The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Performance Assessment of the Lead User Idea-Generation Process for New Product Development
Abstract
Traditional idea generation techniques based on customer input usually collect information on new product needs from a random or typical set of customers. The “lead user process” takes a different approach. It collects information about both needs and solutions from users at the leading edges of the target market, as well as from users in other markets that face similar problems in a more extreme form. This paper reports on a natural experiment conducted within the 3M Company on the effect of the lead user (LU) idea-generation process relative to more traditional methods. 3M is known for its innovation capabilities— and we find that the LU process appears to improve upon those capabilities. Annual sales of LU product ideas generated by the average LU project at 3M are conservatively projected to be $146 million after five years—more than eight times higher than forecast sales for the average contemporaneously conducted “traditional” project. Each funded LU project is projected to create a new major product line for a 3M division. As a direct result, divisions funding LU project ideas are projecting their highest rate of major product line generation in the past 50 years.
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
The Discovery of Grounded Theory; Strategies for Qualitative Research
Glaser, B. G., Strauss, A. L., & Strutzel, E. (1968) · Nursing Research · doi:10.1097/00006199-196807000-00014 · Cited by 39,449
Cognition in Practice: Mind, Mathematics and Culture in Everyday Life
Lave, J. (1988) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511609268 · Cited by 5,148
Duncker, K. (1945) · Psychological Monographs · doi:10.1037/h0093599 · Cited by 2,938
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
Harhoff, D., Henkel, J., & von Hippel, E. (2003) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/s0048-7333(03)00061-1 · Cited by 772
Cited by
Harhoff, D., Henkel, J., & von Hippel, E. (2003) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/s0048-7333(03)00061-1 · Cited by 772
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
Ye, H. (., & Kankanhalli, A. (2018) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.25300/misq/2018/12361 · Cited by 138
How Peripheral Developers Contribute to Open-Source Software Development
Setia, P., Rajagopalan, B., Sambamurthy, V., & Calantone, R. (2012) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.1100.0311 · Cited by 110
Grahl, S., Strack, M., Weinrich, R., & Mörlein, D. (2018) · Journal of Food Quality · doi:10.1155/2018/1919482 · Cited by 78
Next-generation consumer innovation search: Identifying early-stage need-solution pairs on the web
von Hippel, E., & Kaulartz, S. (2021) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2020.104056 · Cited by 71
Preißner, S., Raasch, C., & Schweisfurth, T. (2024) · Journal of Product Innovation Management · doi:10.1111/jpim.12709 · Cited by 28
Metadata
- Authors
- Lilien, G. L., Morrison, P. D., Searls, K., Sonnack, M., & Hippel, E. V.
- Venue
- Management Science
- Published
- 2002-08
- Volume
- 48
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 1042-1059
- ISSN
- 0025-1909 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-5501
- OpenAlex
- W2125345368
- Cited by
- 988
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 37.24
- 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.
