Table 4. Future research directions... | Emerald Publishing

Table 4.

Future research directions

Extended FED steps	Research questions for marketing managers	Research questions for public policymakers	Why FED enables these questions (compared to traditional methods)
Step 1. Multidimensional empathy	Can the various dimensions of empathy act as a segmentation criterion? How can each kind of empathy be easily measured to segment consumers? How can multi-empathy be assessed in companies’ employees?	How can an empathic approach be developed and stimulated among innovation process participants? How can shared frameworks or coordinated initiatives support the adoption of a multi-empathic approach to food well-being across countries??	Traditional design focuses only on One type of empathy, while FED integrates multiple types of empathy, allowing for deeper, more human-centered segmentation and insight generation
Step 2. Holistic assessment	What is the best department that specializes in research that can adopt such a multidisciplinary approach? Which sets of competencies are necessary to effectively carry out a holistic assessment? What organizational mechanisms should be adopted to create effective FED project teams?	How can institutions with diverse expertise be organized into effective research networks to advance food well-being? How can research teams balance disciplinary depth with the integrative perspective needed for holistic food well-being? What evaluation criteria and reviewer expertise are best suited for assessing interdisciplinary FED-based proposals in public funding competitions?	Unlike traditional design that isolates product-focused problems, FED considers the full experience, requiring interdisciplinary collaboration and multi-method research for a broader view of food problems
Step 3. Consumer-centric ideation	How can consumers be recognized according to their levels of expertise? How can consumers be encouraged to invest in food co-creation? What consumer characteristics predict high-value contributions to food codesign?	How can the citizens be encouraged to participate collaboratively in FED efforts? How can children be invited to take part in FED efforts?	FED repositions consumers as partners, not passive testers. This opens new research into how the participation of marketers and consumers affects innovation outcomes
Step 4. Immersive visualization	What types of investment and partnership models are needed to scale immersive prototyping capabilities? What methods can be used to evaluate consumer reactions to immersive visualization experiences?	Which cognitive barriers may limit or prevent effective engagement with immersive virtualization technologies? Can immersive and virtual technologies help FED achieve social inclusion, e.g. incorporate the elderly into FED?	FED’s use of AR/VR enables simulation of experiences before implementation, supporting richer feedback loops and broader stakeholder testing than traditional physical prototypes

Extended FED steps	Research questions for marketing managers	Research questions for public policymakers	Why FED enables these questions (compared to traditional methods)
Step 1. Multidimensional empathy	Can the various dimensions of empathy act as a segmentation criterion? How can each kind of empathy be easily measured to segment consumers? How can multi-empathy be assessed in companies’ employees?	How can an empathic approach be developed and stimulated among innovation process participants? How can shared frameworks or coordinated initiatives support the adoption of a multi-empathic approach to food well-being across countries??	Traditional design focuses only on One type of empathy, while FED integrates multiple types of empathy, allowing for deeper, more human-centered segmentation and insight generation
Step 2. Holistic assessment	What is the best department that specializes in research that can adopt such a multidisciplinary approach? Which sets of competencies are necessary to effectively carry out a holistic assessment? What organizational mechanisms should be adopted to create effective FED project teams?	How can institutions with diverse expertise be organized into effective research networks to advance food well-being? How can research teams balance disciplinary depth with the integrative perspective needed for holistic food well-being? What evaluation criteria and reviewer expertise are best suited for assessing interdisciplinary FED-based proposals in public funding competitions?	Unlike traditional design that isolates product-focused problems, FED considers the full experience, requiring interdisciplinary collaboration and multi-method research for a broader view of food problems
Step 3. Consumer-centric ideation	How can consumers be recognized according to their levels of expertise? How can consumers be encouraged to invest in food co-creation? What consumer characteristics predict high-value contributions to food codesign?	How can the citizens be encouraged to participate collaboratively in FED efforts? How can children be invited to take part in FED efforts?	FED repositions consumers as partners, not passive testers. This opens new research into how the participation of marketers and consumers affects innovation outcomes
Step 4. Immersive visualization	What types of investment and partnership models are needed to scale immersive prototyping capabilities? What methods can be used to evaluate consumer reactions to immersive visualization experiences?	Which cognitive barriers may limit or prevent effective engagement with immersive virtualization technologies? Can immersive and virtual technologies help FED achieve social inclusion, e.g. incorporate the elderly into FED?	FED’s use of AR/VR enables simulation of experiences before implementation, supporting richer feedback loops and broader stakeholder testing than traditional physical prototypes