IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/tuhtim/91.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Are patients and relatives the better innovators? The case of medical smartphone applications

Author

Listed:
  • Goeldner, Moritz
  • Herstatt, Cornelius

Abstract

Prior research has shown that users are a valuable resource for identifying new product or service innovations. However, few scholars have analyzed how different user types such as intermediate and end users are interacting along the value chain of an emerging new product and how they contribute to innovation. Further, user innovation success in the market is often unclear, since very few innovations diffuse directly to customers from the user innovators. We analyze different innovative contributions of intermediate and end users that have been sold and evaluated within the healthcare sector. Several studies in the healthcare sector have shown that healthcare professionals are an important source of innovation. Yet, to date, companies and scholars have paid little attention to the end users of medical devices: patients. We focus on the innovative behavior of patients and their relatives, their motivations, and their contributions to improving the quality of their own and ultimately of other patients' therapy. We analyze innovations of producers, healthcare professionals, patients, and relatives in the German, UK, and U.S. markets for medical smartphone apps (Apple App Store) and conduct 16 semi-structured interviews. Our findings show that users develop around 46% of all medical smartphone applications (apps). We analyzed 510,229 user ratings and found that apps designed by patients, relatives, and healthcare professionals are rated significantly better by App Store customers than apps created by professional software companies. Apps developed by patients' relatives achieve significantly more downloads and generate on average three times higher revenues per year. The initial medical smartphone app developments in the early days of the Apple App Store were mainly triggered by healthcare professionals. The interview data shows the extensive medical knowledge of patients and their relatives, particularly those with chronic diseases. The overall findings are in line with a current literature stream that indicates that patients are gaining more influence on their treatment, are better informed, and are taking more actions to increase their quality of life. Commercial healthcare companies should take advantage of this and should consider including patients and relatives into their product development.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:tuhtim:91
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/129698/1/84953464X.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. 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.
    3. Füller, Johann & Schroll, Roland & von Hippel, Eric, 2013. "User generated brands and their contribution to the diffusion of user innovations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(6), pages 1197-1209.
    4. 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.
    5. Budych, Karolina & Helms, Thomas M. & Schultz, Carsten, 2012. "How do patients with rare diseases experience the medical encounter? Exploring role behavior and its impact on patient–physician interaction," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 105(2), pages 154-164.
    6. 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.
    7. Adams, Pamela & Fontana, Roberto & Malerba, Franco, 2013. "The magnitude of innovation by demand in a sectoral system: The role of industrial users in semiconductors," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 1-14.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Bradonjic, Philip & Franke, Nikolaus & Lüthje, Christian, 2019. "Decision-makers’ underestimation of user innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(6), pages 1354-1361.
    2. Lakomaa, Erik & Sanandaji, Tino, 2021. "Exploring collective consumer innovation in health care: Cases and formal modeling," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(8).
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.

    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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. Pollok, Patrick & Amft, André & Diener, Kathleen & Lüttgens, Dirk & Piller, Frank T., 2021. "Knowledge diversity and team creativity: How hobbyists beat professional designers in creating novel board games," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(8).
    4. 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).
    5. 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).
    6. 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.
    7. Globocnik, Dietfried & Faullant, Rita, 2021. "Do lead users cooperate with manufacturers in innovation? Investigating the missing link between lead userness and cooperation initiation with manufacturers," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    8. Bitzer, Jürgen & Geishecker, Ingo, 2010. "Who contributes voluntarily to OSS? An investigation among German IT employees," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 165-172, February.
    9. Franke, Nikolaus & von Hippel, Eric & Schreier, Martin, 2005. "Finding commercially attractive user innovations: A test of lead user theory," Working papers 4536-05, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    10. Habicht, Hagen & Oliveira, Pedro & Shcherbatiuk, Viktoriia, 2012. "User Innovators: When Patients Set Out to Help Themselves and End Up Helping Many," Die Unternehmung - Swiss Journal of Business Research and Practice, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG, vol. 66(3), pages 277-295.
    11. 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).
    12. Letty, Brigid & Shezi, Zanele & Mudhara, Maxwell, 2012. "An exploration of agricultural grassroots innovation in South Africa and implications for innovation indicator development," MERIT Working Papers 2012-023, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    13. Giannis Milolidakis & Demosthenes Akoumianakis & Chris Kimble, 2013. "Digital traces for business intelligence: A case study of mobile telecoms service brands in Greece," Post-Print halshs-00954440, HAL.
    14. Stumpf, Marcus, 2017. "Kundenintegration bei Serviceleistungen: Empirische Analyse mit Empfehlungen für den Einsatz von Service-Communities," PraxisWISSEN Marketing: German Journal of Marketing, AfM – Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Marketing, vol. 2(01/2017), pages 38-51.
    15. de Jong, Jeroen P.J. & von Hippel, Eric, 2009. "Transfers of user process innovations to process equipment producers: A study of Dutch high-tech firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(7), pages 1181-1191, September.
    16. Anavir Shermon & Mahka Moeen, 2022. "Zooming in or zooming out: Entrants' product portfolios in the nascent drone industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(11), pages 2217-2252, November.
    17. Dahlander, Linus & Magnusson, Mats G., 2005. "Relationships between open source software companies and communities: Observations from Nordic firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 481-493, May.
    18. Cerquera Dussán, Daniel & Müller, Bettina, 2009. "Open Source, ICT infrastructure and firm performance," ZEW Discussion Papers 09-089, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    19. Fiedler, Jakob & Schorn, André & Herstatt, Cornelius, 2023. "The influence of risk classification and community affiliation on the acceptance of user-innovated medical devices," Working Papers 115, Hamburg University of Technology (TUHH), Institute for Technology and Innovation Management.
    20. Sheen S. Levine & Michael J. Prietula, 2014. "Open Collaboration for Innovation: Principles and Performance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(5), pages 1414-1433, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    user innovation; patient; relative; healthcare professional; m-health; medical; smartphone applications; app; apps;
    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:91. 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.