Chapters 3-4

Studies are beginning to show users are first to develop and make significant modifications to products. The results also show that the rate of innovation by users is affected by the degree of commitment to or interest the users have in the product they are helping to improve. For example, university surgeons are likely to innovate when it comes to their instruments because they are very invested in the performance of those products.

There is evidence that product innovation is concentrated among “lead users.” This is because they are typically at the leading edge when it comes to market trends and they anticipate high benefits from obtaining a solution. Many lead users have access to products before the general public so they can detect problems early and help make changes that will benefit most users. They are also very useful at finding problems because of their vested interest in a product or industry. As intensity of hobby interest goes down, it’s likely that rates of user innovation drop too.

Libraries provide an excellent example of user modification. Many libraries found it difficult to find outside vendors that would provide needed/desired modifications to Online Public Access systems (“OPACs”). It became increasingly common for libraries to then hire their own in-house programmers to make needed modifications. Libraries that made their own modifications were found to have the qualities of being lead users. Many of the improvements made by libraries were later used by the manufacturers themselves to improve the OPACs.

Users are often highly heterogeneous when it comes to specific needs. They may differ for many reasons such as available resources and pathway from original state to preferred condition. The diversity of needs among users suggests a need for highly heterogeneous products. This makes things very difficult for manufacturers because they have many considerations when designing products that they want to appeal to many users. In some cases, the most important or most desired characteristic of a product may be unique per user. Users must decide between developing their own solution and paying for someone else to develop it for them.

Several studies have attempted to estimate how much users are willing to pay (WTP) for innovations. The problem with such evaluations is that results often tend to overestimate WTP. In a study involving von Hipple, it was found that costs of improving software often prevent users from making changes to their versions of Apache to the point where they would be completely satisfied.

It is often more cost effective to innovate than to hire a manufacturer when there is only a small amount of affected users or customers. This often saves time and money that would be wasted contacting, creating specifications for, and contracting a manufacturer. It may not even be worthwhile to the manufacturer unless a hefty price is paid.

User-innovators receive additional benefits from innovating for themselves. Much like a puzzle is not valued for the end-result, programmers were found to work on open-source software for intellectual stimulation, to improve their own programming skills, and for the creative experience. The programmers surveyed also mentioned that having control over their own work made the process more appealing and rewarding.