Characteristics of Lead Users in Different Stages of the New Product Development Process: A Systematic Review in the Context of Open Innovation
Abstract
:1. Introduction
RQ: What personal characteristics of lead users’ managers need to consider in the selection process of lead users by considering each stage of the NPD process and the differences between the consumer and industrial segments?
2. The Review Method
2.1. Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria
2.2. Search Strategy
2.3. Study Selection Process
2.4. Quality Assessment
2.5. Data Extraction and Synthesis of SLR
3. Research Results
3.1. Idea Generation Stage
3.1.1. Knowledge and Experience
3.1.2. Motivation and Willingness
3.1.3. Creativity and Skills
3.1.4. Behavior and Attitude
3.2. Concept Generation Stage
3.3. Prototype Development and Testing Stage
4. Discussion
5. Contribution, Implications and Future Research
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
SID | References | Context | Key Findings | Method | Country | Type of Paper | Data Provider | Number of Samples (n) | Journal Name |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
S1 | [25] | industrial (B2B manufacturing of marine vehicles, power plants) | The paper differentiates customer and user knowledge. End-users use the product but do not make a purchasing decision. The customers buy the products but do not use them directly. User knowledge is often tacit and sets long term development goals. Customers can provide explicit knowledge to reach short term needs. | qualitative (holistic case study) | - | Journal | ScienceDirect | 30 | Information and Management |
S2 | [75] | consumer | The paper reveals some characteristics of lead users as a crucial factor of online identification of lead users: being ahead of trend, high expected benefit, user expertise and motivation, extreme user needs, opinion leadership and online commitment. | qualitative (review) | - | Journal | ScienceDirect | - | International Journal of Innovation Management |
S3 | [76] | consumer | The study states that participation in online communities can be a new indicator and potentially effective criteria of assessing lead user potential which can be effectively discovered through social media by netnography and crowdsourcing. | qualitative (case study) | - | Journal | ScienceDirect | 24 | Journal of Engineering and Technology Management |
S4 | [77] | industrial (machine engineering) | The study describes the case when a company follows all the steps that lead-user theory recommends but the project fails. The reason is that companies may not understand when and how to use the lead-user method to reduce the risk of innovation and market. The selection and customer integration need a skilled person. The integration shall involve steps as 1. finding customers with the right knowledge, 2. selecting the right customer category, 3. customer integration in the early phase, 4. keeping high the project team motivation for integrating customers. | qualitative (case study) | Europe and Asia | Journal | Wiley Online Library | 50 | Creativity and Innovation Management |
S5 | [32] | consumer (kitchen appliances) | The study determinate characteristics which are related to lead userness: 1. individual creativity and personality play an important role in the deterministic of lead userness; 2. domain-relevant skills (product-related knowledge and use-experience) and creativity-relevant skills (divergent thinking style) are related to lead userness; 3. intrinsic motivation. Individual creativity can be explained by personality-related characteristics. | qualitative (empirical study) | Germany | Journal | Wiley Online Library | 146 | Creativity and Innovation Management |
S6 | [78] | consumer (kite surfing) | The study confirms that the “high expected benefit” dimension leads to higher innovation likelihood and the “ahead of trend” dimension predict innovation likelihood and commercial attractiveness of the innovation developed by the user. Technical expertise and community-based resources are recommended as search criteria next to the two lead-user components. | quantitative | Europe | Journal | Wiley Online Library | 456 | Product Innovation Management |
S7 | [79] | consumer (sportswear) | The paper finds that active and strong ties between customer and company support significant innovation. This opportunity can lead to better innovation only when a firm builds proper co-creation capabilities. | qualitative (case study) | Germany | Journal | Wiley Online Library | - | R&D Management |
S8 | [80] | consumer | The researchers identify four different kinds of users engaging in co-creation: intrinsically interested, curiosity-driven, need-driven, reward oriented. | qualitative (empirical study) | - | Journal | Google Scholar | California Management Review | |
S9 | [81] | consumer (Swarowsky design competition) | The study highlights that former co-creation experience has a significant impact on the quality of submitted designs. | qualitative (case study) | global | Journal | Google Scholar | 298 | R&D Management |
S10 | [31] | consumer (basketball shoes) | The study states that only very knowledgeable members of the community are innovative and modify existing or create new basketball shoes. They are willing to share their ideas with the sports equipment manufacturer companies. The success of virtual integration depends on the community’s innovation potential and the consumer’s willingness to participate. These innovators are 20% “need-driven” and 80% “excitement-driven”. | qualitative (netnography) | Germany | Journal | ScienceDirect | Journal of Business Research | |
S11 | [23] | consumer (virtual NPD project) | The research finds that the impact is asymmetrical between the consumer’s ability to generate ideas and to develop new products. The threshold levels of domain-specific skills, creativity-relevant process and task motivation are investigated at different stages of product development as idea generation, evaluation of product concepts and interest, testing new products and interest in co-creation. | quantitative | n/a | Journal | Wiley Online Library | 825 | Creativity and Innovation Management |
S12 | [58] | consumer (NPD project from ten different fields) | The paper presents an Internet-based tool that contributes to customer empowerment in virtual new product co-creation activities. Lead users have a higher need to express their knowledge and to articulate their needs. The co-creation tools make stronger feelings of empowerment of customers. | Quantitative | - | Journal | Wiley Online Library | 727 | Journal of Management Information Systems |
S13 | [11] | industrial (healthcare) | The study investigates the link between user and manufacturer interaction and finds that lead users not only help a firm to understand the problem but they can also provide a solution for them. | Quantitative | Germany and UK | Journal | ScienceDirect | 243/146 | Technovation |
S14 | [82] | consumer (financial/IT) | The paper states that different forms of external knowledge contribute differentially to knowledge creation. | Quantitative | USA/Singapore | Journal | ScienceDirect | 399 | Information and Management |
S15 | [27] | industrial (machinery industry) | The paper states that customer interaction has a positive impact on product success during the early and late stages of NPD process while interaction in the middle stages has no performance impact. Technically attractive customers have a negative impact on NPD explained by different effects. Financially attractive customers, lead users and close customers have a positive impact as attractive partners in NPD. | quantitative | Germany | Journal | ScienceDirect | 310 | Journal of Business Research |
S16 | [52] | industrial (healthcare) | The paper states that the high level of expected benefit, the frequent use of information and intrinsic motivation show significant differences between non-lead users and lead users. The research was performed in medical surgery in Turkey. | quantitative | - | Journal | Google Scholar | European Journal of Business and Management | |
S17 | [67] | consumer (game of chance sector) | The article critically reflects the concept of Emergent-Nature Consumers (ENC) [49]. The research states that the lead-users outperform ENC and remain as a primary source of innovations. | quantitative | French | Journal | Wiley Online Library | 53 | Product Innovation Management |
S18 | [49] | consumer (home SmartBox) | The paper states that product concepts developed by customers with high emergent nature (openness to new experience, reflection, verbal and visual processing styles, experimental and rational thinking style, creativity, and optimism) ultimately lead to greater sales compared to products that are developed by other types of customers. | quantitative | global | Journal | JSTOR | 1124 | Journal of Marketing Research |
S19 | [68] | consumer (music instruments) | The research investigates the key personal attributes of customers which responsible for innovations. Innovative users are hobbyists (there is a willingness to share innovations) or responsive for “firm recognition” to undertake innovation. It has been also found that innovative users are like to be lead users which positively impact the quality of innovation. | multiple methods | - | Journal | Google Scholar | 345 | Organization Science |
S20 | [60] | consumer (school groups of children) | The study found that users with betweenness centrality (boundary-spanning position) are able to create highly novel ideas in the idea generation phase. The betweenness centrality also determinates creativity by minimizing communication barriers. A positive correlation has been found between being creative and lead user. | quantitative | Netherlands | Journal | Wiley Online Library | 45 | Creativity and Innovation Management |
S21 | [59] | consumer | Lead users are positioned as bridges between different social groups which can be mapped by modern online mining tools quickly and low in cost and help companies to increase the effectiveness and efficiency of lead-user identification. | quantitative | Netherlands | Journal | Wiley Online Library | 267/3118/50 | Product Innovation Management |
S22 | [57] | industrial (OEM manufacturer) | The paper found that customer’s promise, interdependence technological innovativeness and supplier technical capability positively influence the intention of early supplier involvement in the NPD process. | quantitative | USA | Journal | ScienceDirect | 422 | Journal of Business Research |
S23 | [24] | industrial (health-care) | The study investigates users’ characteristics at different stages of product development in the field of medical technology in case of radical innovations. | qualitative (case study) | - | Journal | ScienceDirect | 45 | Journal of Engineering and Technology Management |
S24 | [47] | industrial (medical) | The study investigates the characteristics of capable users at different levels of their contribution to radical innovations in the field of medical equipment technology. They have high motivation to search for new solutions, own a diverse set of competencies, embedded in a supportive environment, and play an entrepreneurial role. | qualitative (case study) | - | Journal | Wiley Online Library | 36 | R&D Management |
S25 | [13] | industrial (3M) | The paper compares the lead user (LU) idea generation process with conventional methods and finds that the ideas generated by the LU process have a positive impact on the sales revenue, have a significantly higher novelty and more original compared with traditional methods. | quantitative | - | Journal | Google Scholar | 47 | Management Science |
S26 | [17] | consumer (outdoor sport products) | The paper states that the motivation of users to innovate is driven by their specific not fulfilled needs and by the realized discrepancy between the experienced and expected performance of the products. Approximately 9% of the sample users built prototypes or marketable products and do it without contacting a firm to transfer their ideas, concept or prototypes. | quantitative | Germany | Journal | ScienceDirect | 153 | Technovation |
S27 | [30] | consumer (mountain bikes) | The study shows that a user’s personal patterns of product usage (“local” information) highly influence the functionality of innovative ideas. The type of solution is determined by the technical knowledge and skills of the user. It offers that a fundamentally different approach of lead user identification might be possible when firms identify lead users with a specific type of needs (safety mountain bikes shall be developed with bikers who have a high need for safety). | qualitative (empirical study) | North America | Journal | Google Scholar | 287 | Research Policy |
S28 | [53] | industrial (various domains) | The paper states that the customers’ knowledge and its novelty, the customer–firm closeness and the type of communication channels are impact factors of the success of customers co-creation initiatives. | quantitative | Europe | Journal | Wiley Online Library | 126 | Product Innovation Management |
S29 | [51] | consumer (motorbike) | The study states that willingness to collaborate has a high impact, while product knowledge and strategic alignment with the brand identity has a moderate effect on innovativeness in online brand communities. | quantitative | global | Journal | ScienceDirect | 572 | Technovation |
S30 | [61] | consumer (libraries) | The study highlights the values of lead users as early adopters, sources of new ideas, research potential and the role of promoting the process of diffusion. | quantitative | Australia | Journal | ScienceDirect | 432 | Research Policy |
S31 | [71] | consumer (OPAC library information systems) | The study determinates the characteristics of users who modify the system and share information about it. Innovating users more likely to share their innovations with others. | quantitative | Australia | Journal | JSTOR | 122 | Management Science |
S32 | [83] | consumer (sport goods) | The article introduces a toolkit for idea competitions (TIC) to access user’s innovative ideas and solutions and which encourage users to participate in the open innovation process and increase the quality of their submissions. | quantitative | Germany | Journal | Wiley Online Library | 82 | R&D Management |
S33 | [48] | consumer (high-speed broadband network) | The paper examines advanced users (lead users) by their characteristics, adoption behavior and contribution to innovation. | quantitative | Netherlands | Journal | ScienceDirect | 673 | Technological Forecasting & Social Change |
S34 | [84] | consumer (various) | The study compares the product innovation practices of two in-house developers (HILTI, Buechi) and two development contractors (IDEO, Tribecraft). It states that customer contribution is high in in-house developers while it remains at a low level in the case of development contractors. | qualitative | Northern Europe | Journal | Wiley Online Library | - | Creativity and Innovation Management |
S35 | [35] | industrial development of PCB (printed circuit board) quality tester | The study examines the process of product failure. Ostensible customers seem to offer benefits (motivation to solve problems, suggestions for improvements, experience sharing), but their value misleads due to lack of knowledge, vaguely expressed wants and no real intent to purchase. | qualitative | French | Journal | ScienceDirect | 19 | Journal of Engineering and Technology Management |
S36 | [34] | consumer (digital services) | The research states that ideators with solution-oriented behavior (idea + solution) and positive attention to other ideator’s idea are likely to suggest ideas which can be implemented. | qualitative | Germany | Journal | Wiley Online Library | 48 | Creativity and Innovation Management |
S37 | [29] | consumer (extreme consumer sport fields) | The study extends the lead user theory with field-related variables (consumer knowledge, use experience, locus of control and innovativeness) as antecedents and adaptive behavior as consequences. All observed variables support the characteristics of lead userness. | quantitative | global | Journal | Wiley Online Library | 129/193/139 | Product Innovation Management |
S38 | [56] | consumer (kite surfing, tech diving) | The study finds that lead users have high domain-specific innovativeness, perceive new technologies as less complex and therefore adopt new products early. Lead users have stronger opinion leadership and lower opinion seeking characteristics. | qualitative (case study) | - | Journal | Google Scholar | 139/143/193 | Marketing Letters |
S39 | [85] | consumer (online services of soccer clubs) | The study investigates the context of new service development. It has been found that ahead of trend, expertise, consumer knowledge, and extrinsic motivation has a negative impact while dissatisfaction, intrinsic motivation has a positive impact on idea quality. The research states that the characteristics of lead users do not directly create creative output. | quantitative | - | Journal | Wiley Online Library | 120 | Creativity and Innovation Management |
S40 | [18] | consumer (various) | The study describes six user types based on five dimensions and proposes a guideline for optimal integration of users. | qualitative | - | Conference proceedings | Google Scholar | - | ISPIM 22nd conference: Sustainability in innovation: innovation management challenges |
S41 | [54] | consumer (home appliance) | The study states that external user ideas have maximum novelty, user value, and market potential, while internal user ideas are more easily realizable compared to ordinary users. | quantitative | Germany | Journal | ScienceDirect | 864/239 | Research Policy |
S42 | [86] | consumer (mountain engineering industry) | The study tests and supports the hypothesis that embedded lead users (employees who are lead users of their employing firm’s product or services) foster innovation at work. | quantitative | Germany/Switzerland/Italy | Journal | ScienceDirect | 149 | Research Policy |
S43 | [33] | consumer (smart home) | The study states that users with high technical skills lead to technically feasible ideas. Trend-aware and technically innovative users produce ideas of greater originality, while ethically reflective users have ideas with a positive impact on society. | quantitative | - | Journal | Wiley Online Library | 93 | Creativity and Innovation Management |
S44 | [50] | consumer (health monitoring system) | The paper systematically develops a multi-item scale to measure the level of technological reflectiveness (TR) of an individual. External sources with high TR scores can contribute to the early stages of the innovation process. | quantitative | - | Journal (PIM) | Wiley Online Library | - | Product Innovation Management |
S45 | [54] | industrial (3D printer) | The study states that individuals can discover opportunities through recognition rather than search. Individuals with prior knowledge developed through education and work experience will more likely discover innovation opportunities than people without prior knowledge. | qualitative (case study) | USA | Journal | Google Scholar | 22 | Organization Science |
References
- Shrestha, Y.R.; Krishna, V.; von Krogh, G. Augmenting Organizational Decision-Making with Deep Learning Algorithms: Principles, Promises, and Challenges. J. Bus. Res. 2021, 123, 588–603. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chesbrough, H. The Era of Open Innovation. MIT Sloan Manag. Rev. 2003, 44, 35–41. [Google Scholar]
- Enkel, E.; Bogers, M.; Chesbrough, H. Exploring Open Innovation in the Digital Age: A Maturity Model and Future Research Directions. R D Manag. 2020, 50, 161–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Franke, N.; Lüthje, C. User Innovation. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Business and Management; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Bradonjic, P.; Franke, N.; Lüthje, C. Decision-Makers’ Underestimation of User Innovation. Res. Policy 2019, 48, 1354–1361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- de Jong, J.P.J.; Ben-Menahem, S.M.; Franke, N.; Füller, J.; von Krogh, G. Treading New Ground in Household Sector Innovation Research: Scope, Emergence, Business Implications, and Diffusion. Res. Policy 2021, 50, 104270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Demonaco, H.; Oliveira, P.; Torrance, A.; von Hippel, C.; von Hippel, E. When Patients Become Innovators: Health Care Consumers Are Contributing Their Skills, Money, and Time to Develop Effective Solutions That Aren’t Available on the Commercial Market. MIT Sloan Manag. Rev. 2019, 60, 81–88. [Google Scholar]
- von Hippel, E. Lead Users: A Source of Novel Product Concepts. Manag. Sci. 1986, 32, 791–805. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Churchill, J.; von Hippel, E.; Sonnack, M. Lead User Project Handbook: A Practical Guide for Lead User Project Teams; Lead User Concepts Inc.: Cambridge, MN, USA, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- von Hippel, C.D.; Cann, A.B. Behavioral Innovation: Pilot Study and New Big Data Analysis Approach in Household Sector User Innovation. Res. Policy 2021, 50, 103992. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Globocnik, D.; Faullant, R. Do Lead Users Cooperate with Manufacturers in Innovation? Investigating the Missing Link between Lead Userness and Cooperation Initiation with Manufacturers. Technovation 2021, 100, 102187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eisenberg, I. Lead-User Research for Breakthrough Innovation. Res. Technol. Manag. 2011, 54, 50–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lilien, G.L.; Morrison, P.D.; Searls, K.; Sonnack, M.; Von Hippel, E. Performance Assessment of the Lead User Idea-Generation Process for New Product Development. Manag. Sci. 2002, 48, 1042–1059. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Olson, E.; Bakke, G. Creating Breakthrough Innovations by Implementing the Lead User Methodology. Telektronikk 2004, 126–132. [Google Scholar]
- von Hippel, E. Stefan Thomke; Mary Sonnack Creating Breakthroughs at 3M. Harv. Bus. Rev. 1999, 77, 47–57. [Google Scholar]
- Lüthje, C.; Herstatt, C. The Lead User Method: An Outline of Empirical Findings and Issues for Future Research. R D Manag. 2004, 34, 553–568. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lüthje, C. Characteristics of Innovating Users in a Consumer Goods Field: An Empirical Study of Sport-Related Product Consumers. Technovation 2004, 24, 683–695. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schuurman, D.; Mahr, D.; De Marez, L. User Characteristics for Customer Involvement in Innovation Processes: Deconstructing the Lead User-Concept. In Proceedings of the ISPIM 22nd Conference: Sustainability in Innovation: Innovation Management Challenges, Hamburg, Germany, 12–15 June 2011; p. 9. [Google Scholar]
- Sänn, A.; Baier, D. Lead User Identification in Conjoint Analysis Based Product Design. In Challenges at the Interface of Data Analysis, Computer Science, and Optimization; Gaul, W.A., Geyer-Schulz, A., Schmidt-Thieme, L., Kunze, J., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2012; pp. 521–528. [Google Scholar]
- Su, J.; Chen, X.; Zhang, F.; Zhang, N.; Li, F. An Intelligent Method for Lead User Identification in Customer Collaborative Product Innovation. J. Theor. Appl. Electron. Commer. Res. 2021, 16, 1571–1583. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Belz, F.M.; Baumbach, W. Netnography as a Method of Lead User Identification. Creat. Innov. Manag. 2010, 19, 304–313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Su, J.; Zhang, F.; Chen, S.; Zhang, N.; Wang, H.; Jian, J. Member Selection for the Collaborative New Product Innovation Teams Integrating Individual and Collaborative Attributions. Complexity 2021, 2021, 8897784. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Füller, J.; Matzler, K.; Hutter, K.; Hautz, J. Consumers’ Creative Talent: Which Characteristics Qualify Consumers for Open Innovation Projects? An Exploration of Asymmetrical Effects. Creat. Innov. Manag. 2012, 21, 247–262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lettl, C. User Involvement Competence for Radical Innovation. J. Eng. Technol. Manag. JET-M 2007, 24, 53–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abrell, T.; Pihlajamaa, M.; Kanto, L.; Vom Brocke, J.; Uebernickel, F. The Role of Users and Customers in Digital Innovation: Insights from B2B Manufacturing Firms. Inf. Manag. 2016, 53, 324–335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abrell, T.; Benker, A.; Pihlajamaa, M. User Knowledge Utilization in Innovation of Complex Products and Systems: An Absorptive Capacity Perspective. Creat. Innov. Manag. 2017, 27, 168–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Gruner, K.E.; Homburg, C. Does Customer Interaction Enhance New Product Success? J. Bus. Res. 2000, 49, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Boer, H.; Kuhn, J.; Gertsen, F. Continuous Innovation: Managing Dualities through Co-Ordination. 2006. Available online: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.458.2193&rep=rep1&type=pdf (accessed on 27 December 2021).
- Schreier, M.; Prügl, R. Extending Lead-User Theory: Antecedents and Consequences of Consumers’ Lead Userness. J. Prod. Innov. Manag. 2008, 25, 331–346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lüthje, C.; Herstatt, C.; Von Hippel, E. User-Innovators and “Local” Information: The Case of Mountain Biking. Res. Policy 2005, 34, 951–965. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Füller, J.; Jawecki, G.; Mühlbacher, H. Innovation Creation by Online Basketball Communities. J. Bus. Res. 2007, 60, 60–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Faullant, R.; Schwarz, E.J.; Krajger, I.; Breitenecker, R.J. Towards a Comprehensive Understanding of Lead Userness: The Search for Individual Creativity. Creat. Innov. Manag. 2012, 21, 76–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schweitzer, F.; Gassmann, O.; Rau, C. Lessons from Ideation: Where Does User Involvement Lead Us? Creat. Innov. Manag. 2014, 23, 155–167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schemmann, B.; Chappin, M.M.H.; Herrmann, A.M. The Right Kind of People: Characteristics of Successful Ideators’ Online Behaviour. Creat. Innov. Manag. 2017, 26, 277–290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Scaringella, L. Involvement of “Ostensible Customers” in Really New Innovation: Failure of a Start-Up. J. Eng. Technol. Manag. 2017, 43, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- O’Hern, M.S.; Rindfleisch, A. Customer Co-Creation: A Typology and Research Agenda. Rev. Mark. Res. 2010, 6, 84–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cooper, R.G. Accelerating the Process from Idea to Launch; Perseus Publishing: Cambridge, UK, 2001; Volume 3, ISBN 0465025846. [Google Scholar]
- Prahalad, C.K.; Ramaswamy, V. Co-Creation Experiences: The next Practice in Value Creation. J. Interact. Mark. 2004, 18, 5–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hoyer, W.D.; Chandy, R.; Dorotic, M.; Krafft, M.; Singh, S.S. Consumer Cocreation in New Product Development. J. Serv. Res. 2010, 13, 283–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grant, M.J.; Booth, A. A Typology of Reviews: An Analysis of 14 Review Types and Associated Methodologies. Health Inf. Libr. J. 2009, 26, 91–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Booth, A. Systematic Approaches to a Successful Literature Review; Sage: London, UK, 2012; ISBN 0857021354. [Google Scholar]
- Kitchenham, B.A.; Charters, S.M. Guidelines for Performing Systematic Literature Reviews in Software Engineering; EBSE Technical Report Version 2.3; Durham University: Durham, UK; Keele University: Staffordshire, UK, 2007; Volume 1, pp. 1–54. [Google Scholar]
- Webster, J.; Watson, R. Analyzing the Past to Prepare for the Future: Writing a Literature Review. MIS Q. 2002, 26, xiii–xxiii. [Google Scholar]
- Kitchenham, B.A. Procedures for Performing Systematic Reviews; Joint Technical Report; Keele University: Keele, UK, 2004; Volume 33, pp. 1–26. [Google Scholar]
- Nidhra, S.; Yanamadala, M.; Afzal, W.; Torkar, R. Knowledge Transfer Challenges and Mitigation Strategies in Global Software Development—A Systematic Literature Review and Industrial Validation. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2013, 33, 333–355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Biemans, W.G. User and Third-Party Involvement in Developing Medical Equipment Innovations. Technovation 1991, 11, 163–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lettl, C.; Herstatt, C.; Gemuenden, H.G. Users’ Contributions to Radical Innovation: Evidence from Four Cases in the Field of Medical Equipment Technology. R D Manag. 2006, 36, 251–272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sadowski, B.M. Advanced Users and the Adoption of High Speed Broadband: Results of a Living Lab Study in the Netherlands. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2017, 115, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hoffman, D.L.; Kopalle, P.K.; Novak, T.R. The “Right” Consumers for Better Concepts: Identifying Consumers High in Emergent Nature to Develop New Product Concepts. J. Mark. Res. 2010, 47, 854–865. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schweitzer, F.; Rau, C.; Gassmann, O.; Van Den Hende, E. Technologically Reflective Individuals as Enablers of Social Innovation. J. Prod. Innov. Manag. 2015, 32, 847–860. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Marchi, G.; Giachetti, C.; de Gennaro, P. Extending Lead-User Theory to Online Brand Communities: The Case of the Community Ducati. Technovation 2011, 31, 350–361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gürkan, G.Ç. Identification of Lead User Characteristics: The Case of Surgeons in Turkey. Eur. J. Bus. Manag. 2014, 6, 87–93. [Google Scholar]
- Mahr, D.; Lievens, A.; Blazevic, V. The Value of Customer Cocreated Knowledge during the Innovation Process. J. Prod. Innov. Manag. 2014, 31, 599–615. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shane, S. Prior Knowledge and the Discovery of Entrepreneurial Opportunities. Organ. Sci. 2000, 11, 448–469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schweisfurth, T.G. Comparing Internal and External Lead Users as Sources of Innovation. Res. Policy 2017, 46, 238–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schreier, M.; Oberhauser, S.; Prügl, R. Lead Users and the Adoption and Diffusion of New Products: Insights from Two Extreme Sports Communities. Mark. Lett. 2007, 18, 15–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- LaBahn, D.W.; Krapfel, R. Early Supplier Involvement in Customer New Product Development: A Contingency Model of Component Supplier Intentions. J. Bus. Res. 2000, 47, 173–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Füller, J.; Mühlbacher, H.; Matzler, K.; Jawecki, G. Consumer Empowerment through Internet-Based Co-Creation. J. Manag. Inf. Syst. 2009, 26, 71–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kratzer, J.; Lettl, C.; Franke, N.; Gloor, P.A. The Social Network Position of Lead Users. J. Prod. Innov. Manag. 2016, 33, 201–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kratzer, J.; Lettl, C. A Social Network Perspective of Lead Users and Creativity: An Empirical Study among Children. Creat. Innov. Manag. 2008, 17, 26–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Morrison, P.D.; Roberts, J.H.; Midgley, D.F. The Nature of Lead Users and Measurement of Leading Edge Status. Res. Policy 2004, 33, 351–362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Polanyi, M. Personal Knowledge; University of Chicago Press: Chicago, IL, USA, 1958. [Google Scholar]
- Csikszentmihalyi, M. Motivation and Creativity: Toward a Synthesis of Structural and Energistic Approaches to Cognition. New Ideas Psychol. 1988, 6, 159–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kirton, M. Adaptors and Innovators: A Description and Measure. J. Appl. Psychol. 1976, 61, 622–629. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rotter, J.B. Social Learning and Clinical Psychology; Prentice-Hall, Inc.: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- London, H.; John, E., Jr. (Eds.) Dimensions of Personality; Wiley Series on Personality Processes; Wiley: New York, NY, USA, 1978; ISBN 0471543926. [Google Scholar]
- Hamdi-Kidar, L.; Keinz, P.; Le Nagard, E.; Vernette, E. Comparing Lead Users to Emergent-Nature Consumers as Sources of Innovation at Early Stages of New Product Development. J. Prod. Innov. Manag. 2019, 36, 616–631. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jeppesen, L.B.; Frederiksen, L. Why Do Users Contribute to Firm-Hosted User Communities? The Case of Computer-Controlled Music Instruments. Organ. Sci. 2006, 17, 45–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Shah, S. From Innovation to Firm Formation in the Windsurfing, Skateboarding and Snowboarding Industries; Working Papers; University of Washington: Washington, DC, USA, 2005. [Google Scholar]
- Trott, P.; Van Der Duin, P.; Hartmann, D. Users as Innovators? Exploring the Limitations of User-Driven Innovation. Prometheus 2013, 31, 125–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Morrison, P.D.; Roberts, J.H.; Von Hippel, E. Determinants of User Innovation and Innovation Sharing in a Local Market. Manag. Sci. 2000, 46, 1513–1527. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pulles, N.J.; Veldman, J.; Schiele, H. Identifying Innovative Suppliers in Business Networks: An Empirical Study. Ind. Mark. Manag 2014, 43, 409–418. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shah, S.K. From Innovation to Firm Formation: Contributions by Sports Enthusiasts to the Windsurfing, Snowboarding & Skateboarding Industries. In The Engineering of Sport 6; University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, College of Business: Champaign, IL, USA, 2006; Volume 3, pp. 29–34. ISBN 0387346805. [Google Scholar]
- Stock, R.M.; Von Hippel, E.; Gillert, N.L. Impacts of Personality Traits on Consumer Innovation Success. Res. Policy 2016, 45, 757–769. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bilgram, V.; Brem, A.; Voigt, K.-I. User-Centric Innovations in New Product Development—Systematic Indentification of Lead Users Harnessing Interactive and Collaborative Online-Tools. Int. J. Innov. Manag. 2008, 12, 419–458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Brem, A.; Bilgram, V. The Search for Innovative Partners in Co-Creation: Identifying Lead Users in Social Media through Netnography and Crowdsourcing. J. Eng. Technol. Manag. JET-M 2015, 37, 40–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Enkel, E.; Perez-Freije, J.; Gassmann, O. Minimizing Market Risks Through Customer Integration in New Product Development: Learning from Bad Practice. Creat. Innov. Manag. 2005, 14, 425–437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Franke, N.; von Hippel, E.; Schreier, M. Finding Commercially Attractive User Innovations: A Test of Lead-User Theory. J. Prod. Innov. Manag. 2006, 23, 301–315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Fredberg, T.; Piller, F.T. The Paradox of Tie Strength in Customer Relationships for Innovation: A Longitudinal Case Study in the Sports Industry. R D Manag. 2011, 41, 470–484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Füller, J. Refining Virtual Co-Creation from a Consumer Perspective. Calif. Manag. Rev. 2010, 52, 98–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Füller, J.; Hutter, K.; Faullant, R. Why Co-Creation Experience Matters? Creative Experience and Its Impact on the Quantity and Quality of Creative Contributions. R D Manag. 2011, 41, 259–273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Goyal, S.; Ahuja, M.; Kankanhalli, A. Does the Source of External Knowledge Matter? Examining the Role of Customer Co-Creation and Partner Sourcing in Knowledge Creation and Innovation. Inf. Manag. 2020, 57, 103325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Piller, F.T.; Walcher, D. Toolkits for Idea Competitions: A Novel Method to Integrate Users in New Product Development. R D Manag. 2006, 36, 307–318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sandmeier, P.; Morrison, P.D.; Gassmann, O. Integrating Customers in Product Innovation: Lessons from Industrial Development Contractors and In-House Contractors in Rapidly Changing Customer Markets. Creat. Innov. Manag. 2010, 19, 89–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schuhmacher, M.C.; Kuester, S. Identification of Lead User Characteristics Driving the Quality of Service Innovation Ideas. Creat. Innov. Manag. 2012, 21, 427–442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schweisfurth, T.G.; Raasch, C. Embedded Lead Users—The Benefits of Employing Users for Corporate Innovation. Res. Policy 2015, 44, 168–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Inclusion criteria: | Available in full text |
Published between 2000 and 2020 | |
Written in English | |
Related to the research question | |
Within the searched domain of open innovation | |
Published in the selected databases | |
Exclusion criteria: | Full text unavailable in electronic form |
Outside of the search timeframe | |
Research without the description of data sources and methodology | |
No information about lead user characteristics | |
Papers with only secondary research results |
QA1: | Does the research investigate users’ characteristics? |
QA2: | Does the type of cooperation refer to co-creation? |
QA3: | Is the market domain accurately defined? |
QA4: | Is the research about new product development? |
QA5: | Are the research methodology and results accurately described? |
Results of the Study Selection Process | Initial Results | Relevant Studies |
---|---|---|
ScienceDirect | 291 | 16 |
Scopus | 12 | 0 |
JSTOR | 39 | 2 |
Whiley Online Library | 146 | 18 |
Google Scholar (second stage) | - | 9 |
Summary: | 488 | 45 |
SID | QA1 | QA2 | QA3 | QA4 | QA5 | SUM | SID | QA1 | QA2 | QA3 | QA4 | QA5 | SUM |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
S1 | 0.5 | 0 | 1 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 2.5 | S24 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1 | 0.5 | 1 | 3.5 |
S2 | 1 | 0 | 0.5 | 1 | 0 | 2.5 | S25 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1 | 0.5 | 1 | 3.5 |
S3 | 0.5 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2.5 | S26 | 1 | 0.5 | 1 | 0.5 | 1 | 4 |
S4 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 5 | S27 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0.5 | 1 | 3.5 |
S5 | 1 | 0.5 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 4.5 | S28 | 0.5 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 4.5 |
S6 | 1 | 0.5 | 1 | 0.5 | 1 | 4 | S29 | 1 | 0.5 | 1 | 0.5 | 1 | 4 |
S7 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 5 | S30 | 1 | 0.5 | 1 | 0.5 | 1 | 4 |
S8 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1 | 3 | S31 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 5 |
S9 | 1 | 0.5 | 1 | 0.5 | 1 | 4 | S32 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0.5 | 1 | 4.5 |
S10 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0 | 1 | 2.5 | S33 | 0 | 0.5 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2.5 |
S11 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 5 | S34 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 2.5 |
S12 | 1 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1 | 1 | 4 | S35 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 5 |
S13 | 1 | 0.5 | 1 | 0.5 | 1 | 4 | S36 | 1 | 0.5 | 1 | 0.5 | 1 | 4 |
S14 | 1 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1 | 1 | 4 | S37 | 0.5 | 1 | 1 | 0.5 | 1 | 4 |
S15 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 5 | S38 | 1 | 1 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1 | 4 |
S16 | 1 | 0.5 | 1 | 0.5 | 1 | 4 | S39 | 1 | 0.5 | 0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 2.5 |
S17 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 5 | S40 | 1 | 0.5 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 4.5 |
S18 | 1 | 0.5 | 1 | 0.5 | 1 | 4 | S41 | 1 | 1 | 0.5 | 1 | 1 | 4.5 |
S19 | 0.5 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2.5 | S42 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 3 |
S20 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 1 | 0.5 | 1 | 3.5 | S43 | 0 | 0.5 | 1 | 0.5 | 1 | 3 |
S21 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 5 | S44 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 4 |
S22 | 1 | 0.5 | 1 | 0.5 | 1 | 4 | S45 | 1 | 0.5 | 1 | 0.5 | 1 | 4 |
S23 | 1 | 0 | 0.5 | 0 | 1 | 2.5 |
Study ID: | Unique identifier of the study |
Title and Authors: | The title and name of the authors of the study |
Year: | The year of publication (between 2000 and 2020) |
Context: | Identification of the product field (consumer, industrial, mixed, not available) |
Key Findings: | The key findings of the paper |
Methodology: | The used methodology in the research (quantitative, qualitative, mix) |
Country: | The name of the countries covered by the research |
Type: | The type of the paper (journal article, conference proceeding, book chapter) |
Data Provider: | Name of the source the study was retrieved from |
Number of Samples: | Number of samples used in the research |
Journal Name: | Name of the journal the study was published in |
Name of the Journal | Ranking | Number of Studies |
---|---|---|
Creativity and Innovation Management | Q1 | 8 |
Journal of Product Innovation Management | Q1 | 6 |
R&D Management | Q1 | 4 |
Research Policy | Q1 | 4 |
Journal of Business Research | Q1 | 3 |
Journal of Engineering and Technology Management | Q1 | 3 |
Technovation | Q1 | 3 |
Information and Management | Q1 | 2 |
Management Science | Q1 | 2 |
Organization Science | Q1 | 2 |
California Management Review | Q1 | 1 |
European Journal of Management and Business Economics | Q2 | 1 |
International Journal of Innovation Management | Q2 | 1 |
Journal of Management Information Systems | Q1 | 1 |
Journal of Marketing Research | Q1 | 1 |
Marketing Letters | Q1 | 1 |
Technological Forecasting & Social Change | Q1 | 1 |
Stages of the NPD Process | References (Consumer Context) | Consumer Context | Both | Industrial Context | References (Industrial Context) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Development and test | technical expertise (positive impact) | [24,47] | |||
[23,48] | willingness to experiment and test | [24,47] | |||
technical expertise (negative impact) | [27] | ||||
tolerance for ambiguity | [24,47] | ||||
Concept Development | [49] | optimism | |||
[49] | openness to new experience | openness for new technologies | [24,47] | ||
[49] | verbal and visual processing styles | interdisciplinary know-how | [24,47] | ||
[50] | high technological reflectiveness | resources of research | [24,51] | ||
Idea Generation | KNOWLEDGE AND EXPERIENCE | ||||
[17] | prior knowledge and experience | [47,52,53,54] | |||
[30,55] | need and solution knowledge | [24] | |||
[29,31,32] | product knowledge, use experience | [24,51,52,53] | |||
[17,33,56] | technical knowledge | [24,57] | |||
MOTIVATION AND WILLINGNESS | |||||
[23] | intrinsic motivation | [24,47,52] | |||
[58] | experienced empowerment | entrepreneurial mindset | |||
[47] | |||||
[31] | willingness to share ideas | motivation induced by problem | [24] | ||
[51] | willingness to collaborate | ||||
[31] | motivation driven by excitement | ||||
[51] | brand identity | ||||
CREATIVITY AND SKILLS | |||||
[29,32,49] | divergent thinking style | [24] | |||
[23,32,49] | creativity relevant skills | imagination capabilities | [24] | ||
[59,60] | betweenness centrality | ||||
[60] | age and cognitive capacity | ||||
BEHAVIOUR AND ATTITUDES | |||||
[34] | solution-oriented behaviour | financial attractiveness | [27] | ||
[34] | attention to other’s idea | trustworthiness, credibility | [57,58] | ||
[61] | early adaption mindset | personal level of interaction | [24,27] | ||
closeness of relationship | [27] |
Consumer Context | Industrial Context | |
---|---|---|
Type of Users: | hobbyist [29,47,68] | professionals [47,68] |
Interaction/Participation | online user communities without face-to-face interaction [68]; application of IT tools for “low skilled users” to involve [58] | high level of personal interaction (face-to-face) [24,53]; the intensity of customer interaction varies in different stages of the NPD process |
Motivation: | 20% “need-driven” and 80% “excitement-driven” [31], enjoyment of activity [30], experiment-driven [31,73] | induced by needs and problems [24] |
Type of Innovation: | incremental [68] improvements, smaller changes [17]; can be characterized by low novelty [71] and lack of users’ knowledge [35]. | Radical innovation [24] |
Identification of Lead Users Status: | in the beginning of the NPD process [31] | in later phases of the NPD process [24] |
Needed Tools: | online tools | no tools |
Belonging to Community: | motivates greater involvement and willingness to interact [51] | community membership does not impact willingness to become inventive |
Brand Identity/Loyalty | strategic alignment with brand identity [51] | - |
Reward: | Free | - |
Innovation Capabilities: | Low | well-developed [24,72] |
Decision Base: | emotional [35] | rational |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Venesz, B.; Dőry, T.; Raišienė, A.G. Characteristics of Lead Users in Different Stages of the New Product Development Process: A Systematic Review in the Context of Open Innovation. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2022, 8, 24. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc8010024
Venesz B, Dőry T, Raišienė AG. Characteristics of Lead Users in Different Stages of the New Product Development Process: A Systematic Review in the Context of Open Innovation. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity. 2022; 8(1):24. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc8010024
Chicago/Turabian StyleVenesz, Béla, Tibor Dőry, and Agota Giedrė Raišienė. 2022. "Characteristics of Lead Users in Different Stages of the New Product Development Process: A Systematic Review in the Context of Open Innovation" Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity 8, no. 1: 24. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc8010024
APA StyleVenesz, B., Dőry, T., & Raišienė, A. G. (2022). Characteristics of Lead Users in Different Stages of the New Product Development Process: A Systematic Review in the Context of Open Innovation. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 8(1), 24. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc8010024