Using Social Media for Asynchronous Collaboration within Collaborative Networks

Abstract

Societal challenges of today (e.g. aging) are complex and often require systemic solutions to be addressed. To address these challenges, various expertise and knowledge are required; in this sense, collaborative network projects have a lot of potential in offering a systemic solution. Design workshops (synchronous collaboration) are often used to achieve progress in such projects. In this paper we introduce asynchronous collaboration, which can occur anytime, anywhere through the use of social media. We have probed Instagram as a ‘ready-made’ social media platform within two collaborative network project case studies. This was done to experiment with asynchronous collaboration and knowledge sharing in addition to design workshops. Both cases were evaluated through focus groups that indicated how social media has the potential to enable actors to cross-field boundaries, inspire each other, and in this way enrich the design process within asynchronous collaboration. Our contribution with this work is two-fold: on the one hand, we aim to inspire and show how collaborative network projects can benefit from asynchronous collaboration in addition to synchronous collaboration. On the other hand, we hope to contribute to the creation of specific social media platforms as tools for supporting asynchronous collaboration within collaborative networks.

Full text

Participatory Innovation Conference 2013, Lahti, Finland www.pin-c2013.org/ 1
USING SOCIAL MEDIA FOR
ASYNCHRONOUS COLLABORATION
WITHIN COLLABORATIVE NETWORKS
NICK STURKENBOOM, EHSAN BAHA, YUAN LU, GABRIELE TEMPESTA
DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL DESIGN, SUB-DEPARTMENT BUSINESS PROCESS DESIGN
EINDHOVEN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY
N.STRUKENBOOM@TUE.NL; S.E.BAHA@TUE.NL; Y.LU@TUE.NL; G.TEMPESTA@STUDENT.TUE.NL
ABSTRACT
Societal challenges of today (e.g. aging) are
complex and often require systemic solutions to be
addressed. To address these challenges, various
expertise and knowledge are required; in this
sense, collaborative network projects have a lot of
potential in offering a systemic solution.
Design workshops (synchronous collaboration) are
often used to achieve progress in such projects. In
this paper we introduce asynchronous
collaboration, which can occur anytime, anywhere
through the use of social media.
We have probed Instagram as a ‘ready-made’
social media platform within two collaborative
network project case studies. This was done to
experiment with asynchronous collaboration and
knowledge sharing in addition to design
workshops.
Both cases were evaluated through focus groups
that indicated how social media has the potential to
enable actors to cross-field boundaries, inspire
each other, and in this way enrich the design
process within asynchronous collaboration.
Our contribution with this work is two-fold: on the
one hand, we aim to inspire and show how
collaborative network projects can benefit from
asynchronous collaboration in addition to
synchronous collaboration. On the other hand, we
hope to contribute to the creation of specific social
media platforms as tools for supporting
asynchronous collaboration within collaborative
networks.
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND
Societal challenges, also referred to as ‘wicked
problems’ (Rittel et al. 1973), are known for their
complex and dynamic nature. In order to be fully
addressed, societal challenges require solutions that can
bring about systemic change within society (Mont 2002,
Tan et al. 2006, van Gent et al. 2011). Product Service
System (PSS) design seems to be a promising concept
when dealing with ‘wicked problems’ (Baha et al. in
press).
In order to instigate this systemic change a collaborative
network that consists of various actors (e.g. producers,
stakeholders, opinion leaders, and consumers) is needed
to support the creation of the PSS (Tomico et al. 2011).
The underlying idea of collaborative networks is that
different actors can bring in key knowledge and
expertise into the system, increasing the likelihood of
creating a meaningful innovative solution. Collaborative
networks are known for a horizontal hierarchy, lacking
a clear leading actor (Chesbrough et al. 2006, Mandell
& Keast 2007, Howden 2007).

2 Participatory Innovation Conference 2013, Lahti, Finland www.pin-c2013.org/
Working within collaborative networks, in contrary to
cooperative or coordinative networks, can be complex
and risky due to the following factors (Mandell & Keast
2007, Stompff 2012):
• Stakeholder (inter)dependency: Actors within
collaborative networks are often strongly dependent
on each other, which makes reaching consensus
difficult.
• Cross-cultural boundaries: Actors may have
different incentives or perspectives on how the
project should be framed. Also, jargon can limit
communication between actors.
• Unpredictability: Actors sometimes may quit the
network or become redundant whilst new actors
emerge.
• Availability of time and attention: (Project) activities
are often not a prime directive of actors but rather
additional tasks to their normal schedule, making it
hard to consolidate on meetings or participation.
• Legitimacy: Because of the horizontal hierarchy,
often actors find themselves in a democratic
innovation process, being a compromise. In
particular, when the value proposition is not clear or
defined, actors may find themselves in a position
where they lack power or legitimacy to lead the
actors towards a successful design process,
especially when they are not in charge of vital
resources.
In short, for actors in a collaborative network it is
essential to form strong interpersonal connections.
These connections can be influenced by actively sharing
data, knowledge, demonstrate competencies, and
collaboratively sensing and exploring the design
landscape (Howden 2007). Usually, these activities are
done within workshops (‘synchronous’ events).
By putting the user central in the innovation design
process, these workshops enable a joint practice within
the collaborative network. (Sanoff 2006, Soini 2006,
Mattelmäki 2007, Buur & Matthew 2008, Tomico et al.
2011).
However, when the multi-stakeholder innovation
process is only based on ‘synchronous moments’, in
which actors can collaborate and discuss, multiple
disadvantages appear:
• Isolation/De-contextualization of knowledge:
Workshops allow for limited time and often de-
contextualize the actors from context, from which
otherwise interesting or valuable knowledge can be
shared.
• Retaining momentum: often, long time gaps may
appear in between workshops. This makes it hard to
retain momentum and keep actors engaged within
the project, thus undermining the creation of
interpersonal connections.
• (Mis)communication issues: in order for actors with
different backgrounds to collectively explore and
reach consensus, assumptions and
miscommunications need to be eliminated.
However, the frequency of workshops is usually
insufficient to deal with this issue.
In this paper, we address the disadvantages of only
deploying synchronous collaboration moments by using
social media as a tool to support ‘asynchronous
collaboration’; meaning that actors do not need to share
the same space and time in order to collaborate.
Therefore, we are interested in finding ways that enable
actors to share knowledge anytime, anywhere.
The rapid use of social networking sites (such as
Facebook), and media-sharing technology (such as
YouTube), and their increasing availability in mobile
platforms, is changing the way that we are
communicating with each other. Social media are
changing the way that information is passed across our
societies and around the world. The concept of social
media has been widely explored in business creation to
create better communication platforms between
consumers-producers, consumers-consumers, and
producers-producers (Kaplan & Haenlein 2010).
Social media allow for bi-directional or multi-
directional forms of knowledge sharing among actors.
On the contrary, traditional knowledge management or
consumer research methods within design often use
one-directional form to gather or spread data. In other
words, social media enable a more democratic way of
knowledge management within multi-stakeholder
innovation.
The diffusion of social media enabled devices makes the
use of social media attractive to share tacit knowledge
(knowledge from in situ) within actors in a collaborative
network. Another advantage of social media can be that
they empower all the actors to equally contribute in
sharing their knowledge and/or perspective.
1.2 OBJECTIVE
Our work departs from the idea that social media has
potential to serve as a knowledge sharing platform
supporting asynchronous collaboration between actors
within collaborative networks.
With our research we aim to investigate to what extent
social media can support asynchronous collaboration
within collaborative networks and for design.
Moreover, we are interested to find out whether the
design workshops’ limitations can be compensated by
the use of social media.
1.3 STRUCTURE OF THIS PAPER
This paper is structured in five sections. We start by
explaining our research approach and methodology
(section 2.1). We then present a social media selection
study and motivate the platform that we have selected
for this research (section 2.2). In the following section
we introduce two collaborative network case studies,
each related to a different societal challenge (section
3.1).

Participatory Innovation Conference 2013, Lahti, Finland www.pin-c2013.org/ 3
Then we explain how our investigation (asynchronous
collaboration through social media) was set up and
executed (section 3.2). In section four we present the
results of each case study (sections 4.1 and 4.2). Based
on focus groups, after each experiment, we drive
conclusions and discuss them in section five. Finally, in
section six, we define our future work.
2. RESEARCH APPROACH AND
METHODOLOGY
2.1 CASE STUDY (PROBING AND FOCUS GROUP)
We performed two case study experiments using
existing, real life, collaborative networks (Yin 2008). To
include complexity as a dimension in our research, we
selected a large and a small collaborative network. In
both case studies, an existing social media platform was
probed and reflected upon together with the involved
collaborative network actors, within a focus group
(Mattelmäki 2007, Berg & Lune 2011).
2.2 SELECTING A SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORM
A social media platform was selected and used as a
‘ready-made’ probe. Since there are many social media
platforms available, a set of requirements was defined
and used to select the most appropriate platform for our
study. The following requirements were considered in
our selection process based on design guidelines for
knowledge sharing tools, provided by Burg et al.
(2008):
• Accessibility: The social media platform should
allow the actors to capture/record knowledge in any
context.
• Presentation: The sharing platform should focus on
conveying media input visually rather than having a
pure textual orientation.
• Efficiency: Capturing knowledge should be done
efficiently without interfering with the actors’ daily
life.
• Compatibility: The social media platform should be
available for multiple devices; to capture, share, or
view knowledge from.
Based on the requirements, the following social media
platforms were evaluated: Instagram, Evernote, Twitter,
Pinterest, and Yammer. In the end, Instagram was
chosen as the platform to be probed. Instagram enables
actors to share and communicate knowledge through
photos, related captions, and additional comments (from
both the uploader and viewers). Adding both captions
and comments to the photo, in context, makes
knowledge more concrete and understandable, enabling
other actors to relate to it more easily (see Figure 1). In
addition to captions and comments, the uploader can
associate hashtags to each photo. Hashtags enable
organization, (semantic) grouping of the photo
collection and offer the possibility of filtering it through
Instagram’s internal search engine (Hashtag 2013).
Figure 1: By adding a caption the moment after a photo was taken,
actors have the possibility to concretize their knowledge about the
captured content, e.g. relating to a personal experience, a special
insight or explaining what is happening. The hashtag #gbmstory was
part of the setup of the first case study; it was added to define and
categorize this knowledge as a design opportunity.
3. CASE STUDY SETUP AND EXECUTION
3.1 SOCIETAL CHALLENGES AS CASE STUDIES
Two ongoing projects aimed at addressing societal
challenges were selected and used as cases for our
research. The projects related to the societal challenges:
aging (case 1) and energy saving (case 2). Below we
describe each case in detail followed by our experiment
design for the case.
3.1.1 DESCRIPTION CASE 1 (GREY BUT MOBILE)
The first case study was performed within the project
Grey but Mobile (GbM), as part of the Dutch national
‘Creative Industry Scientific Program’ (CRISP 2010).
The goal of GbM is to address the societal challenge of
aging and care in relation to mobility and social
participation of elderly in the Netherlands, using PSS
solutions.
GbM attempts to instigate meaningful change in the
society by designing solutions within a collaborative
network, consisting of various actors based on a
quadruple helix innovation model. This model includes
the industry, the public sector, knowledge institutions,
and societal representatives (active citizens)
(Carayannis & Campbell 2009, Tomico et al. 2011).
Two design workshops within the GbM project formed
the context of our first case study (probing Instagram to
support asynchronous communication).

4 Participatory Innovation Conference 2013, Lahti, Finland www.pin-c2013.org/
3.1.2 DESCRIPTION CASE 2 (ENERGY CONSUMPTION)
The second case study took place within an industrial
design MSc graduation project, aimed at stimulating
energy saving behavior within the campus of Eindhoven
University of Technology (TU/e). The student, who
initiated the project, wanted to design a PSS solution to
address this societal challenge. However, at that
moment, the project was yet to be framed in terms of
specific context and direction.
In order to frame the project and define interesting
directions, Instagram was probed as a collaborative tool
to gather different perspectives on energy consumption
within TU/e. In practice, a small team was formed
between the student and an involved design researcher
to benefit from multiple perspectives.
3.2 SETTING UP THE CASE STUDIES
In this section we describe the separate setup of the two
case studies.
3.2.1 SETUP CASE 1 (GREY BUT MOBILE)
An electronic probe package was designed, consisting
of the ‘ready-made’ Instagram app, an assignment brief,
and a manual of use of the probe (see Figure 2). The
package was then distributed through e-mail to the GbM
collaborative network actors after the first workshop.
Four out of ten invited participants (around 50% of the
network) were included in this study. These were: the
first author, an innovation manager from a care
organization, an innovation manager from a public
transport company, and an account manager from the
municipality. The actors were asked to collect and
share: project inspiration, context related experts and
current problems elderly face within the society.
Moreover, a set of three categories of hashtags were
defined and used to collaboratively explore the design
space:
• #GbMinspiration: Projects that have been done in
the past or other material that can inspire the
network in addressing the societal challenge.
• #GbMexperts: People with expertise from which the
network can benefit.
• #GbMstory: Situations or challenges elderly people
currently deal with, meant to give the network a
more empathic orientation.
After sending the electronic package (see Figure 2), all
actors were contacted to confirm: package reception,
acceptance of the assignment, and understanding of the
brief. The participants had one and a half weeks to
upload the required materials before meeting again in a
design workshop. The collected results would be used
for supporting the second workshop by putting them on
an ‘inspiration wall’ for co-design purposes. Within this
workshop, the collaborative network would co-design
PSS concepts.
At the end of the second workshop, a focus group was
organized to get more insight on how Instagram
Figure 2: Pages from the manual that was provided to the participants
through e-mail.
contributed to asynchronous collaboration in between
the two workshops. In addition, individual interviews
were held with each experiment participant to get more
insights on how the Instagram platform was received,
and to what extent it was useful for asynchronous
collaboration in between and for the workshop(s).
3.2.2 SETUP CASE 2 (ENERGY CONSUMPTION)
Before our social media experiment, the MSc graduate
had executed a ‘photo safari’ (Broberg et al. 2011), with
his photo camera, with the aim of exploring how energy
was used in TU/e. This allowed room to compare the
two techniques.
In this case study, Instagram was used intensively for
three days, allowing the designer and the design
researcher to share their perspectives and findings in
how energy is being consumed within various locations
of the TU/e campus. This was to uncover behavioral
patterns and infrastructural/unforeseen uses of energy
within different activities in different contexts.
Before starting the probing session, a hands-on training
was provided with examples on how to capture tacit
knowledge and make it explicit through adding
captions, comments or hashtags. We added this step to
the probing experiment based on the knowledge that
was gained from the previous case study experiment
design.
After the three days, the collaborative network actors
joined forces in a meeting in which they co-explored
interesting aspects of the collected material. The
uploaded photos, were analyzed and discussed while
being displayed through a browser, using a third party
client of Instagram, Pinstagram (Pictacular 2012). After
the analysis, the participants had a focus group to reflect
upon the use of social media for asynchronous
collaboration within this experiment.
In addition, the MSc graduate who had executed the
‘photo safari’ was asked to write down a reflection in
which he would compare the two approaches (photo
camera vs. Instagram) and elaborate on his subjective
experience of using social media within a small
collaborative network for design exploration.

Participatory Innovation Conference 2013, Lahti, Finland www.pin-c2013.org/ 5
Figure 3: The ‘inspiration wall’ created from the Instagram probe
results during the second workshop.
4. RESULTS
4.1 CASE STUDY 1 (GREY BUT MOBILE)
The participating actors uploaded their previous elderly
related projects as inspiration to convey what they have
been doing in the past. Because of the social media
probe, two actors were triggered to share documents
about their earlier pilot projects with other actors in the
collaborative network.
Concretely, one actor uploaded four different photos
spread over the three categories (Inspiration, Experts,
and Story). The second actor uploaded seven
inspirational sources, the third actor uploaded eight
photos divided over the three categories. The fourth
actor was not uploading any material. This was
observed by the other actors who then decided to get in
contact with the former.
For the description of the uploaded materials,
participants used short keywords, similar to hashtags, to
express their inspirational sources. The pictures by
themselves generally conveyed enough information
about what they were about, suggesting the focus and
intention of the actors to some extent.
We also observed that whenever an actor, for any
reason, did not share anything on Instagram, the social
media context provided an indication that this actor
required attention. Compared to traditional workshops
(synchronous events), this type of collaboration
provides organizers with instant/dynamic information
that might be of use for their facilitation role.
The photos were presented on an ‘inspiration wall’
during the second workshop, which allowed participants
to reflect upon each other’s work (see Figure 3).
The contents of the uploaded photos indicate that actors
mainly share projects related to their own expertise,
giving little attention to customer needs or expertise
from other fields. The content of the photo material, to
some extent, reflects the expertise/knowledge of each
actor, indirectly indicating what is missing for the
project. In addition it shows which actors require more
intensive facilitation, during the workshop, to open up
for better collaboration.
These findings also raised awareness that most actors
still require support in crossing the boundaries of their
field (acculturate) in order to get better insights in the
‘wicked problem’ and the needs of future customers.
One of the societal representatives acknowledged that
many organizations currently have a tunnel vision, due
to which they fall into recurring thinking patterns,
leading to repeat conventional solutions. The focus
group and separate actor interviews revealed that the use
of a visually oriented social media platform forced
actors to work and think differently. Actors were used to
be ‘thinking on paper’ and to share largely textual
materials rather than concretizing and showing their
ideas through pictures and captions.
The time-effectiveness of asynchronous collaboration
was acknowledged within the focus group:
Innovation Manager from care organization: {The problem
with every organization is time and money... Time seems to
be shorter when you're working with different
organizations.}
Using social media for asynchronous collaboration was
also appreciated:
Manager of Infrastructure within the municipality:
{Normally, we have a tunnel vision, the idea of the tool is to
keep you reflecting on the project. We connect with the
project through notes and pictures}
Still, most of the participants found difficulties in using
their smartphone for social media. They mentioned that
this was because of a ‘generation gap’. In addition,
some of the actors were not sure about how they could
reply within the browser, despite stating before that they
knew how to use the platform before the session started.
4.2 CASE STUDY 2 (ENERGY CONSUMPTION)
The second experiment added valuable insights within
the advantages of using social media as a tool for co-
exploration. The participant, who had performed a
‘photo safari’ before, stated:
{I regret I didn’t find out about this tool sooner}
Social media allowed him to get out of his own tunnel
vision, enrich and co-reflect his perspective with others.
Concretely, there were over fifty photos shared within
the small collaborative network. The ability to add
context to the photo through comments and hashtags
was especially appreciated by the participating actor
within this session. This allowed the photos ‘to speak’
in contrast to the previous ‘photo safari’, in which it was
often forgotten what exactly was meant with a photo, or
why was it captured in the first place.

6 Participatory Innovation Conference 2013, Lahti, Finland www.pin-c2013.org/
Figure 4: Instagram probe analysis session. On the right: probe results
displayed on screen; on the left: post-its used to capture and group the
subjective insights.
The ability to add captions also made it easier to discuss
the context of the photo, and exchange subjective
interpretations and experiences (see Figure 1).
For the analysis, photos were displayed on a large TV
screen using Pinstagram within a browser. Meanwhile
the designers physically captured tacit knowledge by
writing on post-its and grouping them (see Figure 4).
By looking at the context from different perspectives,
the design exploration got much richer in terms of
creating new and increasing awareness about certain
energy use behavior. It provided rich content for
dialogue about the design context. Or as the designer
who performed the ‘photo safari’ puts it:
{To conclude, it was the very format of the session that
contributed to its success: it was an open, group discussion
centered not just on a central theme (the one of my project)
but around our own creations and point of views (the
photos). This ownership element stimulated participation and
sharing of information coming also from our own experience
and personal life as well.}
5. CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION
We have probed Instagram as a ‘ready-made’ social
media platform to support asynchronous collaboration
within collaborative networks. This was done within
two projects that aimed to address societal challenges.
In the remaining parts of this section we draw
conclusions and discuss them one by one.
5.1 ASYNCHRONOUS COLLABORATION
5.1.1 THE ACTORS
Asynchronous collaboration, probed by using
Instagram, proved to lower the threshold for the actors
to get engaged in collaborative projects, contributing to
retain project momentum to some extent. In particular,
we found out that the social media platform Instagram,
enabled informal and low effort communication through
surprise and dialogue. This communication is based on
sharing knowledge through captioned and tagged
photos, representing situations, people, ideas or even
other sources of knowledge (e.g. books).
5.1.2 THE ORGANIZERS
Instagram was found to be useful by the project
organizers due to the instant/dynamic sharing of
knowledge among the actors. This allowed the
organizers to anticipate on the shared knowledge and
modify the structure of workshops accordingly (section
4.1). In addition, since knowledge is instantly shared
across the collaborative network, the organizers did not
have to actively distribute it to each actor.
5.1.3 THE PROJECT
The case studies indicate that projects can benefit from
rich discussions due to asynchronous collaboration
possibilities enabled through social media. The
introduction of social media in the projects resulted in
actors: bringing in more knowledge, uncovering their
interest, and increasing their availability for the project.
These elements, benefited the project by improving the
systemic understanding of the ‘wicked problems’, and
shifting towards a more user-driven approach.
5.2 INSTAGRAM
5.2.1 PROS
Within the two experiments, the use of social media
platform Instagram benefited actors and organizers in
the following ways:
• It provides more interaction moments, as there is no
need to make appointments: content can be uploaded
to the platform and shared with others at all times.
This potentially allows to save up more time for the
PSS project.
• It allows the actors to go more in depth in the project
due to the possibility to contribute more (in situ)
knowledge and expertise, while using the workshops
for having face-to-face reflection/interaction.
• It enables informal and low effort communication
thanks to the introduction of comment-based
dialogue and the combination of photos, captions
and hashtags. We observed this to be a motivating
factor for actors to get more engaged within the
collaboration.
• The additional knowledge that is shared by actors
through Instagram creates a common knowledge
source for actors to reflect upon during meetings.
This improves the quality of communication and
understanding of each other’s incentives for
collaboration.
• The possibility to add hashtags and captions to a
photo after capturing was found most appealing by
the designer from the second case study (section
4.2). Through description, the photo becomes
concretized based upon the actor’s view in an
(actual) context.
5.2.2 CONS
We encountered the following cons when using
Instagram for asynchronous collaboration:

Participatory Innovation Conference 2013, Lahti, Finland www.pin-c2013.org/ 7
• Instagram as a social media platform only facilitates
photo sharing, whereas participants from the first
case study all expressed the need to also share other
types of files, especially documents.
• While Instagram has a relatively quick learning
curve for use, a possible ‘generation gap’ was
expressed by some actors above forty years old.
• Some actors found the lack of privacy over uploaded
content to Instagram disturbing. Please note that
Instagram does not ensure a closed network that
provides full ownership over uploaded content.
• Instagram does not have many features for
representing the shared knowledge. This led us to
rely on ‘Pinstagram’ for structuring the photos for
analytic purposes. In addition, we used Post-it’s for
reflecting and drawing relations between the shared
knowledge.
5.2.3 UNEXPLORED OPPORTUNITIES
The possibility to initiate a discussion within the
commenting system of Instagram remained largely
unused in both case studies, while it does show potential
in further exploiting the shared knowledge. The authors
are interested to see whether social media can also
contribute to asynchronous dialogue within
participatory innovation (Buur & Matthews 2008).
We still lack clear guidelines on how we can encourage
participants in using the social media platform to share
knowledge and to motivate people in discussing about
this knowledge. Some insights can be gained through
the works of Gupta & Govindarajan (2000), who
distinguish five factors that determine whether
knowledge will be shared.
5.3 GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS
Finally, we would like to provide a few general
recommendations for deploying asynchronous
collaboration in collaborative network projects, using
social media:
• To ensure satisfying outcomes when deploying
social media for asynchronous collaboration, we
strongly recommend to provide a brief hands-on
training beforehand.
• Before deploying asynchronous collaboration within
a collaborative network project, we recommend
project organizers to first negotiate with the actors
how asynchronous collaboration could benefit the
project.
6. FUTURE WORK
We are interested in similar case studies that can
contribute in exploring to what extent social media can
be used within open or participatory innovation. This
study has also inspired us to do research on how tools
such as cultural probes can be innovated using social
media.
7. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We would like to thank the following organizations for
participating in our experiment: Connexxion, Zuidzorg,
the City of Eindhoven, Eindhoven University of
Technology, and Design Academy Eindhoven. In
specific, we would like to thank their representatives:
Marco Cowan, Gerard van Bakel, Jacquelien Smits,
Lettie Hoogstra, Annette Visser, Lotte van den
Munckhof, Bas Raijmakers, Maartje van Gestel, and
Heather Daam.
This research was funded within the Creative Industry
Scientific Program (CRISP). CRISP is supported by the
Dutch Ministry of Education, Culture, and Science.
REFERENCES
Baha, SE, Sturkenboom N, Lu Y & Raijmakers B in
press, Initiating a Collaborative Network: From a
Designer’s Perspective for PSS Innovations,
Proceedings of the 2nd Cambridge Academic Design
Management Conference (CADMC 2013), 4-5
September 2013, University of Cambridge, Cambridge,
UK.
Buur J & Matthews B 2008, Participatory innovation,
International Journal of Innovation Management,
vol.12, no. 03, pp. 255-273.
Chesbrough H, Vanhaverbeke W & West J 2006, Open
innovation: researching a new paradigm, Oxford
University Press, USA.
Berg BL & Lune H 2011, Qualitative research methods
for the social sciences, 8th edn, Pearson, London, UK.
Broberg O, Andersen V & Seim R 2011, Participatory
ergonomics in design processes: the role of boundary
objects, Applied Ergonomics, vol. 41, no. 3, pp. 464-
472.
Carayannis E & Campbell D 2009, ‘Mode 3’ and
‘quadruple helix’: toward a 21st century fractal
innovation ecosystem, International Journal of
Technology Management, vol. 46, no. 3/4.
CRISP 2010, Creative industry scientific program
(CRISP) - design of product service systems, CRISP.
Gupta AK & Govindarajan V 2000, Knowledge flows
within multinational corporations, Strategic
Management Journal, vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 473-496.
Hashtag 2013, ‘Hashtag’, Wikipedia, the free
encyclopedia, viewed 5 May 2013,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hashtag
Howden P 2007, So you think you can manage in a
complex network, viewed 5 May 2013,
http://www.dpi.vic.gov.au/agriculture/about-
agriculture/publications-resources/policy-strategy/so-
you-think-you-can-manage-in-a-complex-network

8 Participatory Innovation Conference 2013, Lahti, Finland www.pin-c2013.org/
Kaplan AM & Haenlein M 2010, Users of the world,
unite! the challenges and opportunities of social media,
Business Horizons, vol. 53, no. 1, pp. 59-68.
Mandell M & Keast RL 2007, Evaluating network
arrangements: toward revised performance measures,
Public performance & management review, vol. 30, no.
4, pp. 574-597.
Mattelmäki T 2007, Probing for co-exploring,
CoDesign, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 65-78.
Mont OK 2002, Clarifying the concept of product
service-systems, Journal Cleaner Production, vol. 10,
no. 3, pp. 237-245.
Pictacular 2012, viewed 5 May 2013,
http://www.pictacular.co/
Rittel, Horst WJ, Melvin M & Webber 1973, Dilemmas
in a general theory of planning, Policy Sciences, vol. 4,
no. 2, pp. 155-169.
Sanoff H 2006, Multiple views of participatory design,
METU Journal of the Faculty of Architecture, vol. 23,
no. 2, pp. 131-143.
Soini K 2006, Industrial designers as facilitators: how to
enable collaboration in multidisciplinary workshops,
Proceedings of Connecting - a Conference on the
Multivocality of Design History & Design Studies, 23-
25 August 2006, Helsinki - Tallinn.
Stompff G 2012, Facilitating team cognition: how
designers mirror what NPD teams do, PhD thesis, Delft
University of Technology.
Tan RL, McAloone TC & Andreasen MM 2006, What
happens to integrated product development models with
PSS approaches?, Proceedings of the 6th Integrated
Product Development, Magdeburg, Germany.
Tomico O, Lu Y, Baha SE, Lehto P & Hirvikoski 2011,
Designers initiating open innovation with multi-
stakeholder through co-reflection sessions. Proceedings
of the 4th World Conference on Design Research
(IASDR 2011), 31 October - 4 November 2011, Delft
University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands. pp.
317-329.
van Burg J, Berends H & van Raaij E 2008, Organizing
knowledge sharing in networks: the theory, In de Man
AP, Knowledge Management and Innovation in
Networks, Edward Elgar Pub.
van Gent SH, Megens CJPG, Peeters MMR, Hummels,
CCM, Lu Y & Brombacher AC 2011, Experiential
Design Landscapes as a Design Tool for Market
Research of Disruptive Intelligent Systems, Proceedings
of the 1st Cambridge Academic Design Management
Conference (CADMC 2011), 7-8 September 2011,
University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Yin RK 2008, Case Study Research: Design and
Methods (Applied Social Research Methods), 4th edn,
Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, California, USA.