IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/tuhtim/108.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

User entrepreneurs for social innovation: The case of patients and caregivers as developers of tangible medical devices

Author

Listed:
  • Göldner, Moritz
  • Herstatt, Cornelius
  • Canhão, Helena
  • Oliveira, Pedro

Abstract

Prior research has shown that some patients and caregivers such as relatives are innovating in relation to their unmet medical needs. However, there is little evidence whether and how these ideas are later implemented into market-ready solutions and subsequently commercialized. We analyze cases of patients and their caregivers becoming user entrepreneurs - persons who develop and market medical devices according to their own and/or their relatives' needs. We apply the framework of opportunity recognition and exploitation and conduct 14 case studies with medical device developers who have successfully brought their product to market. Our findings show that these innovation opportunities were mostly recognized during time-consuming and exhausting daily routines when no suitable medical device or other solutions were present. In 12 cases, the inventor founded a company to commercialize a product; in the remaining two cases, the idea was licensed after IP was secured. In all cases, the innovation had significant impacts on the quality of lives of the patients and, in case of caregivers, on both the patients and relatives. Since technical knowledge was not present in most cases, knowledgable friends and relatives were consulted and often integrated into the product development. The most prevalent motivation for further development and diffusion turned out to be the aspiration to validate the product idea and to deliver the benefits to others with the same ailment. This finding on innovation's social component complements current research on lead-users, as the solution of one's own problem was previously regarded as the key motivation. One major constraint to diffusing a medical device are regulations in the healthcare sector. Ten of 14 products in our sample were approved medical devices, with five classified as a higher-risk products and five as lower-risk products. We observe that patients and caregivers who recognize and exploit their ideas in the medical devices market did so despite particularly high market entry barriers in this sector. Few patients and caregivers were capable to bring even higher-risk medical devices to the market. This is unsurprising, because neither patients nor cargivers are experienced or trained to go through these time-consuming, demanding, and sometimes costly procedures. Healthcare companies should establish measures to support innovative patients and to systematically integrate them into their innovation processes.

Suggested Citation

  • Göldner, Moritz & Herstatt, Cornelius & Canhão, Helena & Oliveira, Pedro, 2019. "User entrepreneurs for social innovation: The case of patients and caregivers as developers of tangible medical devices," Working Papers 108, Hamburg University of Technology (TUHH), Institute for Technology and Innovation Management.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:tuhtim:108
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/204560/1/1678127752.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Franke, Nikolaus & Hippel, Eric von, 2003. "Satisfying heterogeneous user needs via innovation toolkits: the case of Apache security software," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(7), pages 1199-1215, July.
    2. Scott Morton, Fiona M & Podolny, Joel M, 2002. "Love or Money? The Effects of Owner Motivation in the California Wine Industry," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(4), pages 431-456, December.
    3. Eric von Hippel, 1986. "Lead Users: A Source of Novel Product Concepts," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(7), pages 791-805, July.
    4. Luthje, Christian & Herstatt, Cornelius & von Hippel, Eric, 2005. "User-innovators and "local" information: The case of mountain biking," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 951-965, August.
    5. Howells, Jeremy, 2006. "Intermediation and the role of intermediaries in innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 715-728, June.
    6. Anthony Onwuegbuzie & Nancy Leech, 2007. "A Call for Qualitative Power Analyses," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 41(1), pages 105-121, February.
    7. Dev K. Dutta & Mary M. Crossan, 2005. "The Nature of Entrepreneurial Opportunities: Understanding the Process Using the 4I Organizational Learning Framework," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 29(4), pages 425-449, July.
    8. Aaron K. Chatterji, 2009. "Spawned with a silver spoon? Entrepreneurial performance and innovation in the medical device industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(2), pages 185-206, February.
    9. Hienerth, Christoph & von Hippel, Eric & Berg Jensen, Morten, 2014. "User community vs. producer innovation development efficiency: A first empirical study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 190-201.
    10. G. M.P. Swann, 2009. "The Economics of Innovation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13211.
    11. Alfonso Gambardella & Christina Raasch & Eric von Hippel, 2017. "The User Innovation Paradigm: Impacts on Markets and Welfare," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(5), pages 1450-1468, May.
    12. Schweisfurth, Tim G. & Raasch, Christina, 2018. "Absorptive capacity for need knowledge: Antecedents and effects for employee innovativeness," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(4), pages 687-699.
    13. Schweisfurth, Tim G., 2017. "Comparing internal and external lead users as sources of innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 238-248.
    14. Cajaiba-Santana, Giovany, 2014. "Social innovation: Moving the field forward. A conceptual framework," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 42-51.
    15. Baldwin, Carliss & Hienerth, Christoph & von Hippel, Eric, 2006. "How user innovations become commercial products: A theoretical investigation and case study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(9), pages 1291-1313, November.
    16. Paul D Ellis, 2011. "Social ties and international entrepreneurship: Opportunities and constraints affecting firm internationalization," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 42(1), pages 99-127, January.
    17. Fiona M. Scott Morton & Joel M. Podolny, 2002. "Love or Money? The Effects of Owner Motivation in the California Wine Industry," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(4), pages 431-456, December.
    18. Goeldner, Moritz & Herstatt, Cornelius, 2016. "Are patients and relatives the better innovators? The case of medical smartphone applications," Working Papers 91, Hamburg University of Technology (TUHH), Institute for Technology and Innovation Management.
    19. Geoff Mulgan, 2006. "The Process of Social Innovation," Innovations: Technology, Governance, Globalization, MIT Press, vol. 1(2), pages 145-162, April.
    20. Henkel, Joachim, 2006. "Selective revealing in open innovation processes: The case of embedded Linux," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 953-969, September.
    21. Viktor Braun & Cornelius Herstatt, 2008. "The Freedom-Fighters: How Incumbent Corporations Are Attempting To Control User-Innovation," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 12(03), pages 543-572.
    22. Abdallah S. Daar & Peter A. Singer & Deepa Leah Persad & Stig K. Pramming & David R. Matthews & Robert Beaglehole & Alan Bernstein & Leszek K. Borysiewicz & Stephen Colagiuri & Nirmal Ganguly & Roger , 2007. "Grand challenges in chronic non-communicable diseases," Nature, Nature, vol. 450(7169), pages 494-496, November.
    23. Pol, Eduardo & Ville, Simon, 2009. "Social innovation: Buzz word or enduring term?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 878-885, December.
    24. Eric von Hippel, 1994. ""Sticky Information" and the Locus of Problem Solving: Implications for Innovation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 40(4), pages 429-439, April.
    25. Haefliger, Stefan & Jäger, Peter & von Krogh, Georg, 2010. "Under the radar: Industry entry by user entrepreneurs," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(9), pages 1198-1213, November.
    26. Jong, Jeroen de & Gillert, Lennart & Stock, Ruth, 2018. "First Adoption of Consumer Innovations: Exploring Market Failure and Alleviating Factors," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 110834, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    27. Goeldner, Moritz & Kruse, Daniel J. & Herstatt, Cornelius, 2017. "Lead user method vs. innovation contest: An empirical comparison of two open innovation methodologies for identifying social innovation for flood Resilience in Indonesia," Working Papers 101, Hamburg University of Technology (TUHH), Institute for Technology and Innovation Management.
    28. de Jong, Jeroen P.J. & Gillert, Nils Lennart & Stock, Ruth M., 2018. "First adoption of consumer innovations: Exploring market failure and alleviating factors," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 487-497.
    29. Choi, Young Rok & Lévesque, Moren & Shepherd, Dean A., 2008. "When should entrepreneurs expedite or delay opportunity exploitation?," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 333-355, May.
    30. Sonali K. Shah & Kevin G. Corley, 2006. "Building Better Theory by Bridging the Quantitative–Qualitative Divide," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(8), pages 1821-1835, December.
    31. Michael Gibbert & Winfried Ruigrok & Barbara Wicki, 2008. "What passes as a rigorous case study?," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(13), pages 1465-1474, December.
    32. Svensson, Peter O. & Hartmann, Rasmus Koss, 2018. "Policies to promote user innovation: Makerspaces and clinician innovation in Swedish hospitals," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 277-288.
    33. Oliveira, Pedro & von Hippel, Eric, 2011. "Users as service innovators: The case of banking services," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(6), pages 806-818, July.
    34. van der Have, Robert P. & Rubalcaba, Luis, 2016. "Social innovation research: An emerging area of innovation studies?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(9), pages 1923-1935.
    35. Yaqub, Ohid, 2018. "Serendipity: Towards a taxonomy and a theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 169-179.
    36. Aaron K. Chatterji & Kira Fabrizio, 2012. "How Do Product Users Influence Corporate Invention?," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(4), pages 971-987, August.
    37. Scott Shane, 2000. "Prior Knowledge and the Discovery of Entrepreneurial Opportunities," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 11(4), pages 448-469, August.
    38. Peredo, Ana María & McLean, Murdith, 2006. "Social entrepreneurship: A critical review of the concept," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 56-65, February.
    39. Franke, Nikolaus & Shah, Sonali, 2003. "How communities support innovative activities: an exploration of assistance and sharing among end-users," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 157-178, January.
    40. Edwards-Schachter,Mónica & Wallace,Matthew, 2015. "âShaken, but not stirredâ: six decades defining social innovation," INGENIO (CSIC-UPV) Working Paper Series 201504, INGENIO (CSIC-UPV).
    41. Bullinger, Angelika C. & Rass, Matthias & Adamczyk, Sabrina & Moeslein, Kathrin M. & Sohn, Stefan, 2012. "Open innovation in health care: Analysis of an open health platform," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 105(2), pages 165-175.
    42. Nerine Mary George & Vinit Parida & Tom Lahti & Joakim Wincent, 2016. "A systematic literature review of entrepreneurial opportunity recognition: insights on influencing factors," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 12(2), pages 309-350, June.
    43. Schweisfurth, Tim G. & Raasch, Christina, 2018. "Absorptive Capacity for Need Knowledge: Antecedents and Effects for Employee Innovativeness," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 47(4), pages 687-699.
    44. Lakhani, Karim R. & von Hippel, Eric, 2003. "How open source software works: "free" user-to-user assistance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 923-943, June.
    45. Riggs, William & von Hippel, Eric, 1994. "Incentives to innovate and the sources of innovation: the case of scientific instruments," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(4), pages 459-469, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Preißner, Stephanie & Raasch, Christina & Schweisfurth, Tim, 2017. "Is necessity the mother of disruption?," Kiel Working Papers 2097, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    2. de Jong, Jeroen P.J. & Ben-Menahem, Shiko M. & Franke, Nikolaus & Füller, Johann & von Krogh, Georg, 2021. "Treading new ground in household sector innovation research: Scope, emergence, business implications, and diffusion," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(8).
    3. Maria Roszkowska-Menkes, 2017. "User Innovation: State of the Art and Perspectives for Future Research," Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation, Fundacja Upowszechniająca Wiedzę i Naukę "Cognitione", vol. 13(2), pages 127-154.
    4. Bradonjic, Philip & Franke, Nikolaus & Lüthje, Christian, 2019. "Decision-makers’ underestimation of user innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(6), pages 1354-1361.
    5. Pamela Adams & Roberto Fontana & Franco Malerba, 2016. "User-Industry Spinouts: Downstream Industry Knowledge as a Source of New Firm Entry and Survival," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(1), pages 18-35, February.
    6. Kinsuk Mani Sinha & Pamela Adams & Franco Malerba, 2015. "Intermediate Users as a Source of Innovation in a Development Context: Empirical Evidence and Theory," Globelics Working Paper Series 2015-14, Globelics - Global Network for Economics of Learning, Innovation, and Competence Building Systems, Aalborg University, Department of Business and Management.
    7. Wu, Chia-huei & de Jong, Jeroen P.J. & Raasch, Christina & Poldervaart, Sabrine, 2020. "Work process-related lead userness as an antecedent of innovative behavior and user innovation in organizations," Open Access Publications from Kiel Institute for the World Economy 228657, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    8. Wu, Chia-huei & de Jong, Jeroen P.J. & Raasch, Christina & Poldervaart, Sabrine, 2020. "Work process-related lead userness as an antecedent of innovative behavior and user innovation in organizations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(6).
    9. Pieper, Thorsten & Herstatt, Cornelius, 2018. "User innovation barriers and their impact on user-developed products," Working Papers 106, Hamburg University of Technology (TUHH), Institute for Technology and Innovation Management.
    10. van der Boor, Paul & Oliveira, Pedro & Veloso, Francisco, 2014. "Users as innovators in developing countries: The global sources of innovation and diffusion in mobile banking services," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(9), pages 1594-1607.
    11. Svensson, Peter O. & Hartmann, Rasmus Koss, 2018. "Policies to promote user innovation: Makerspaces and clinician innovation in Swedish hospitals," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 277-288.
    12. Block, Jörn H. & Henkel, Joachim & Schweisfurth, Tim G. & Stiegler, Annika, 2016. "Commercializing user innovations by vertical diversification: The user–manufacturer innovator," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 244-259.
    13. Resch, Christian & Kock, Alexander, 2021. "The influence of information depth and information breadth on brokers’ idea newness in online maker communities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(8).
    14. Fursov, Konstantin & Linton, Jonathan, 2022. "Social innovation: Integrating product and user innovation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    15. Agarwal, Rajshree & Shah, Sonali K., 2014. "Knowledge sources of entrepreneurship: Firm formation by academic, user and employee innovators," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(7), pages 1109-1133.
    16. Schweisfurth, Tim G. & Raasch, Christina, 2015. "Embedded lead users—The benefits of employing users for corporate innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 168-180.
    17. Sheen S. Levine & Michael J. Prietula, 2014. "Open Collaboration for Innovation: Principles and Performance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(5), pages 1414-1433, October.
    18. Adrián Kovács & Bart Looy & Bruno Cassiman, 2015. "Exploring the scope of open innovation: a bibliometric review of a decade of research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(3), pages 951-983, September.
    19. Alexandre Trigo, 2016. "Innovation in the Era of Experience: The Changing Role of Users in Healthcare Innovation," Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation, Fundacja Upowszechniająca Wiedzę i Naukę "Cognitione", vol. 12(2), pages 29-51.
    20. Jeppesen, Lars Bo, 2021. "Social movements and free innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(6).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    user innovation; social innovation; user entrepreneurship; patient; caregiver; medical device; opportunity recognition; opportunity exploitation;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:tuhtim:108. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ittuhde.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.