+1 Recommend
1 collections

      If you have found this article useful and you think it is important that researchers across the world have access, please consider donating, to ensure that this valuable collection remains Open Access.

      Prometheus is published by Pluto Journals, an Open Access publisher. This means that everyone has free and unlimited access to the full-text of all articles from our international collection of social science journalsFurthermore Pluto Journals authors don’t pay article processing charges (APCs).

      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      A typology of strategies for user involvement in innovation processes

      * , ,
      Pluto Journals


            This paper investigates how an organization can involve users in innovation processes. Based on three case studies and the literature on spaces, user-driven innovations and design management, the paper develops a framework that organizes different types of user involvement strategies. The framework aims to provide a rich understanding of how innovative spaces can be staged under different management strategies. To test the framework, nine SMEs from different Danish industries were selected. The findings show that the framework needs to be flexible in order to accommodate how users can be involved in different contexts and stages of the process. In addition, the study demonstrates various approaches to innovative spaces for involving users and their interests in the company. The framework includes a critique of the one-sided promotion of certain innovation paradigms in the literature. As demonstrated in this paper, different contexts require very different innovation approaches.


            Author and article information

            Pluto Journals
            1 December 2020
            : 36
            : 4 ( doiID: 10.13169/prometheus.36.issue-4 )
            : 347-365
            Department of Entrepreneurship and Relationship Management, University of Southern Denmark, Universitetsparken 1, 6000 Kolding, Danmark
            Author notes

            CORRESPONDING AUTHOR: pia@ 123456s2rvang.dk

            © 2020 Pluto Journals

            All content is freely available without charge to users or their institutions. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles in this journal without asking prior permission of the publisher or the author. Articles published in the journal are distributed under a http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

            Custom metadata

            Computer science,Arts,Social & Behavioral Sciences,Law,History,Economics


            1. Aapaoja, A. and Haapasalo, H. (2014) ‘A framework for stakeholder identification and classification in construction projects’, Open Journal of Business and Management, 2, pp.43–55.

            2. Adams, R., Mann, L., Jordan, S. and Daly, S. (2009) ‘Exploring the boundaries: language roles and structures in cross-disciplinary design teams’ in McDonnell, J. and Lloyd, P. (eds) About: Designing: Analysing Design Meeting, Taylor & Francis, Boca Raton FL, pp.339–58.

            3. Akhilesh, K. (2017) Co-creation and Learning: Concepts and Cases, Springer, New Delhi.

            4. Akrich, M. (1995) ‘User representations: practices, methods and sociology’ in Rip, A., Misa, T. and Schot, J. (eds), Managing Technology in Society: The Approach of Constructive Technology Assessment, Pinter, London, pp.167–84.

            5. Bager, T. (2011) ‘The camp model for entrepreneurship teaching’, International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 7, pp.279–96.

            6. Barki, H. and Hartwick, J. (1994) ‘Measuring user participation, user involvement, and user attitude’, MIS Quarterly, 18, 1, pp.59–82.

            7. Bengtsson, L., Lakemond, N., Lazzarotti, V., Manzini, R., Pellegrini, L. and Tell, F. (2015) ‘Open to a select few? Matching partners and knowledge content for open innovation performance’, Creativity and Innovation Management, 24, 1, pp.72–86.

            8. Binder, T. (2002) ‘Intent, form and materiality in the design of interaction technology’ in Floyd, C. et al. (eds) Social Thinking Software Practice, MIT Press, Cambridge MA, pp.451–67.

            9. Binder, T. and Brandt, E. (2008) ‘The Design: Lab as platform in participatory design research’, CoDesign, 4, 2, pp.115–29.

            10. Binder, T., Brandt, E., Halse, J., Foverskov, M., Olander, S. and Yndigegn, S. (2011) ‘Living the (codesign) lab’ in Proceedings of Nordic Design Research Conference 2011, Alto University, Helsinki, pp.1–10.

            11. Bisgaard, T. and Høgenhaven, C. (2010) Creating New Concepts, Products and Services with User Driven Innovation, Nordic Innovation Centre, Oslo.

            12. Bødker, M. and Nielsen, J. (2008) ‘Vision labs: seeing UCD as a relational practice’ in Proceedings of the 20th Annual Australasian Conference on Computer-Human Interaction: Designing for Habitus and Habitat, ACM Press, New York, pp.283–6.

            13. Bourne, L. and Walker, D. (2005) ‘Visualising and mapping stakeholder influence’, Management Decision, 43, 5, pp.649–60.

            14. Brandt, E. (2004) ‘Action research in user-centered product development’, AI and Society, 18, 2, pp.113–33.

            15. Brodersen, C., Dindler, C. and Iversen, O. (2008) ‘Staging imaginative places for participatory prototyping’, CoDesign, 4, 1, pp.19–30.

            16. Bucciarelli, L. (2005) ‘Design collaboration: who's in? who's out?‘ in Binder, T. and Hellstrôm, M. (eds) Design Spaces, EDITA IT Press, Helsinki, pp.64–71.

            17. Callon, M. (1986) ‘Some elements in a sociology of translation: domestication of the scallops and fishermen of St Brieuc Bay’, in J. Law (ed.) Power, Action and Belief: A New Sciology of Knowledge? London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, pp.196–233.

            18. Callon, M. and Law, J. (1989) ‘On the construction of sociotechnical networks: content and context revisited’ in Hargens, L., Jones, R. and Pickering, A. (eds), Knowledge and Society: Studies in the Sociology of Science, Past and Present, JAI Press, Stamford CT, pp.57–83.

            19. Chapman, C. and Ward, S. (2003) Project Risk Management: Processes, Techniques and Insights, John Wiley, Chichester, UK.

            20. Chesbrough, H. (2003) Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology, Harvard Business School Press, Boston.

            21. Chesbrough, H., Vanhaverbeke, W. and West, J. (2006) Open Innovation: Researching a New Paradigm, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

            22. Child, J. (2011) ‘Challenging hierarchy’, in Alvesson, M., Bringman, T. and Willmott, H. (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Critical Management Studies, pp.1–15.

            23. Choi, H. and Burnes, B. (2013) ‘The internet and value co-creation: the case of the popular music industry’, Prometheus: Critical Studies in Innovation, 31, 1, pp.35–53.

            24. Clausen, C. and Yoshinaka, Y. (2007) ‘Staging socio-technical spaces: translating across boundaries in design’, Journal of Design Research, 6, 1–2, pp.61–78.

            25. Crane, A. and Ruebottom, T. (2012) ‘Stakeholder theory and social identity: rethinking stakeholder identification’, Journal of Business Ethics, 102, pp.77–87.

            26. Dansk Design Center (2019) D2I: Design to Innovate, Copenhagen, available at https://www.d2i.dk/en/ march 2019 (accessed October 2020).

            27. Drew, S. and West, D. (2002) ‘Design and competitive advantage: strategies for market acceptance’, Journal of General Management, 28, 2, pp.58–74.

            28. Elias, A., Cavana, R. and Jackson, L. (2002) ‘Stakeholder analysis for R&D project management’, R&D Management, 32, 4, pp.301–10.

            29. Elmquist, M., Fredberg, T. and Ollila, S. (2009) ‘Exploring the field of open innovation’, European Journal of Innovation Management, 12, pp. 326–45.

            30. Eyal, G. (2019) The Crisis of Expertise, Polity Press, Cambridge.

            31. Fagerberg, J., Mowery, D. and Nelson, R. (2005) The Oxford Handbook of Innovation, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

            32. Freeman, R. (1984) Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach, Pitman Publishing, Marshfield MA.

            33. Gish, L., Clausen, C. and Hansen, C. (2009) ‘A case study of idea work in the early phases of product development’ in Proceedings of International Conference on Engineering Design, Stanford University, Stanford CA, pp.447–58.

            34. Gruber, M., De Leon, N., George, G., and Thompson, P. (2015) ‘Managing by design’, Academy of Management Journal, 58, 1, pp.1–7.

            35. Hafeez, K., Alghatas, F., Foroudi, P., Nguyen, B. and Gupta, S. (2018) ‘Knowledge sharing by entrepreneurs in a virtual community-of-practice (VCoP)‘, Information Technology and People, 32, 2, pp.405–29.

            36. Halse, J., Brandt, E., Clark, B. and Binder, T. (2010) Rehearsing the Future, Danish Design School Press, Copenhagen.

            37. Hansen, S. and Byrge, C. (2009) ‘The creative platform: a new paradigm for teaching creativity’, Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 18, pp.33–50.

            38. Ivory, C. (2004) ‘Client, user and architect interactions in construction: implications for analysing innovative outcomes from user-producer interactions in projects’, Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 16, 4, pp.495–508.

            39. Knapp, J., Kowitz, B. and Zeratsky J. (2016) Sprint: How to Solve Big Problems and Test New Ideas in Just Five Days, Simon & Schuster, New York.

            40. Latour, B. (1987) Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers through Society, Harvard University Press, Cambridge MA.

            41. Leonard-Barton, D. (1995) Wellsprings of Knowledge: Building and Sustaining the Source of Innovation, Harvard Business School Press, Boston.

            42. Lettl, C., Herstatt, C. and Gemuenden, H. (2006) ‘Learning from users for radical innovation’, International Journal of Technology Management, 33, 1, pp.25–45.

            43. Liedtka, J. and Ogilvie, T. (2011) Designing for Growth: A Design Thinking Toolkit for Managers, Columbia University Press, New York.

            44. Lijphart, A. (1971) ‘Comparative politics and the comparative method’, American Political Science Review, 65, 3, pp.682–93.

            45. Lilien, G., Morrison, P., Searls, K., Sonnack, M. and von Hippel, E. (2002) ‘Performance assessment of the lead-user idea generation process for new product development’, Management Science, 48, 8, pp.1042–59.

            46. Luck, R., and McDonnell, J. (2005) ‘Architect and use interaction: the spoken representation of form and functional meaning in early design conversation’. Design Studies, 27, pp.141–166.

            47. Lüthje, C. and Herstatt, C. (2004) ‘The lead user method: an outline of empirical findings and issues for future research’, R&D Management, 34, 5, pp. 553–68.

            48. Meredith, J., Mantel, S. and Shafer, S. (2016) Project Management: A Managerial Approach, John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken NJ.

            49. Miles, M. and Huberman, A. (1994) Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook, Sage, Thousand Oaks CA.

            50. Newcombe, R. (2003) ‘From client to project stakeholder: a stakeholder mapping approach’, Construction Management and Economics, 21, 8, pp.841–8.

            51. Nielsen, J. (1993) Usability Engineering, Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco.

            52. Nonaka, I. and Takeuchi, H. (1995) The Knowledge-Creating Company, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

            53. Olson, M. and Ives, B. (1981) ‘User involvement in system design: an empirical test of alternative approaches’, Information and Management, 4, 4, pp.183–95.

            54. Paludan, T. (2010) ‘Creating spaces of learning’, in Halse, J., Brandt, E., Clark, B. and Binder, T. (eds) Rehearsing the Future, Danish Design School Press, Copenhagen, pp.170–7.

            55. Patton, M. (2015) Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods: Integrating Theory and Practice, Sage, Thousand Oaks CA.

            56. Prahalad, C. and Ramaswamy, V. (2004) The Future of Competition: Co-creating Unique Value with Customers, Harvard Business School Press, Boston.

            57. Ramaswamy, V. and Gouillart, F. (2010a) ‘Building the co-creative enterprise’, Harvard Business Review, 88, 10, pp.100–9.

            58. Ramaswamy, V. and Gouillart, F. (2010b) The Power of Co-Creation: Build it with Them to Boost Growth, Productivity, and Profits, Simon & Schuster, London.

            59. Ramaswamy, V. and Ozcan, K. (2018) ‘What is co-creation? An interactional creation framework and its implications for value creation’, Journal of Business Research, 84, 2, pp.196–205.

            60. Remneland-Wikhamn, B. and Wikhamn, W. (2011) ‘Open innovation climate measure: the introduction of a validated scale’, Creativity and Innovation Management, 20, 4, pp.284–95.

            61. Rill, B. (2016) ‘Resonant co-creation as an approach to strategic innovation’, Journal of Organizational Change Management, 29, 7, pp.1135–52.

            62. Rill, B. and Hämäläinen, M. (2018) The Art of Co-Creation: A Guidebook for Practitioners, Springer, Berlin.

            63. Ritter, T. and Ford, D. (2004) ‘Interactions between suppliers and customers in business markets’ in Håkansson, H., Harrison, D. and Waluszewski, A. (eds) Rethinking Marketing: Developing a New Understanding of Markets, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, UK, pp.99–116.

            64. Roy, S., Singh, G., Hope, M., Nguyen, B., and Harrigan, P. (2019) ‘The rise of smart consumers: role of smart servicescape and smart consumer experience co-creation’, Journal of Marketing Management, 35, 15/16, pp.1480–1513.

            65. Sanders, E. and Stappers, P. (2008) ‘Co-creation and the new landscapes of design’, CoDesign, 4, 1, pp.5–18.

            66. Sanoff, H. (2007) ‘Editorial: Special issue on participatory design’, Design Studies, 28, 3, pp.213–15.

            67. Schuurman, D., De Marez, L. and Ballon, P. (2013) ‘Open innovation processes in living lab innovation systems: insights from the LeYLab’, Technology Innovation Management Review, 3, pp.1128–36.

            68. Schön, D. (1991) The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action, Ashgate, London.

            69. Spinuzzi, C. (2005) ‘The methodology of participatory design’, Technical Communication, 52, 2, pp.2163–74.

            70. Starbuck, W. and Nystrom, P. (1981) ‘Why the world needs organisational design’, Journal of General Management, 6, 3, pp.3–17.

            71. Storvang, P. and Clarke, A. (2014) ‘How to create a space for stakeholders’ involvement in construction', Construction Management and Economics, 32, 12, pp.121166–82.

            72. Storvang, P., Mortensen, B. and Clarke, A. (2018) ‘Using workshops in business research: a framework to diagnose, plan, facilitate and analyze workshops’ in Freytag, P. and Young, L. (eds) Collaborative Research Design: Working with Business for Meaningful Findings, Springer, Berlin, pp.155–74.

            73. Storvang, P., Haug, A., and Nguyen, B. (2020) ‘Stimulating consumer community creation through a co-design approach’, International Journal of Market Research, 62, 2, pp.2176–94.

            74. Sørensen, K.H. and Williams, R. (eds) (2002) Shaping Technology, Guiding Policy: Concepts, Spaces and Tools. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

            75. Thomson, M. and Koskinen, T. (2012) Design for Growth and Prosperity, European Design Leadership Board, Helsinki.

            76. Thyssen, M., Emmitt, S., Bonke, S. and Kirk-Christoffersen, A. (2010) ‘Facilitating client value creation in the conceptual design phase of construction projects: a workshop approach’, Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 6, 1, pp.118–30.

            77. Ward, S. and Chapman, C. (2008) ‘Stakeholder uncertainty management in projects’, Construction Management and Economics, 26, 6, pp.6563–77.

            78. Wikhamn, B. (2013) ‘Two different perspectives on open innovation: libre versus control’, Creativity and Innovation Management, 22, 4, pp.4375–85.

            79. Xie, J., Song, X. and Stringfellow, A. (1998) ‘Interfunctional conflict, conflict resolution styles, and new product success: a four-culture comparison’, Management Science, 44, 12, pp.12192–206.

            80. Yang, J. and Shen, G., Ho, C. and Xue, X. (2011) ‘Stakeholder management in construction: an empirical study to address research gaps in previous studies’, International Journey of Project Management, 29, 7, pp.900–10.


            Comment on this article