0
Apollon WP1 D1.1A Catalogue of state-of-the-art concepts, existing tools and lessons learned for cross-border Living Lab n...
Existing tools and lessons learned for cross-border Living Lab networks<br />Process:<br />WP1 conductedextensive LL netwo...
Background<br />Since 2006 trendtowardsmorenetworkedforms of livinglabcollaboration<br />Objectivesemphasizelearning, shar...
Findings<br />Networks established in bottom-upprocessfromindividualinitiatives<br />Bothregional and thematicnetworksexis...
Studied Networks of LivingLabs<br />European Network of Living Labs (ENoLL) - °2006<br />Nordic-Baltic Network of Living l...
Process<br />The applied common validation and consolidation of interview outcomes have been kept very simple by intention...
Findings<br />The exchange of best practices and lessons learned is seen as the most important goal of the network.<br />W...
SWOT Analysis of the EuropeanLivingLab Networks<br />
Sixsuccesscriteria for networking<br />Open service architecture that supports intelligent service creation and adaptation...
Apollon Categorization for LivingLab Network Management<br />
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Apollon wp1 d1 summary

669

Published on

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
669
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
3
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
8
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Transcript of "Apollon wp1 d1 summary"

  1. 1. Apollon WP1 D1.1A Catalogue of state-of-the-art concepts, existing tools and lessons learned for cross-border Living Lab networksSummary of the Findings<br />May 12, 2010<br />
  2. 2. Existing tools and lessons learned for cross-border Living Lab networks<br />Process:<br />WP1 conductedextensive LL network SOTA review and analysis on M1-M6 of Apollon project<br />Findingscollectedfrom x initiatives in interviews and projectdocumentationreviews<br />Findingsreported in 4 categories and analyzedwith SWOT and relevance to APOLLON project<br />Scope:<br />EuropeanLivingLab (cross-border) networks<br />Network levelcollaboration and management<br />Developmenttrends<br />Methodologies<br />SuccessFactors, addedvalue<br />
  3. 3. Background<br />Since 2006 trendtowardsmorenetworkedforms of livinglabcollaboration<br />Objectivesemphasizelearning, sharing,harmonization and jointprojects<br />Common consentregarding the vastpotentialimpact of cross-bordernetworking and sharedpracticesexist<br />Networks still in earlystages and no specificcriteria, rules, toolsormethodologies for networksexist<br />
  4. 4. Findings<br />Networks established in bottom-upprocessfromindividualinitiatives<br />Bothregional and thematicnetworksexist<br />Collaborationprojectbased<br />Various management models:based on stages of life cycle, layers of interaction, categorization by use cases, phases of development or Living Lab maturity<br />Culture, contract and competition issues priority topics that must be agreed on<br />Issues with sustainability<br />
  5. 5. Studied Networks of LivingLabs<br />European Network of Living Labs (ENoLL) - °2006<br />Nordic-Baltic Network of Living labs - °2007<br />The Finnish Network of Living Labs<br />Open Living Labs Sweden, OLLSE - °2007<br />Network of Dutch Living Labs: Orange Living labs - °2008<br />UK Living labs<br />Portuguese Network of Living Labs<br />Projects:<br />C@R (Collaboration at Rural)<br />Ecospace<br />Laboranova<br />COLLABS<br />Finlab<br />ENoLL Nordic<br />OpenLite<br />Open Living Labs SwEden (OLLSE)<br />CoreLabs<br />PanLabII<br />
  6. 6. Process<br />The applied common validation and consolidation of interview outcomes have been kept very simple by intention and comprises the following information:<br />Main category and sub-category according to the categorization of the APOLLON methodology framework<br />The concept category distinguishing between methodologies, organizational/governance structures and tools<br />The origin of the finding naming the project’s or initiative’s name and its concept<br />A verbal description summarizing the main facts about the finding<br />A SWOT analysis listing strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats of the findings<br />Available references for further details<br />An indication of the relevance of the findings for the APOLLON methodology framework<br />
  7. 7. Findings<br />The exchange of best practices and lessons learned is seen as the most important goal of the network.<br />When the network has produced concrete output, it is still more a gathering of what is available or possible within (each of) the Living labs.<br />the sustainability of the networks is unsure<br />There is a lack of clear defined rules and procedures within the network that determine how partners should collaborate with each other<br />it is required to start developing new methods, tools, protocols, technical requirements and to establish a better exchange and re-usability of processes and procedures creating higher impact on the product / service innovator, the user and the whole local/regional eco-system.<br />leverage their expertise and combine customers and suppliers into a seamlessly integrated value network by embedding their local ecosystems into a broader cross-border ecosystem of Living Lab networks.<br />
  8. 8. SWOT Analysis of the EuropeanLivingLab Networks<br />
  9. 9. Sixsuccesscriteria for networking<br />Open service architecture that supports intelligent service creation and adaptation<br />Seamless & pervasive environment for service and knowledge discovery<br />Secure, dependable and trustworthy infrastructure<br />Network, device and application interoperability<br />Application Support for variety of interfaces<br />
  10. 10. Apollon Categorization for LivingLab Network Management<br />
  1. A particular slide catching your eye?

    Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.

×