RESEARCHING OPEN INNOVATION THROUGH

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

discourse. These modes may be

Yet some companies, such as controlled by the company itself,
Lego, has taken a step further and by a third-party or be user-led.
released (parts of) their product
portfolio as open source, thus Given the many alternatives for
letting their customers into the how to tap into and harness the
core of product innovation and Web 2.0 “wisdom of the crowd”, it
design (Ågerfalk & Fitzgerald, is not surprising that many
2008). Certainly, “Given the many organizations are
conversations similar alternatives for how struggling with how to
to those in the to tap into and respond to the social
company-controlled harness the Web 2.0 media phenomenon in
forums also happen “wisdom of the order to reap its
in other corners of crowd”, it is not benefits.
the social media surprising that many
space. Examples organizations are Given the many
include third-party struggling with how alternatives for how to
consumer to respond to the tap into and harness
information and social media the Web 2.0 “wisdom
product ranking phenomenon in order of the crowd”, it is not
sites, such as to reap its benefits.” surprising that many
Pricerunner, non-
organizations are
company specific forums, such as
struggling with how to respond to
KVR Audio, and independent
image and video sharing services, the social media phenomenon in
such as Flickr and YouTube, not to order to reap its benefits
mention Twitter, Facebook and the (according to Gartner a top ten
blogosphere were just about strategic priority of organizations
everything gets scrutinized. Thus, currently). In fact, several
we can distinguish at least four organizations have experienced
modes of open innovation through serious inconvenience because of
social media with varying degrees social media exposure brought
of stakeholder interaction: about by creative and sometimes
opensourcing, crowdsourcing, displeased customers.
discussion forums, and public
RESEARCHING OPEN INNOVATION THROUGH
SOCIAL MEDIA
Pär Ågerfalk, Uppsala University; Mark Aakhus, Rutgers; Mikael
Lind, Viktoria Institute
April 2010
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. individual can be understood only

In order to understand how in terms of the whole social group
companies respond (and ought to of which he is member, since his
respond) to social media and open individual acts are involved in
innovation, we must first larger social acts, which go beyond
understand what it means to be himself and which implicate the
social and how such an other members of the group.” It is
thus essential to look both for
understanding can help to
social grounds and social purposes
recognize how social media shape
when studying actions. Social
companies’ on-line presence and grounds form the history of an
ongoing conversations with action. Social actions are thus
various stakeholders. We assume interactive where several inter-
that managerial response to social related actions constitute patterns
media can be grounded in of actions related to each other by
practical theories of pragmatics, initiatives and responses (Linell,
emphasizing action and 1998). One single action can be
communication that make both an initiative and a response.
assumptions about how A human being intervenes in the
communication works and how it world, by performing actions, in
ought to work (Aakhus, 2007). order to create some differences in
their environment—to achieve
Fundamentally, the social world is ends. An important distinction can
created and recreated through be made between the result and
human actions. Most actions are the effects of an action (von
social: “That action will be called Wright, 1971): while the actor is in
social which in its meaning as control of the immediate results of
intended by the actor or actors, their actions, the long-term effects
takes account of the behavior of may be hard to predict. The
others and is thereby oriented in philosophical orientation of
its course” (Weber, 1978, p. 4). pragmatics puts attention to
This suggests that a social action peoples’ use of language and the
has both social grounds and social knowledge about interaction in
purposes. As claimed by Mead solving basic problems of
(1934, p 6) “the behavior of an communication.
RESEARCHING OPEN INNOVATION THROUGH
SOCIAL MEDIA
Pär Ågerfalk, Uppsala University; Mark Aakhus, Rutgers; Mikael
Lind, Viktoria Institute

April 2010

Constraints can also be an object

This means a focus upon meaning, of intentional design as people
action, and coherence. In ordinary create and re-configure the ways
interaction these are managed they meet and gather and as
through constraints participants technologies and procedures are
impose on their interaction developed to support various
through linguistic and non- kinds of communication. In the
linguistic means, especially as history of work and management,
these frame
“The design of the for instance, the
allowable nature, role, and
contributions to technology and relationship of types of
ongoing activity what action it meetings workers have
(Levinson, 1979). makes possible (or with each other and
Constraints arise as impossible) reveals with management have
participants shape practical been an important part
their actions to
pragmatic theories of management (Yates,
contribute to a 1989). Meetings,
purpose and for organizational encounters, and the
interpret others’ communication.” activities these are to
actions relative to produce are the object
that joint purpose (Levinson, of design in many theories of
1979). Constraints include who organizational design. These
can participate and what identify micro-matters are the space where
they can project, the allocation of disruptive technology creates
turns and types of turns, topics, shifts and thus struggles over the
and so on (Drew and Heritage, role and nature of encounters and
1993; Levinson, 1979). Purpose meetings in the workplace (who
can be joint goals, or shared should be involved, what should
identities, that vary in explicitness be discussed, topic, relevant
and formality as in the way chat, contributions, how to solve
business meeting, negotiation, differences, and the like).
and a judicial hearing differ from
each other (Drew and Heritage, The uses of social media, and
1993; Levinson, 1979). 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

managerial responses to social

and constraints for interaction media:
between an organization and its
stakeholders. These technologies • Exigence: Activities exist
are actable—that is, they are tools relative to some exigency
for stakeholders to act relative to which is the framing of the
the organization and each other. “something needed to be
Of course, the technology only done,” the audience, and the
supports certain actions and constraints on the situation.
fosters certain forms of • Purpose: Activities have
interactivity. It is in the design of some overriding purpose (or
these technologies that hierarchy of purposes) that
organizations signal their relations address (or have the
to stakeholders. The design of the potential to address) the
technology and what action it exigence as conceived.
makes possible (or impossible) • Orchestration: Activities
reveals practical pragmatic have aspects that can be
theories for organizational characterized in terms of
communication. The design of the features of interactivity. This
technology, and especially what it includes features, such as:
presupposes about organizational o Types of contributions
communication, can be a source of o Sequencing of
innovation and struggle. contributions
Pragmatics provides grounding for o Roles and participation
understanding this aspect of status
organizational communication as o Networks and the
it relates to open innovation input‐output
through social media. relationships among
‘conversations’.
We put forward the following • Rationale: Activities have a
concepts, drawn from Aakhus rationale that links the
(2002) and de Moor and Aakhus ostensible means‐ends
(2006), to guide the empirical task relationship between the
of reconstructing the practical process and product of
pragmatic theories evident in 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
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.

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
1
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.