Collaboration Management

30

31 Having determined external value creation via open strategy is not enough collaboration

management must be conducted to insure competitiveness. Alignment of collaboration and strategy is here important. A firm must understand its processes of building and capturing value, to choose the appropriate strategy (Pisano & Verganti, 2008). Me-Mover’s CEO Eliason expresses the vision of user involvement; “I think it will be a really great idea like the Ferrari case you showed me, to make a list with the different products and then tell the users this is the base and you are welcome to propose suggestions”(Eliason, 2011). This expression shows that the important part for Me-Mover is to manage the collaboration in a direction that sparkle creativity, and generates solutions to their exact challenges. To make sure the investment of resources is not going to waste or inefficiency causing slack.

Therefore a hierarchical structure of the collaboration is needed with Me-Mover at the top to set directions and innovation tasks. It leaves out the innovation community and consortium, due to in this case inappropriate flat governance. The essence of the last two modes of collaboration

innovation mall and elite circle will applied to manage the different layers of users that surround Me-Mover.

The different layers are as before mentioned, an inner layer of selected individuals and an outer layer consisting of a crowd with arms length relation to the firm.

To manage the inner layer of users the principles from elite circle will fit. Selective participation is for the few that shows extra ordinary talent and willingness to help Me-Mover solve challenges.

Removing arms length relation and their full potential can be explored and exploited by the firm and themselves.

The closed elite circle participation can opposite the innovation mall create an environment that underpins development of new concepts.“For example, the development of radically new product concepts or product architectures is an integral task that has to be embraced in its entirety. In such cases, closed modes that provide an environment where collaborators can closely interact must be employed”(Pisano & Verganti, 2008, p.82). Due to this radically new development projects are best placed here, and managed with a closed principle. In this case such projects could be the ones concerning new variants of the personal transporter or the belonging clothing assortment, which CEO Eliason expresses his vision about.

32 Providing entirety is one feature that underpins Me-Mover’s user collaboration, another one is protectionism. The closed collaboration offers more protection of intellectually property rights.

Because it is a selective participation and only individuals trustworthy should be invited.

Trustworthy users reduce the chance of leakage of valuable information, and at the same time the risk of opportunistic behaviour is decreasing.

Leakage of information is important in two matters. First, when the firm is applying for patents.

According to the European Patent Office an invention is only patentable if it fulfils the requirements of novelty and non-prejudicial disclosure (European Patent Office, 2011). It means the invention has to be unknown to the general public before it is patentable. Leakage to the public of inventions Me-Mover wants to patent can damage this. European patenting rules are undisputable because of Me-Mover’s internationalisation plans are to compete on major European markets.

Second, potential competitors might get useful insights if valuable information is careless managed.

Working with trustworthy users with passion for the brand reduces the chance of disclosure of information preventing a patent. Displacement of information might lead to competitors getting insights. Such insights might lead to improved competitiveness and make the market more difficult for the firm to operate in.

To manage the outer layer of users which have arms length relation to the firm, innovation mall principles are applicable. This mode of collaboration is a true crowdsourcing approach. The idea behind is when firms post problems, and then lets anyone propose solutions (Pisano & Verganti, 2008). The firm due to its place in the top of the hierarchy define some tasks they need to solve, and via external posting let outsiders take up the task.

Among other things it is appropriate when,“you need ideas from many parties, and the best ideas may come from unexpected sources”(Pisano & Verganti, 2008, p.81). Open participation gives anyone access, and hereby Me-Mover is not in danger of “judging the book by its cover”. Meaning that even the most unlikely source, might hold a key to solve the problem at hand. Overall

innovation mall principles suit a crowdsourcing approach. Due to these strong linkages between them it is applicable to use.

33 Openness towards users is essential in Me-Mover’s case. Uncomplicated access to a network is an absolute success driver, to ease participation for the members. The crowdsourcing approach must be understandable and accessible for the crowd.

But openness has its challenges. Open collaboration works best when problems can be divided in minor parts. But for radically new product concepts, entirety of the problem must be available (Pisano & Verganti, 2008). Me-Mover must be aware of this, and distribute challenges between inner and outer layer of users in correspondence to it. The problem can be avoided by placing projects concerning new products in the elite circle collaboration mode.

The collaboration is hierarchical. The hierarchical form means that a specific organisation gets to choose both problem definition and solution (Pisano & Verganti, 2008). This fit the firm because it wants full focus on its defined challenges, to insure solutions can be feasible.

A controversy can appear, if Me-Mover through true crowdsourcing spirit lets its’ users vote for solutions. This will be a decomposition of the hierarchical structure. Because then the firm gives up its authority to choose solutions. Furthermore there is a chance that none suitable solutions will be chosen. This will disrupt the innovation management. A way of dealing with this is to do a pre-screening of the gathered solutions, insuring that whatever solution is voted for by the crowd it will suit the firm.

In the end Pisano and Verganti, like crowdsourcing theory, identify both financial and nonfinancial incentives as crucial for user involvement (Pisano & Verganti, 2008). This underlines the utmost importance to offer incentives to user. Offering them something in return for their work is close to the only way of attracting them.

34