1,720,957 research outputs found
Customer Participation and Product Innovation in the Era of Industry 4.0 and 3D Printing: Evidence at Firm and Individual-Level
Full text linkMy PhD dissertation consists of two chapters which empirically analyse the impact of the modern technologies of Industry 4.0 on customer participation (CP) in new product development (NPD) process of firms in general, and the impact of 3D printing on individual-level innovation performance in particular. These studies aim to contribute to the debate on the evolution of CP from customers as passive recipients of products offered by firms to independent makers of their desired products.
Initially, customers had no input in what was offered to them, and they were the submissive recipients of firms’ products. The market was perceived as the aggregate of demand and value transfer, whereas companies were the points of value creation (Kotler, 2002; Vargo & Lusch, 2004). With the advent and omnipresence of the Internet, information asymmetry reduced between firms and customers. As a result, the customers started taking part in the NPD process as mere information providers to active partners. Consequently, active customers happened to appear as lead users (Von Hippel, 1986) whose opinion carried weight which could influence the changes in product features and subsequent adoption of products by other customers. Companies also realized the importance of customers’ feedback and opinion; hence, CP evolved further, and customers were provided with toolkits (Von Hippel, 2001b). “User toolkits for innovation” provided customers with a free environment within defined bounds related to specific products and allowed them to develop their customized products via trial-and-error. Customers also started forming virtual customer communities (Nambisan, 2002) to discuss the ideas and information regarding products and desired new features. But it is the recent work which has given formal recognition to CP in NPD (Chang & Taylor, 2016) by acknowledging various participation roles a customer can
7
take on in NPD, e.g. a customer as an information source, a co-developer and an innovator (Cui & Wu, 2016; 2017).
The world is forecasting the fourth industrial revolution prompted by advanced technologies, and the twenty-first century demands technological innovation and novel product development approach (L. Li, 2018a). The term ‘Industry 4.0’ (German: Industrie 4.0) – representing the much-anticipated fourth industrial revolution symbolising the increased use of modern technologies in the manufacturing process of firms – was coined at ‘Hannover Messe 2011’ in Germany as part of its high-tech strategy to sustain the competitive advantage and meet the requirements of future production. Other countries have also initiated similar ventures and use different terminologies like ‘Internet of Things’ in the United States and ‘Made-in-China 2025’ in China to represent the phenomenon of Industry 4.0. Consequently, there is an increasing trend of investment by firms in the technologies associated with Industry 4.0. Although some of these technologies like robotics, 3D printing, laser cutting are in use since over two decades, many of Industry 4.0 applications necessitate the combination of these technologies (Xu et al., 2018). However, the connectivity between these technologies is not extensively discussed before 2011. But now, the discussion has started as the technologies have reached a mature state of application and are materialized under the concept of Industry 4.0 (Santos et al., 2017). According to Gilchrist (2016), “Industry 4.0 is essentially a revised approach to manufacturing that makes use of the latest technological inventions and innovations, particularly in merging operational and information and communication technology.”
The first chapter of this thesis is a firm-level analysis which focuses on analysing the impact of Industry 4.0 technologies on CP in firms’ NPD process where customers work as co-developers. Customer participation is defined as the magnitude of the customer’s engagement in
8
the company’s NPD process (Fang, 2008). Scholars consider the investment in modern technologies a significant internal factor to cater to customized demand of consumers (Kotha, 1996). Industry 4.0 technologies are interactive because of the digital connectivity of tools and remote inputs and have the potential to take the magnitude of customer’s participation to a higher level and engage them in the product design and production process. Hence, it is essential to empirically investigate this claim as the Industry 4.0 technologies will not only help to develop new products and services (Lee et al., 2014), but the provision of customized products will also help to reduce the number of goods returned. For empirical analysis, we collected the data from 123 North Italian firms by using a structured questionnaire targeted to chief operating officers or managers in charge of technological and manufacturing processes. The firms were currently using Industry 4.0 technologies like 3D scanner, additive manufacturing, IoT and intelligent products, robotics, big data and cloud, augmented reality and laser cutting.
Another facet of recent technological scenario is that it takes the empowerment of customers and end-users one step further from toolkits and customer communities. Now some technologies are in direct reach and use of individuals. One potentiality linked with such technologies, especially 3D printing (3DP), is the transformation of customers into real “makers” (Anderson, 2012). 3DP is “a process of joining materials to make objects from 3D model data, usually layer upon layer, as opposed to subtractive manufacturing methodologies” (ASTM, 2012). A computer-aided design (CAD) file of the object idea is generated by using a software which contains all the information of the physical object. To develop the physical object, the 3D printer receives the print command and based on the digital file, transforms the information in the arrangement of material layers upon layers. As the material layers bind together directly from a CAD file, it reduces the product development time and intensity of physical flows (Holmström et
9
al., 2017). The additive style of manufacturing also eliminates many intermediaries like labour (Ford & Despeisse, 2016) and expensive and time-consuming tools. 3DP is ideal for the economies-of-one and is not resource-intensive. These features make 3DP ideal for end-user and open innovation. Subsequently, 3DP aids firms as well as individual makers to execute a project from the design stage to final output (Rayna & Striukova, 2016a).
Apart from knowledge creation and social exchange, the use of technology forms the basis of the relationship of makers movement with entrepreneurship (Browder et al., 2019). The prices have decreased considerably, and 3DP is in access to end-user and makers. Recent research shows that makerspaces are significant platforms for 3DP spread and adoption (Woodson ey al., 2019). 3DP has the potential to empower makers and boost end-user innovation and entrepreneurship linked with the maker movement. Despite the increasing importance and relevance of 3DP, very little is known about the factors affecting the acceptance and use of 3DP among the exiting users. More importantly, the impact of the use of 3DP on innovation performance is not empirically acknowledged at individual-level.
The second chapter is an individual-level empirical analysis of the factors affecting the acceptance and use of 3DP by makers in makerspaces. Makerspaces have been used as local places of shared resources and provision of manufacturing technologies that are not as commonly available as internet connectivity and computers (Kostakis et al., 2015). This chapter uses an extended model of the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology 2 (UTAUT2) (Venkatesh et al., 2012) to explore the factors affecting the acceptance and use of 3DP by makers. The model is extended on the outcome side to analyse the impact of the use by incorporating a new construct, ‘innovation performance’ as a consequence of use. For empirical analysis, I developed a survey, using the scales validated by exiting studies and distributed it to the visitors
10
of makerspaces registered on three platforms; hackerspaces.org, makerspaces.make.co and fabfoundattion.org and had the facilities of 3DP. In total, 338 responses were used for the empirical analysis of the study.
The results of the first chapter confirm that the use of Industry 4.0 technologies does have a positive impact on CP in the development of product design and production process of the firms. The effect is stronger for CP in design than CP in the production process. The firms which report product flexibility as their competitive advantage, are more like to allow CP in the product design and production process. The findings of the second chapter, focused at the individual-level adoption and impact of 3DP on innovation performance, show that the makers are adopting 3DP printing because they expect an increase in their performance and the opinion of the important people around them also matters in the adoption decision. Empirical results indicate that the adoption of 3DP also depends on the availability of facilitating conditions and the hedonic motivation extracted from the use of 3DP. The results also provide empirical evidence of the impact of the use of 3DP on makers’ innovation performance
Industry 4.0 and co-creation in new product development
No full textThe value delivered to consumers depends on providing superior and reliable service using
technology. The technologies of Industry 4.0 are interactive in nature, but literature lacks
the studies focusing on analyzing their impact on new product development and customer
participation therein. This empirical work on made in Italy firms is aimed at extending the
implication of customer participation in product development in Industry 4.0 settings. The
results show that Robotics, Laser Cutting and Augmented reality have positive impact on
customer participation and the companies with increased use of Industry 4.0 technologies
allow more customer participation in product development. Study also offers practical
implications for managers and a guideline for the firms which have already invested or
planning to invest in Industry 4.0 technologies
Customer participation in new product development: an Industry 4.0 perspective
Full text linkPurpose – The use of modern technologies of the fourth industrial revolution, commonly known as “Industry 4.0” (I4.0), is believed to have considerable potential for product customisation. In this context, this paper aims to explore whether or not using these technologies impacts customer participation (CP) in a firm’s new product development (NPD) process.
Design/methodology/approach – To empirically test the proposed relationships, the authors collected the North Italian manufacturing firms’ data and applied regression analysis.
Findings – Empirical results indicate that, on the one hand, the technologies have their specific and individual impacts, and on the other hand, the firms which use more I4.0 technologies allow more customer participation in their product design and production process. This positive impact is more robust in product design than in the production process.
Practical implications – Managers aiming to benefit from CP should broaden the scope of adopting I4.0 technologies and consider different roles concerning the design and production phases of the new product development process. Recognising the importance and allowing CP in NPD will enable firms to meet the customised demands.
Originality/value – To the best of the authors’ knowledge, the proposed relationships of this study have been extensively debated theoretically in the I4.0 context but never empirically tested before. It is one of the few studies which discusses the strategic adoption and the combined use of I4.0 technologies to create more opportunities for product customisation
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Variations on the Author
Full text link“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
Full text linkWe provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts
Full text linkWe conducted a full-scale evaluative citation analysis study of scholars in the XML research field to explore just how different from each other author rankings resulting from different citation counting methods actually are, and to demonstrate the capability of emerging data and tools on the Web in supporting more realistic citation counting methods. Our results contest some common arguments for the continued
use of first-author citation counts in the evaluation of scholars, such as high correlations between author rankings by first-author citation counts and other citation
counting methods, and high costs of using more realistic citation counting methods that are not well-supported by the ISI databases. It is argued that increasingly available digital full text research papers make it possible for citation analysis studies to go beyond what the ISI databases have directly supported and to employ more
sophisticated methods
koamabayili/VECTRON-author-checklist: VECTRON author checklist
No full textWe have done our best to complete the author checklist relating to the use of animals in the hut study. Note that the objective for the hut study was to evaluate the IRS treatment applications for residual efficacy against Anopheles mosquitoes, including the local An. coluzzii mosquito population. Cows were only used to attract mosquitoes into the huts and no tests were carried out directly on the cows. The author checklist is intended for use with studies where experiments are carried out on animals, which is why we have had such difficulty in completing this for the hut study, as many of the questions do not relate to how the cows were used
- …
