The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
User Toolkits for Innovation: Consumers Support Each Other
Abstract
User toolkits for innovation were recently proposed as a means to eliminate (costly) exchange of need‐related information between users and manufactures in the product development process. The method transfers certain development tasks to users and thereby empowers them to create their own desired product features. This article examines the implications of different levels of opportunities for consumer involvement (OCI) in product development to learn what happens when firms pass design tasks on to consumers. It explores this issue by studying the relation between the employment of user toolkits and the need for firms to support their consumers. An analysis of 78 computer games products and the amount of support given by firms to the consumers of these products suggests that a share of the costs firms save on information acquisition by letting consumers “do it themselves” may eventually reemerge as costs in consumer support. In other words, an increase in opportunities for consumer involvement seems to increase the need for supporting consumers. A promising solution to the problem of support costs is identified, namely, the establishment of consumer–consumer support interaction. A case study of an outlier in terms of firm support to consumers—Westwood Studios—shows that consumers who use toolkits may be willing to support each other. Such interactive problem solving in a firm‐established user community is advantageous to the firm, because the process reduces the amount of resources that the firm itself needs to dedicate to the support of consumers using toolkits. Generally, consumer‐to‐consumer interaction can facilitate problem‐solving in the consumer domain, can aid the diffusion of toolkit related knowledge, and potentially can enhance the outcomes produced by the toolkit approach.
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
A Model of Customer Satisfaction with Service Encounters Involving Failure and Recovery
Smith, A. K., Bolton, R. N., & Wagner, J. (1999) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.2307/3152082 · Cited by 2,058
Shifting Innovation to Users via Toolkits
von Hippel, E., & Katz, R. (2002) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.48.7.821.2817
Cited by
Hansen, E. G., Gomm, M. L., Bullinger, A. C., & Moslein, K. M. (2010) · International Journal of Innovation and Sustainable Development · doi:10.1504/ijisd.2010.034559 · Cited by 35
Metadata
- Authors
- Jeppesen, L. B.
- Venue
- Journal of Product Innovation Management
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2005-06-16
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 347-362
- ISSN
- 0737-6782 (ISSN-L)
- 1540-5885
- OpenAlex
- W1987504425
- Cited by
- 260
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 28.99
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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.