The DOI matches its OpenAlex record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
FROM EXPERIENCE: Developing New Product Concepts Via the Lead User Method: A Case Study in a “Low‐Tech” Field
Open accessAbstract
Conventional market research methods do not work well in the instance of many industrial goods and services, and yet, accurate understanding of user need is essential for successful product innovation. Cornelius Herstatt and Eric von Hippel report on a successful field application of a “lead user” method for developing concepts for needed new products. This method is built around the idea that the richest understanding of needed new products is held by just a few users. It is possible to identify these “lead users” and then draw them into a process of joint development of new product concepts with manufacturer personnel. In the application described, the lead user method was found to be much faster than traditional ways of identifying promising new product concepts as well as less costly. It also was judged to provide better outcomes by the firm participating in the case. The article includes practical detail on the steps that were used to implement the method at Hilti AG, a leading manufacturer of products and materials used in construction.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Lead User Analyses for the Development of New Industrial Products
Urban, G. L., & von Hippel, E. (1988) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.34.5.569 · Cited by 1,125
Cited by
Open innovation in SMEs: Trends, motives and management challenges
van de Vrande, V., de Jong, J. P. J., Vanhaverbeke, W., & de Rochemont, M. (2009) · Technovation · doi:10.1016/j.technovation.2008.10.001 · Cited by 2,184
Managing Co-creation Design: A Strategic Approach to Innovation
Frow, P., Nenonen, S., Payne, A., & Storbacka, K. (2015) · British Journal of Management · doi:10.1111/1467-8551.12087 · Cited by 518
Democratizing innovation: The evolving phenomenon of user innovation
von Hippel, E. (2009) · International Journal of Innovation Science · doi:10.1260/175722209787951224 · Cited by 459
Benefits of and barriers to involving users in medical device technology development and evaluation
Shah, S. G. S., & Robinson, I. (2007) · International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care · doi:10.1017/s0266462307051677 · Cited by 299
Factors affecting late adoption of digital innovations
Jahanmir, S. F., & Cavadas, J. (2018) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.01.058 · Cited by 177
Welfare Implications of User Innovation
Henkel, J., & von Hippel, E. (2005) · Essays in Honor of Edwin Mansfield · doi:10.1007/0-387-25022-0_5 · Cited by 174
Ye, H. (., & Kankanhalli, A. (2018) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.25300/misq/2018/12361 · Cited by 138
The major role of clinicians in the discovery of off-label drug therapies
DeMonaco, H. J., Ali, A., & von Hippel, E. (2006) · Pharmacotherapy The Journal of Human Pharmacology and Drug Therapy · doi:10.1592/phco.26.3.323 · Cited by 142
Horizontal Innovation Networks - by and for Users
von Hippel, E. (2002) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.328900 · Cited by 70
Amann, J., & Rubinelli, S. (2017) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/jmir.7406 · Cited by 34
Metadata
- Authors
- Herstatt, C., & von Hippel, E.
- Venue
- Journal of Product Innovation Management
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1992-09-01
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 213-221
- ISSN
- 0737-6782 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2166043165
- Cited by
- 713
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 16.68
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
