This report is intended to collect, present, and evaluate the various solutions applied in individual operational pilots for their (upscaling and transnational transfer) potential, in terms of opportunities and barriers, over the short and long(er)-term. This is done by identifying the main characteristics of the solutions and sites and the relevant influencing factors at different local (dimension) contexts.The analysis provides insights in barriers but also opportunities and conditions for success across four main dimensions that make up the local context landscape. We consider two main roll-out scenarios:1. Upscaling within the boundaries of the country where the operational pilot (OP) took place2. Transnational Transfer relates to the potential for transferring a (V4)ES solution to any of the other three (project) countriesThere are several aspects within the four main dimensions that are cross-cutting for all four countries, either because EU legislation lies at its roots, or because market conditions are fairly similar for certain influencing factors in those dimension.Ultimately, both Smart Charging and V2X market are still in their relevant infancies. The solutions applied in various SEEV4-City pilots are relatively straightforward and simple in ‘smartness’. This helps the potential for adoption but may not always be the optimal solution yet. The Peak shaving or load/demand shifting solutions are viable options to reduce costs for different stakeholders in the (electricity) supply chain. The market is likely to mature and become much smarter in coming 5 – 10 years. This also includes the evolvement (or spin-offs) of the solutions applied in SEEV4-_City as well. At least in the coming (approximately) 5 years Smart Charging appears to have the better financial business case and potential for large scale roll-out with less (impactful) bottlenecks, but looking at longer term V2X holds its potential to play a significant role in the energy transition.A common denominator as primary barriers relates to existing regulation, standards readiness and limited market availability of either hardware or service offerings.
The purpose of this paper is to gain deeper insight into the practical judgements we are making together in ongoing organizational life when realizing a complex innovative technical project for a customer and so enrich the understanding of how customer orientation emerges in an organization. The outcome contributes to the knowledge of implementing customer orientation in an organization as according to literature (Saarijärvi, Neilimo, Närvänen, 2014 and Van Raaij and Stoelhorst, 2008) the actual implementation process of customer orientation is not that well understood. Saarijärvi, Neilimo and Närvänen (2014) noticed a shift from measuring the antecedents of customer orientation and impact on company performance, towards a better understanding how customer orientation is becoming in organizations. A different way of putting the customer at the center of attention can be found in taking our day-to-day commercial experience seriously, according to the complex responsive process approach, a theory developed by Stacey, Griffin and Shaw (2000). The complex responsive processes approach differs from a systems thinking approach, because it focuses on human behavior and interaction. This means that the only agents in a process are people and they are not thought of as constituting a system (Groot, 2007). Based on a narrative inquiry, the objective is to convey an understanding of how customer orientation is emerging in daily organizational life. Patterns of interaction between people are investigated, who work in different departments of an organization and who have to fulfill customer requirements. This implies that attention is focused towards an understanding in action, which is quite distinct from the kind of cognitive and intellectual understanding that dominates organisational thought. The reflection process resulting from this analysis is located in a broader discourse of management theory.
