DELIVERABLE Project Acronym:
APOLLON
Grant Agreement number:
250516
Project Title:
Advanced Pilots of Living Labs Operating in Networks
D2.5 Strategy for setting up cross-border pilots in Homecare and Independent Living Domain
Revision: v4
Authors: Bram Lievens - IBBT
Project co-funded by the European Commission within the ICT Policy Support Programme Dissemination Level P
Public
C
Confidential, only for members of the consortium and the Commission Services
P
Apollon – Deliverable D2.5
Revision History Revision Date Author V1 V2 V3 V4
Organisation Description
Bram Lievens
IBBT
Bram Lievens
Description of networks and hypothesis
Bram Lievens
IBBT
Results of survey
IBBT
Strategy towards LL network
Bram Lievens
IBBT
Editing
The information in this document is provided as is and no guarantee or warranty is given that the information is fit for any particular purpose. The user thereof uses the information at its sole risk and liability.
Statement of originality: This deliverable contains original unpublished work except where clearly indicated otherwise. Acknowledgement of previously published material and of the work of others has been made through appropriate citation, quotation or both.
ICT PSP Project Reporting Template
2
FINAL Version, 02/05/2012
Apollon – Deliverable D2.5
Table of Contents Table of Contents ................................................................................................................ 3 1.
Introduction ................................................................................................................. 4
2. The need for a cross-border network of Living Labs on Health and Wellbeing ........................................................................................................................................ 5 3.
4.
5.
How Living Labs envision a thematic network ................................................ 8
3.1.2 Results ........................................................................................................................................... 8 3.1.3 Summary ................................................................................................................................... 16 3.2 Results from the pilot ....................................................................................................16
Towards a cross-border thematic network ................................................... 19
4.1 Focus of the domain specific network .....................................................................20 4.2 Role of the health thematic network ........................................................................21 4.2.2 Addressing the challenges ................................................................................................. 21 4.2.3 Providing access and stimulating collaboration ....................................................... 22 4.3 Services the network needs to offer .........................................................................24 4.3.2 Towards Living Labs ............................................................................................................ 25 4.3.3 Towards SMEs......................................................................................................................... 26 4.4 How to organize the network ......................................................................................28
Conclusion .................................................................................................................. 30
ICT PSP Project Reporting Template
3
FINAL Version, 02/05/2012
Apollon – Deliverable D2.5
1. Introduction This document list the various aspects that are related and are of importance in the setting-up of a cross-border pilot in the domain of homecare and wellbeing. It is based on the experience within the various pilots in WP2. It is therefore mainly a compilation of the findings and lessons learned as already reflected in various other APOLLON documents (deliverables of WP2 (D2.1 and D2.4), WP1(D1.4 & D1.5) and WP6 (D6.6)).
Although initial we focused on the domain of homecare and wellbeing, we will, in this strategy towards a thematic domain network, extent this to the broader domain of Health and Well-being. This is based on the results and experiences within APOLLON, the interaction with the Living Labs and industrial actors and the future challenges we are confronted with in this domain.
This deliverable consist of three main parts. First, a brief introduction section that focuses on networking. Based on this we formulated some hypothesizes with regard to the organization of a thematic network in the domain of health. Second, we will give an extensive overview of the data and results of the survey we organized within the European Network of Living Labs. This survey focused specifically on the creation of a thematic domain network and assessed the needs amongst those Living Lab that have a key-activity in the domain. Third, we provided a vision on how such Living Lab network in health and well-being should be organized, which activities they have to target‌
ICT PSP Project Reporting Template
4
FINAL Version, 02/05/2012
Apollon – Deliverable D2.5
2. The need for a cross-border network of Living Labs on Health and Well-being At the start of the APOLLON the Living Labs were still confronted with a strong local focus. Today they are well connected in their own market, having the necessary eco-system in place. But within that market, the stakeholders often are already well connected. In order to be able to access new markets and the different ecosystems it is necessary that these local networks are being connected. The hypothesis here is that the Living Labs – as a neutral organizations – are well placed to play the broker role to connect the different eco-systems.
Figure 1 The importance of brokers in a network
This is in line with what Baden-Fuller (1995) 1 state eg. that “those networks that are not guided strategically by a ‘center’ are unable to meet the demanding challenges of today’s markets” . This means that, currently such network is becoming a necessity not only for Living Labs, but especially for SMEs and large enterprises and that it has to be facilitated by a broker. This broker needs to act as a gateway so that they can filter and dispatch in an efficient way. Our next hypothesis is that it is not sufficient to organize a network of which everyone is part of, but that, to connect different networks, a central gateway is needed.
Lorenzoni, G. & Baden-Fuller, C. (1995) Creating a Strategic Center to Manage a Web of Partners. California Management Review, 37(3), 146-163
1
ICT PSP Project Reporting Template
5
FINAL Version, 02/05/2012
Apollon – Deliverable D2.5 When looking at collaborative networks Heikkilä (2010) 2 claims that networks can be seen as different several layers in respect to the intensity of the relationships, collaboration and commitment to cooperation. In the below figure this layered, collaborative network is visualized. It consist of structural partners that together with stakeholders (subcontractors) and local partners form a dynamic pool. When projecting this to Living Lab setting; our hypothesis is that they are often structured in such a way that, within a cross-border network they need follow a layered model. They will act as a first entry point for their clients (industrial players or public organizations) providing access to both a local eco-system in the domain as well as the connection to new eco-systems or markets.
Next to the structure and the broker functionality, the main role of the network is to facilitate access on different levels. According to Uzzi and Dunlap (2005) 3 networks deliver three unique advantages with regard to access: access to private, more disclosed information, an entry to diverse assets, skills… and finally it gives also an increased power-element (due to the previous elements). This also means that, with regard to the role of the network itself, first of all a network has to be able to provide ‘connectivity’. This means providing easy access to the other members in the network. This is not just a dispatching element, but it also requires a good profiling of the members on the one hand and an active policy to steer this ‘connectivity. Second, the network has to be able to provide the necessary confidence in and between the partners. This means that the members of the network itself are valuable, reliable… But also there has to be sufficient confidence, trust to work in a neutral and open environment.
Heikkilä, M. (2010). Coordiantion of Complex Operations Over Organisational Boundaries. . Jyväskylä Studies in Computing. Jyväskylän Yliopisto. University of Jyväskylä. 3 Uzzi, B. and Dunlap, S. (2005). How to Build Your Network. Harvard Business Review. December 2005 2
ICT PSP Project Reporting Template
6
FINAL Version, 02/05/2012
Apollon – Deliverable D2.5 When we look at how the health sector is organized in Europe (and within the EU members states (see eg. the table below,) we do see that it is very local centered organized in different ways. This means that getting access to these systems, especially within a cross-border setting, this is not that easy. A local actor that can facilitate this access is a necessity. For SMEs and even large enterprises it is not obvious to find the right entry in that market. Our hypothesis is that the Living Labs, operating in a network, can facilitate such broker function.
Table 1. Country-specific organization of home health and social care in EU countries
However, it is not sufficient that the network itself facilitate access to specific eco-systems or partners. It is necessary that the members within that network themselves are very active. This means that the different stakeholders should actively interact with the various members to increase knowledge, explore new opportunities‌ So therefore our final hypothesis is that a cross-border thematic network domain has to be an active network domain in which members can and do interact and collaborate with each other.
ICT PSP Project Reporting Template
7
FINAL Version, 02/05/2012
Apollon – Deliverable D2.5
3. How Living Labs envision a thematic network During the APOLLON project we as WP2 have coordinated the survey on the needs and demands of the Living Lab community with regard to a thematic structured approach. The full description of the results can be found in D6.6. In this section we will elaborate on the results related to the domain of Health and Well-Being. The survey was deployed to all Living Labs that are a member of the ENoLL community, eg. 274 Living Labs. In total 48 Living Labs have responded to the survey.
The survey was constructed in such way that after a first general section, the Living Labs that have a specific focus in one of the Apollon domains (homecare and independent Living, Energy Efficieny, eManfucturing and eMedia) would be filtered to a specific subset of questions targeted to this domain. For what concerns health and homecare we see that 23 Living Labs are active in the domain, but that – for those Living Labs that responded, 8 of them have a dominant focus on health and well-being. The results are based on their input. 3.1.2 Results
Figure 2. Overview of domains in which LL are active
ICT PSP Project Reporting Template
8
FINAL Version, 02/05/2012
Apollon – Deliverable D2.5
Figure 3. Main focus of the Living Labs
When looking at the subdomains of Health we do see that most Living Labs do have a broad focus but that independent livings as well as prevention are the most important themes they are active in.
Figure 4. Domains in which the Health Living Labs are most active
ICT PSP Project Reporting Template
9
FINAL Version, 02/05/2012
Apollon – Deliverable D2.5 This is also reflected in the projects that are being deployed in the Living Labs. Beside these themes we do also notice that the Living Labs are active in Health records, robotics as well as on the cross-over with Energy.
Figure 5. Projects being performed in various health domains
But when we look at the interest of the Living Labs in health specific domains we do notice that there is a huge interest in mainly three topics: mobile health services, ambient assisted Living Systems and medical training (in a broad sense).
ICT PSP Project Reporting Template
10
FINAL Version, 02/05/2012
Apollon – Deliverable D2.5
Figure 6. Overview of the health topics in which the Living Labs have an interest
We also do see that the health Living Labs have performed projects that covers the wide spectrum of the health well-being domain. This implies that the Living Labs do not only have expertise in this domain but also that they have (access to) the necessary stakeholders to facilitate different types of projects.
Figure 7. The amount of projects performed in a specific health area
ICT PSP Project Reporting Template
11
FINAL Version, 02/05/2012
Apollon – Deliverable D2.5 The projects are mainly performed within a public-private partnership in which the triple helix of government, industrial actors and research institutes clearly is reflected.
Figure 8. Partners of the Living Lab and the type of collaboration
When investigating a domain thematic network of Living Labs we do see that all Living Labs agree that such initiative is perceived as useful and a necessity. Organizing this network should be best be done as part of the European Network of Living Labs (as it is today). The participation to this network however, should be ideally be free of charge.
ICT PSP Project Reporting Template
12
FINAL Version, 02/05/2012
Apollon – Deliverable D2.5
Figure 9. Vision on a thematic network on health
Within these operational focus there are three main aspects the network should focus on: •
•
•
Relationship with users: How can you engage users to be part of the Living Lab experiment? How do keep in touch and perform research activities with them? Measurement instruments: Which instruments can be you used to facilitate specific research questions? For example how can you measure both economic and societal impact of eg. a telemonitoring system. Need for tracking and logging: how can you monitor your test-panel and their behaviour in a easy, non-intrusive way?
ICT PSP Project Reporting Template
13
FINAL Version, 02/05/2012
Apollon – Deliverable D2.5
Figure 10. Overview on the operational elements the network should focus on
It is clear that such network should not only cover the very specific operational issues of Living Lab projects. The scope of such network would be much broader and focusing on the following aspects: • • • •
Connecting and collaboration with stakeholders Developing sector specific methodologies and services Sharing domain specific knowledge and experience Networking with other Living Labs
ICT PSP Project Reporting Template
14
FINAL Version, 02/05/2012
Apollon – Deliverable D2.5
Figure 11. Scope of the health domain specific network
When looking what the network needs to do and be organized within the above scope, we do see two main elements. First of all the network should focus on the sharing of information. This knowledge sharing is on two levels: on the one hand information on and about the Living Lab itself. What are they doing, how are they organized, what assets do they have…? On the other hand they want to share information on the projects that are being performed in the Living Lab. What type of projects, what are the results, who’s involved, how set-up…? Second, the network should also organize workshops in which not only this information can be shared, but also to tackle very specific issues that are important in the execution of health Living Lab projects. This can range from issues like privacy over user involvement to tools and methods that can be used.
ICT PSP Project Reporting Template
15
FINAL Version, 02/05/2012
Apollon – Deliverable D2.5
Figure 12. Organizational aspects of the network
3.1.3 Summary When looking at the results of the survey, although the limited response rate, we do see some interesting elements. First of all it is acknowledge that there is a clear interest and necessity in a thematic network. All Living Labs confirmed that they would become a member of such initiative. This network should be organized within the structure of the European Network of Living Labs. Ideally this should be free of charge and open to all Living Labs. The topics that this network should focus on in the first place are, according the Living Labs, mHealth, and Ambient Assisted Living. The network itself can not only target operational issues but should especially focus on the exchange of information of specific health related topics and the sharing of Living Lab data .
The survey reflects the vision of the Living Labs that are active in the domain itself. Their needs towards a cross-border network are mainly focused on their own type of organization and the way to improve this. However, it is clear from the results of the cross-border pilots performed in APOLLON that the thematic network also should address and target other type of actors such as SMEs, public organizations and large companies.
3.2 Results from the pilot
ICT PSP Project Reporting Template
16
FINAL Version, 02/05/2012
Apollon – Deliverable D2.5 During the cross-border pilots in APOLLON and by so working in a cross-border network enriched the Living Labs in their activities and facilitated SMEs to enter foreign markets. The Living Labs discovered some new roles and act, in this cross-border setting much more as a facilitator of establishing a local ecosystem and providing access to local stakeholders. They are well positioned to do this in an easy and efficient way. Their neutral role offers them the necessary confidentiality and trust for different actors. The Living Labs specialized in Health, Homecare and Wellbeing have therefor a clear role as both the test bed for innovation and as a central point in role of innovation intermediary. A thematic network of Living Labs do offer a platform in which they are easy accessible. Based on the experiences of the cross-border pilots in the domain of Health a number of specific elements – related to this domain – have been identified as crucial in the set-up of these types of pilots and in which a thematic network can play an active role. We list the following (these items are more elaborated in D2.4 Evaluation and Recommendation) •
•
•
•
•
•
•
Privacy: especially in health related collaborations and pilots is a crucial element. Next to EU regulation each country has specific rules to this in which you need not only a good guidance, but also access to those organisations that are in line with these rules. Liability: for those projects in which more emergency alert services or medical related services or products are being tested, liability is of essence and the margin to experiment less flexible. Also here fall-back mechanism need to be in place. Ethics: In health and well-being you not only work with specific user group but you also get in touch with very sensitive data. Exchange on how to deal with these data and the proper procedures are required Local assessment: When facilitating cross-border collaboration a quick local assessment of the feasibility prior to the project is needed. A more thorough investigation can be performed afterwards. Safety: That safety is an important point-of-attention seems obvious, but difficult part is that the strictness of the safety for the client is very different per country or even per care organization. The Living Lab can assess this and also investigate the possible impact. Maturity & reliability: related to the previous element – it is, especially within the health domain required to work with stable, mature nd reliable services and products. The living lab can facilitate the necessary tests to make sure that it meets the standards. Cost: the element of cost refers to the eco-system and the accompanying business model. Here the Living Lab can provide the necessary insights to either position a certain service or product in the right way or to make sure that it complies with the existing models.
ICT PSP Project Reporting Template
17
FINAL Version, 02/05/2012
Apollon – Deliverable D2.5 •
•
•
Trust: Living Labs need to enhance trust on two levels: on the one hand between the different partners involved in a project and to the test-panel on the other hand Rules and regulations: Living Labs do not only guide partners in the specific rules and regulation to which a service has to comply, but they can also create and offer a test-environment that can bypass some of these to evaluate new innovative things for which current legislation is not adjusted Access to end-users: Living Labs are a crucial actor in identifying the right organisations that can fulfil the role of the trusted party and by so act as a gateway between the project and the end-users to fulfil various aspects (getting user feedback, installing devices….)
Figure 13. Overview of critical elements in Health related cross-border pilots
ICT PSP Project Reporting Template
18
FINAL Version, 02/05/2012
Apollon – Deliverable D2.5
4. Towards a cross-border thematic network When we envision a thematic domain network, it is clear that we cannot limit this only to the scope of Homecare and Independent Living. Not only are the Living Labs tackling more elements of Health, we do see that the challenges (as eg identified in different European and national strategies) are much broader then this. Therefor it is required to extent the scope of the network to the broader domain of Health and Well-being. This will enable a more holistic approach and allows to set different foci based upon the needs (see further) The Health and Well-Being thematic domain network has to be an open structure where organizations and individuals that are active or have an interest in this domain can be part of. However, a distinction will have to be made between those organization, in casu Living Labs that have a key-competence and activity in this and those that are working in the domain on a more sporadic base. Depending on the maturity of the Living Lab with regard to their activities in the domain we do believe it is beneficiary to have a core group of senior Living Labs. This group will have to take a lead position in the network. They will interact closer with each other on different topics and activities related to the domain of Health and Well-being. It is important that they, due to their expertise, can act as a reference group to the other members of the Living Lab. Beside this, it will be mainly this group that can not only share their knowledge and expertise to assist the other Living Labs in improving their Living Lab activities and set-up in the domain, but also to guide companies and public organizations to the network. It is mainly this expertise that is one of the key-assets of the network towards external organizations and companies. It will be important that a set of senior Living Labs will also act as the steering group of the domain network. They will be responsible for determining the operations of the network, both on an content as a more operational level. Eg. they will be responsible for drafting the work program and defining the topics to be addressed based on the challenges they encounter (from the field or on a more strategic level). As the network organization needs to a be as flat as possible on the hand and to be as active as possible on the other hand it is important that the members of the steering group (that do play a crucial role) can change according the needs. Therefore it would be good to work with a rotating mechanism, meaning that each year the composition can change. Preferable, the chairperson of this steering group is the responsible within ENoLL for the domain of Health, as elected by the council members.
ICT PSP Project Reporting Template
19
FINAL Version, 02/05/2012
Apollon – Deliverable D2.5
Figure 14. Organizational model thematic domain network on Health and Well-being
4.1 Focus of the domain specific network The health domain, understood in its broadest terms, is one of the most significant economic and social fields of activity in developed nations. A broad and inclusive approach to the concept of Health, and well-being offers more opportunities for creative ideas and synergies with related fields. Due to the growing aging population and the rapid increase of health care costs, different types of innovations, including systemic, social and managerial innovations are fundamental and urgent for the aging European society. That is to say, innovations related to the health and social sector are urgent, however they are not sufficient, and hence, we need broader systemic innovations, penetrating various societal and knowledge sectors. There resides a need for new type of systemic and managerial innovations, based on crowdsourcing and open innovation. The main goal is to collectively achieve rapid solutions to given questions and challenges, e.g. the promotion of wellbeing, social networks models and community care, democracy and financial system in collaboration among citizens, administration and private sector. Active Ageing, Integrated Care and Independent Living are seen as one of the key elements in addressing these challenges. A core element in these concepts is the need to support people to live as long and as healthy as possible independently at home or in their preferred environment, assisted by technology, innovative services and processes and new business models. The focus should be on solutions that are not perceived as stigmatizing through co-creation methodologies with future users. Living Labs in health & wellbeing can make the difference as they stimulate userdriven innovations and open-innovation collaboration in order to empower the elderly and to enable independent living. This will be a strategic principle within the ICT PSP Project Reporting Template
20
FINAL Version, 02/05/2012
Apollon – Deliverable D2.5 overall thematic domain of Health and Well-being. Therefore the thematic network of Living Labs in the domain of Health & Well-being will initially focus on the elements that are related to the domains of (e)homecare, ambient assisted living and telehealth.. The scope of the network of Living Labs in this domain is dual. On the one hand the network wants to assemble all those Living Labs that have done projects and have an active interest in the domain. Within this larger group of Living Labs a more coregroup of Living Labs will operate. This group will act as a reference group that will interact more closely with each other. It is within this interaction that they will exchange lessons learned and experiences not only to each other, but also to larger community of Living Labs that are member of this thematic network. This core group is necessary to create a solid base, knowledge pool and trustworthy network of Living Labs that have the expertise and ability to set-up cross-border projects and to assist SMEs and large companies in large scale pilots. Important in this selection is the use of a common eco-system approach (see further). This core group will also set the benchmark for the other living labs. In the end the objective is that due to these core groups and their experience the other Living labs can evolve to a more mature, focused and specialized living lab in the domain.
4.2 Role of the health thematic network When we look at the challenges we encountered in the cross-border pilots of APOLLON as well as to the specific topics raised in the survey, we do see that the role of the network has various functions. 4.2.2 Addressing the challenges The network has to be able to address the following challenges related to the domain of health, by providing the members and users of the network the necessary insights and knowledge on these challenges on the hand and a way of tackle them during cross-border collaboration: •
•
Difference in the eco-system: the Health context is organised very differently in each region / country. This implies that the Living labs are confronted with other type of partners, stakeholders, business models… The establishment of similar set-ups in each living labs is therefore not feasible. However, the network has to offer not only insights in how the local Health and Well-Being is organised, but also a gateway to get access to the different stakeholders that are necessary to set-up collaborative living lab projects. In addition, as health is often (semi-public organised it is different for a new actor (SME) to enter the specific market (based on the public, subsidized model). New ways of enabling experiments, outside a complete commercial oriented (B-2-C) business model are also needed. Different rules and regulation: the domain of health is subject to a very complex set of rules and regulations. This does not only differ from country
ICT PSP Project Reporting Template
21
FINAL Version, 02/05/2012
Apollon – Deliverable D2.5
•
•
•
to country but even within countries. Therefore performing projects in this domain does not only require a thorough insight in these aspects but also implies that often specific procedures need to be followed. This offers also a bottleneck in the feasibility for cross-border pilots. Setting up mirror projects or simply transferring one set-up from one context to the other is only possible if it is assessed and adjusted to these local rules. Access to a vulnerable target group: When performing projects in the domain of Health or Well-Being one is confronted with vulnerable target groups such as elderly, sick and or disabled people. These groups can not be accessed in the same way that the majority of test-users or participants are reached and involved. Also often this group is difficult to be reached as they protect themselves from society. To access these vulnerable groups you need to have a.o. specific methods, dedicated ‘entry-points’,…. These are often trusted parties. The living labs operating in a network and setting up crossborder projects will have to provide these type of ‘entry-points’. Local ‘visibility’ / presence: Trust is a crucial element in the set-up of projects in Health and Well-being. Therefore trusted parties are a key element (see also above). To facilitate this trust local presence is a necessity. This means that the Living Labs have to act as a trusted party towards the different actors in the eco-system. Those partners can act as a gateway to the endusers Benchmarking: Finally, projects in Health and Well-Being also are confronted with a specific challenge regarding benchmarking. Measuring the value and impact within Health and Well-Being are also not always on a pure economical level. The societal impact is mostly as equal important. To prove whether a system has impact it is not sufficient to perform eg. an evaluation questionnaire. To grasp the real value of an experiment it is not only crucial to have access to a good benchmark, but also to create the correct research environment and offer the right instruments.
4.2.3 Providing access and stimulating collaboration The objectives of a community of Living Labs operating in a network within the domain of Health and Homecare are in general threefold. First it has to be an environment in which the various partners can share lessons learned, experiences… Second, referring to this core circle, it also has to be an active community that helps the Living lab members with useful methods and tools. Finally the community should also be ‘collaborative’ meaning that between the different stakeholders there is
ICT PSP Project Reporting Template
22
FINAL Version, 02/05/2012
Apollon – Deliverable D2.5 interaction in terms of collaboration by setting up joined projects etc… We will elaborate more on these levels.
4.2.3.1
Access to information
•
As mentioned before – the network of Living Labs in Health would consist of two layers: a core layer and a larger community. In the first place it is the objective to establish the exchange of knowledge and experiences with regard to Living Labs in the Health and Well-being domain both within and between these layers and Living Labs. Here a specific focus will have to be on operational issues encountered during Living Lab projects and how they were handled successfully.
•
The network also has to network with Living Labs active in other domains. The chairman of the network will have to play an active role in facilitating this.
•
Within this knowledge sharing, there has to be a specific focus on identifying proven methods to get Living Labs involved in collaboration with health, wellbeing service providers. This has not only to be facilitated in an electronic way (knowledge-center, newsletters…) but also has to be the scope of the workshops and specific events.
•
Beyond the own community, the network also has to act as an ambassador of the Living Lab movement. They will have to promote the Living Labs as a useful and attractive tool for innovation and service development for Health & Well-Being related projects and initiatives.
4.2.3.2 •
•
Pro-active network
First, the network of Living Labs, need to address specific needs of the community with regard to user driven innovation in the domain. These issues (eg. in-house access at vulnerable groups) are than subject of the various activities of the Living Lab (workshops, taskforces…). For this a programme has to be drafted by the steering group in which the focus of the network is decided. This programme has a timeline for one year and will frame the scope for tackling specific identified needs. Subsequently, based on this need-identification, the network of Living Labs will have to create different taskforces that focuses on the development of specific Living Lab tools, methods and techniques specifically targeting the
ICT PSP Project Reporting Template
23
FINAL Version, 02/05/2012
Apollon – Deliverable D2.5
•
challenges of the domain of Health and Well-Being. For example on capturing user feedback from elderly people. Thirdly, an important objective for the network is to collaborate & connect with the various stakeholders in the domain. The Health and Well-being domain is in that sense a very specific domain as this is in essence a very closed community, with a very specific eco-system. Therefore the network has to provide the access – both in the different regions and sectors – for the members of the Living Lab network to the local eco-systems.
4.2.3.3 •
•
•
Stimulating collaboration
The network of Living Labs in Health has to stimulate and facilitate collaboration between the members on the one hand and with additional partners (outside the network) on the other hand. The members will have to work together to join forces and by so offer a large platform that can leverage innovation projects and by so addressing some of the main challenges in the domain. This will not only imply that there will be an active cross-border and inter-Living Lab collaboration, but that the members of the network also will set up joined projects. These projects can range from dataexchange for bottom-up innovation to real Living Lab projects over different regions. To stimulate and foster this the network has to enable an easy access to the various Health eco-systems all over Europe. By so, stakeholders, public and private partners, are able to set-up large-scale, comparative cross-border projects. In addition, it is also necessary that the Living labs are able to identify local needs (by users, stakeholders…) and use this to generate new collaborations and projects from a bottom up perspective. Therefore the network, as a prolongation of the network acts as a matchmaker between SMEs, health services and public organizations, across borders. Often one is in search of a solution of a certain need. It is the task of the network to guide these actors – by pointing them to results of previous partners, bringing them in contact with service providers…
4.3 Services the network needs to offer Based on the results of pilots executed in the APOLLON project, it is clear that it is not feasible nor possible to establish a, fixed common eco-system installed in every Living Lab in which there are fixed partnerships with local actors and stakeholders. But we have identified the need towards a good system in which the Living Labs ICT PSP Project Reporting Template
24
FINAL Version, 02/05/2012
Apollon – Deliverable D2.5 could rapidly map the most efficient eco-system based on the project requirements. This would be one of the main services of the network of Living Labs. Due this ecosystem mapping the Living lab will be able to identify the required roles and responsibilities needed in the project and connect to the most appropriate actor. Another key-service that the network of Living Labs needs to offer is a way of exchanging the needs and demands of the various local stakeholders with the other members and by so try to do some matchmaking. The domain network service offered by the network and its members can be identified on two levels: towards living labs and towards SMEs, public organizations… 4.3.2 Towards Living Labs As already mentioned in the scope and objectives the network of Living Lab should acts as a vivid, active and collaborative network both towards its members as to the Living Lab community as a whole. For achieving this, the network will focus on some of the following key-services:
Sharing tools and methods: This will be done by various means. First of all the network will actively use the knowledge centre as developed within APOLLON. The objective is that this will grow as the reference site for the Living Labs. Second, the tools and methods will also be subject of specific workshops that the network will organize. Exchange information and best practices: Between the members of the Living lab as well as towards the stakeholders, the network will focus on very specific elements that are crucial in the set-up of a (cross-border) Living lab project in health and well-being. It will therefore tackle specific issues such as: ethical issues, privacy matters, the involvement of vulnerable groups, and the interaction with elderly people. This will be done by the creation of specific taskforces that concentrate on these topics. Second, it will also disseminate results of the different projects in which the members are involved. Not only will we focus on the data outcome itself but also on the process, set-up… This will be done through newsletters that will be spread around on a frequent base. This data will also be inserted into the knowledge centre (see above). Involvement of vulnerable groups: Especially with the vulnerable groups it is required to have a partner involved that the users know and trust. The network, through its Living labs member will be able to provide the most suitable actor that can act as the single point of contact (SPOC) or liaison officer that can set-up the relationship with users. This can be the local Living Lab or another specific actor identified through the eco-system mapping. Not only that direct link, but also how to engage them in the activities, will be a key element for the network (see above).
ICT PSP Project Reporting Template
25
FINAL Version, 02/05/2012
Apollon – Deliverable D2.5 

Tracking & monitoring: In the cross-border Living Labs it is a basic condition that all activities are being tracked and monitored. This has to be done on different levels. First of all on the specific project level it is required to retrieve statistics on the use or experience of a certain services. In order to be comparable between set-ups the data has to be interoperable and comparable. This is not only necessary to compare results, but also when services are being transferred. The network of Living Labs will provide tools and methods to support and safeguard this. Second, it is also important that the Living Labs keep track on what is happening with regard to various aspects of health (on a general level but also on specific domains such as regulation). A kind of basic monitoring of regional data is an important element in identifying needs and by so defining new bottom-up projects. This type of monitoring will also be an activity coordinated by the network. Objective is to have a general topic list or questionnaire that will be used by each of the members. By so we will have specific regional data. This will generate opportunities to define new cross-border projects. Working towards an eco-system approach: During the cross-border pilots of APOLLON it was clear that within Health the eco-system is a crucial element. It is known that the health system is structured in various different ways within Europe. However, we discovered that each region is organized and structured more differently than expected. In order to set-up cross-border projects the participation of the stakeholders of this eco-system is crucial. Therefore it is necessary to have a good method and process in place that allows the network and the Living Labs to identify rapidly the necessary actors and to engage them actively. The objective is that based on the results of the APOLLON, such approach is being embedded in all of the Living Labs that are within the core-group. Having this standardized approach will give the network the unique position towards SMEs. They will be able to do a scan of the necessary actors, how they are related to each other as well as their interest. This eco-system approach will be one of the key elements within the network and will not only be distributed amongst the members, but will also be annually revised by one of the taskforces. This approach will also act as a guideline for those Living Labs that are not in the core-group or have less or no experience in Health Living Labs.
4.3.3 Towards SMEs The services towards SMEs are on the one hand being facilitated through the services offered by the network towards its members. On the other hand, in addition to those, the network will also focus on some specific services addressing the needs ICT PSP Project Reporting Template
26
FINAL Version, 02/05/2012
Apollon – Deliverable D2.5 of the industry or government. There will be a special focus on the needs of SMEs, which are partly different. •
•
•
•
Analysis of the feasibility / requirement: Especially in health it is extremely important to have a good working set-up, with almost no technical issues, as they are often being used in critical situations. Therefore it is not only necessary to do a good requirement analysis, but also a pre-check of the service. The network of Living Labs will offer this requirement analysis (based on the templates developed within APOLLON) in which they will not only look at the technological requirements in detail, but also to social and contextual requirements. This will be done on the level of all the involved partners. By so the impact on the level of the service, set-up… can be assessed much more. This will allow the SME to estimate the feasibility and cost of the project. On the other hand, once this analysis is done and the set-up is being adjusted accordingly, it is still very important to do a pre-test in a real life setting prior to the roll-out to test users. The network of Living Lab will be able to support the SMEs in such pre-test set-up through its members. This pre-check is a crucial milestone in the further process of the project. Support to facilitate creation of cross-border collaboration and new pilots: One of the main services of the domain network of Living Labs is facilitating and guiding SMEs in the cross-border set-up and collaboration. This will be done both actively and passively. Actively the network itself will try to, based on the bottom-up user-centred design approach, create opportunities for cross-border projects in which they will involve SMEs, public organisations… On the ‘passive’ level –the network will assist SMEs that contact the domain network (either directly or via its members) for a specific project or pilot. For the latter, the role of the network is twofold: identifying proper partners with whom a pilot can be set-up and executed and the set-up of the collaboration with other Living Labs itself. Suitable methodology to address potential new pilots and cross-border collaboration: The domain network will offer guidance and consultancy towards the SMEs with regard to domain specific issues (as already mentioned above). Especially in relation to the process of a cross-border pilot as well as on how to capture feedback of users in this context, will be one of the key elements. Identification of success cases and stories to support new pilot establishment: The domain network, with its international dimension, will also organize various workshops and will be present in different events and conferences in the domain. During these events, it will provide a platform for the SMEs to showcase and or demonstrate successful projects. In addition, during the cross-border pilots in which the domain or one of its members is
ICT PSP Project Reporting Template
27
FINAL Version, 02/05/2012
Apollon – Deliverable D2.5 involved, local showcases will be organised. This is not only for promoting the project results, but also to act as a matchmaking event between SMEs themselves as well as towards the other Living Labs and their projects.
4.4 How to organize the network Creating an overview with available resources in the domain network of health and well-being is extremely difficult. Not only are the different Living Labs often project based organized and by so the used technologies… from a temporary nature, but also there is a permanent evolution in the domain. Also the setting and involved ecosystem is mostly too project specific. This implies that these settings and collaborations are not often ‘re-usable’ for other type of projects. Due to this and the changing nature of the projects and sector, we do think it is more useful to list the various expertise’s of the members of the Living Lab. The knowledge center will be the primary channel through which members can describe their expertise and track record. The domain network will use a template covering all the different elements of information that Living Labs have to provide. During the workshops and showcases the Living Labs will also have the opportunity to illustrate their assets. It will be the responsible of the domain network to assure that every member is up-todate with the latest status of each of the Living Labs active in the field. The newsletter will be one of the main instruments to do so. The domain network of Living Labs on health and well-being will consist primarily of Living Labs that are member of the European Network of Living Labs (ENoLL). Being a member is one of the prerequisite to be part of the core-group. In addition a supporting group will be established. This will be in line with the ENoLL policy on that level. As the domain network of Living Labs will operate from within the European network of Living Labs, the membership of this network is free of charge for ENoLL members. For what concerns the various activities – the different members of the core-group will primarily have to do this. They will be responsible for organizing the workshops, establishing the taskforces… This has to be considered as an investment of the Living Labs that are active in this network. Not only will they help themselves and the other Living Labs, but it will create opportunities for new projects. In other words, Living Labs that want to be member of this network will actively have to contribute. For the events and workshops, this will be done under the umbrella of ENoLL. These events will be organized on a self-sustainable basis: either through specific project contributions or through access fees. The latter will be kept to a strict minimum and at a very low fee. In order to be able to do so the domain network will try to cooperate and team up with existing domain specific organizations and events. For what concerns the specific services towards SMEs (such as matchmaking, ecosystem analysis…), here the model is dual. Either it is part of the standard assessment trajectory of a Living Lab (eg. finding partners in setting up new ICT PSP Project Reporting Template
28
FINAL Version, 02/05/2012
Apollon – Deliverable D2.5 collaborative projects) or it is a very specific assignment performed by the Living Lab. For the latter a cost can be claimed to the SME. If necessary, the search for (additional) funding can be part of this exercise. Preferably this is a public-private partnership where it is a collaborative exercise in which the SME also take an active part. For project acquisition, service delivery‌ it will always be the participating Living Labs that will jointly discuss how costs and revenues are being handled. The basic principle is that the network will work towards cross-border activities in which both local and remotely Living Labs are active. This is crucial in the referring task each member has
ICT PSP Project Reporting Template
29
FINAL Version, 02/05/2012
Apollon – Deliverable D2.5
5. Conclusion Based on the results of the APOLLON pilots and the feedback of the different actors (Living Labs, public organizations and industrial companies) we do see a strong need for a domain specific network on Health and Well-being. This network however is first targeted to the community of Living Labs itself. It acts as a knowledge and exchange platform on the one hand and as a broker, gateway for (new) collaborations on the other hand. It has to bee seen as instrument that allows Living Labs to connect to each other and by so extend their current network and eco-system to new markets, new stakeholders, new target groups…
The establishment of a common eco-system within this network is however not feasible nor recommendable. However, the network needs to provide access to new, existing ecosystem in the various countries and regions. The Living Labs in the network need to operate both as gateway and active broker. In this role they need to be able to activate the right local stakeholders required for the crossborder pilot. This matchmaking is one of the core objectives of a domain specific network. Therefore the necessary instruments (partner profiles, methodologies…) needs to be in place. When we look at the initial hypothesis we raised in the beginning, we can confirm al of them: •
•
•
•
•
The Living Labs – as neutral organizations – are well placed to play the broker role to connect the different eco-systems. It is indeed to goal that the network can open up new environments, new ecosystems to collaborate with The living labs need to act as a central gateway to facilitate the connection to those other ecosystems. It is not just a give-through, but it is clear that the access needs to be supported by a local party that can be trusted. The network has to offer such finding place in which living labs can find each other and built up the necessary trust. A cross-border network is a layered model on which different ecosystems both within the domain as outside the domain of health can be organised. Living Labs, operating in a network, do have a clear broker function where they facilitate between the various stakeholders within the (extended) eco-system) A cross-border thematic network domain has to be an active network domain in which members can and do interact and collaborate with each other. The establishment of a steering group of experienced Living Labs is crucial in this respect.
ICT PSP Project Reporting Template
30
FINAL Version, 02/05/2012
Apollon – Deliverable D2.5 When creating a domain specific network on health and well-being it is necessary that it in the first place focuses on the Living Labs. Here the main objective is to share knowledge on all different type of levels (projects, assets,‌.) and to exchange methods and tools to address the various bottlenecks in cross-border collaboration in the health and wellbeing domain. Second, the network should also target SMEs, large enterprises and public organizations, were it has to act as a broker and gateway to new markets and eco-systems. The network itself needs to connect different ecosystems and by so creating opportunities for these stakeholders. Only by then every actor will benefit the most from this type of network.
ICT PSP Project Reporting Template
31
FINAL Version, 02/05/2012
