taken for granted. Diverse competences and interests of participating actors often make technology development projects complicated and volatile. The study describes two specific challenges faced in a living lab project: i) power issues between the actors and ii) end-user reluctance to participate in the development of new technology. Despite the hardships, we suggest that the living lab environment worked as a catalyst for learning between users and developers. Nevertheless, realizing the benefits of this learning may be more challenging than is usually expected. Learning for interaction is needed before effective learning in interaction is possible.10acollaboration10aconflicts10agerontechnology10ahealth care10alearning10aliving labs1 aHakkarainen, Louna1 aHyysalo, Sampsa  uhttp://timreview.ca/article/749