Overview regression analysis Consequences of lead userness

In this section I conduct further anal3 es to test and refute alternative explanations of my findings. Two specific explanations come to mind  

To test these two alternative explanations, I conduct two-step regression analj es 1 use lead userness and control variables in a baseline model that is then augmented by functional affiliation and job satisfoction, respectively. Note that the sample size is smaller in the case of job satisfaction [n=97], the reason being that questions on job satisfaction were optional for firms 2, 3 and 4, and were not included at all in the questionnaire used in firm 1. As we will see, my results do not lend empirical support to either of the two alternative explanations. 

by way of a second robustness check, 1 test whether job satisfaction rather than lead userness explains the effects that I discovered of lead userness on organizational behavior. 

1 used simple correlation analysis to explore the relationship between lead userness of employees and job satisfaction. 1 did not find a significant relationship (r=-0,026 p 0,05). This finding came somewhat to my surprise. After all, it would seem natural to suppose that lead users who manage to make their passion their profession should experience higher levels of job satisfaction. 

To the best of my knowdedge, this study is the first to research embedded lead user s innovation-related behavior. 1 find that embedding lead users in producer firms can be an effective way for firms to absorb and leverage user knowdedge for iimovation embedded lead users join need knowdedge, derived from their personal use experience or their interactions with other users, and solution knowledge available inside the different departments of the firm. Thus, 1 suggest th play a crucial role in the iimovation process. 

---

Table 33 Overview regression analysis (Consequences of lead userness)...

---