<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>EconStor Community: Institut für Technologie- und Innovationsmanagement (TIM), Technische Universität Hamburg-Harburg</title>
    <link>http://hdl.handle.net/10419/55361</link>
    <description>Hamburg University of Technology (TUHH), Institute for Technology and Innovation Management</description>
    <textInput>
      <title>The Community's search engine</title>
      <description>Search the Channel</description>
      <name>search</name>
      <link>http://www.econstor.eu/simple-search</link>
    </textInput>
    <item>
      <title>To own or not to own: How ownership affects user innovation - An empirical study in the German rowing community</title>
      <link>http://hdl.handle.net/10419/68262</link>
      <description>Title: To own or not to own: How ownership affects user innovation - An empirical study in the German rowing community
&lt;br/&gt;
&lt;br/&gt;Authors: Tietze, Frank; Pieper, Thorsten; Herstatt, Cornelius
&lt;br/&gt;
&lt;br/&gt;Abstract: Prior research on user innovation has concentrated on markets in which products (e.g., mountain bikes, kitesurfing equipment, tools, etc.) are typically purchased by those users who modify them. However, in numerous markets, this is not the case, for example, those in which equipment is rented. Moreover, firms increasingly servitize, selling functionality instead of products. Thus, product ownership is being transferred to users less and less. Instead of purchasing products, users increasingly rent or lease equipment. Consequently, our research investigates the impact of product ownership on user innovation behavior. We question whether absent ownership is an innovation barrier, negatively impacting users' propensity to innovate. This should be particularly relevant to firms that collaborate with users, scouting for their ideas. This study was conducted in the German rowing community. In contrast with previously studied sports markets, equipment ownership in rowing often remains with sport clubs and not with individual users. Following a pre-study, we distributed a survey to the members of 410 clubs enlisted in the German Rowing Federation's roster. Our approach yielded 743 responses. We present results from multivariate ordinal and logistic regressions for two dependent variables (idea generation and realized ideas), differentiating between three ownership types (private, non-private with dedicated use, and non-private with shared use). Our results reveal that private ownership has significant positive effects on user innovation behavior. Users, who own their equipment develop significantly more innovative ideas and have a significantly higher probability to realize ideas than users who use equipment that is owned by a third party. We find that private ownership positively moderates use experience's impact on the development and realization of ideas. The results imply that manufacturers should be aware of the effect that ownership could have, particularly when offering services or in situations where ownership rights are not transferred to users (e.g., leasing models). We discuss measures to remedy the negative impact of absent ownership, such as equipment sponsorships complemented by specific use contracts, experiment labs, and insurances.</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 29 Oct 2012 22:58:59 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Open global innovation networks as enablers of frugal innovation: propositions based on evidence from India</title>
      <link>http://hdl.handle.net/10419/68261</link>
      <description>Title: Open global innovation networks as enablers of frugal innovation: propositions based on evidence from India
&lt;br/&gt;
&lt;br/&gt;Authors: Tiwari, Rajnish; Herstatt, Cornelius
&lt;br/&gt;
&lt;br/&gt;Abstract: Recent years have seen the emergence of low-cost innovations targeted at economically weaker sections of the society, seeking to align business with social welfare. In many instances, results on the ground have been, however, rather sobering as firms have generally (probably justifiably) worried that 'good quality, low price' products may cannibalize into their regular business. At the same time those very customers that were intended to benefit from the new approach have tended to shy away fearing low quality and social stigma of using cheap products. Using multiple case studies of successful affordability-driven innovations ('frugal innovations') from India we investigate how firms can effectively reduce market and technology uncertainty of product innovations targeted at price-sensitive customers. The key criteria to success seem to lie in reducing the overall cost of ownership and enhancing customer perception of quality and image. The case studies reveal that affordability-driven innovations are especially successful when firms seek recourse to open global innovation networks (OGINs) for collaborative development in all phases of the innovation value chain.</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 29 Oct 2011 22:58:59 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Consumer innovation in the poor versus rich world: Some differences and similarities</title>
      <link>http://hdl.handle.net/10419/68260</link>
      <description>Title: Consumer innovation in the poor versus rich world: Some differences and similarities
&lt;br/&gt;
&lt;br/&gt;Authors: Praceus, Sarah; Herstatt, Cornelius
&lt;br/&gt;
&lt;br/&gt;Abstract: Innovative, distinct products and no cheaper copies of the rich world are essential in order to succeed at the Base of the Pyramid (BoP). However, this type of innovation requires more, in-depth information on the BoP and solution spaces, which are both difficult to access. Literature proposes to generate innovations bottom up through user involvement but remains silent on how to identify and integrate BoP consumers into the innovation process. One obvious solution is to connect up with and cooperate with innovating consumers of the BoP. However, this raises the questions whether 1) user innovation exists at the BoP at what levels of quality and 2) how firms can support the innovators to implement them into real world solutions. In this paper we specifically address the first question and analyze patterns and characteristics of a large sample of innovations developed by people living at the Indian BoP collected by the Indian National Innovation Foundation (NIF). We compare these innovations to consumer innovations in the developed world and examine effects of demographic, knowledge and context factors on innovation activity and the outcome. We find similarities with consumer innovation in the developed world and at the same time adaptations to the BoP context, e.g. fulfillment of rather basic necessities than hobby-related needs. Innovation quality is mostly driven by the innovator's knowledge and market recognition is highest for creative innovations developed for others. The paper further shows that consumer innovations are a good starting point for firms seeking solutions for BoP markets. Product needs can be systematically deducted and provide insights on how to identify promising consumer innovators at the BoP. Finally, this research contributes to better understand user innovation behavior in a specific context and by that enriches innovation research.</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 29 Oct 2011 22:58:59 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>To own or not to own: How ownership affects user innovation - An empirical study in the German rowing community</title>
      <link>http://hdl.handle.net/10419/68262</link>
      <description>Title: To own or not to own: How ownership affects user innovation - An empirical study in the German rowing community
&lt;br/&gt;
&lt;br/&gt;Authors: Tietze, Frank; Pieper, Thorsten; Herstatt, Cornelius
&lt;br/&gt;
&lt;br/&gt;Abstract: Prior research on user innovation has concentrated on markets in which products (e.g., mountain bikes, kitesurfing equipment, tools, etc.) are typically purchased by those users who modify them. However, in numerous markets, this is not the case, for example, those in which equipment is rented. Moreover, firms increasingly servitize, selling functionality instead of products. Thus, product ownership is being transferred to users less and less. Instead of purchasing products, users increasingly rent or lease equipment. Consequently, our research investigates the impact of product ownership on user innovation behavior. We question whether absent ownership is an innovation barrier, negatively impacting users' propensity to innovate. This should be particularly relevant to firms that collaborate with users, scouting for their ideas. This study was conducted in the German rowing community. In contrast with previously studied sports markets, equipment ownership in rowing often remains with sport clubs and not with individual users. Following a pre-study, we distributed a survey to the members of 410 clubs enlisted in the German Rowing Federation's roster. Our approach yielded 743 responses. We present results from multivariate ordinal and logistic regressions for two dependent variables (idea generation and realized ideas), differentiating between three ownership types (private, non-private with dedicated use, and non-private with shared use). Our results reveal that private ownership has significant positive effects on user innovation behavior. Users, who own their equipment develop significantly more innovative ideas and have a significantly higher probability to realize ideas than users who use equipment that is owned by a third party. We find that private ownership positively moderates use experience's impact on the development and realization of ideas. The results imply that manufacturers should be aware of the effect that ownership could have, particularly when offering services or in situations where ownership rights are not transferred to users (e.g., leasing models). We discuss measures to remedy the negative impact of absent ownership, such as equipment sponsorships complemented by specific use contracts, experiment labs, and insurances.</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 29 Oct 2012 22:58:59 GMT</pubDate>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

