Corporate practices to deploy user-driven innovations

2. User-driven innovations as a corporate strategy.

As it was mentioned earlier, companies focus on the users' needs and attract users for innovations development. According to respondents, user-driven innovations concept is recognized by global managerial teams and became a part of corporate innovations strategies. That demonstrates that user-driven innovations approach became widely recognized. The table 7 summarizes expert's responds on corporate user-driven innovations strategies.

Table 7: Availability of corporate policy promoting user-driven innovations deployment approach

Expert	Availability of the policy	Authorization level	Distributon
1	v	Global	The users-oriented approach is a part of our innovation strategy that is distributed internally.
2	v	Global	We can see the impact of the user-oriented innovation policy in our business principles and targets. We receive recommendations via manuals.
3	v	Global	The company positions itself as customer oriented. This approach became a part of brand positioning.
4	v	Global & local	User-driven innovations approach - is a part of our brand. We have special global training to study the methods of users' involvement and improve our competencies.
5	X		We didn't fix our vision for collaboration with users' formally in a policy. Nevertheless, we are user-focused and interact with our customers in terms of product development.
6	v	Global & local	Recently focus on user became a part of the innovation strategy for our company. It helps to promote the corporate brand as the social-oriented company.
7	v	Global & local	We receive general recommendations from a global team, but we have hands free to decide how and when we cooperate with users. We train our teams internally.

Source: Author's compilation of experts' responses

Summing up, most of experts mentioned that users' involvement strategy is beamed down from the global level. But cooperation methods can be chosen and applied to each project at the discretion of local teams. Moreover, it is worth mentioning that companies actively distribute and promote user-driven innovation approach as a part of brand positioning.

3. Cross-international multi-functional collaboration.

The project success depends on interrelations' efficiency and clear areas of responsibility assignment within the team. The experts pointed out that multi-functional teams are common for the user-driven innovations deployment process. The major role refers to marketing department. Experts representing this function shared that they actively communicate with customers on early stages of the project.

At the same time, representatives of multinational companies mentioned about the centralization of design and R&D teams in one or several selected locations. These teams are responsible for product design for the global company. That is why representatives of marketing function are considered as the central point of collaboration with users. Regional marketing teams gather, interpret and report users' solutions instead of design and R&D direct communication with users. That complicates the process of collaboration with the users and the results depending on how marketing specialists understand and interpret the users' ideas.

The experts shared their vision on cross-international collaboration:

We do not have R&D and design teams locally. But it doesn't mean that we can't develop or improve products taking into account regional specific features (Expert 4).

Communication with remote teams can become a big challenge. Instead of design department - user direct communications, marketing becomes a transfer point of customers' suggestions. That requires much time spending and technical knowledge. Nevertheless, such approach allows the company to save money and to gather best specialist in one place (Expert 1).

We think that localization of R&D could bring more opportunities for regional innovation creation. Nevertheless, we appreciate our local engineers who can contribute to the process as they obtain technical knowledge and can help users to strengthen their ideas with technological solutions (Expert 3).

On one hand it is important to involve people from different functions into the innovation development process while on the other hand involvement of many participants can lead to a mess as everyone has its own interpretations of ideas. Thus, we try to structure the process and to define responsibilities. It is essential when involved employees locate in different countries (Expert 4).

When you gather experts with various areas of expertise and organize them in one team, you need to create the common understanding. In case it is not achieved, the initial idea is can be misinterpreted by different participants. As soon as this information is synthesized and diffused within different corporate levels it positively impacts strategic corporate decisions (Expert 5).

In reliance on interviewees responses it is possible to conclude that any user-driven innovation project can't be done without a multifunctional team. Besides marketing, R&D and design, experts indicated the important role of supporting functions. For instance, finance team is involved for project appraisal. It is responsible for evaluation of commercial viability of the innovative project. Human resources managers are liable for competent and qualified teams' formation.

4. User-driven innovation projects' funding reduction.

In spite of the fact that user-driven innovation approach became widely recognized, experts are concerned about projects' funding reduction:

Because of current rough market conditions, we had to significantly cut the budget on innovation projects (Expert 1).

For now, global team poorly finance regional innovation programs. What is more - it is hardly possible to find investors on the local market (Expert 3).

We continue to collaborate with our customers. But we face strong budgetary conditions. In terms of cost-saving, we decided not to start long-term strategical innovations projects, but we are working with users to improve functional capabilities of available solutions Current strategy - is to realize projects shortly and with minimum expenses (Expert 5).

We do not have enough resources to realize expensive programs. We have the lack of human resources for intensive market research and can't afford to hire new employees (Expert 2).

The experts argued that innovation project strongly depends on the availability of resources. Nevertheless, companies continue to realize small projects oriented on innovation development of existing products. While budgets are significantly limited, they still enable the innovative team to conduct main researches and implement their results into corporate practice.

5. Competencies significance.

The user-driven innovations deployment project is the complex process that requires participants to obtain special knowledge and competencies. According to interviewees, the well-formed team - is the most crucial factor for the project's success:

We understand that that is not so important how great the techniques and methods that you apply if our team doesn't have relevant qualities as the ability to forecast to be holistic. The success of the project depends also on team leader's competencies and character (Expert 1).

When communicating with users it is important to be on the same wavelength with them. In order to get inspiration from our target groups, we should read the newspapers, magazines, watch the TV, meet them face to face, learn to talk the language of our target group, connect with people within company who know them and speak their language and use these colleagues as the sounding board (Expert 4).

The participants' ability to analyze the users' ideas and to translate it into the commercially perspective product is the key success factor of user-driven innovations project (Expert 5).

Time is quality and focus means speed. Make enough time to work on your proposition - focused and with depth - it is better to spend a few days only on that proposition than to work months on it and find it weak (Expert 7).

We pay considerable attention to our teams' development as professionals. We want them to be experts in products we have, to be aware of market trends and to have skills and competencies for effective collaboration with our customers (Expert 6).

Experts' concerns regarding employees' proficiency demonstrate that current project team members do not always have enough competencies for projects implementation. Therewith, companies realize competencies significance and the necessity to train and to develop their employees.

The conducted interviews with experts from marketing, R&D and design allowed to identify the current trends of corporate user-driven innovation deployment practices. The results showed that the user is being considered as the source of inspiration rather than innovation, but can significantly impact the innovating project by sharing his idea. Nevertheless, the companies' role in the process is the most critical, because the success of the products commercialization depends on various factors as an accurate interpretation of users' ideas, availability of resources, technical realization, quality conformance, and marketing strategy competiveness, corporate pricing policy and other.

The research confirmed that multinational innovative companies actively involve users into innovation projects and consider this approach as a part of their innovation strategy. Additionally, it allows strengthening brand appeal in the eyes of the society and potential investors. The interviews results confirm the research findings regarding the cross-functional teams' involvement into user-driven innovation projects. However, expects are concerned about centralization of functions as it complicates the localized innovation process. Moreover, they mentioned such problem as lack of resources that significantly impacts the number and the scale of innovation projects. The positive side is that companies are ready to train and develop their employees as they realize the importance of teams' professionalism for the success of the user-driven innovation deployment process.

Discussion and Conclusion

User-driven innovations approach is an important part of the overall innovative activity in the economy. Currently, companies face strong market competition and deal with the aggressive financial environment. Users' involvement into innovation project became a popular and cost-effective solution. This new trend confirmed its efficiency in various industrial and services sectors. However, the successful realization of the user-driven innovation deployment process depends on the companies' performance as they can face the wide range of project failure risks.

The strong analysis of research studies on user-driven innovations concept and corporate practices of deploying user-driven innovations allowed to determine the special aspects of the process. Specification of the key terms underlying the research has allowed establishing that user-driven innovations deployment process takes place when an individual user or a firm realizes its needs and applies its knowledge for innovations creation through collaboration with a company. Despite the fact that the fact users' idea is a core of the project, the company plays a key role in the innovation process. The success formula of this approach and at the same time the biggest challenge for companies is the advanced understanding of customers' needs and the capability to select and to transform users' ideas into commercially successful products or services.

Within the executed work the key research objectives were achieved. First of all, advantages and limitations of users' involvement into innovation process were identified. Application of the studied approach can be beneficial for the user as he receives the desired product or service and even additional reward for the insights. Moreover, the user enjoys the innovation process itself as he can fulfill his potential while participating in challenging and inspiring projects. The additional benefit for him is a solid reputation that he gains within the users' communities and in the companies' perception. From the corporate perspective the main advantage is the creation of a commercially viable product with low expenditures. The positive aspect of user-driven innovation approach is its wide applicability in different spheres.

Nevertheless, collaboration with users has its limitations as the user doesn't obtain enough technical knowledge and skills to provide accomplished solutions, they can be more motivated in receiving the monetary award than meaningful innovation creation, and their innovation activity within the project is limited by corporate rules.

The determination of possible advantages and limitations possesses theoretical and practical importance as their understanding is essential for the accurate implementation of the user-driven innovation project and arrangement of user-driven innovation activities.

Within the conducted research the prospective spheres of user-driven innovations were determined. For this purpose, the largest and the most innovative companies were identified along with the user-driven innovations deployment examples within the selected industries. As the result, the most attractive industries for users' engagement are auto and truck manufacturers, software and programming, telecommunication and electronics, personal/healthcare, food and drug stores. The relation to determined spheres was one of the criteria for choosing the interviewees for empirical research. Moreover, the identification of the perspective spheres for corporate collaboration with users has the practical contribution. That justifies the necessity to apply the user-driven innovations approach by those companies within highlighted industries which didn't practice this approach before.

One more theoretical contribution of the research is the user-driven innovation process description. The process description is represented in the developed user-driven innovation deployment process matrix that is investigated based on a comprehensive analysis of the relevant literature. The proposed matrix describes the key process steps and correlates them with the job functions that are involved in the process. Moreover, it presents the examples of job families related to each process step and their role in the process. Correlation of the innovation activities with relative job families is critically important as user-driven innovation process success depends heavily on appropriate organizational structure creation.

Process analysis findings are practically important for companies, especially for big corporations with multifunctional and multilevel organizational structures as they need to implement and maintain structured user-driven innovations deployment process. Based on the proposed matrix management teams can structure the process for realized projects and form a multi-functional team involving specialist referring to the specified job families.

The empirical research allowed identifying the corporate practices trends based on interviewees responses. In comparison with results previously achieved, it is possible to conclude that multinational innovative companies related to the perspective industries in fact involve users into innovation projects and consider this approach as a part of their innovation strategy. Nevertheless, companies' attitude to users and their role in the innovation process slightly differs from the initial concept. They see the user as a source of inspiration for their projects. Experts pay attention to their role in the process as a decisions maker, developer, and implementator.

The respondents realize the importance of cross-functional team collaboration within the project. Thus, the user-driven innovation process description can be useful for them as it demonstrates the way of the project organizational structuring. Moreover, the companies recognize the project teams' competencies significance for the efficient project realization.

The conducted research has several limitations. The first limitation of the research is that it is very difficult to identify the user-driven innovations out of an enormous number of innovations. Often companies are not ready to open the real source of the innovation. Moreover, the process is more about co-creation that complicates the real user-driven innovation cases determination.

Secondly, the empirical research findings are based on the responses of pretty small interviewees group. It is critical to underscore that the strict selection criteria and received recommendations allowed determining the experts who had real experience of collaboration with users and relevant projects implementation. The experts who were selected for the research are representatives of multinational companies that refer to the perspective industries for users' involvement. Therefore, the focus group selection allowed gathering information relevant to research objectives. Nevertheless, it doesn't show whether the user-driven innovations approach is applied by governmental and small companies.

In future work, the research can be strengthened by analysis of the competencies required for each user-driven innovations process step implementation. In accordance with the interviews results, that is practically important for business as the project team members do not always have enough competencies for project's implementation. Nevertheless, companies need to ensure availability of specific competencies as it significantly impacts the project's prospects of success. Therefore, it is essential to identify the competencies and skills of employees that are required for successful project realization.



References

AcMadelis et al., 1970. Project SAPPHO. A study of success and failure in industrial innovation, vol. 1. Center for the study of industrial innovation, London.

Aiken M., Hage J., 1971. The organic organization and innovation. Sociology, vol. 5, no. 1.

Alam I., 2002. An exploratory investigation of user involvement in new service development. Journal of the Academy of marketing science, 30.

Bin G., 2013. A reasoned action perspective of user innovation: model and empirical test. Industrial marketing management, 42.

BMW Group website. URL: https://www.bmwgroup.com/en/

innovation.html, last accessed: 27.03.2016.

Bosch-Sijtsema P., Bosch J., 2015. User involvement throughout the innovation process in high-tech industries. Journal of product innovation management, 32 (5).

Bozeman B., Rogers J., 2001. Strategic management of government-sponsored R&D portfolios. Environment and planning C: government and policy.

Brockhoff K., 2003. Customers' perspectives of involvement in new product development. International journal of technology management, 26.

Bryson J. R., Clark J., Vanchan V., 2015. Handbook of manufacturing industries in the world economy. Edward Elgar publishing limited.

Buxmann P., Diefenbach H., Hess T., 2012. The software industry: economic principles, strategies, perspectives. Springer science & business media.

Carrefour website. URL: http://www.carrefour.com/, last accessed: 29.03.2016.

Carter C. F., Williams B. R., 1957. Industry and technical progress: factors governing the speed of application of science. London: Oxford university press.

Chesbrough H.W, 2006. Open innovation. The new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Harvard business school press.

Churchill J., von Hippel E., Sonnack M., 2009. Lead user project handbook: a practical guide for lead user research teams. URL: http://web.mit.edu/evhippel/www/Lead%20User%20Project%20Handbook%20%28Ful l%20Version%29.pdf , last accessed: 27.03.2016.

Cooke P., Asheim B., Boschma R., Martin R., Schwartz D., Tцdtling F., 2011. Handbook of regional innovation and growth. Edward Elgar publishing.

Cooper R.G., Kleinschmidt E.J., 2007. Winning business in product development: the critical success factors. Journal of product innovation management.

Corey E., 1956. The development of markets for new materials. Division of research. Graduate school of business administration. Harvard University.

Daimler website. URL: https://www.daimler.com/innovation/en/, last accessed: 27.03.2016.

Department of Energy. Phillipines (DE.P), 2010. Renewable energy. Plans and programs (2011-2030).

Dewar R. D., Dutton J. E., 1986. The adoption of radical and incremental innovations: an empirical analysis. Management science.

Diab A., 2016. Self-organized mobile communication technologies and techniques for network optimization. IGI global.

Enz C.A., 2012. Strategies for the implementation of service innovations. Cornell hospitality quarterly, 53 (3).

European Commission website, URL: http://ec.europa.eu/research/

participants/portal/desktop/en/opportunities/h2020/topics/3077-co-creation-02-2016.html, last accessed: 26.03.2016.

European Commission, 2010. Communication from The Commission. A strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth Europe 2020, Brussels.

European Commission, 2012. Fostering user-driven innovation through cluster.

Eurostat website. URL: http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat, last accessed: 26.03.2016.

Flowers S., von Hippel E., de Jong J., Sinozic T., 2010. Measuring user innovation in the UK: the importance of product creation by users.

Forbes Global 2000, 2015. URL: http://www.forbes.com/global2000

/list/#tab:overall, last accessed: 25.03.2016.

Forbes the world's most innovative companies, 2015. URL: http://www.forbes.com/innovative-companies/list/2/#tab:rank, last accessed: 25.03.2016.

Franke N., Piller F., 2004 Value creation by toolkits for user innovation and design: The case of the watch market. Journal of product innovation management, 21.

Franke N., Shah S., 2003. How communities support innovative activities: An exploration of assistance and sharing among end-users. Research policy, 32 (1).

Freeman, C., 1968. Chemical process plant: innovation and the world market. National institute economic review, 45.

General Motors website. URL: http://www.gm.com/index.html, last accessed: 27.03.2016.

Google Inc. website. URL: https://www.google.com/intl/en/about/, last accessed: 27.03.2016.

Gruner K.E., Homburg C., 2000. Does customer interaction enhance new product success? Journal of business research, 49.

Grunert K.G., Jensen B.B., Sonne A.M., Bruns K., Scholderer J., Byrne D.V., Lettl C., 2010. Consumer-oriented innovation in the food and personal care products sectors: understanding consumers and using their insights in the innovation process. Cambridge, UK: Woodhead publishing.

Halabi S. F., 2015. Food and drug regulation in an era of globalized markets. Academic press.

HAY Group, 2009. Job family modeling. Tools to support job evaluation and career development. URL: http://www.haygroup.com/Downloads/us/misc/

Job_Family_Modeling_-_Hay_Group_NA_Chemicals_Industry_Forum_October_

2009.pdf, last accessed: 23.03.2016.

IMB website. URL: http://www.ibm.com/us-en/, last accessed: 27.03.2016.

International labour organization (ILO), 2012. International standard classification of occupations-08. URL: http://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---dgreports/---dcomm/---publ/documents/publication/wcms_172572.pdf, last accessed: 17.03.2016.

Jamison group, 2008. A roadmap for alternative fuels in Australia: ending our dependence on oil. Report to NRMA Motoring & Services.

Janssen K.L., Dankbaar B., 2008. Proactive involvement of consumers in innovation: selecting appropriate techniques. International journal of innovation management, vol. 12, no. 3.

Jeppesen L., Frederiksen L., 2006. Why do users contribute to firm-hosted user communities? The case of computer-controlled music instruments. Organization science, 17 (1).

Jeppesen L., Molin M., 2003. Consumers as codevelopers: learning and innovation outside the firm. Technology analysis & strategic management, 15(3).

Jewkes J., Sawers D., Stillerman R., 1969. The sources of invention. Norton and company, New York.

Johnson & Johnson website. URL: http://www.jnjinnovation.com, last accessed: 28.03.2016.

Kaasinen E., Ainasoja M., Vulli E., Paavola H., Hautala R., Lehtonen P., Reunanen E., 2010. User involvement in service innovations. VTT Tiedotteita - research notes, 2552.

Kaulio M.A., 1998. Customer, consumer and user involvement in product development: A framework and a review of selected methods. Total qual. manag., 9.

Kok, R.A.W., Hillebrand, B., Biemans, W.G., 2003. What makes product development market oriented? Towards a conceptual framework. International journal of innovation management, 7.

Kratzer J, Lettl C., Franke N., Gloor P.A., 2016. The social network position of lead users. Journal of product innovation management.

Kretschmer T., Bolliger K., Koob C., 2010. LIFE 2 - innovation through collaboration. Bonn: D-Telekom.

Kroeber A. R., 2016. China's economy. What everyone needs to know. Oxford university press.

Kyoto protocol to the United Nations framework convention on climate change, 1998

Lagrosen S., 2005. Customer involvement in new product development: a relationship marketing perspective. European journal of innovation management, 8.

Langabeer II J. R., Helton J., 2015. Health care operations management. A systems perspective. 2nd edition. Jones & Bartlett publishers.

Lettl, C., 2007. User involvement competence for radical innovation. Journal of engineering and technology management.

Li Yang Chinas, Kuhn R. L., 2007. Banking & financial markets. The internal research report of the Chinese Government. John Wiley & Sons (Asia) Pte. ltd.

Lichtenstein N., 2013. Wal-Mart: The face of twenty-first-century capitalism. The new press.

Lu?thje C., 2002. Characteristics of innovating users in a consumer goods field. An empirical study of sport-related product consumers. MIT Sloan school of management.

Magee D., 2013. Summary: How Toyota became #1 - the secrets behind one of the world's biggest companies. BusinessNews publishing.

Magnusson P.R., Matthing J., Kristensson P., 2003. Managing user involvement in service innovation. Journal of service research, vol. 6, no. 2.

Mдkinen S., et al., 2013. Mountaineering - a combinatory approach for identifying lead users and other rare research subjects. Aalto University publication series “Science and technology”.

McKinsey & Company, 2011. What marketers say about working online. McKinsey global survey results.

Meadows D., 1969. Estimate accuracy and project selection models in industrial research. Industrial management review.

Mello S., 2001. Right process, right product. Research technology management, no. 1.

Michell A., 2011. Samsung Electronics and the struggle for leadership of the electronics industry. John Wiley & Sons.

Microsoft Corporation, 2013. Best practices for innovation: Microsoft's innovation management framework.

Morgon P. A., 2014. Sustainable development for the healthcare industry: reprogramming the healthcare value chain. Springer.

Morrison D.P., Pamela D., Roberts J. H., von Hippel E., 2000. Determinants of user innovation and innovation sharing in a local market. Management science 46, no. 12.

Murray A., 2016. 50 most innovative companies. Fortune magazine.

Natural resources Canada (NRCan), 2012. The ecoENERGY efficiency program.

Nelson R. R., 1959. The economics of invention: a survey of the literature. Journal of business, 32 (April): 101-27.

NESTA, 2010. Measuring innovation in UK. London.

OECD, 2005. Oslo manuals. 3rd edition.

Philips Industry Consulting, 2009. End-user driven innovation. Koninklijke Philips Electronics N.V. Document order number: 8112 968 99801.

Prause G., Thurner Th., 2014. User communities - drivers for open innovation. Foresight-Russia.

PwC, 2015. Global top 100 companies by market capitalization. An IPO center publication.

Riggs W., von Hippel E., 1996. A lead user study of electronic home banking services?: lessons from the learning curve. Sloan working paper. Sloan School of management. Massachusetts institute of technology.

Ringel M., Taylor A., Zablit H., 2015. Innovation in 2015. The Boston consulting group.

Rogers, E. M., 1995. Diffusion of innovations: 3rd ed. The free press, New York.

Rohn, J. A., 2005. Cost-justifying usability in vendor companies. Cost-justifying usability: an update for the internet age. Morgan Kaufmann publishers (an imprint of Elsevier).

Rosted J., 2005. User-driven innovation. Results and recommendations. FORA, № 13.

Samsung Electronics website. URL: http://www.samsung.com/

us/ssic/innovation_areas/, last accessed: 28.03.2016.

Sawhney M., Verona G., Prandelli E., 2005. Collaborating to create: the internet as a platform for customer engagement in product innovation. Journal of interactive marketing, 19 (4).

Schreier M., Pruegl R., 2008. Extending lead-user theory: antecedents and consequences of consumers' lead userness. Journal of product innovation management.

Shapiro C., 2008. Corporate confidential: 50 secrets your company doesn't want you to know - and what to do about them. Marshall Cavendish business.

Shimokawa K., 2013. Japan and the global automotive industry. Cambridge university press.

Shumpeter J., 1934 (1912). The theory of economic development. New Brunswick, New Jersey: Transaction books.

Tacer B., Ruzzier M., 2015. User-driven innovation: an exploratory study. Economic and business review, no. 1.

Taylor D., 2015. The secrets of big business innovation: an insider's guide to delivering innovation, change and growth. Harriman house publishing.

Tesco website. URL: http://www.tescolabs.com/about/, last accessed: 29.03.2016.

The California energy commission's alternative and renewable fuel and vehicle technology program (ARFVTP), 2007. Assembly bill 118 (Nъсez, Chapter 750, Statutes of 2007)

The Fortune Global 500, 2000-2015, URL: http://fortune.com/

global500/, last accessed: 25.03.2016.

Thomke S., Sonnack M., von Hippel E., 1999. Creating breakthroughs at 3M. Harvard business review 77, no. 5.

Tietz R., Morrison D. P., Lu?thje C., Herstatt C., 2004. The process of user-innovation: A case study on user innovation in a consumer goods setting. Technologie und innovations management. Technische Universitдt Hamburg-Harburg.

Toyota motors website. URL: http://www.toyota-global.com/innovation/, last accessed: 27.03.2016.

Trott P., van der Duin P., Hartmann D., 2013. Users as innovators? Exploring the limitations of user-driven innovation. Prometheus, vol. 31, no. 2.

U.S. bureau of labor statistics, 2013. Standard occupational classification definitions. URL: http://www.bls.gov/soc/soc_2010_definitions.pdf, last accessed: 27.02.2016.

UK visas & immigration, 2015. Codes of practice for skilled workers. URL: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/

423732/codes_of_practice_april_2015.pdf, last accessed: 05.02.2016.

Umeh J., 2015. IBM Innovation labs - where old meets new, and everything in between... URL: https://www.capgemini.com/blog/capping-it-off/2015/11/ibm-innovation-labs-where-old-meets-new-and-everything-in-between/ November 26. Last accessed: 27.03.2016

Urban G.L., von Hippel E., 1988. Lead user analysis for the development of new industrial products. Management science, 34.

Verizon website. URL: http://www.verizon.com/about/our-company/innovation-programs, last accessed: 28.03.2016.

Volkswagen website. URL: http://en.volkswagen.com/en/innovation-and-technology.html, last accessed: 27.03.2016.

von Hippel E., 1976 (A). The dominant role of users in the scientific instrument innovation process. Research policy 5, no. 3.

von Hippel E., 1976 (B). The dominant role of the user in semiconductor and electronic subassembly process innovation. Massachusetts institute of technology.

von Hippel E., 1977. Transferring process equipment innovations from user-innovators to equipment manufacturing firms. R&D management 8, no. 1.

von Hippel E., 1978. Successful industrial products from customer ideas. Journal of marketing.

von Hippel E., 1986. Lead users: a source of novel product concepts. Management science 32 (7).

von Hippel E., 1988. The sources of innovation. Oxford University press, Oxford.

von Hippel E., 1994. Incentives to innovate and the sources of innovation: the case of scientific instruments. Research policy 23, no. 4.

von Hippel E., 2001 (A). Perspective: user toolkits for innovation. Journal of product innovation management 18, no. 4.

von Hippel E., 2001 (B). Innovation by user communities: learning from open-source software. MIT Sloan management review 42, no. 4.

von Hippel E., 2005. Democratizing innovation: The evolving phenomenon of user innovation. Journal fur betriebswirtschaft.

von Hippel E., 2007. Horizontal innovation networks by and for users. Industrial and corporate change.

von Hippel E., 2008. “Pyramiding”: efficient identification of rare subjects. Sloan school of management, Massachusetts Institute of technology.

von Hippel E., Jin C., 2009. The major shift towards user-centered innovation: implications for China's innovation policymaking. Journal of knowledge-based innovation in China.

Voss, A., Hartswood, M., Procter, R., Rouncefield, M., Slack, R., Bьscher, M., 2009. Configuring user-designer relations - interdisciplinary perspectives, 1. ed. Springer science and business media, London.

Wal-Mart Stores website. URL: http://blog.walmart.com/

topics/innovation, last accessed: 29.03.2016.

Wдldchen D., 2014. Towards a new order in the global automotive industry: how Asian companies catch up to their western peers. Anchor academic publishing.

Zahay D., Griffin A., Fredericks E., 2011. Information use in new product development: an initial exploratory empirical investigation in the chemical industry. Journal of product innovation management.

Zaytseva A., Shuvalova O., Meissner D., 2013. Higher School of Economics. Research paper No. WP BRP 08/STI/2013.

Размещено на Allbest.ru

...