Changes for page Living Lab Key Performance Indicators

Summary

• Page properties (1 modified, 0 added, 0 removed)

Details

Page properties

Content

...	...	@@ -2,109 +2,143 @@
2	2
3	3	Table 8 Living Lab Key Performance Indicators
4	4
5		-|Chapter|Criterion|KPI
6		-|(% rowspan="9" %)**Strategy**|(% rowspan="4" %)Governance|(((
	5	+|(% style="text-align:center; vertical-align:middle" %)Chapter|(% style="text-align:center; vertical-align:middle" %)Criterion|(% style="text-align:center; vertical-align:middle" %)KPI
	6	+|(% rowspan="9" style="text-align:center; vertical-align:middle" %)**Strategy**|(% rowspan="4" %)Governance|(((
7	7	1. % of (active) involvement of a balanced and diverse group of stakeholders in the development of the vision & mission of the living lab (e.g., all Q4 represented is 100%)
8	8	)))
9	9	|(((
	10	+(% start="2" %)
10	10	1. % of participation of a balanced and diverse group of stakeholders in the governance of the living lab (strategic & operational roles and decision-making processes)
11	11	)))
12	12	|(((
	14	+(% start="3" %)
13	13	1. Presence of partner agreements/arrangements for co-innovation
14	14	)))
15	15	|(((
	18	+(% start="4" %)
16	16	1. Completeness of a strategic roadmap for the living lab (SMART goals, responsibilities, and decision-making processes)
17	17	)))
18	18	|(% rowspan="2" %)Business Model|(((
	22	+(% start="5" %)
19	19	1. Completeness of the described business model approach (value propositions, problems & solutions, activities & resources, key stakeholders, customers, users, costs & revenues, metrics & impacts)
20	20	)))
21	21	|(((
	26	+(% start="6" %)
22	22	1. Number of (different) services offered by the living lab (e.g., stakeholder engagement) covering (all) different phases of the innovation cycle
23	23	)))
24	24	|(% rowspan="3" %)Culture & Collaboration|(((
	30	+(% start="7" %)
25	25	1. Presence of internal & external business & client relation management process/strategy (including contracts)
26	26	)))
27	27	|(((
	34	+(% start="8" %)
28	28	1. Frequency of internal communication & results sharing to keep partners informed & aligned
29	29	)))
30	30	|(((
	38	+(% start="9" %)
31	31	1. Number of regional, national & international collaborations beyond the scope of an individual living lab project
32	32	)))
33		-|(% rowspan="5" %)**Operations**|Human Resources|(((
	41	+|(% rowspan="5" style="text-align:center; vertical-align:middle" %)**Operations**|Human Resources|(((
	42	+(% start="10" %)
34	34	1. % of Implementation of needed internal roles and responsibilities within the operational living lab team in a flexible way (are all roles sufficiently attributed depending on the size of the operational living lab team)
35	35	)))
36	36	|(% rowspan="2" %)Operations|(((
	46	+(% start="11" %)
37	37	1. Time spent within successfully completed projects and/or activities related to the living lab (how many weeks/months/years of experience does the living lab has in running projects and/or activities)
38	38	)))
39	39	|(((
	50	+(% start="12" %)
40	40	1. Completeness & frequency of internal self-monitoring processes (how often is the living lab monitoring essential parts of their organization: strategic, financial, equipment & infrastructure, policy, project outcomes)
41	41	)))
42	42	|(% rowspan="2" %)Equipment & infrastructure|(((
	54	+(% start="13" %)
43	43	1. % accessibility in time to facilities (e.g., offices, co-creation spaces, testing facilities...)
44	44	)))
45	45	|(((
	58	+(% start="14" %)
46	46	1. % accessibility in time to hard- & software (e.g., co-creation materials, computers, wearables, interaction software, polling/survey software...)
47	47	)))
48		-|(% rowspan="4" %)**Openness**|(% rowspan="2" %)Innovation partnerships, projects & processes|(((
	61	+|(% rowspan="4" style="text-align:center; vertical-align:middle" %)**Openness**|(% rowspan="2" %)Innovation partnerships, projects & processes|(((
	62	+(% start="15" %)
49	49	1. % of implementation needed processes to safeguard a reflective and iterative approach to transdisciplinary collaboration
50	50	)))
51	51	|(((
	66	+(% start="16" %)
52	52	1. % of implementation of needed processes to safeguard an ethical approach (e.g., regulatory requirements, data protection needed, etc.)
53	53	)))
54	54	|(% rowspan="2" %)Ownership of results|(((
	70	+(% start="17" %)
55	55	1. % of implementation of needed rules & regulations regarding the use, sharing & licensing of data and IP of collaborative outcomes
56	56	)))
57	57	|(((
	74	+(% start="18" %)
58	58	1. % of implementation of user agreements (data, IPR, rights, liabilities)
59	59	)))
60		-|(% rowspan="6" %)**Users & reality**|(% rowspan="2" %)User centricity|(((
	77	+|(% rowspan="6" style="text-align:center; vertical-align:middle" %)**Users & reality**|(% rowspan="2" %)User centricity|(((
	78	+(% start="19" %)
61	61	1. % of diversity of stakeholders involved as end-users in living lab projects and/or activities
62	62	)))
63	63	|(((
	82	+(% start="20" %)
64	64	1. Degree of influence end-users exerts on the different phases of the innovation cycle (from informing to empowerment)
65	65	)))
66	66	|(% rowspan="2" %)Lifecycle & real-life|(((
	86	+(% start="21" %)
67	67	1. Degree of involvement of end-users in the different phases of the innovation cycle e.g., problem space, solution space, implementation space...)
68	68	)))
69	69	|(((
	90	+(% start="22" %)
70	70	1. Degree of use of real-life contexts of users in the different phases of the innovation cycle
71	71	)))
72	72	|(% rowspan="2" %)Tools & methods|(((
	94	+(% start="23" %)
73	73	1. Degree of appropriateness of tools & methods used for the different phases of the innovation cycle
74	74	)))
75	75	|(((
	98	+(% start="24" %)
76	76	1. Frequency of external communication & results sharing to keep end-users and external stakeholders informed and engaged
77	77	)))
78		-|(% rowspan="5" %)**Impact & value**|(% rowspan="4" %)Co-created values|(((
	101	+|(% rowspan="5" style="text-align:center; vertical-align:middle" %)**Impact & value**|(% rowspan="4" %)Co-created values|(((
	102	+(% start="25" %)
79	79	1. % Satisfaction of users/stakeholders (from the whole value chain) concerning their involvement/influence on the innovation cycle
80	80	)))
81	81	|(((
	106	+(% start="26" %)
82	82	1. Frequency of knowledge sharing (including results) with relevant (internal & external) stakeholders from the value chain
83	83	)))
84	84	|(((
	110	+(% start="27" %)
85	85	1. Number of relevant (open) educational resources (including datasets, trainings) shared/provided for relevant stakeholders
86	86	)))
87	87	|(((
	114	+(% start="28" %)
88	88	1. % Satisfaction of users/stakeholders concerning knowledge sharing & capacity building (learning materials & infrastructures)
89	89	)))
90	90	|Impacts|(((
	118	+(% start="29" %)
91	91	1. Completeness & frequency of impact assessments (how often is the living lab monitoring different types of impacts they are generating: societal, environmental, economic, regulatory, academic)
92	92	)))
93		-|(% rowspan="6" %)**Stability & harmonization**|(% rowspan="3" %)Stability|(((
	121	+|(% rowspan="6" style="text-align:center; vertical-align:middle" %)**Stability & harmonization**|(% rowspan="3" %)Stability|(((
	122	+(% start="30" %)
94	94	1. % Increase in number of relationships (with a reliable partner network and customers)
95	95	)))
96	96	|(((
	126	+(% start="31" %)
97	97	1. Level of financial sustainability based on a balanced & diversified set of fundings (structural vs. project-based) & revenue streams
98	98	)))
99	99	|(((
	130	+(% start="32" %)
100	100	1. Number of living lab value propositions, flexible to adapt to new circumstances
101	101	)))
102	102	|(% rowspan="3" %)Harmonization & scale-up|(((
	134	+(% start="33" %)
103	103	1. % Increase in number of partners committed to scale up products/solutions/services developed by the living lab
104	104	)))
105	105	|(((
	138	+(% start="34" %)
106	106	1. Number of products/solutions/services (able to be) scaled-up
107	107	)))
108	108	|(((
	142	+(% start="35" %)
109	109	1. Number of participation in (cross-border/cross-sectoral) initiatives/projects based on harmonized living lab infrastructures, standards, skills, methods, tools processes or services
110	110	)))