Table Of ContentForschungs-/ Entwicklungs- /
Innovations-Management
Hans Dietmar Bürgel (em.) · Diana Grosse
Cornelius Herstatt · Hans Koller · Christian Lüthje
Martin G. Möhrle Hrsg.
Thorsten Pieper
User Innovation
Barriers’ Impact
on User-Developed
Products
An Empirical Investigation
on User Innovation Processes
Forschungs-/Entwicklungs-/
Innovations-Management
Reihe herausgegeben von
Hans Dietmar Bürgel, Stuttgart, Deutschland
Diana Grosse, Freiberg, Deutschland
Cornelius Herstatt, Hamburg, Deutschland
Hans Koller, Hamburg, Deutschland
Christian Lüthje, Hamburg, Deutschland
Martin G. Möhrle, Bremen, Deutschland
Die Reihe stellt aus integrierter Sicht von Betriebswirtschaft und Technik
Arbeitsergebnisse auf den Gebieten Forschung, Entwicklung und Innovation vor.
Die einzelnen Beiträge sollen dem wissenschaftlichen Fortschritt dienen und die
Forderungen der Praxis auf Umsetzbarkeit erfüllen.
Reihe herausgegeben von
Professor Dr. Hans Dietmar Bürgel Professor Dr. Hans Koller
(em.) Universität der Bundeswehr Hamburg
Universität Stuttgart
Professor Dr. Christian Lüthje
Professorin Dr. Diana Grosse vorm. de Technische Universität Hamburg-
Pay Harburg
Technische Universität Bergakademie
Professor Dr. Martin G. Möhrle
Freiberg
Universität Bremen
Professor Dr. Cornelius Herstatt
Technische Universität
Hamburg-Harburg
Weitere Bände in der Reihe http://www.springer.com/series/12195
Thorsten Pieper
User Innovation
Barriers’ Impact
on User-Developed
Products
An Empirical Investigation
on User Innovation Processes
With a foreword by Prof. Dr. Cornelius Herstatt
Thorsten Pieper
TU Hamburg
Hamburg, Germany
Dissertation Technische Universität-Hamburg/2018
Forschungs-/Entwicklungs-/Innovations-Management
ISBN 978-3-658-25505-3 ISBN 978-3-658-25506-0 (eBook)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-25506-0
Library of Congress Control Number: 2019932982
Springer Gabler
© Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2019
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part
of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations,
recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission
or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or
dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt
from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this
book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the
authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained
herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with
regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
This Springer Gabler imprint is published by the registered company Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden
GmbH part of Springer Nature
The registered company address is: Abraham-Lincoln-Str. 46, 65189 Wiesbaden, Germany
Foreword
The dissertation of Thorsten Pieper deals with a topic of business innovation research that is
relevant in both theoretical and practical terms. More precisely, it deals with a special topic of
innovation research, the so-called "user innovations". This research strand is now more than
30 years old and was founded by Prof. Eric von Hippel and his students, among whom I may
count myself. The research was initially - and for many years - concerned with the phenome-
non itself and to fathom it empirically. The central question was whether and in which appli-
cation contexts user innovations play a role. Today there is high agreement that user innova-
tions "happen" in very different application contexts - often in connection with market failures.
Companies understandably try to use the creative and innovative potential of users for their
own product development and at the latest since the intensive use of the internet for market
research purposes, users are actively and passively involved in the innovation work of com-
panies. Modern instruments are "netnography" or "community innovation competitions".
However, companies as well as other innovative organizations (e.g. universities or incubators)
also try to use this potential "off-line", e.g. in connection with Fab Labs or product clinics.
Overall, there is a growing openness for user innovation. In this context the question arises
how users innovate (typically) and in contrast to formal organizations and which difficulties,
obstacles or barriers they have to deal with. It is to be expected that at least individual user
innovators will have comparatively fewer resources or limited access to technical know-how.
If user innovators pursue commercial intentions with their developments, which is more likely
to be the exception, then additional challenges will arise in the approval and marketing of their
products. In addition, there are legal challenges and intellectual property rights of existing
manufacturer products if they are modified, for example, by users. The questions outlined
above in connection with the innovation barriers of user innovators were already addressed a
few years ago by another dissertation at my institute. At that time, this first paper was primarily
devoted to the intellectual property challenges faced by user innovators in connection with the
modification of patented products (dissertation by Viktor Braun).
In this dissertation, Thorsten Pieper takes up the topic of innovation barriers in a neutral way.
The aim of his work is to develop a more differentiated picture and in particular to provide
answers to two complex questions: 1) What role do different barriers to user innovations play
VI Foreword
in the process of these (considered phases: concept development and prototyping)? 2) What
influence do certain characteristics of innovative users have on the identified barriers?
Thorsten Pieper makes his empirical research contribution through two investigations. In the
first study, he examines the influence of innovation barriers and resource restrictions on user
innovation qualitatively (exploratively) - based on Smart Home energy products and solutions.
In his second study, he first develops a research model and examines large-scale quantitative,
explanatory barrier effects as well as accompanying moderator effects, whereby he analyzes
influences of personal characteristics (user innovators) and results (developed innovations)
separately. The latter he examines using the example of Fab Labs at home and abroad using a
whole battery of multivariate methods. Finally, he brings all results together and discusses his
descriptive and explicative findings. The work concludes with implications for research and
practice as well as starting points for further research questions and research directions.
The quality of the research results in connection with the expert interpretation and a precise
presentation confirm the research approach chosen by Thorsten Pieper. For me, his essential
contribution lies not so much in the formation of theory as in the very well-founded expansion
of theory and the processing of a relevant phenomenon. In this respect, Thorsten Pieper does
a very good job both conceptually and methodically and makes a recognizable, scientific con-
tribution.
Altogether, this dissertation is a very recommendable reading for innovation researchers as
well as innovation practitioners.
Prof. Dr. Cornelius Herstatt
Hamburg, December 7th 2018
Preface
The concept of user innovation came up in the 1980s. It stated that not only companies devel-
oped new products but also ordinary people tinkered on products and managed to successfully
invent useful artefacts. However, user innovation itself is older than the research stream ex-
amining this phenomenon of open and user innovation. Users have always been forced to find
creative solutions for their problems when companies were not able to provide specific solu-
tions or even did not exist to produce these solutions desired by the users. Hence, valuable
innovations, ranging from ballpoint pens and coffee filters up to sports cars and complex med-
ical devices, left the users’ forges and became successful on worldwide markets. This work on
user innovation barriers shall not focus on shortcomings in user innovation processes triggered
by the impact of problems and constraints. Rather, this work shall demonstrate the users’ mas-
sive creative potential in circumventing those barriers and developing complex products
providing high user value ratios.
The process of user innovations is considerably similar to the preparation of a dissertation
project. Both, user innovations and dissertation projects start off with vague ideas about what
do develop and how the process should look like. The users or researchers are optimistic at
the beginning and plunge themselves into work. However, when both physically start to de-
velop their concept; to acquire materials or data and try to put everything into a reasonable
framework, first problems arise. Processes become more and more iterative than initially in-
tended and barriers have to be circumvented. Nevertheless, user innovators or researchers do
hardly give up. Both are willing to succeed and in the end, the final outcome proves their skills
and expertise. They were challenged by the barriers along the process but these influences led
to a reliable running product or - in prevalent case - to a satisfactory publication.
Nevertheless, in contrast to many users tinkering on their own and being successful in this
way, a dissertation project will never be successful without the support and guidance of others
if the project has reached a serious deadlock or the researcher needs moral support. In my case,
I was encouraged by many people who supported my work selflessly. I am thankful for the
guidance of Professor Cornelius Herstatt advising my dissertation at the Institute for Technol-
ogy and Innovation Management. He left me the freedom to develop my own ideas and to
follow my own way but provided valuable support whenever necessary. Furthermore, I thank
Professor Carsten Schultz from CAU Kiel to be my second examiner and to constructively
discuss my research especially with regard to conceptual and statistical issues. For chairing
VIII Preface
my dissertation and providing valuable insights on several scientific conferences, I would like
to thank Professor Christoph Ihl from Hamburg University of Technology.
In the scientific environment, the presence of senior researchers, mentors, post-docs and col-
leagues is essential. In many discussions with my mentors Dr. Frank Tietze from the Univer-
sity of Cambridge and Professor Tim Schweisfurth from the University of Southern Denmark,
I was able to learn what research is about, how to further develop my research approach, how
to improve the method of analysis and link my results to theory. At this point, once again,
many thanks to both. I also want to recognize the vice-president of our institute, Dr. Stephan
Buse, for his continuous support in many projects in which we tried to enable co-creation of
user innovators and companies in order to figure out if our research results were resilient in
practice. In particular, I am grateful to the best colleagues I have ever had, especially to
Viktoria Drabe, Moritz Göldner, Jens Lehnen, Sandra-Luisa Moschner, André Schorn and my
office-mate Timo Weyrauch. Without their help, this work would have never been accom-
plished and over the years our professional relationship turned into real friendship. It is also
worth pointing out that all our institute members constitute a positive environment that facili-
tates the research process.
Last, I would like to thank my family and friends for taking me as I am and helping me in
every condition of life. Thank you Ulrike for the wonderful time we spend and for everything
that I cannot express with words. Thanks to my parents Marianne and Carsten for raising me
in a rural area, for the patience they need to get along well with me and for being always ready
to drop everything when help is needed. Thanks to my grandparents Erna and Bernhard as
well as Maria and Wilhelm for teaching me respect for nature and animal life. Finally, thanks
to my sister Andrea, to my sister Christina, who took over the dissertations’ editing, and my
brother Christopher. You are supporting me in any way and situation without expecting any-
thing in return.
I wish the reader an interesting insight into the field of users’ product development and the
possibility to apply my findings in the corporate environment when a new stage of open inno-
vation in product development shall be climbed.
Thorsten Pieper
Hamburg, December 18th 2018
Table of contents
Section A: Focus and scope...................................................................................................... 1
1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Research problem and relevance ............................................................................... 2
1.2 Research questions and research objective ................................................................ 8
1.3 Structure of dissertation ........................................................................................... 10
2 Conceptual foundations of open and user innovation .................................................... 13
2.1 The concept of open innovation .............................................................................. 13
2.2 The concept of lead users ........................................................................................ 16
2.3 User innovation ........................................................................................................ 19
2.3.1 Characteristics of user innovators .................................................................... 21
2.3.2 User innovation process ................................................................................... 24
2.3.3 User innovation product ................................................................................... 27
3 Barriers to user innovation ............................................................................................. 31
3.1 Corporate innovation barriers .................................................................................. 32
3.2 Constraints in creative processes ............................................................................. 35
3.3 Technological barriers ............................................................................................. 37
3.4 Social barriers .......................................................................................................... 39
3.5 Legal barriers ........................................................................................................... 41
3.6 Ownership barriers................................................................................................... 43
3.7 Distinction of barriers and resource constraints ...................................................... 49
4 Summary and research gap ............................................................................................. 53
Section B: Qualitative study – Distinction of barriers and constraints .................................. 57
1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 57
2 Research framework and propositions ........................................................................... 61
3 Methods .......................................................................................................................... 63
