This study was conducted based on, to my knowledge, the latest research on cognitive distance and user involvement in extant literature. Nevertheless, limitations and research opportunities emerge from the methodology applied, adjacent research fields and, of course, the findings and implications of this study.
This is the first study of individual cognitive distance effects in innovation settings applying Construal Level Theory. Therefore, further studies in similar settings would
represent a highly welcome addition to these findings. Here, the role of temporal cognitive distance is of particularly high interest.
Ideation, user involvement and creativity in general are related to complex cognitive processes with high variability. Although the utmost care was taken to control for potential confounding effects and to obtain a high level of external validity, one should refrain from forecasting effects based on the regression analysis. Rather, additional innovation-related experimental cognitive distance studies should be conducted in other industries and with other customer groups (e.g. product development for children).
As suggested by psychological learning theory (Bower & Hilgard, 1981), in order to be able to recall new knowledge, learning requires repetition. Thus, one should study and explore further the effect of user involvement when frequent user-involvement treatments are used. Here, a repeated measures experimental design could be aimed for.
I tested both user involvement and cognitive effects in the ideation phase (the fuzzy front- end of innovation). Methodologically, I responded to a call from Witell et al. (2011).
However, both effects should be validated in different stages of the innovation process, e.g. in concept refinement stage. However, the later stages seem impractical as the degree of freedom necessary for fundamental changes designed to meet customer needs would probably no longer be permitted.
An experimental study is characterised by high internal validity of results, opening up the possibility of drawing inferential statements on the effects that can be generalised.
Although several measures have been taken to recreate an ideal and realistic ideation setting, future studies should use alternative methods to verify cognitive distance effects.
Here, one could scout firms’ ideation stocks and try to collect cognitive distance characteristics ex-post in order to relate results to the cognitive distance of the idea originators.
Another general flaw of ideation studies is rooted in the high degree of uncertainty as to whether ideas will become successful or not (and thus their future actual use value).
Hence, only a limited number of ideas will be followed up and given the chance to prove themselves. Thus, there is always a high risk of over- or underestimating the future value of an idea to the customer. Although great care was taken to recruit an experienced and knowledgeable silver-ager idea assessment panel, misjudgement cannot be ruled out.
Therefore, future research should use longitudinal studies in order to observe product success, controlling for cognitive distance and degree of user involvement.
References
Adams, R. G., & Blirszner, R. (1998). Baby boomer friendships. Journal of the American Society on Aging, 22(1), 70–75.
Adler, P. S., & Kwon, S.-W. (2002). Social capital: Prospects for a new concept. Academy of Management Review, 27(1), 17–40.
Aguinis, H., Beaty, J. C., Boik, R. J., & Pierce, C. A. (2005). Effect size and power in assessing moderating effects of categorical variables using multiple regression: A 30-year review. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(1), 94–107.
Ahmad, R. (2002). The older or ageing consumers in the UK: Are they really that different?
International Journal of Market Research, 44(3), 337–360.
Ahmed, A. M. (2007). Group identity, social distance and intergroup bias. Journal of Economic Psychology, 28(3), 324–337.
Akrich, M. (1992). The de-scription of technical objects. In W. E. Bijker & J. Law (Eds.), Shaping technology/building society. Studies in sociotechnical change (pp. 205–224).
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Alam, I. (2002). An exploratory investigation of user involvement in new service development. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 30(3), 250-261.
Alam, I. (2006). Removing the fuzziness from the fuzzy front-end of service innovations through customer interactions. Industrial Marketing Management, 35(4), 468–480.
Allmendinger, J., & Ebner, C. (2006). Arbeitsmarkt und demografischer Wandel. Zeitschrift für Arbeits- und Organisationspsychologie A&O, 50(4), 227–239.
Al-Zu'bi, Z. M. F., & Tsinopoulos, C. (2012). Suppliers versus lead users: Examining their relative impact on product variety. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 29(4), 667–680.
Amabile, T. M. (1983). The social psychology of creativity: A componential conceptualization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(2), 357–376.
Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context: Update to The social psychology of creativity:
Update to The social psychology of creativity. Boulder, Colorado: Westview press.
ANBO. (2015). Algemene Nederlandse Bond voor Ouderen. Retrieved from http://www.anbo.nl/de-vereniging/over-ons/about-anbo on 02.10.2015.
Anderson, J. R., Funke, J., & Plata, G. (2007). Kognitive Psychologie (6th ed.). Berlin:
Spektrum Akademischer Verlag.
© Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH 2017
M. Marwede, Product Development for Distant Target Groups, Forschungs-/Entwicklungs-/Innovations-Management, DOI 10.1007/978-3-658-18325-7
Backhaus, K., Erichson, B., Plinke, W., & Weiber, R. (2011). Multivariate Analysemethoden:
Eine anwendungsorientierte Einführung (13th ed.). Berlin: Springer.
Balland, P.-A. (2012). Proximity and the evolution of collaboration networks: Evidence from research and development projects within the global navigation satellite system (GNSS) industry. Regional Studies, 46(6), 741–756.
Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Prentice-Hall series in social learning theory.
Upper Saddle River: Prentice-Hall.
Bandura, A. (2003). Observational Learning. In J. H. Byrne (Ed.), Learning and Memory (pp. 482–484). New York: Macmillan Reference USA.
Bantel, K. A., & Jackson, S. E. (1989). Top management and innovations in banking: Does the composition of the top team make a difference? Strategic Management Journal, 10, 107–124.
Barak, B., & Schiffman, L. G. (1981). Cognitive age: A nonchronological age variable.
Advances in Consumer Research, 8(1), 602–606.
Barrett-Lennard, G. T. (1981). The empathy cycle: Refinement of a nuclear concept.
Journal of Counseling Psychology, 28(2), 91.
Bechtold, U., & Sotoudeh, M. (2013). Assistive technologies: Their development from a technology assessment perspective. Gerontechnology, 11(4), 521–533.
Bennett, R. C., & Cooper, R. G. (1981). The misuse of marketing: an American tragedy.
Business Horizons, 24(6), 51–61.
Blackman, M. C., & Funder, D. C. (1998). The effect of information on consensus and accuracy in personality judgment. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 34(2), 164–181.
Boeddrich, H.-J. (2004). Ideas in the workplace: A new approach towards organizing the fuzzy front end of the innovation process. Creativity and Innovation Management, 13(4), 274–285.
Bogardus, E. S. (1933). A social distance scale. Sociology & Social Research, 17, 265–271.
Bolton, R., & Saxena-Iyer, S. (2009). Interactive services: A framework, synthesis and research directions. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 23(1), 91–104.
Borsboom, D., Mellenbergh, G. J., & van Heerden, J. (2003). The theoretical status of latent variables. Psychological review, 110(2), 203.
Boschma, R. (2005). Proximity and innovation: A critical assessment. Regional Studies, 39(1), 61–74.
Bosch-Sijtsema, P., & Bosch, J. (2015). User involvement throughout the innovation process in high-tech industries. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 32(5), 793–
807.
Bouchard, T. J., Barsaloux, J., & Drauden, G. (1974). Brainstorming procedure, group size, and sex as determinants of the problem-solving effectiveness of groups and individuals. Journal of Applied Psychology, 59(2), 135–138.
Boudreau, K. J., & Lakhani, K. R. (2015). Innovation experiments: Researching technical advance, knowledge production and the design of supporting institutions. Innovation Policy and the Economy, 16, forthcoming.
Bower, G. H., & Hilgard, E. R. (1981). Theories of learning (5th ed.). The century psychology series. Englewood Cliffs/N.J.: Prentice-Hall.
Bracht, G. H., & Glass, G. V. (1968). The external validity of experiments. American Educational Research Journal, 437–474.
Bratfisch, O. (1969). A further study of the relation between subjective distance and emotional involvement. Acta Psychologica, 29, 244–255.
Bratfisch, O., Ekman, G., Lundberg, U., & Krucer, K. (1971). Subjective temporal distance and emotional involvement. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 12, 147–160.
Breschi, S., Lissoni, F., & Malerba, F. (2003). Knowledge-relatedness in firm technological diversification. Research Policy, 32, 69–87.
Bretschneider, U. (2012). Die Ideen-Community zur Integration von Kunden in den Innovationsprozess (Doctoral thesis). Technische Universitọt Mỹnchen, Mỹnchen.
Brewer, M. B., & Lui, L. (1984). Categorization of the elderly by the elderly: Effects of perceiver's category membership. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 10, 585–
595.
Briggs, R. O., Reinig, B. A., Shepherd, M. M., Yen, J., & Nunamaker Jr., J. F. (1997). Quality as a function of quantity in electronic brainstorming. In IEEE (Ed.), Proceedings of the Thirtieth Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (Vol. 2, pp. 94–103). Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society Press.
British Standards Institute. (2005). BS 7000-6: Design management systems. Managing inclusive design. Retrieved from http://shop.bsigroup.com/ProductDetail/
?pid=000000000030142267 on 02.03.2016.
Brockhoff, K. (2003). Customers' perspectives of involvement in new product development. International Journal of Technology Management, 26(5-6), 464–481.
Brooks, J. (2014). Business Adventures: Twelve Classic Tales from the World of Wall Street.
s.l.: Open Road Media.
Buehler, R., Griffin, D. W., & Ross, M. (1994). Exploring the “planning fallacy”: Why people underestimate their task completion times. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 366–381.
Burger, J. M. (1986). Temporal effects on attributions: Actor and observer differences.
Social Cognition, 4, 377–387.
Burt, R. S. (2000). The network structure of social capital. Research in Organizational Behaviour, 22, 345–423.
Caldwell, J. E. (2007). Clickers in the large classroom: Current research and best-practice tips. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 6(1), 9–20.
Cantner, U., & Meder, A. (2007). Technological proximity and the choice of cooperation partner. Journal of Economic Interaction and Coordination, 2, 45–65.
Carley, K. M. (2014). ORA: A Toolkit for Dynamic Network Analysis and Visualization. In R. Alhajj & J. Rokne (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Social Network Analysis and Mining (pp. 1219-1228). New York: Springer.
Carrasco, J., Miller, E., & Wellman, B. (2008). How far and with whom do people socialize?:
Empirical evidence about distance between social network members. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2076, 114–122.
Chandran, S., & Menon, G. (2004). When a Day Means More than a Year: Effects of Temporal Framing on Judgments of Health Risk. Journal of Consumer Research, 31, 375–
389.
Chang, T.-Z. D., & Vowles, N. (2013). Strategies for improving data reliability for online surveys: A case study. International Journal of Electronic Commerce Studies, 4(1), 121–
130.
Chesbrough, H. W. (2003). The era of open innovation. MIT Sloan Management Review, 44(3), 35–41.
Christensen, C. M., & Bower, J. L. (1996). Customer power, strategic investment, and the failure of leading firms. Strategic Management Journal, 17(3), 197–218.
Cleaver, M., & Muller, T. E. (2002). I want to pretend I’m eleven years younger: subjective age and seniors’ motives for vacation travel. Social Indicators Research, 60(1), 227–241.
Clemes, M. D., Gan, C., Kao, T.-H., & Choong, M. (2008). An empirical analysis of customer satisfaction in international air travel. Innovative Marketing, 4(2), 50–62.
Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 128–152.
Colquitt, J. A. (2008). From the editors publishing laboratory research in AMJ: A question of when, not if. Academy of Management Journal, 51(4), 616–620.
Coltman, T., Devinney, T. M., Midgley, D. F., & Venaik, S. (2008). Formative versus reflective measurement models: Two applications of formative measurement. Journal of Business Research, 61(12), 1250–1262.
Cooper, R. G., & Kleinschmidt, E. J. (1987). Success factors in product innovation. Industrial Marketing Management, 16(3), 215–223.
Cooper, R., Edgett, S., & Kleinschmidt, E. (2001). Portfolio management for new product development: Results of an industry practices study. R&D Management, 31(4), 361–
380.
Cooper, R. G. (1990). Stage-gate systems: A new tool for managing new products. Business Horizons, 33(3), 44–54.
Cooper, R. G. (2008). Perspective: The Stage-Gate® idea-to-launch process - update, what's new, and NexGen systems. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 25(3), 213–232.
Cooper, R. G., & Kleinschmidt, E. (1994). Screening new products for potential winners.
IEEE Engineering Management Review, 22(4), 24–30.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore, Washington, DC:
Sage.
Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16(3), 297–334.
Crystal, S., & Shea, D. (1990). Cumulative advantage, cumulative disadvantage, and inequality among elderly people. The Gerontologist, 30(4), 437–443.
Cureton, E. E., & D'Agostino, R. B. (2013). Factor Analysis: An Applied Approach. Hoboken:
Taylor and Francis.
Dahan, E., & Hauser, J. R. (2002). The virtual customer. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 19(5), 332–353.
Dawes, R. M. (1972). Fundamentals of attitude measurement. Oxford, England: John Wiley
& Sons.
Dean, D. L., Hender, J. M., Rodgers, T. L., & Santanen, E. L. (2006). Identifying quality, novel, and creative Ideas: Constructs and scales for idea evaluation. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 7(1), 30.
Delbecq, A. L., & Van de Ven, A. H. (1971). A group process model for problem identification and program planning. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 7(4), 466–492.
Demirbilek, O., & Demirkan, H. (2004). Universal product design involving elderly users:
A participatory design model. Applied Ergonomics, 35(4), 361–370.
Denzin, N. K. (1978). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods (2. ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Deutsche Seniorenliga e.V. (2015). Wir über uns. Retrieved from http://www.deutsche- seniorenliga.de/wir-ueber-uns.html on 01.10.2015.
Di Guardo, M. C., & Harrigan, K. R. (2012). Mapping research on strategic alliances and innovation: A co-citation analysis. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 37(6), 789–811.
Diehl, M., & Strửbe, W. (1987). Productivity loss in brainstorming groups: Toward the solution of a riddle. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53(3), 497.
Docampo Rama, M., Ridder, H. de, & Bouma, H. (2001). Technology generation and age in using layered user interfaces. Gerontechnology, 1(1), 25–40.
Drucker, P. (2014). Innovation and Entrepreneurship. Routledge Classics. s.l.: Taylor and Francis.
Dunning, D., Griffin, D. W., Milojkovic, J., & Ross, L. (1990). The overconfidence effect in social prediction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 568–581.
D'Zurilla, T. J., Maydeu-Olivares, A., & Kant, G. L. (1998). Age and gender differences in social problem-solving ability. Personality and individual differences, 25(2), 241–252.
Eisma, R., Dickinson, A., Goodman, J., Mival, O., Syme, A., & Tiwari, L. (2003). Mutual inspiration in the development of new technology for older people. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Inclusive Design and Communication (INCLUDE) (Vol.
7). London, UK.
Ekman, G., & Bratfisch, O. (1965). Subjective distance and emotional involvement: A psychological mechanism. Acta Psychologica, 24, 446–453.
Enkel, E., Perez-Freije, J., & Gassmann, O. (2005). Minimizing market risks through customer integration in new product development: Learning from bad practice.
Creativity and Innovation Management, 14(4), 425–437.
Fang, E. (2008). Customer participation and the trade-off between new product innovativeness and speed to market. Journal of Marketing, 72(4), 90–104.
Farage, M. A., Miller, K. W., Ajayi, F., & Hutchins, D. (2012). Design principles to accommodate older adults. Global Journal of Health Science, 4(2), 2–25.
Faullant, R., Schwarz, E. J., Krajger, I., & Breitenecker, R. J. (2012). Towards a comprehensive understanding of lead userness: The search for individual creativity.
Creativity and Innovation Management, 21(1), 76–92.
Fiedler, K., Jung, J., Wọnke, M., & Alexopoulos, T. (2012). On the relations between distinct aspects of psychological distance: An ecological basis of construal-level theory. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 1014–1021.
Fiedler, K. (2007). Construal level theory as an integrative framework for behavioral decision-making research and consumer psychology. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 17(2), 101–106.
Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. Los Angeles: Sage.
Field, A., & Hole, G. (2011). How to design and report experiments. Los Angeles: Sage.
Fisk, A. D. (2009). Designing for older adults: Principles and creative human factors approaches (2. ed). Human factors & aging series. Boca Raton, Fla: CRC Press/Taylor &
Francis.
Foster, A. C. (2015). Consumer expenditures vary by age. Retrieved from http://www.bls.gov/opub/btn/volume-4/consumer-expenditures-vary-by-age.htm on 25.02.2016.
Franke, N., Hippel, E. von, & Schreier, M. (2006). Finding commercially attractive user innovations: A test of lead-user theory. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 23(4), 301–315.
Franke, N., Poetz, M. K., & Schreier, M. (2014). Integrating problem solvers from analogous markets in new product ideation. Management Science, 60(4), 1063–1081.
Franke, N., & Shah, S. (2003). How communities support innovative activities: An exploration of assistance and sharing among end-users. Research Policy, 32(1), 157–
178.
Fredberg, T., & Piller, F. T. (2011). The paradox of tie strength in customer relationships for innovation: A longitudinal case study in the sports industry. R&D Management, 41(5), 470–484.
Friesdorf, W., & Heine, A. (Eds.). (2007). sentha — seniorengerechte Technik im họuslichen Alltag. Berlin: Springer.
Fuchs, C., & Schreier, M. (2011). Customer empowerment in new product development.
Journal of Product Innovation Management, 28(1), 17–32.
Fujita, K., Henderson, M. D., Eng, J., Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2006). Spatial distance and mental construal of social events. Psychological Science, 17, 278–282.
Funder, D. C., & Van Ness, M. J. (1983). On the nature and accuracy of attributions that change over time. Journal of Personality, 51, 17–33.
Furrer, O., Liu, B. S.-C., & Sudharshan, D. (2000). The relationships between culture and service quality perceptions basis for cross-cultural market segmentation and resource allocation. Journal of Service Research, 2(4), 355–371.
Gaubinger, K., Rabl, M., Swan, S., & Werani, T. (2015). Innovation and product management: A holistic and practical approach to uncertainty reduction. Springer Texts in Business and Economics. Berlin: Springer.
Geisinger, K. F. (2010). Bogardus social distance scale. In I. B. Weiner & W. E. Craighead (Eds.), The corsini encyclopedia of psychology . Hoboken, NJ, USA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Gelman, A., & Hill, J. (2008). Data analysis using regression and multi level hierarchical models (6th ed.). Analytical methods for social research. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ.
Press.
Gemser, G., & Perks, H. (2015). Co-creation with customers: An evolving innovation research field. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 32(5), 660–665.
Gertler, M. S. (2004). Manufacturing Culture: The Institutional Geography of Industrial Practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Glaeser, E. L., Laibson, D., & Sacerdote, B. (2002). An economic approach to social capital.
The Economic Journal, 112(483), 437–458.
Gmür, M. (2003). Co-citation analysis and the search for invisible colleges: A methodological evaluation. Scientometrics, 57(1), 27–57.
Gonzales, E., Tan, J., & Morrow-Howell, N. (2010). Assessment of the refined aging semantic differential: Recommendations for enhancing validity. Journal of Gerontological Social Work, 53(4), 304–318.
Google Inc. (2015). Google Scholar. Retrieved from http.//scholar.google.com on 19.05.2015.
Gough, H. G. (1979). A creative personality scale for the Adjective Check List. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 37(8), 1398–1405.
Griffin, A., & Hauser, J. R. (1993). The voice of the customer. Marketing Science, 12(1), 1–
27.
Gruner, K. E., & Homburg, C. (2000). Does customer interaction enhance new product success? Journal of Business Research, 49(1), 1–14.
Hair, J. F. (2010). Multivariate data analysis: A global perspective (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
Haldin-Herrgard, T. (2000). Difficulties in diffusion of tacit knowledge in organizations.
Journal of Intellectual Capital, 1(4), 357–365.
Hank, R., & Meck, G. (2016). „Weniger Deutsche sind ein Glück“. Frankfurter Allgemeine (FAZ.net). Retrieved from http://www.faz.net/-gqe-8e345 on 04.03.2016.
Hansen, M. T. (1999). The search-transfer problem: The role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organization subunits. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(1), 82–
111.
Hansen, S., Berente, N., & Lyytinen, K. (2009). Requirements in the 21st century: Current practice and emerging trends. In P. Loucopoulos, K. Lyytinen, J. Mylopoulos, & B.
Robinson (Eds.), Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing: Vol. 14. Design requirements engineering: A ten-year perspective (pp. 44–87). Berlin: Springer.
Harrison, G. W., & List, J. A. (2004). Field experiments. Journal of Economic Literature, 1009–1055.
Hauser, J., Tellis, G. J., & Griffin, A. (2006). Research on innovation: A review and agenda for marketing science. Marketing Science, 25(6), 687–717.
Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York: Guilford Press.
Hayes, A. F., & Krippendorff, K. (2007). Answering the call for a standard reliability measure for coding data. Communication Methods and Measures, 1(1), 77–89.
Hemetsberger, A., & Füller, J. (2009). Qual der Wahl — Welche Methode führt zu kundenorientierten Innovationen? In H. H. Hinterhuber & K. Matzler (Eds.), Kundenorientierte Unternehmensführung: Kundenorientierung — Kundenzufriedenheit
— Kundenbindung (pp. 413–447). Wiesbaden: Gabler.
Hemetsberger, A., & Godula, G. (2007). Integrating expert customers in new product development in industrial business–virtual routes to success. Innovative Marketing, 3(3), 28–39.
Henderson, M. D. (2009). Psychological distance and group judgments: The effect of physical distance on beliefs about common goals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 35, 1330–1341.
Henderson, M. D., Fujita, K., Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2006). Transcending the ‘‘here’’:
The effect of spatial distance on social judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 845–856.
Herbig, P., & Dunphy, S. (1998). Culture and Innovation. Cross Cultural Management, 5(4), 13–21.
Herstatt, C., & Hippel, E. von. (1992). From experience: Developing new product concepts via the lead user method: A case study in a “low-tech” field. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 9(3), 213–221.
Herzog, S. M., Hansen, J., & Wọnke, M. (2007). Temporal distance and ease of retrieval.
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43, 483–488.
Hill, G. W. (1982). Group versus individual performance: Are N+ 1 heads better than one?
Psychological bulletin, 91(3), 517.
Hinds, P. J., & Mortensen, M. (2005). Understanding conflict in geographically distributed teams: The moderating effects of shared identity, shared context, and spontaneous communication. Organization Science, 16(3), 290–307.
Hippel, E. von. (1976). The dominant role of users in the scientific instrument innovation process. Research Policy, 5(3), 212–239.
Hippel, E. von. (1978). A customer-active paradigm for industrial product idea generation.
Research Policy, 7(3), 240–266.
Hippel, E. von. (1994). Sticky information and the locus of problem solving: Implications for innovation. Management Science, 40(4), 429–439.
Hippel, E. von. (2001). User toolkits for innovation. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 18(4), 247–257.
Hoaglin, D. C., & Iglewicz, B. (1987). Fine-tuning some resistant rules for outlier labeling.
Journal of the American Statistical Association, 82(400), 1147–1149.
Hofstede, G. (1983). The cultural relativity of organizational practices and theories.
Journal of International Business Studies, 75–89.
Hofstede, G. (1984). Cultural dimensions in management and planning. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 1(2), 81-99.
Homburg, C., Wieseke, J., & Bornemann, T. (2009). Implementing the marketing concept at the employee–customer interface: The role of customer need knowledge. Journal of Marketing, 73(4), 64–81.
Howard, J. H., & Howard, D. V. (1997). Learning and Memory. In A. D. Fisk & W. A. Rogers (Eds.), Handbook of human factors and the older adult (pp. 7–26). San Diego, Calif.:
Academic Press.
Huber, F. (2012). On the role and interrelationship of spatial, social and cognitive proximity: Personal knowledge relationships of R&D workers in the Cambridge information technology cluster. Regional Studies, 46(9), 1169–1182.
Hummert, M. L. (1994). Stereotypes and patronizing speech. In M. L. Hummert, J. M.
Wiemann, & J. F. Nussbaum (Eds.), Interpersonal communication in older adulthood.
Interdisciplinary theory and research (pp. 162–184). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Hyysalo, S. (2009). Learning for learning economy and social learning. Research Policy, 38(5), 726–735.
Ifflọnder, K., Levsen, N., Lorscheid, I., Pakur, S., & Wellner, K. (2012). Innovation and product development for aging users: Innoage (Management@TUHH No. 6). Hamburg.
Retrieved from Technische Universitọt Hamburg website:
https://www.econbiz.de/Record/innoage-innovation-and-product-development-for- aging-users-iffl%C3%A4nder-klaus/10009757161 on 10.06.2016.
International Standardization Organization. (2010). 9241-210: Human-centred design
for interactive systems. Retrieved from
http://www.iso.org/iso/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=52075 on 08.03.2016.
Ireland, D. R., Hitt, M. A., Bettis, R. A., De Porras, & Auld, D. (1987). Strategy formulation processes: Differences in perceptions of strength and weaknesses indicators and environmental uncertainty by managerial level. Strategic Management Journal, 8(5), 469–485.
Ives, B., & Olson, M. H. (1984). User involvement and MIS success: A review of research.
Management Science, 30(5), 586–603.
Janssen, K. L., & Dankbaar, B. E. (2008). Proactive involvement of consumers in innovation: Selecting techniques. International Journal of Innovation Management, 12(3), 511–541.