<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><xml><records><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Lynn Coorevits</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Annabel Georges</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Dimitri Schuurman</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">A Framework for Field Testing in Living Lab Innovation Projects</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Technology Innovation Management Review</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">context research</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">field test</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">living labs</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">testing</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">user innovation</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2018</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">12/2018</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">https://timreview.ca/article/1204</style></url></web-urls></urls><publisher><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Talent First Network</style></publisher><pub-location><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ottawa</style></pub-location><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">8</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">40-50</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">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.</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">12</style></issue><custom1><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">imec.livinglabs
Lynn Coorevits is an Innovation Manager at imec.livinglabs, where she is responsible for tools and methodologies that improve testing in living labs. She is also affiliated to the imec-mict-ugent department Ghent University in Belgium as a Senior User Researcher. She holds master degrees in Psychology and Marketing Analysis from Ghent University and has over 10 years of experience in innovation research and consultancy. </style></custom1><custom2><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">imec.livinglabs
Annabel Georges is a User Specialist at imec.livinglabs. Within this “living-lab-as-a-service” she conducts user research to structurally support innovation development for SMEs. Next to this, she is also involved in several smart city projects. Her main research topics are drop-out and user engagement within field tests and working on the processes of current living lab practices. Annabel holds a Master in Communication Sciences degree with a specialization in New Media and Society at Ghent University.</style></custom2><custom3><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">imec.livinglabs
Dimitri Schuurman is the Team Lead of the Business Model and User Research Team at imec.livinglabs. He holds a PhD and a Master’s degree in Communication Sciences from Ghent University in Belgium. Together with his imec colleagues, Dimitri developed a specific living lab offering targeted at entrepreneurs in which he has managed over 100 innovation projects. He is also active in the International Society for Professional Innovation Management (ISPIM) and in the European Network of Living Labs (ENoLL) as a living labs specialist. His main interests and research topics are situated in the domains of open innovation, user innovation, and innovation management. </style></custom3></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Abdolrasoul Habibipour</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Annabel Georges</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Anna Ståhlbröst</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Dimitri Schuurman</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Birgitta Bergvall-Kåreborn</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">A Taxonomy of Factors Influencing Drop-Out Behaviour in Living Lab Field Tests</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Technology Innovation Management Review</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">drop-out</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">field test</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Living lab</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">taxonomy</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">user engagement</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">user motivation</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2018</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">05/2018</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://timreview.ca/article/1155</style></url></web-urls></urls><publisher><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Talent First Network</style></publisher><pub-location><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ottawa</style></pub-location><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">8</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">5-21</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">The concept of a “living lab” is a relatively new research area and phenomenon that facilitates user engagement in open innovation activities. Studies on living labs show that the users’ 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 “drop-out” 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 “drop-out” in living lab field tests.</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">5</style></issue><custom1><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Luleå University of Technology
Abdolrasoul Habibipour is a PhD student in Information Systems at Luleå University of Technology in Sweden and is a User Engagement Expert at Botnia Living Lab, Sweden. His research focuses on user engagement in living lab research, with a particular emphasis on users’ motivations and needs. Abdolrasoul has previously worked in information technology (IT) projects for more than 13 years as a project leader and project manager as well as software designer and developer. He is currently involved in international innovation and research projects such as UNaLab project, U4IoT project, as well as Privacy Flag project, all of which are financed by the European Commission.</style></custom1><custom2><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">imec.livinglabs
Annabel Georges is a User Specialist at imec.livinglabs in Belgium. Annabel holds a Master’s degree in Communication Sciences from Ghent University, with a specialization in New Media and Society. Since 2013, she has worked at imec.livinglabs, where she has conducted research for more than 15 innovation projects. Her main interests are contextual research, field tests, and working on improvements on current living lab practices.</style></custom2><custom3><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Luleå University of Technology
Anna Ståhlbröst is a Professor of Information Systems at Luleå University of Technology, Sweden, and Managing Director of Botnia Living Lab in Sweden. Her research is focused on the phenomena of living labs and open, user-driven innovation processes, with special interest in end-user needs and motivations. Anna’s research is related to different application areas such as smart cities, domestic IT use, and online privacy. She has participated in several international and national innovation and research projects, and she is currently involved in the UNaLab project, U4IoT project, as well as Privacy Flag project, all of which are financed by the European Commission.</style></custom3><custom4><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">imec.livinglabs
Dimitri Schuurman is the Team Lead of the Business Model and User Research Team at imec.livinglabs. He holds a PhD and a Master’s degree in Communication Sciences from Ghent University in Belgium. Together with his imec colleagues, Dimitri developed a specific living lab offering targeted at entrepreneurs in which he has managed over 100 innovation projects. He is also active in the International Society for Professional Innovation Management (ISPIM) and in the European Network of Living Labs (ENoLL) as a living labs specialist. His main interests and research topics are situated in the domains of open innovation, user innovation, and innovation management. </style></custom4><custom5><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Luleå University of Technology
Birgitta Bergvall-Kåreborn is Vice Chancellor and Professor in Information Systems at Luleå University of Technology, Sweden. Birgitta’s research interests concern design-oriented research focused on participatory design in distributed and open environments; human-centric and appreciative methodologies for design and learning; value-based information systems development; the increasing overlap between stakeholder participation and labour sourcing; and its consequences for value creation and value capture. She has published several articles within these areas, and she has participated in a large number of national and international research projects.</style></custom5></record></records></xml>