MÉTODOS, TÉCNICAS E INSTRUMENTOS

The literature review revealed that innovating users often possess lead user characteristics, which were being ahead of a trend and high expected benefits from obtaining a solution to their needs. These two characteristics are considered to be a major driver for user innovation. The ahead of the trend component was hard to determine, and only a few cases were coded with code 1.1 (ahead of trend). For social entrepreneurs in a BoP context this has been coded 4 times by the researcher, 11 by coder 2, whereas coder 1 has not given this code to the cases. When the BoP context was omitted this was coded 3 times by coder 1, 8 times by the researcher and 14 times by coder 2. The difficulty in establishing whether an innovation was ahead of a trend is due to the variety of the innovations and the lack of knowledge of the researcher and coders regarding this. Earlier research on user innovation used experts in the related industries to judge this component, the researcher did not have access to this kind of expertise, and it would not have been feasible regarding the breath of the topics (innovations) under study. Researchers have ascribed the commercial attractiveness of an innovation to the characteristic being ahead of a trend. Regarding the following propositions:

- P.1.1 The lead user characteristics, being ahead of a trend influence the likelihood that users will innovate.

- P.5 The user innovator characteristics, being ahead of a trend and expected benefits positively influence the likelihood that users will innovate and commercialise their innovations

This research, based on the information at hand, could not make statements regarding the influence of this component. This is not problematic, because earlier research has found that the two lead user components were independent of each other. The innovation likelihood is often determined by the expected benefit component, and this characteristic has been found at several cases.

With regard to the expected benefits, code 1.2, this code has been given in total 37 times by coder 1, 27 times by the researcher and 13 times by coder 2. In total have 27 cases been

described that have been coded for the expected benefits component and concerned a personal need component. There were 13 cases which concerned products or services targeting the BoP that had this component, and in 14 cases which were not targeting the BoP. All the cases that concerned the BoP context have been described. The cases that did not concern the BoP context

97 have only be described when two or more coders had coded the expected benefit component. The reason why these cases have been described is because this is an important attribute of the user innovator characteristics. Experiencing a need or gap for in-house use, and the feeling of dissatisfaction have been ascribed to the expected benefits of users. Only Eco Femme shows the in-house use component clearly, because in that case it could clearly be established that the entrepreneur was a user of the product before she commercialised the innovation. The other cases did not clearly show that it concerned users that wanted to obtain solutions for in-house felt needs, although events in the personal situation by which certain needs were felt triggered the development of an innovation or the establishment of an organisation.

When the BoP context was left out of the analysis, Cool2Care, showed strong analogies with the user-entrepreneurship theory, because it clearly shows the gap the entrepreneur experienced in his personal life and the search for a solution to solve this need. Although the entrepreneur was not in need to obtain a solution for his personal situation, the experience that he had to go through made him see a gap and subsequently an opportunity. Other cases showed that a personal experience was the trigger to identify an opportunity. With regard to the propositions 1.2 and 5:

- P. 1.2 The lead user characteristic ‘expected benefits’ increases the likelihood that a user will innovate

- P. 5 The user innovator characteristics, being ahead of a trend and expected benefits positively influence the likelihood that users will innovate and commercialise their innovations

The cases did not provide enough information to make sound statements about propositions 1.2 and 5, whether the expected benefits increases the likelihood that users will innovate and commercialises its innovation. It was found that personal experience, which resulted in a felt need, was an important component in the identification of opportunities; however, it was lacking the component that the innovation served in-house purposes. It was found, however, that new needs, which is an element of the expected innovation related benefits, was an important trigger for the development of innovations and the establishment of organisations accordingly. It should be noted that with health innovations the solving of an in-house need would be even more difficult, for example, case 45: Ella’s Monitor, where the death of a child was the trigger to develop a device to stop sudden death syndrome. Other examples, such as case 54: Care for Lupus and case 49: Sucre Blue were established due to the founders having a disease, and case 46: Face it TOGETHER were the founder had personal experience with addiction. These events in the founder’s personal lives that contributed to feeling a new need or seeing a gap that otherwise might not have been experienced. Thereby, resulted this new need in a sense of

98 dissatisfaction, which is also an important element of the expected innovation related benefits. However, it was not to obtain a solution for an in-house need that drove these entrepreneurs to develop solutions that aimed to benefit themselves. All the entrepreneurs were inspired by personal experience and their new needs to help others. In a sense did these personal felt needs contributed to the use of local information, which was in this instance the use of personal information regarding events that happened in the entrepreneur’s personal lives. Although evidence has not been found that this leaded to informational asymmetries, it might be assumed that the deep related knowledge regarding these personal events have contributed to

informational asymmetries.

5.1.2 Resources related to user innovation and commercialisation of user