Stakeholder Engagement: Applying Dechnology in a Technology-Oriented Organization

  • Chih-Shiang (Mike) WuEmail author
  • William Huang
  • Pei-Lin Chen
  • Tung-Jung Sung
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9180)


Technology revolution and the subsequent innovation can bring about a multitude of benefits for the society. However, innovation derived from a single technology push is no longer sufficient to meet the needs of the current market. While past studies have suggested that an ideal environment for innovation involves the engagement of multiple stakeholders, in practice, this ideal has remained a major challenge for many technology-oriented organizations. In 2010, the Industrial Technology Research Institute (ITRI) launched a project called Dechnology, where service design and design thinking were incorporated into the R&D process. The project developed the Dechnology innovation model, and successfully engaged stakeholders in the innovative process, which helped the collaboration between ITRI and corporations. This study looked at three cases from the Dechnology project and investigated the mechanisms applied in the Dechnology innovation model. This study further illustrated that the Dechnology project utilized three main mechanisms, which were (1) to apply the end-user voice properly, (2) to build a multidisciplinary facilitation team, and (3) to establish visualized co-creation environments.


Stakeholder engagement Service design Innovation Co-creation 


  1. Anthony, S.D., Duncan, D.S., Siren, P.M.A.: Build an innovation engine in 90 days. Harvard Bus. Rev. 92(12), 60–68 (2014)Google Scholar
  2. Arnold, E., Rush, H., Bessant, J., Hobday, M.: Strategic planning in research and technology institutes. R&D Manage. 28(2), 89–100 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ayuso, S., Rodríguez, M.A., García-Castro, R., Ariño, M.A.: Does stakeholder engagement promote sustainable innovation orientation? Ind. Manage. Data Syst. 111, 1399–1417 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brown, K., Schmied, H., Tarondeau, J.C.: Success factors in R&D: A meta-analysis of the empirical literature and derived implications for design management. Acad. Rev. 2, 72–87 (2002)Google Scholar
  5. Chesbrough, H.W.: The era of open innovation. Sloan Manage. Rev. 44(3), 35–41 (2003)Google Scholar
  6. Clatworthy, S.: Service innovation through touch points: development of an innovation toolkit for the first stages of new service development. I. J. Des. 5(2), 15–28 (2011)Google Scholar
  7. Driver, A.J., Peralta, C., Moultrie, J.: Exploring how industrial designers can contribute to scientific research. I. J. Des. 5(1), 17–28 (2011)Google Scholar
  8. Evan, W.M., Freeman, R.E.: A stakeholder theory of the modern corporation: kantian capitalism. In: Beauchamp, T.L., Bowie, N.E. (eds.) About Ethical Theory and Business, 3rd edn. PrenticePHall, Englewood Cliffs (1988)Google Scholar
  9. Gould, R.W.: Open innovation and stakeholder engagement. J. Technol. Manage. Innov. 7(3), 1–11 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hung, W.K., Huang, W.: Creating value for technology by design: a case study of dechnology project. J. Des. 18(1), 41–64 (2013)Google Scholar
  11. Lee, S.M., Olson, D.L., Trimi, S.: Co-innovation: convergenomics, collaboration, and co-creation for organizational values. Manage. Decis. 50(5), 817–831 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lo, T.H.: Technology Innovation Management of Industrial Technology Research Institute in Taiwan. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, National Chiao Tung University, Hsinchu, Taiwan, R.O.C. (2005)Google Scholar
  13. Mager, B., Sung, T.J.: Special issue editorial: designing for services. Int. J. Des. 5(2), 1–3 (2011)Google Scholar
  14. Norman, D.A.: The research-Practice Gap: The need for translational developers. Interactions 17(4), 9–12 (2010)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Osterwalder, A., Pigneur, Y., Bernarda, G., Smith, A., Papadakos, T.: Value Proposition Design: How to Create Products and Services Customers Want. John Wiley & Son, Hoboken (2014)Google Scholar
  16. Perks, H., Cooper, R., Jones, C.: Characterizing the role of design in new product development: an empirically derived taxonomy. J. Product Innov. Manage. 22, 111–127 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Richardson, A.: Innovation X: Why a Company’s Toughest Problems Are Its Greatest Advantag. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco (2010)Google Scholar
  18. Rothwell, R.: Towards the fifth-generation innovation process. Int. Mark. Rev. 11(1), 7–31 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Sautter, E.T., Leisen, B.: Managing stakeholders: a tourism planning model. Ann. Tourism Res. 26(2), 312–328 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Smith, N.C., Ansett, S., Erez, L.: How Gap Inc., Engaged With its Stakeholders. MIT Sloan Manage. Rev. 52(4), 69–76 (2011)Google Scholar
  21. Stefano, D., Gambardella, A., Verona, G.: Technology push and demand pull perspectives in innovation studies: current findings and future research directions. Res. Policy 14(8), 1283–1295 (2007)Google Scholar
  22. Stickdorn, M., Schneider, J.: This is Service Design Thinking. Wiley, Hoboken (2011)Google Scholar
  23. Verganti, R.: Design-driven innovation: changing the rules of competition by radically innovating what things mean. Harvard Business Press, Boston (2009)Google Scholar
  24. Yang, C.F., Wu, C.S., Gong, Y., Sung, T.J.: Transformative service design: from technology to dechnology. In: The Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Applied Human Factors and Ergonomics AHFE 2014, Kraków, Poland, 19–23 July, 2657–2668 (2014)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Chih-Shiang (Mike) Wu
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • William Huang
    • 1
  • Pei-Lin Chen
    • 1
  • Tung-Jung Sung
    • 2
  1. 1.Industrial Technology Research InstituteHsinchuTaiwan
  2. 2.National Taiwan University of Technology and ScienceTaipeiTaiwan

Personalised recommendations