Towards Patients as Innovators: Open Innovation in Health Care

  • Christoph W. KuenneEmail author
  • Kathrin M. Moeslein
  • John Bessant
Conference paper


One of the recent developments in the health care sector has been the use of Web 2.0-based technology. This is promising for two reasons. Firstly, the Web 2.0 provides features that help to give patients an active voice. Secondly, patients obtain easier access to health-related information and gain a better understanding of their health status. This chapter focuses on patients as innovators and takes a case-based approach to explore an open innovation perspective on Health 2.0. It derives a taxonomy of real-world platforms in Health 2.0 settings and presents experience from a large-scale open innovation pilot.


Open Innovation Radical Innovation Health Care Sector Personal Health Record Online Platform 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



This research was partially supported by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (project EIVE, 01FG09006). The sponsor had no role in the study design, the collection, analysis and interpretation of data, the writing of the report, or the submission of the paper for publication.


  1. Bessant J, Kuenne CW, Moeslein KM (2012) Opening up healthcare innovation: innovation solutions for a 21st century healthcare system. Advanced Institute of Management Research, LondonGoogle Scholar
  2. Bullinger AC, Rass M, Adamczyk S, Moeslein KM, Sohn S (2012) Open innovation in health care: analysis of an open health platform. Health Policy 105(2–3):165–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chesbrough HW (2003) Open innovation: the new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Harvard Business School Press, BostonGoogle Scholar
  4. Christensen C, Grossman JH, Hwang J (2009) The innovator’s prescription: a disruptive solution for health care. McGraw-Hill, New York, 496 ppGoogle Scholar
  5. Ettlie J (1999) Managing innovation. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  6. Eysenbach G (2008) Medicine 2.0: social networking, collaboration, participation, apomediation, and openness. J Med Internet Res 10(3):e22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Foster R, Kaplan S (2001) Creative destruction: why companies that are built to last underperform the market and how to successfully transform them. Currency/Doubleday, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  8. Francis D, Bessant J (2005) Targeting innovation and implications for capability development. Technovation 25(3):171–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Garcia R, Calantone R (2002) A critical look at technological innovation typology and innovativeness terminology: a literature review. J Prod Innov Manage 19(2):110–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hughes B, Joshi I, Wareham J (2008) Health 2.0 and Medicine 2.0: tensions and controversies in the field. J Med Internet Res 10(3):e23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kuenne CW, Rass M, Adamczyk S, Bullinger AC, Moeslein KM (2011) Patients as innovators: an open innovation perspective on health 2.0. In: Proceedings of world conference on mass customization, personalization, and co-creation 2011, San Francisco, CAGoogle Scholar
  12. Kummervold PE, Chronaki CE, Lausen B, Prokosch H-U, Rasmussen J, Santana S et al (2008) eHealth trends in Europe 2005–2007: a population-based survey. J Med Internet Res 10(4):e42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Lettl C, Herstatt C, Gemuenden HG (2006) Users´ contributions to radical innovation: evidence from four cases in the field of medical equipment technology. R&D Manage 36(3):251–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Musser J, O’Reilly T (2007) Web 2.0 principles and best practices. O’Reilly Media, SebastopolGoogle Scholar
  15. Neyer AK, Bullinger AC, Moeslein KM (2009) Integrating inside and outside innovators: a sociotechnical systems perspective. R&D Manage 39(4):410–419CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. OECD (2007) Participative web: user-created content. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, ParisGoogle Scholar
  17. Oh H, Rizo C, Enkin M, Jadad A (2005) What is eHealth: a systematic review of published definitions. J Med Internet Res 7(1):e1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. O’Reilly T (2005) What is web 2.0: design patterns and business models for the next generation of software. Social Science Research Network working paper series. SSRNGoogle Scholar
  19. Piller FT, Walcher D (2006) Toolkits for idea competitions: a novel method to integrate users in new product development. R&D Manage 36(3):307–318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Randeree E (2009) Exploring technology impacts of Healthcare 2.0 initiatives. Telemed J e-Health 15(3):255–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Schepers J, Schnell R, Vroom P (1999) From idea to business – how Siemens bridges the innovation gap. Res Technol Manage 42(3):26–31Google Scholar
  22. Tidd J, Bessant J, Pavitt K (2005) Managing innovation: integrating technological, market and organizational change. Science and technology, 3rd edn. Wiley, ChichesterGoogle Scholar
  23. Van De Belt TH, Engelen LJ, Berben SA, Schoonhoven L (2010) Definition of Health 2.0 and Medicine 2.0: a systematic review. J Med Internet Res 12(2):e18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Von Hippel E (1988) The sources of innovation. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  25. Von Hippel E (2005) Democratizing innovation. MIT Press, BostonGoogle Scholar
  26. Wanless D (2002) Securing our future: taking a long-term view. HM Treasury, LondonGoogle Scholar
  27. Yin RK (2003) Case study research design and methods, 3rd edn. Sage Publications, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer India 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christoph W. Kuenne
    • 1
    Email author
  • Kathrin M. Moeslein
    • 1
    • 2
  • John Bessant
    • 3
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Information SystemsUniversity of Erlangen-NurembergNurembergGermany
  2. 2.HHL – Leipzig Graduate School of ManagementLeipzigGermany
  3. 3.University of Exeter Business SchoolExeterUK

Personalised recommendations