RESEARCHING OPEN INNOVATION THROUGH SOCIAL MEDIA Pär Ågerfalk, Uppsala University; Mark Aakhus, Rutgers; Mikael Lind, Viktoria Institute April 2010

This article explores collaboration through social media and the subsequent requirements in companies´online presence

and communication skills. The world is social, and so are most human actions.

Internet, as a technology and medium for connecting people, has had profound effects on organizations, both on internal and external relationships. With the emergence of user-generated content through social media, the Internet is commonly seen as a marketplace of information, constantly updated and always on top of the most recent developments in society. This new marketplace raises a number of issues. For instance, knowledge workers may engage in knowledge creation that (potentially) exposes company sensitive information to the outside world. On the other hand, it also means that their organizations can benefit from outside knowledge contributions. Different platforms and solutions for enabling people to get in contact and share information are being developed at an ever-increasing speed.

Open innovation initiatives and platforms are closely interlinked with the social media

phenomenon. It is by leveraging Web 2.0 technologies that, for instance, Dell and Starbucks have managed to open up their innovation processes and provided structures for involving customers more directly in their product development through what has become known as crowdsourcing (Howe, 2006). These platforms go beyond mere call for feature requests as they provide for users (i.e. customers) to actively propose, discuss, evaluate and rank ideas and solutions. Other companies, such as Moog Music and IKEA, utilise user forums to achieve some of the same benefits. In these cases customers are allowed freely (albeit moderated by the company) to discuss issues related to the company’s products. This sometimes results in feature requests being proposed although the main purpose of such forums seems to be customers’ taking care of customer support by helping each other to solve product related problems.

RESEARCHING OPEN INNOVATION THROUGH SOCIAL MEDIA Pär Ågerfalk, Uppsala University; Mark Aakhus, Rutgers; Mikael Lind, Viktoria Institute April 2010

Yet some companies, such as Lego, has taken a step further and released (parts of) their product portfolio as open source, thus letting their customers into the core of product innovation and design (Ågerfalk & Fitzgerald, 2008). Certainly, conversations similar to those in the company-controlled forums also happen in other corners of the social media space. Examples include third-party consumer information and product ranking sites, such as Pricerunner, non-company specific forums, such as KVR Audio, and independent image and video sharing services, such as Flickr and YouTube, not to mention Twitter, Facebook and the blogosphere were just about everything gets scrutinized. Thus, we can distinguish at least four modes of open innovation through social media with varying degrees of stakeholder interaction: opensourcing, crowdsourcing, discussion forums, and public

discourse. These modes may be controlled by the company itself, by a third-party or be user-led.

Given the many alternatives for how to tap into and harness the Web 2.0 “wisdom of the crowd”, it is not surprising that many

organizations are struggling with how to respond to the social media phenomenon in order to reap its benefits. Given the many alternatives for how to tap into and harness the Web 2.0 “wisdom of the crowd”, it is not surprising that many organizations are

struggling with how to respond to the social media phenomenon in order to reap its benefits (according to Gartner a top ten strategic priority of organizations currently). In fact, several organizations have experienced serious inconvenience because of social media exposure brought about by creative and sometimes displeased customers.

RESEARCHING OPEN INNOVATION THROUGH SOCIAL MEDIA Pär Ågerfalk, Uppsala University; Mark Aakhus, Rutgers; Mikael Lind, Viktoria Institute April 2010

“Given the many alternatives for how

to tap into and harness the Web 2.0

“wisdom of the crowd”, it is not

surprising that many organizations are

struggling with how to respond to the

social media phenomenon in order to reap its benefits.”

In some of these cases, the company used the very same media to respond successfully to diverse incidents (e.g. The Domino’s Pizza case). In other cases, companies responded more or less with ignorance (e.g. the attempt to ban mobile phones at US college football games and the United Breaks Guitars case). Social media create new possibilities for interaction. In so doing, these media invite innovations and struggles over how stakeholders ought to interact with each other. Yet, the models for how all these stakeholder should stand in relation to each other and interact (or not) primarily arose with the large hierarchical organizations of the 20th century. These models are now being challenged. What then, can we as researchers do to help remedy this situation? By understanding better managerial response to social media, we would argue. The emergence of open innovation through social media is similar to earlier disruptive innovations (Bower and Christensen, 1995), yet different in some key respects.

First, to most organizations social media as such do not form part of the core business (if they are not software manufacturers). Rather, these technologies have evolved along with the development of service-based Internet infrastructures to become a threat or an indispensable asset for companies to communicate and interact, internally and externally. Second, the impact of social media on an organization is not based on market demand. Rather, as pointed out by Lyytinen and Rose (2003), disruptive information systems innovations tend to be based on pull strategies rather than push. That is, they emerge from within the organization. Third, it seems that social media become disruptive as they are adopted through a boot-strapping approach which builds momentum primarily due to an increasing number of users of the specific media rather than inherent features in the technology itself. Thus, they are “infrastructural innovations” (Lyytinen and Rose, 2003) but with an emphasis on social momentum as a driver for disruption rather than a giant leap

RESEARCHING OPEN INNOVATION THROUGH SOCIAL MEDIA Pär Ågerfalk, Uppsala University; Mark Aakhus, Rutgers; Mikael Lind, Viktoria Institute April 2010

in underlying technology. In order to understand how companies respond (and ought to respond) to social media and open innovation, we must first understand what it means to be social and how such an understanding can help to recognize how social media shape companies’ on-line presence and ongoing conversations with various stakeholders. We assume that managerial response to social media can be grounded in practical theories of pragmatics, emphasizing action and communication that make assumptions about how communication works and how it ought to work (Aakhus, 2007).

Fundamentally, the social world is created and recreated through human actions. Most actions are social: “That action will be called social which in its meaning as intended by the actor or actors, takes account of the behavior of others and is thereby oriented in its course” (Weber, 1978, p. 4). This suggests that a social action has both social grounds and social purposes. As claimed by Mead (1934, p 6) “the behavior of an

individual can be understood only in terms of the whole social group of which he is member, since his individual acts are involved in larger social acts, which go beyond himself and which implicate the other members of the group.” It is thus essential to look both for social grounds and social purposes when studying actions. Social grounds form the history of an action. Social actions are thus interactive where several inter-related actions constitute patterns of actions related to each other by initiatives and responses (Linell, 1998). One single action can be both an initiative and a response. A human being intervenes in the world, by performing actions, in order to create some differences in their environment—to achieve ends. An important distinction can be made between the result and the effects of an action (von Wright, 1971): while the actor is in control of the immediate results of their actions, the long-term effects may be hard to predict. The philosophical orientation of pragmatics puts attention to peoples’ use of language and the knowledge about interaction in solving basic problems of communication.

RESEARCHING OPEN INNOVATION THROUGH SOCIAL MEDIA Pär Ågerfalk, Uppsala University; Mark Aakhus, Rutgers; Mikael Lind, Viktoria Institute April 2010

This means a focus upon meaning, action, and coherence. In ordinary interaction these are managed through constraints participants impose on their interaction through linguistic and non-linguistic means, especially as these frame allowable contributions to ongoing activity (Levinson, 1979). Constraints arise as participants shape their actions to contribute to a purpose and interpret others’ actions relative to that joint purpose (Levinson, 1979). Constraints include who can participate and what identify they can project, the allocation of turns and types of turns, topics, and so on (Drew and Heritage, 1993; Levinson, 1979). Purpose can be joint goals, or shared identities, that vary in explicitness and formality as in the way chat, business meeting, negotiation, and a judicial hearing differ from each other (Drew and Heritage, 1993; Levinson, 1979).

Constraints can also be an object of intentional design as people create and re-configure the ways they meet and gather and as technologies and procedures are developed to support various kinds of communication. In the history of work and management,

for instance, the nature, role, and relationship of types of meetings workers have with each other and with management have been an important part of management (Yates, 1989). Meetings, encounters, and the activities these are to produce are the object

of design in many theories of organizational design. These micro-matters are the space where disruptive technology creates shifts and thus struggles over the role and nature of encounters and meetings in the workplace (who should be involved, what should be discussed, topic, relevant contributions, how to solve differences, and the like).

The uses of social media, and other IT, to engage various stakeholders provide accordances

RESEARCHING OPEN INNOVATION THROUGH SOCIAL MEDIA Pär Ågerfalk, Uppsala University; Mark Aakhus, Rutgers; Mikael Lind, Viktoria Institute April 2010

“The design of the technology and what action it

makes possible (or impossible) reveals

practical pragmatic theories for organizational communication.”

and constraints for interaction between an organization and its stakeholders. These technologies are actable—that is, they are tools for stakeholders to act relative to the organization and each other. Of course, the technology only supports certain actions and fosters certain forms of interactivity. It is in the design of these technologies that organizations signal their relations to stakeholders. The design of the technology and what action it makes possible (or impossible) reveals practical pragmatic theories for organizational communication. The design of the technology, and especially what it presupposes about organizational communication, can be a source of innovation and struggle. Pragmatics provides grounding for understanding this aspect of organizational communication as it relates to open innovation through social media.

We put forward the following concepts, drawn from Aakhus (2002) and de Moor and Aakhus (2006), to guide the empirical task of reconstructing the practical pragmatic theories evident in

managerial responses to social media:

• Exigence: Activities exist relative to some exigency which is the framing of the “something needed to be done,” the audience, and the constraints on the situation.

• Purpose: Activities have some overriding purpose (or hierarchy of purposes) that address (or have the potential to address) the exigence as conceived.

• Orchestration: Activities have aspects that can be characterized in terms of features of interactivity. This includes features, such as:

o Types of contributions o Sequencing of

contributions o Roles and participation

status o Networks and the

input‐output relationships among ‘conversations’.

• Rationale: Activities have a rationale that links the ostensible means‐ends relationship between the process and product of interaction. Whether that

RESEARCHING OPEN INNOVATION THROUGH SOCIAL MEDIA Pär Ågerfalk, Uppsala University; Mark Aakhus, Rutgers; Mikael Lind, Viktoria Institute April 2010

link is actual or symbolic matters but for a variety of instrumental and non‐instrumental reasons.

Researching the role of social media in open innovation calls for diversity in the application of research methods (Langley, 1999; Romano, 2003). A research programme based on the concepts laid out above is seen as a pragmatic means for empirical and design oriented research into open innovation through social media. Such research would be highly influenced by studying different instances of interactions related to the disruptive nature of social media by considering the elements that make up a social media infrastructure (e.g., in addition to the technology, the policy statements, interviews, news accounts, agreements of different kinds, such as non‐disclosure agreements, explicit and informal work agreements and arrangements between groups and organizations) as well as blog commentaries.

We are currently in the process of systematically collecting actual cases of managerial responses to

social media and analyzing these by use of the pragmatic approach discussed here. We aim to develop further our explanatory mechanism that distinguishes how managerial responses vary to include why these responses vary. We assume that has to do with practical theories about how interaction processes lead to outcomes, such as new innovations. The ambition is to develop practical theories for informing organizations in their task of developing an attitude and strategies for using the potential of social media in their interaction with various stakeholders. Our hope is that such an orientation will generate relevant empirical data and help develop a reflective attitude towards open innovation through social media by people taking part in such interaction. ¶

RESEARCHING OPEN INNOVATION THROUGH SOCIAL MEDIA Pär Ågerfalk, Uppsala University; Mark Aakhus, Rutgers; Mikael Lind, Viktoria Institute April 2010

1

Open Innovation From the Open Innovation Forum’s perspective open innovation involves all aspects of creating new business opportunities by engaging end-users in co-creative activities. Web 2.0 technologies has caused electronic collaboration to evolve, hence paving the way for companies to invite customers and employees to be involved in the refinement of their offerings. Ideally open innovation will create win-win situations where users get services that are more oriented to their needs and organizations will offer services that are more desired by the market. The Open Innovation Forum The Open Innovation Forum aims at being a knowledge hub and rallying point for user-oriented open innovation, where innovation experts and researchers can collaborate on improving theories and practices, while open innovation novices are invited to follow, or take active part, in the development of the area. www.openinnovationforum.com

RESEARCHING OPEN INNOVATION THROUGH SOCIAL MEDIA Pär Ågerfalk Pär J. Ågerfalk is a Professor of Computer and Systems Science at Uppsala University where he holds the Chair in Computer Science in Intersection with Social Sciences. Prof. Ågerfalk’s current research centres on open source software development, globally distributed and flexible software development methods and how information systems development and conceptual modelling can be informed by language/action theory.

Mark Aakhus Mark Aakhus, Ph.D., is an Associate Professor of Communication at Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey. His research focuses on the emergence and management of conflicts that arise as people attempt to make decisions, solve problems, and learn. Among the real world research he investigates organizations trying to develop workable information systems, groups trying to formulate collective action and communities grappling with development issues.

Mikael Lind Mikael Lind, Ph.D., is an Associate Professor of Informatics at the University of Borås and a Research Manager at the Viktoria Institute in Gothenburg. He is the director of the informatics department and the founder of the InnovationLab at the school of Business and Informatics in Borås. His research focus is on Pragmatist IS research on Co-design of Business and IT. The research is divided into four research areas; Business Process Management, e-Service Innovation, Method Engineering, and Research Methods for Information Systems Development.

The content in this article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribute 3.0 License, which allows the material to freely be copied, distributed, transmitted and remixed as long as the work is attributed to the original authors.