as how to achieve a certain look by means of layer cutting, or how to
manufacturer-based designers, and so they will require much less
achieve a certain streaked color pattern by selectively dying some
training to use the toolkit effectively.
strands of hair. However, an expert user is often very well practiced
at the skill of examining the shape of his or her face and hairstyle
589
For example, in the case of custom integrated circuit design, the
as reflected in a mirror, and visualizing specific improvements that
users of toolkits are typically electrical engineers who are design-
might be desirable in matters such as curls, shape, or color. In
ing electronic systems that will incorporate custom semiconduc-
addition, the user will be very familiar with the nature and func-
tor chips. The digital design language normally used by electrical
tioning of everyday tools used to shape hair, such as scissors and
engineers is Boolean algebra. Therefore, user-friendly toolkits for
combs.
custom semiconductor design are provided that allow toolkit users
to design in this language. That is, users can create a design,
A user-friendly toolkit for hairstyling innovation can be built upon
592
test how it works, and make improvements using only their own,
these familiar skills and tools. For example, a user can be invited
customary design language. At the conclusion of the design pro-
to sit in front of a computer monitor, and study an image of her face
cess, the toolkit then translates the user's logical design into the
and hairstyle as captured by a video camera. Then, she can select
design inputs required by the semiconductor manufacturer's pro-
from a palette of colors and color patterns offered on the screen,
duction system.
can superimpose the effect on her existing hairstyle, can exam-
590
A design toolkit based on a language and skills and tools familiar
ine it, and can repeatedly modify it in a process of trial-and-error
to the user is only possible to the extent that the user has familiar-
learning. Similarly, the user can select and manipulate images of
ity with some appropriate and reasonably complete language and
familiar tools, such as combs and scissors, to alter the image of the
100
Democratizing Innovation
length and shape of her own hairstyle as projected on the computer
by adding to and subtracting from that starting point.
screen, can study and further modify the result achieved, and so
Translating Users' Designs for Production
596
forth. Note that the user's new design can be as radically new as is
desired, because the toolkit gives the user access to the most ba-
The “language” of a toolkit for user innovation must be convertible
597
sic hairstyling variables and tools such as hair color and scissors.
without error into the language of the intended production system
When the user is satisfied, the completed design can be translated
at the conclusion of the user's design work. If it is not, the entire
into technical hairstyling instructions in the language of a hairstyling
purpose of the toolkit will be lost---because a manufacturer receiv-
specialist---the intended production system in this instance.
ing a user design will essentially have to do the design work over
again. Error-free translation need not emerge as a major problem--
593
In general, steady improvements in computer hardware and soft-
-for example, it was never a major problem during the development
ware are enabling toolkit designers to provide information to users
of toolkits for integrated circuit design, because both chip design-
in increasingly friendly ways. In earlier days, information was often
ers and chip producers already used a language based on digi-
provided to users in the form of specification sheets or books. The
tal logic. In contrast, in some fields, translating from the design
user was then required to know when a particular bit of information
language preferred by users to the language required by intended
was relevant to a development project, find the book, and look it
production systems can be the central problem in toolkit design.
up. Today, a large range of potentially needed information can be
As an illustration, consider a recent toolkit test project managed by
embedded in a computerized toolkit, which is programmed to offer
Ernie Gum, the Director of Food Product Development for the USA
the user items of information only if and as a development being
FoodServices Division of Nestlé.
worked on makes them relevant.
One major business of Nestlé FoodServices is producing custom
598
594
Module Libraries
food products, such as custom Mexican sauces, for major restau-
rant chains. Custom foods of this type have traditionally been
595
Custom designs seldom are novel in all their parts. Therefore, a li-
developed by or modified by the chains' executive chefs, using
brary of standard modules will be a valuable part of a toolkit for user
what are in effect design and production toolkits taught by culinary
innovation. Provision of such standard modules enables users to
schools: recipe development procedures based on food ingredi-
focus their creative work on those aspects of their product or ser-
ents available to individuals and restaurants, and processed with
vice designs that cannot be implemented via pre-designed options.
restaurant-style equipment. After using their traditional toolkits to
For example, architects will find it very useful to have access to a
develop or modify a recipe for a new menu item, executive chefs
library of standard components, such as a range of standard struc-
call in Nestlé Foodservices or another custom food producer and
tural support columns with pre-analyzed structural characteristics,
ask that firm to manufacture the product they have designed---and
that they can incorporate into their novel building designs. Simi-
this is where the language translation problem rears its head.
larly, users who want to design custom hairstyles will often find it
helpful to begin by selecting a hairstyle from a toolkit library. The
There is no error-free way to translate a recipe expressed in the
599
goal is to select a style that has some elements of the desired
language of a traditional restaurant-style culinary toolkit into the
look. Users can then proceed to develop their own desired style
language required by a food-manufacturing facility. Food factories
101
Democratizing Innovation
must use ingredients that can be obtained in quantity at consis-
developing Mexican sauces would contain a chili puree ingredient
tent quality. These are not the same as, and may not taste quite
processed on industrial equipment identical to that used to produce
the same as, the ingredients used by the executive chef during
food in commercial-size lots. (Each ingredient in such a toolkit also
recipe development. Also, food factories use volume production
contains traces of materials that will interact during production---for
equipment, such as huge-steam-heated retorts. Such equipment
example, traces of tomato are included in the chili puree---so that
is very different from restaurant-style stoves and pots and pans,
the taste effects of such interactions will also be apparent to toolkit
and it often cannot reproduce the cooking conditions created by
users.)
the executive chef on a stove-top---for example, very rapid heat-
Chefs interested in using the Nestlé toolkit to prototype a novel
ing. Therefore, food-production factories cannot simply produce a
602
Mexican sauce would receive a set of 20--30 ingredients, each in a
recipe developed by or modified by an executive chef “as is” under
separate plastic pouch. They would also be given instructions for
factory conditions---it will not taste the same.
the proper use of these ingredients. Toolkit users would then find
that each component differs slightly from the fresh components he
600
As a consequence, even though an executive chef creates a pro-
totype product using a traditional chef's toolkit, food manufactur-
or she is used to. But such differences are discovered immediately
ers find most of that information---the information about ingredients
through direct experience. The chef can then adjust ingredients
and processing conditions---useless because it cannot be straight-
and proportions to move to the desired final taste and texture that
forwardly translated into factory-relevant terms. The only informa-
is desired. When a recipe based on toolkit components is finished,
tion that can be salvaged is the information about taste and texture
it can be immediately and precisely reproduced by Nestlé factories-
contained in the prototype. And so, production chefs carefully ex-
-- because now the executive chef is using the same language as
amine and taste the customer's custom food prototype, then try to
the factory. In the Nestlé case, field testing by Food Product De-
make something that tastes the same using factory ingredients and
velopment Department researchers showed that adding the error-
methods. But an executive chef's taste buds are not necessarily
free translation feature to toolkit-based design by users reduced
the same as production chef taste buds, and so the initial factory
the time of custom food development from 26 weeks to 3 weeks by
version---and the second and the third---is typically not what the
eliminating repeated redesign and refinement interactions between
customer wants. So the producer must create variation after vari-
Nestlé and purchasers of its custom food products.
ation until the customer is finally satisfied.
Discussion
603
601
To solve the translation problem, Gum created a novel toolkit of
A toolkit's success in the market is significantly correlated with
604
pre-processed food ingredients to be used by executive chefs dur-
that toolkit's quality and with industry conditions. Thus, Prügl and
ing food development. Each ingredient in the toolkit was the Nestlé
Franke (2005) studied the success of 100 toolkits offered in a sin-
factory version of an ingredient traditionally used by chefs during
gle industry: computer gaming. They found that success, evalu-
recipe development: That is, it was an ingredient commercially
ated by independent experts, was significantly correlated with the
available to Nestlé that had been processed as an independent in-
quality of execution of the attributes of toolkits that have been dis-
gredient on Nestlé factory equipment. Thus, a toolkit designed for
cussed in this chapter. That is, success was found to be signif-
102
Democratizing Innovation
icantly affected by the quality of trial-and-error learning enabled
can. For example, a design for a gate array generated with a
by a toolkit, by the quality of fit of the solution space offered to
toolkit will typically take up more physical space on a silicon chip
users' design problems, by the user friendliness of the tools pro-
than would a fully custom-developed design of similar complexity.
vided, and by the quality of module libraries offered with the toolkit.
Even when toolkits are on offer, therefore, manufacturers may
Schreier and Franke (2004) also obtained information on the im-
continue to design certain products (those with difficult technical
portance of toolkit quality in a study of the value that users placed
demands) while customers take over the design of others (those
on consumer products (scarves, T shirts, cell phone covers) cus-
involving complex or rapidly evolving user needs).
tomized with a simple, manufacturer-supplied toolkit. They found
Toolkits can be designed to offer a range of capabilities to users.
user willingness to pay for custom designs, as measured by Vick-
607
At the high end, with toolkits such as those used to design custom
rey auctions, was significantly negatively affected by the difficulty
integrated circuits, users can truly innovate, creating anything im-
of creating custom designs with a toolkit. In contrast, willingness to
plementable in digital electronics, from a dishwasher controller to
pay was significantly positively affected by enjoyment experienced
a novel supercomputer or form of artificial life. At the low end, the
in using a toolkit.
product configurators commonly offered by manufacturers of mass-
customized products enable, for example, a watch purchaser to
605
With respect to industry and market conditions, the toolkit-for-user
innovation approach to product design is likely to be most appealing
create a custom watch by selecting from lists of pre-designed faces,
to toolkit suppliers when the heterogeneous needs of many users
hands, cases, and straps. (Mass-customized production systems
can be addressed by a standard solution approach encoded in a
can manufacture a range of product variations in single-unit quan-
toolkit. This is because it can be costly to encode all the solution
tities at near mass-production costs (Pine 1993). In the United
and production information relevant to users' design decisions. For
States, production systems used by these manufacturers are gen-
example, a toolkit for custom semiconductor design must contain
erally based on computerized production equipment.)
information about the semi-conductor production process needed
The design freedom provided by toolkits for user innovation may
608
to ensure that product designs created by users are in fact pro-
not be of interest to all or even to most users in a market character-
ducible. Encoding such information is a one-time cost, so it makes
ized by heterogeneous needs. A user must have a great enough
the best economic sense for solution approaches that many will
need for something different to offset the costs of putting a toolkit
want to use.
to use for that approach to be of interest. Toolkits may therefore be
offered only to a subset of users. In the case of software, toolkits
606
Toolkits for user innovation are not an appropriate solution for
may be provided to all users along with a standard, default version
all product needs, even when heterogeneous needs can be ad-
of the product or service, because the cost of delivering the extra
dressed by a common solution approach. Specifically, toolkits will
software is essentially zero. In such a case, the toolkit's capability
not be the preferred approach when the product being designed
will simply lie unused in the background unless and until a user has
requires the highest achievable performance. Toolkits incorporate
sufficient incentive to evoke and employ it.
automated design rules that cannot, at least at present, translate
designs into products or software as skillfully as a human designer
Provision of toolkits to customers can be a complement to lead user
609
103
Democratizing Innovation
idea-generation methods for manufacturers. Some users choosing
Manufacturers that think long-term disadvantages may accrue from
611
to employ a toolkit to design a product precisely right for their own
a switch to toolkits for user innovation and design will not necessar-
needs will be lead users, whose present strong need foreshadows
ily have the luxury of declining to introduce toolkits. If any manu-
a general need in the market. Manufacturers can find it valuable
facturer introduces a high-quality toolkit into a field favoring its use,
to identify and acquire the generally useful improvements made by
customers will tend to migrate to it, forcing competitors to follow.
lead users of toolkits, and then supply these to the general mar-
Therefore, a firm's only real choice in a field where conditions are
ket. For this reason, manufacturers may find it valuable implement
favorable to the introduction of toolkits may be whether to lead or
toolkits for innovation even if the portion of the target market that
to follow.
can directly use them is relatively small.
610
Toolkits can affect existing business models in a field in ways that
may or may not be to manufacturers' competitive advantage in the
longer run. For example, consider that many manufacturers of
products and services profit from both their design capabilities and
their production capabilities. A switch to user-based customiza-
tion via toolkits can affect their ability to do this over the long term.
Thus, a manufacturer that is early in introducing a toolkit approach
to custom product or service design may initially gain an advan-
tage by tying that toolkit to its particular production facility. How-
ever, when toolkits are made available to customer designers, this
tie often weakens over time. Customers and independent tool de-
velopers can eventually learn to design toolkits applicable to the
processes of several manufacturers. Indeed, this is precisely what
has happened in the custom integrated circuit industry. The toolk-
its revealed to users by the initial innovator, LSI, and later by rival
producers were producer-specific. Over time, however, Cadance
and other specialist toolkit supply firms emerged and developed
toolkits that could be used to make designs producible by a num-
ber of vendors. The end result is that manufacturers that previously
benefited from selling their product-design skills and their produc-
tion skills can be eventually forced by the shifting of design tasks
to customers via toolkits to a position of benefiting from their pro-
duction skills only.
104
Democratizing Innovation
612
12 Linking User Innovation to Other Phenomena and
source have uses for what is revealed.
On an intuitive basis,
Fields
one can immediately see that these conditions are often met. Of
course, people and firms know different things. Of course there are
613
This final chapter is devoted to describing links between user-
many things that one would not be averse to freely revealing; and of
centered innovation and other phenomena and literatures.
Of
course others would often be interested in what is freely revealed.
course, innovation writ large is related to anything and everything,
After all, as individuals we all regularly freely reveal information not
so the phenomena and the literatures I will discuss here are only
generally known to people who ask, and presumably these people
those hanging closest on the intellectual tree. My goal is to enable
value at least some of the information we provide.
interested readers to migrate to further branches as they wish,
assisted by the provision of a few important references.
With
The economics of information communities can be much simpler
617
respect to phenomena, I will first point out the relationship of user
than that of the user innovation communities discussed earlier, be-
innovation to information communities---of which user innovation
cause valuable proprietary information is often not at center stage.
communities are a subset. With respect to related fields, I begin
When the service provided by information communities is to of-
by linking user-centric innovation phenomena explored in this
fer non-proprietary “content” in a more convenient and accessible
book to the literature on the economics of knowledge, and to the
form, one need consider only the costs and benefits associated
competitive advantage of nations. Next I link it to research on the
with information diffusion. One need not also consider potential
sociology of technology. Finally, I point out how findings regarding
losses associated with the free revealing of proprietary innovation-
user innovation could---but do not yet---link to and complement
related information.
the way that product development is taught to managers.
It is likely that information communities are getting steadily more
618
614
Information Communities
pervasive for the same reasons that user innovation communities
are: the costs of diffusing information are getting steadily lower as
615
Many of the considerations I have discussed with respect to user
computing and communication technologies improve. As a result,
innovation communities apply to information communities as well-
information communities may have a rapidly increasing impact on
--a much more general category of which user innovation commu-
the economy and on the landscape of industry. They are and will
nities are a subset. I define information communities as communi-
be especially empowering to fragmented groups, whose members
ties or networks of individuals and/or organizations that rendezvous
may for the first time gain low-cost access to a great deal of rich
around an information commons, a collection of information that is
and fresh information of mutual interest. As is the case for user
open to all on equal terms.
innovation networks, information networks can actually store con-
616
In close analogy to our discussions of innovation communities,
tent that participants freely reveal and make it available for free
I propose that commons-based information communities or net-
downloading. (Wikipedia is an example of this.) And/or, informa-
works will form when the following conditions hold: (1) Some have
tion networks can function to link information seekers and informa-
information that is not generally known. (2) Some are willing to
tion holders rather than actually storing information. In the latter
freely reveal what they know. (3) Some beyond the information
case, participants post to the network, hoping that someone with
105
Democratizing Innovation
the requested information will spot their request and provide an
buyers. Similarly, product and service purchasers benefit from
answer (Lakhani and von Hippel 2003). Prominent examples can
good information on the characteristics of the various offerings
be found in the medical field in the form of specialized websites
in the market. Traditionally, firms have collected information on
where patients with relatively rare conditions can for the first time
users' needs and on products' characteristics by means of face-
find each other and also find specialists in those conditions. Pa-
to-face interviewing and (in the case of mass markets) question-
tients and specialists who participate in these groups can both pro-