Search results

This research aims to investigate how backstage visibility affects intangibility and perceived risk at the pre-purchase stage and how service credence moderates the effect of backstage visibility on intangibility and perceived risk. It also focuses on the effect of backstage visibility on perceived service quality and value at the post-purchase stage and the moderating role of the service contact level.

This research tests the causal relationships between backstage visibility and customers’ service evaluations through two experimental studies.

Study 1 shows that customers who are exposed to backstage cues perceive less pre-purchase risk in the service than those who are not exposed. Pictures plus text information are more effective than text illustrations alone for risk reduction. This risk reduction effect is stronger for high-credence than for low-credence services and is partially mediated by the perceived intangibility of the service. Study 2 reveals that customers with access to backstage cues perceive higher service quality and higher overall value from service experiences. The value increase is more significant for high-contact than for low-contact services.

Future research could apply different methods to different data sources to provide further insight about backstage visibility.

The findings of this research suggest that allowing customers to view some backstage activities before purchase helps tangibilize the service, achieve more effective communication with customers and create more positive service experiences.

Demand-based pricing fixes price according to customers’ perceptions of service value and to their resulting willingness to pay. This pricing approach enables service companies to align their prices to customers’ preferences and to their expenditure propensity. Accordingly, it can generate higher margins than other pricing approaches. Nevertheless, this approach is difficult to implement operationally. Consequently, in order to overcome these implementation difficulties, the purpose of this paper is to provide a demand-based pricing approach based on the user-friendly technique of service blueprint (SB).

The methodology relies on the design science leads. Design science deals with creating artefacts or models for supporting human or organizational purposes; such artefacts have to be assessed against criteria of utility or value for users. Accordingly, an experimental action research is performed for both implementing and testing the proposed pricing approach.

Starting from the main difficulties hindering implementation of demand-based pricing, SB is proved to enable companies to overcome such difficulties and to support its implementation. Moreover, by employing SB, an innovative approach for fixing service prices is provided.

The proposed approach enables managers of service companies to overcome difficulties of demand-based pricing and to employ pricing strategies according to demand-based drivers.

In line with a recent call for research on service pricing, this paper develops a new pricing approach, which is able to promote demand-based pricing.

Hospitality services are among the most robust experiences enjoyed by consumers. To deliver them successfully, careful attention to detail is first needed for the design and development of those experiences. This chapter begins by exploring the array of elements that holistically construct an experience, from process to people to physical environments. Then, the customer experience management framework is used to outline a recommended technique for approaching experience design. Finally, a brief survey of visualization techniques shows how experiences can be modeled for assessment and improvement.

Collaboration between frontline employees (FLEs) and frontline robots (FLRs) is expected to play a vital role in service delivery in these increasingly disrupted times. Firms are facing the challenge of designing effective FLE-FLR collaborations to enhance customer experience. This paper develops a framework to explore the potential of FLE-FLR collaboration through the lens of interdependence in customer service experience and advances research that specifically focuses on employee-robot team development.

This paper uses a conceptual approach rooted in the interdependence theory, team design, management, robotics and automation literature.

This paper proposes and defines the Frontline employee – Frontline robot interdependence (FLERI) concept based on three structural components of an interdependent relationship – joint goal, joint workflow and joint decision-making authority. It also provides propositions that outline the potential impact of FLERI on customer experience and employee performance, and outline several boundary conditions that could enhance or inhibit those effects.

Managerial insights into designing an employee-robot team in service delivery are provided.

This study is the first to propose a novel conceptual framework (FLERI) that focuses on the notion of human-robot collaboration in service settings.

According to popular belief, transparency is a versatile tool for the governance of organizations: it is supposed to help in mitigating problems such as corruption, economic deficiencies, and a lack of legitimacy. However, is it a truly effective panacea, as it has been envisioned by its advocates? Empirical research gives reason to doubt, indicating that there is a wide gap between the idealized expectations of transparency and its practical merits. Organizations face severe difficulties when they try to implement such measures, especially because their daily activities often deviate significantly from societal expectations. Putting a combination of Erving Goffman’s frontstage/backstage theory and Niklas Luhmann’s sociological systems theory to use, this chapter conceptualizes organizations as social entities constantly engaged in boundary-maintenance, which not only comprises – in Luhmannian terms – “operative closure” (the autonomy of a system from direct influence of its environment) but also boundaries of visibility. It is thus not at all surprising that organizations regularly try to circumvent the implementation of transparency and develop new practices of secrecy. This chapter outlines an integrative conceptualization that enables researchers to reject mundane visions of how transparency ought to improve organizations, and suggests new pathways for empirical research.

This study aims to investigate the dynamic interplay between the management control system (MCS) and organizational identity (OI) in the Deepwater Horizon incident involving British Petroleum (BP). It examines how the MCS manages challenges, particularly those addressing the embarrassment stemming from identity disparities between external portrayal (frontstage) and internal operations (backstage), with a focus on the often-underestimated influence of the media.

This study builds upon the frameworks developed by Ravasi and Schultz (2006) and Malmi and Brown (2008) to construct a theoretical framework that profoundly investigates the relationship between MCS and OI. The framework developed guided the research design and incorporated a qualitative approach complemented by an illustrative case study. The research data was rigorously gathered from diverse sources, including official BP documents and influential media outlets, with a particular focus on well-established American and British newspapers.

BP’s MCS plays a dual role: it exposes discrepancies in safety, leadership and values, causing embarrassment and identity damage, yet catalyses a sense-making process leading to organizational transformation and shifts in the OI. This transformation influences sense-giving and prompts changes in MCS. The study reveals an intricate interplay in identity management between frontstage audiences (e.g. influential media) and backstage actors (e.g. BP’s senior management). It highlights interdependencies both within and between MCS and OI, emphasizing their roles in interacting within identity management. The longitudinal recovery is intricately tied to mutual political interests between BP and the USA, which are significantly facilitated by the media’s role.

This study acknowledges limitations that point future research opportunities. Interviews could provide a more dynamic understanding of MCS changes and organizational transformations. Investigating the role of leadership, particularly the new chief executive office, and the influence of political versus organizational factors in shaping identity claims is essential. Additionally, the effectiveness and historical context of interdependencies should be quantitatively assessed. Theoretical limitations in the OI and MCS frameworks suggest the need for context-specific categorisations. This research serves as a foundation for further exploration of the intricate dynamics between MCS, OI and organizational responses to crises.

This study offers valuable insights with practical implications for organizations facing identity challenges in the wake of significant incidents. Organizations can better navigate crises by recognizing the multifaceted role of MCS in identity damage and restoration. It underscores the importance of addressing both frontstage and backstage aspects of OI while managing identity discrepancies, thereby enhancing transparency and credibility. Additionally, understanding the intricate interdependencies within OI and MCS can guide organizations in implementing more effective identity restoration strategies. Furthermore, the study highlights the significance of media influence and the need to engage with it strategically during crisis management.

This study’s findings have significant social implications for organizations and the broader public. By recognizing the multifaceted role of MCS in shaping identity, organizations can enhance transparency and credibility, rebuilding trust with the public. Additionally, the study highlights the critical role of media in influencing perceptions and decision-making during crises, emphasizing the importance of responsible and ethical reporting. Understanding the intricate interplay between MCS and OI can inform better crisis management strategies and improve how organizations respond to and recover from incidents, ultimately benefiting society by promoting more accountable and responsible corporate behaviour.

This study’s distinctness lies in its innovative exploration of MCS, which transcends traditional methodologies that focus narrowly on front or backstage aspects of OI and often adhere to predetermined MCS practices. It underscores the importance of concurrently addressing both the front- and backstage audiences in managing the embarrassment caused by identity discrepancies and restoration. The research uncovers multifaceted interdependencies within MCS and OI, and these extend beyond simplistic relationships and emphasize the complex nature of identity restoration management.

Extant research conceptualizes rankings as measures that fundamentally shape modern life by virtue of being publicly available. Yet, studies seldom explore the act of publishing when accounting for the attention rankings raise in larger stakeholder audiences. In short, we know a lot about the impact of rankings, but considerably less about the organizational practices devised by those who produce them – the rankers. Borrowing from Goffman, the paper conceptualizes modern rankings as public performances carefully prepared on backstages and unfolding on multiple frontstages. Using a qualitative data set, the paper traces the full spectrum of organizational practices that make rankings public performances: on the backstage, launch dates have to be set, numbers packaged, and “teams” prepared; on the frontstage, performances are held through face-to-face interactions (at launch events) as well as in a variety of mediated settings. Overall, the findings indicate that the more ranking organizations seek the attention of larger stakeholder audiences, the more the publication process is transformed into what one of the informants describes as “a big firework.”

As every day work is central to people's lives and events serve as significant contextual factors, examining what impact the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic restrictions had on knowledge workers warrants further investigation. The author's research question investigated how employees in the London Insurance Market had made sense of their work identities during a period of mandated remote work and isolation from co-workers, leaders and others, amidst a turbulent environment. To address this enquiry, this research drew on Goffman's institutional, dramaturgical and stigma theories.

Data used in this research are from an ongoing PhD study of how individuals conceive, construct and conduct their careers in this field. As individuals and their social worlds are interwoven, a qualitative methodological approach was employed in this research.

Participants were thrusted into a position where they had no prior knowledge what identity they should adopt in a situation which had totalising characteristics. The loss of clear boundaries between work and home setting caused a deterioration of participants' work identities whilst physical separation from their institutions and co-workers posed a risk of disconnecting their past work identities from the present. Moreover, participants' experiences of deterioration and disconnection were intertwined with their demographic and occupational identities.

This study aligns with existing research on identity work, emphasising the crucial role of social interaction in the formation of work identities. However, it also highlights that the establishment and sustenance of work identities is also reliant on individuals having separate frontstage and backstage settings to understand and interpret their conduct and those of their significant others.

This study aims to investigate disclosure of asbestos-related liabilities in corporate accounts and counter-accounts to examine whether and how accounting contributes to corporate accountability for asbestos-contaminated products.

This study uses the Goffmanesque perspective on impression management to examine instances of concealed asbestos-related liabilities in corporate accounts vis-à-vis the revealing of such liabilities in counter-accounts.

The findings show counter-accounts provide significant information on liabilities originating from the exposure of employees and consumers to asbestos. By contrast, the malleability of accounting tools enables companies to eschew accounting disclosures. While the frontstage positive performance of companies served an impression management role, their backstage concealing actions enabled companies to cover up asbestos-related liabilities. These companies used three categories of mechanisms to avoid disclosure of asbestos-related liabilities: concealing via a “cloak of competence”, impression management via epistemic work and a silent strategy of concealment frontstage with strategic reorganisation backstage.

This study has policy relevance as regulators need to consider the limits of corporate disclosures as an accountability tool. The findings may also initiate academic and practitioner conversations about accounting standards for long-term liabilities.

This study highlights the strategies companies use both frontstage and backstage to avoid disclosing asbestos-related liabilities. Through analysis of accounts and counter-accounts, this study identifies the limits of accounting as an accountability tool regarding asbestos-induced diseases and deaths.

Some studies show that improvisation is a source of change, whereas others show that it is a source of stability. The purpose of this paper is to specify the factors which set the boundary between improvised change and improvised stability.

The paper draws on two published studies and contrasts their findings to analyze the extent to which improvisation leads to organizational change or organizational stability.

The paper suggests that the most innovative instances of improvisation reproduce some features of everyday experience. The extent to which an improvisation is a source of stability or a source of change depends on the dynamics of variation, selection and retention therein.

Future research needs to add empirical flesh to this theoretical skeleton to push research on organizational improvisation beyond the study of its causes and into further research on its consequences.

The paper deals with the paradox of making sense about two apparently opposing streams of research on improvisation.