IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hig/wpaper/wpbrp08sti2013.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

User innovation - empirical evidence from Russia

Author

Listed:
  • Anna Zaytseva

    (Centre d'etudes de la vie politique, Universite Libre de Bruxelles)

  • Olga Shuvalova

    (Research Fellow, Institute for Statistical Studies and Economics of Knowledge, Laboratory for Economics of Innovation)

  • Dirk Meissner

    (Deputy Head, Laboratory for Science and Technology Studies, Institute for Statistical Studies and Economics of Knowledge, National Research University Higher School of Economics)

Abstract

Innovations are commonly seen as resulting from the commercialization of new ideas and technological goods by dedicated organizations, especially firms. This conception is reflected in a producer-oriented approach to science, technology and innovation policy-making (STI). However a new understanding of the role of users within innovation processes is gradually taking shape, with profound policy implications. User innovations are often not based on technological improvement or R&D and remain largely under-estimated. Although there are many case studies of user innovators at the industry level, the role of users is not captured by general statistics on innovation. Up to now the only exception is the empirical evidence-based study of user innovation carried out in the UK in 2009. Recently it was complemented by empirical data from the USA and Japan. The present article aims to contribute to closing the gap of empirical data on user engagement into innovation activities at cross-country level. The analysis is based on the results from a national survey carried out in Russia in 2011. The findings contribute to the better understanding of user innovators profile and of the factors which underpin user innovator activities in the context of emerging economies. The article is organized as follows. The first section reviews the relevant literature on the user innovation concept and the main features of user innovations as compared to producer-generated innovations, as well as on the measurement of user innovators. The second section presents the research methodology and the main empirical results. Finally, the paper discusses some of main analytical and policy implications of the empirical findings

Suggested Citation

  • Anna Zaytseva & Olga Shuvalova & Dirk Meissner, 2013. "User innovation - empirical evidence from Russia," HSE Working papers WP BRP 08/STI/2013, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:hig:wpaper:wpbrp08sti2013
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.hse.ru/data/2013/04/08/1294510119/08STI2013.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Eric von Hippel, 1986. "Lead Users: A Source of Novel Product Concepts," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(7), pages 791-805, July.
    2. 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.
    3. G. M.P. Swann, 2009. "The Economics of Innovation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13211.
    4. Medina D., Carlos, 2013. "Implicaciones fiscales del proyecto de reforma a la salud," Perfil de Coyuntura Económica, Universidad de Antioquia, CIE, issue 22, pages 87-97, May.
    5. James Stewart & Sampsa Hyysalo, 2008. "Intermediaries, Users And Social Learning In Technological Innovation," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 12(03), pages 295-325.
    6. Carliss Y. Baldwin & Eric von Hippel, 2009. "Modeling a Paradigm Shift: From Producer Innovation to User and Open Collaborative Innovation," Harvard Business School Working Papers 10-038, Harvard Business School.
    7. von Hippel, Eric, 2010. "Open User Innovation," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 411-427, Elsevier.
    8. Roel Nahuis & Ellen Moors & Ruud Smits, 2009. "User producer interaction in context: A classification," Innovation Studies Utrecht (ISU) working paper series 09-01, Utrecht University, Department of Innovation Studies, revised Jan 2009.
    9. World Bank, 2010. "Innovation Policy : A Guide for Developing Countries," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 2460, December.
    10. Jeroen de Jong & Eric von Hippel, 2010. "Open, distributed and user-centered: Towards a paradigm shift in innovation policy," Scales Research Reports H201009, EIM Business and Policy Research.
    11. Marek Jemala, 2010. "Introduction To Open Technology Innovation Strategies," Acta Oeconomica Pragensia, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2010(3), pages 3-20.
    12. Harhoff, Dietmar & Henkel, Joachim & von Hippel, Eric, 2003. "Profiting from voluntary information spillovers: how users benefit by freely revealing their innovations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(10), pages 1753-1769, December.
    13. Douthwaite, B. & Keatinge, J. D. H. & Park, J. R., 2001. "Why promising technologies fail: the neglected role of user innovation during adoption," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 819-836, May.
    14. Flanagan, Kieron & Uyarra, Elvira & Laranja, Manuel, 2010. "The ‘policy mix’ for innovation: rethinking innovation policy in a multi-level, multi-actor context," MPRA Paper 23567, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Pierre Barbaroux, 2009. "On the nature and logics of innovation capabilities within knowledge-intensive environments: a case study," Journal of Innovation Economics, De Boeck Université, vol. 0(1), pages 169-188.
    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. Jutta Günther & Dirk Meissner, 2017. "Clusters as Innovative Melting Pots?—the Meaning of Cluster Management for Knowledge Diffusion in Clusters," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 8(2), pages 499-512, June.
    2. Elias G. Carayannis & Dirk Meissner, 2017. "Glocal targeted open innovation: challenges, opportunities and implications for theory, policy and practice," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(2), pages 236-252, April.
    3. Natalia Shmatko, 2013. "Graduates’ Competencies For The Innovation Labour Market," HSE Working papers WP BRP 13/STI/2013, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    4. Elena M. Chernovich & Valentina V. Polyakova, 2014. "Innovative Agency Flow: The Case Of Whitewater Paddling Community," HSE Working papers WP BRP 30/STI/2014, National Research University Higher School of Economics.

    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. repec:hig:wpaper:wp-brp-08-sti-2013 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. 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).
    5. Lettl, Christopher & Rost, Katja & von Wartburg, Iwan, 2009. "Why are some independent inventors 'heroes' and others 'hobbyists'? The moderating role of technological diversity and specialization," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 243-254, March.
    6. Siebeling, T. & Romijn, H.A., 2005. "Why People Contribute Voluntarily to Innovation: Insights from South Africa 's Siyabuswa Educational Improvement & Development Trust," Working Papers 05.13, Eindhoven Center for Innovation Studies.
    7. 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).
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. Carliss Baldwin & Eric von Hippel, 2011. "Modeling a Paradigm Shift: From Producer Innovation to User and Open Collaborative Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(6), pages 1399-1417, December.
    12. Konstantin Fursov & Thomas Thurner, 2016. "God Helps Those Who Help Themselves! A Study of User-Innovation in Russia," HSE Working papers WP BRP 59/STI/2016, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    13. 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.
    14. Maxim Kotsemir & Alexander Abroskin & Dirk Meissner, 2013. "Innovation concepts and typology – an evolutionary discussion," HSE Working papers WP BRP 05/STI/2013, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    15. 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).
    16. Paul Windrum & Doris Schartinger & Luis Rubalcaba & Faiz F. Gallouj & Marja Toivonen, 2016. "The co-creation of multi-agent social innovations," Post-Print halshs-01322603, HAL.
    17. repec:wsi:acsxxx:v:21:y:2019:i:08:n:s1363919619500142 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. 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.
    19. Franco Malerba, 2006. "Innovation and the evolution of industries," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 3-23, April.
    20. Alexander Brem & Volker Bilgram & Adele Gutstein, 2021. "Involving Lead Users in Innovation: A Structured Summary of Research on the Lead User Method," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Alexander Brem (ed.), Emerging Issues and Trends in INNOVATION AND TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT, chapter 2, pages 21-48, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    21. Daniel Gama e Colombo, 2016. "Impact Assessment of Tax Incentives to Foster Industrial Innovation in Brazil: The Case of Law 11,196/05," Working Papers, Department of Economics 2016_30, University of São Paulo (FEA-USP).
    22. JUSTIN DORAN & NOIRIN McCARTHY & MARIE O’CONNOR, 2019. "The Importance Of Internal Knowledge Generation And External Knowledge Sourcing For Sme Innovation And Performance: Evidence From Ireland," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 23(07), pages 1-30, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    User Innovation; Innovation Sources; Open Innovation; Innovation Management; Demand Driven Innovation;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L21 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Business Objectives of the Firm
    • M10 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - General
    • M14 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - Corporate Culture; Diversity; Social Responsibility
    • M31 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Marketing and Advertising - - - Marketing
    • O21 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Development Planning and Policy - - - Planning Models; Planning Policy
    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes

    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:hig:wpaper:wpbrp08sti2013. 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: Shamil Abdulaev or Shamil Abdulaev (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/hsecoru.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.