I actually read Democratizing Innovation a while ago, having reviewed it back in 2013. But I realized that I hadn't put my notes up yet (just a review) so here they are. You can get the book for free as a pdf at the authors website.
“I first ask them how satisfied they are with their backpack. Initially, most say, “It's OK.” But after some discussion, a few complaints will slowly begin to surface (slowly, I think, because we all take some dissatisfaction with our products as the unremarkable norm.)”
“I first ask them how satisfied they are with their backpack. Initially, most say, “It's OK.” But after some discussion, a few complaints will slowly begin to surface (slowly, I think, because we all take some dissatisfaction with our products as the unremarkable norm.)”
But there are still a bunch of students
who decide to make some sort of change to their backpack to make it
at least a little better.
“adding more beta testers...
increases the probability that someone's toolkit will be matched to
the problem in such a way that the bug is shallow to that person.”
(Raymond qtd in von Hippel.)
That is, adding more people who look at a problem increases the chances that the solution will be simple to someone.
That is, adding more people who look at a problem increases the chances that the solution will be simple to someone.
“The
assets of some user
will then generally be found to be a just-right fit to many
innovation development problems.”
parallel
between user-innovator and scholar-activist?
Userinnovation.mit.edu
In the
early days of computing, it was common to freely share software and
modifications to it. Almost as soon as the first firm restricted
access to source code, counters including the General Public License
started appearing. Some people started calling these “copyleft.”
hacker
culture as an anarchist thing?
Conventional
economic language talks about producers and consumers, supply and
demand, but Weber notes that “the open source process scrambles
these categories” (qtd in von Hippel) as users become part of the
production process. He also suggests this integration could occur in
other areas.
In
open source, users are
able to make complicated products themselves, like Firefox and Linux.
(A user is kind of like a consumer, but it's a word that still works
when the user is also the one making the thing.)
Experts
in many fields form interest groups and informally help each other,
freely revealing information in ways similar to that of open source
processes. (von Hippel.)
Amabile,
T. M. 1996. Creativity in Context. Westview.
Antelmon,
Kristin. 2004. “Do Open Access Articles Have a Greater Research
Impact?” College and Research Libraries 65, no 5: 372-382
Christensen,
C. M. 1997. The Innovator's Dilemma. Harvard Business School Press.
Morris,
A. D. and C. McClurg, eds. 1992. Frontiers in Social Movement Theory.
Yale University Press.
Harhoff,
D., J. Henkel, and E. von Hippel. 2003. Profiting from Voluntary
Information Spillovers: How Users Benefit by Freely Revealing Their
Innovations.” Research Policy. 35, no 10:1753-1769.
Mishina,
K. 1989. Essays on Technological Evolution. PhD Thesis, Harvard
University.
Von
Hippel, E. 1976. The Dominant Role of Users in the Scientific
Instrument Innovation Process. Research Policy 5, no 3: 212-39
Wow thanks!
ReplyDeleteYes, Alyssa:
ReplyDeleteuser does work = maker, producer (especially engineering and arts/finance respectively).
Ah, the bugs users get bitten by and react to. One might be a mosquito; another a tseste fly. The effects, too - like bumps, irritations, infections.
Instead of backpacks, I did/do this with shoes and socks.
The "research impact" question would have been interesting in 2004, or even 1994.
"We all take dissatisfaction with our products as the unremarkable norm" - what about discomfort and what are the thresholds/tolerances?