The Palgrave Encyclopedia of Strategic Management

Living Edition
| Editors: Mie Augier, David J. Teece

User Innovation

Living reference work entry
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-349-94848-2_380-1
How to cite

Abstract

Almost 30 years ago, researchers began a systematic study of innovation by end users and user firms. At that time, the phenomenon was generally regarded as a minor oddity. Today, it is clear that innovation by users, generally openly shared, is a very powerful and general phenomenon. It is rapidly growing in extent due to continuing advances in computing and communication technologies that are increasing the capabilities of user–innovators. It is also becoming both an important rival to and an important feedstock for producer-centred innovation in many fields. In this entry, I provide an overview of what the international research community now understands about this phenomenon.

Keywords

Intellectual Property Open Source Software Agency Cost Individual User Custom Producer 
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 is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Allen, R.C. 1983. Collective invention. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 4: 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baldwin, C., C. Hienerth, and E. von Hippel. 2006. How user innovations become commercial products: A theoretical investigation and case study. Research Policy 35: 1291–1313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. De Jong, J.P.J., and E. von Hippel. 2009. Transfer of user process innovations to process equipment producers: A study of Dutch high-tech firms. Research Policy 38: 1181–1191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Enos, J.L. 1962. Petroleum progress and profits: A history of process innovation. Boston: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  5. Franke, N., and S. Shah. 2003. How communities support innovative activities: An exploration of assistance and sharing among end-users. Research Policy 32: 157–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Franke, N., and E. von Hippel. 2003. Satisfying heterogeneous user needs via innovation toolkits: The case of apache security software. Research Policy 32: 1199–1215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Freeman, C. 1968. Chemical process plant: Innovation and the world market. National Institute Economic Review 45: 29–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gault, F., and E. von Hippel. 2009. The prevalence of user innovation and free innovation transfers: Implications for statistical indicators and innovation policy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Sloan School of Management. Working paper No. 4722-09 (January).Google Scholar
  9. Harhoff, D., J. Henkel, and E. von Hippel. 2003. Profiting from voluntary information spillovers: How users benefit by freely revealing their innovations. Research Policy 32: 1753–1769.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Henkel, J. 2006. Selective revealing in open innovation processes: The case of embedded Linux. Research Policy 35: 953–969.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Henkel, J., and E. von Hippel. 2005. Welfare implications of user innovation. Journal of Technology Transfer 30: 73–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Herstatt, C., and E. von Hippel. 1992. From experience: Developing new product concepts via the lead user method: A case study in a ‘low tech’ field. Journal of Product Innovation Management 9: 213–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hienerth, C. 2006. The commercialization of user innovations: The development of the rodeo kayak industry. R&D Management 36: 273–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Jeppesen, L. B. 2004. Profiting from Innovative User Communities: How Firms Organize the Production of User Modifications in the Computer Games Industry. Department of Industrial Economics and Strategy, Copenhagen Business School, Working paper No. WP-04.Google Scholar
  15. Lakhani, K., and B. Wolf. 2005. Why hackers do what they do: Understanding motivation and effort in free/open source software projects. In Perspectives on free and open source software, ed. J. Feller, B. Fitzgerald, S.A. Hissam, and K.R. Lakhani. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  16. Lettl, C., C. Herstatt, and H. Gemünden. 2005. The entrepreneurial role of innovative users. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing 20: 339–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lilien, G.L., P.D. Morrison, K. Searls, M. Sonnack, and E. von Hippel. 2002. Performance assessment of the lead user idea generation process. Management Science 48: 1042–1059.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lim, K. 2000. The many faces of absorptive capacity: Spillovers of copper interconnect technology for semiconductor chips. Cambridge, MA: MIT Sloan School of Management. Working paper No. 4110.Google Scholar
  19. Morrison, P.D., J.H. Roberts, and E. von Hippel. 2000. Determinants of user innovation and innovation sharing in a local market. Management Science 46: 1513–1527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Morrison, P.D., J.H. Roberts, and D. Midgley. 2004. The nature of lead users and measurement of leading edge status. Research Policy 33: 351–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Nuvolari, A. 2004. Collective invention during the British industrial revolution: The case of the Cornish pumping engine. Cambridge Journal of Economics 28: 347–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Raasch C, and von Hippel E. 2012. Modeling interactions between the user and producer innovation paradigms: User-contested and user-complemented markets for innovation. Working paper, MIT Sloan School of Management. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2079763. Accessed 12 June 2013.
  23. Riggs, W., and E. von Hippel. 1994. The impact of scientific and commercial values on the sources of scientific instrument innovation. Research Policy 23: 459–469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Rosenberg, N. 1976. Perspectives on technology. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Schumpeter, J.A. 1934. The theory of economic development. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Shah, S. 2000. Sources and patterns of innovation in a consumer products field: Innovations in sporting equipment. Cambridge, MA: MIT Sloan School of Management. Working paper No. 4105.Google Scholar
  27. Shah, S.K., and M. Tripsas. 2007. The accidental entrepreneur: The emergent and collective process of user entrepreneurship. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal 1: 123–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Shah, S., S.W. Sheryl, and E.J. Reedy. 2012. The Kauffman firm survey: Who are user entrepreneurs? Findings on innovation, founder characteristics, and firm characteristics. Kansas City: Kauffman Foundation.Google Scholar
  29. Smith, A. 1776. An inquiry into the nature and causes of wealth nations. New York: Modern Library.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Urban, G.L., and E. von Hippel. 1988. Lead user analyses for the development of new industrial products. Management Science 34: 569–582.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Von Hippel, E. 1988. The source of innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Von Hippel, E. 1994. Sticky information and the locus of problem solving: Implications for innovation. Management Science 40: 429–439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Von Hippel, E. 2005. Democratizing innovation. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  34. Von Hippel, E., and S.N. Finkelstein. 1979. Analysis of innovation in automated clinical chemistry analyzers. Science & Public Policy 6: 24–37.Google Scholar
  35. Von Hippel, E., and R. Katz. 2002. Shifting innovation to users via toolkits. Management Science 48: 821–833.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Von Hippel, E., and G. von Krogh. 2003. Open source software and the ‘private-collective’ innovation model: Issues for organization science. Organization Science 14: 209–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.MIT Sloan School of ManagementBostonUSA