8/9/2019 Present Ccc06 Feb2010

1/15

A Finnish Perspective to Living Labs

Aki EnkenbergConfederation of Finnish Industries EK

COFISA Closing Conference / 17 February 2010

8/9/2019 Present Ccc06 Feb2010

2/15

Inside vs. outside the firm

Source: OECD 200817.2.2010

8/9/2019 Present Ccc06 Feb2010

3/15

Company innovations with user involvement in

Finland (out of all innovations)

Source: Hyvnen J., Saarinen J. 200917.2.2010

8/9/2019 Present Ccc06 Feb2010

4/15

5.3.200917.2.2010

8/9/2019 Present Ccc06 Feb2010

5/15

New forms of innovation

Openness and user-involvement characterise most new oremerging forms of innovation

Changes driven mostly by innovative companies and user

communities

This has also been recognised within the scope of innovation policyin many countries

Finlands national innovation strategy in 2008 adopted promotion of

demand- and user-driven innovation as one key area Ministry of the Employment and the Economy: policy framework and

action plan for demand- and user-driven innovation (also LivingLabs) in 2009-2010

17.2.2010

8/9/2019 Present Ccc06 Feb2010

6/15

Typology of user- or customer-centric innovation

projects in Finland

Project type User input and involvement

User-centric information service or user

needs analysis

Users as source of information

User-centric workshops, innovation forumsor similar

Users take part in planning andconceptualisation

Open source software development,implementation or service business

(Global) user community involved in all phasesof product development and decision-making

Open innovation environment or innovationcommunity

Users are members of a network openlydisseminating information

Living Labs supporting user-driveninnovation

Users involved in testing, piloting in real-lifecircumstances

Testbeds, technology platforms Users invoved in testing, piloting within aspecified environment / infrastructure

Other user- or customer-centric projects User roles can vary or not pre-defined

Source: Lehenkari, Kautonen, Lemola,& Viljamaa 2009

17.2.2010

8/9/2019 Present Ccc06 Feb2010

7/15

7(Source: EU Commission 2009)

17.2.2010

8/9/2019 Present Ccc06 Feb2010

8/15

5.3.200917.2.2010

8/9/2019 Present Ccc06 Feb2010

9/15

Current situation in Finland

Approximately 30 Living Labs in Finland, ranging from feasibilitystudies to mature operations, rural to urban

The approach is utilised mostly for:

Conceptualising new products or services with users

For fine-tuning products or services before market launch

Modifying and developing existing products or services in novelways: user input and participation in development

At the activity level, Living Labs carry out and offer:

Project management and case / pilot execution, fundingapplication services, innovation tools, service or productdevelopment support, scenario work, usability studies and user

needs analysis, research services, high speed networks,

17.2.2010

Source: Orava 2009

8/9/2019 Present Ccc06 Feb2010

10/15

Status of Finnish Living Labs

75% operational, but processes still in development

13% beginning operations in 2009/2010

8% in planning phase

4% in operation for several years

Maturity still low

Source: Orava 2009

17.2.2010

8/9/2019 Present Ccc06 Feb2010

11/15

Managing organisations of Finnish Living Labs

27% regional development companies

23% polytechnics

23% other

15% universities

12% other public organisations

Initiatives typically public or PPPs

17.2.2010

Source: Orava 2009

8/9/2019 Present Ccc06 Feb2010

12/15

Sectors of activities in Living Labs

29% health / wellbeing

21% construction, living, regional or city development

19% ICT, media

12% tourism, experience industries

12% other: energy, agriculture

7% public services

Typically more than one per LL

17.2.2010

Source: Orava 2009

8/9/2019 Present Ccc06 Feb2010

13/15

Some things to consider

Many Living Labs in Europe seem to be linked to publicly-fundedapplied research projects or government-led regional developmentprojects - business models are still emerging

Living Labs seem to include open and closed innovation activities,technology push has not disappeared

The no-right definition, no copyright model has produced a rangeof different approaches and examples of what a Living Lab could be

Co-creation with users is already happening outside of Living Labs

needs better articulation of the added value provided Need for redefined expertise, methods, tools and service processes

to manage interacting actors, product elements, technologies,services or systems is evident but practical approaches areneeded

17.2.2010

8/9/2019 Present Ccc06 Feb2010

14/15

European Network of Living Labs

The European Network of Living Labs ENoLL is a community ofLiving Labs in Europe launched in November 2006

ENoLL aims to support co-creative, human-centric and user-driven

research, development and innovation The network has grown in three waves up to 129 member Living

Labs fourth wave closed in Jan 2010

The network applies and shares new methodologies for co-creative

research, development and innovation, including new means ofopen source, open architecture developments, IPR, management ofresearch and innovation as well as new forms of direct userinvolvement in the innovation process

Interest towards living labbing is still increasing and the number ofprojects and initiatives is growing

17.2.2010

8/9/2019 Present Ccc06 Feb2010

15/15