Search results

This study aims to understand and explain how institutional change occurs at the level of value co-creation practices in service ecosystems. Despite the centrality of collective practices to the service ecosystems perspective, theoretically grounded explanations of how practices change and become institutionalized remain underdeveloped. Applying the theory of routine dynamics, this paper addresses two questions as follows: what does the institutional change mean at the level of value co-creation practices and what processes underlie these changes?

The study develops a conceptual framework that characterizes value co-creation practices as routines involving three aspects, namely, ostensive, performative and artifactual. As a key element in institutional change, the interplay between these informs an account of institutional change processes in service ecosystems.

The proposed conceptual framework specifies the conditions for institutional change in terms of value co-creation routines. First, any such change is seen to be grounded in alignment between changing institutional rules and the ostensive, performative and artifactual aspects of routines. Second, this alignment is seen to emerge through a dialectics of planned and practice-based activities during institutional change. An empirical research agenda is proposed for the analysis of institutional change processes in different service ecosystems.

This conceptual framework extends existing accounts of how service ecosystems change through the contributions of multiple actors at the level of value co-creation practices.

The paper aims to conceptualize how behavioral shifts in times of crisis drive the transformation of value co-creation.

Referencing two empirical contexts, the paper explores how digital service platforms facilitate changes in actors’ mental models and institutional arrangements (legal, social, technological) that drive transformation of value co-creation in service ecosystems.

The proposed conceptual framework contributes to existing research by identifying micro-level changes in actors’ mental models and macro-level changes in institutional arrangements enabled by digital service platforms in service ecosystems. In particular, the framework identifies motivation, agility and resistance as moderators of behavioral shifts in times of crisis. This account offers a finer-grained theorization of the moderating factors and underlying mechanisms of service ecosystem transformation but does not extend to the ensuing “new normal.”

The proposed framework indicates how digital platforms support shifts in actors’ behavior and contribute to the transformation of value co-creation. While the enablers are situation-specific and may therefore vary according to the prevailing conditions, the actor-related concepts advanced here seem likely to remain relevant when analyzing the transformation of value co-creation in other crisis situations.

The new conceptual framework advanced here clarifies how behavioral shifts during a crisis drive the transformation of value co-creation and suggests directions for future research.

The service environment is becoming increasingly turbulent, leading to calls for a systemic understanding of it as a set of dynamic service ecosystems. This paper advances this understanding by developing a typology of service ecosystem dynamics that explains the varying interplay between change and stability within the service environment through distinct behavioral patterns exhibited by service ecosystems over time.

This study builds upon a systematic literature review of service ecosystems literature and uses system dynamics as a method theory to abductively analyze extant literature and develop a typology of service ecosystem dynamics.

The paper identifies three types of service ecosystem dynamics—behavioral patterns of service ecosystems—and explains how they unfold through self-adjustment processes and changes within different systemic leverage points. The typology of service ecosystem dynamics consists of (1) reproduction (i.e. stable behavioral pattern), (2) reconfiguration (i.e. unstable behavioral pattern) and (3) transition (i.e. disrupting, shifting behavioral pattern).

The typology enables practitioners to gain a deeper understanding of their service environment by discerning the behavioral patterns exhibited by the constituent service ecosystems. This, in turn, supports them in devising more effective strategies for navigating through it.

The paper provides a precise definition of service ecosystem dynamics and shows how the identified three types of dynamics can be used as a lens to empirically examine change and stability in the service environment. It also offers a set of research directions for tackling service research challenges.

Although service research typically asserts that institutions coordinate actors’ value creation processes, institutions and resources are not necessarily transparent, aligned, or pre-existing. This paper aims to develop a more granular perspective on how actors coordinate for value.

Drawing on the established concepts of signaling and screening theory, this paper adopts a service marketing perspective to explore how independent heterogeneous actors coordinate for value creation at the individual level. Illustrative cases of corporate startup collaborations are presented in support of the proposed conceptual framework.

Actors share and acquire information through signaling and screening activities in a coordinative dialogue with other actors. These resource integration activities (for resource creation and matching) affect actors’ valuations and future actions.

The one-sided explanations of coordination in the existing literature reflect the dominance of the institutional theory. By contrast, the proposed agency-oriented perspective based on the integration of signaling and screening functions offers a more granular conceptualization of the resource integration process. As well as capturing how actors use coordinating dialogue to match resources and institutions, this account also shows that matching is a core element of resource integration rather than an antecedent. The findings indicate paths for future research that focus on the actor.

Service managers increasingly strive to achieve sustainability through strategies centered on circularity. With a focus on saving, extending and (re)generating resources and their enclosing service systems, circularity can contribute to environmental, social and financial gains. Yet, the notion of circularity is surprisingly understudied in service research. This article seeks to provide an initial conceptual understanding of circular service management, introducing illustrative strategies and research priorities for circular service management. This paper provides a roadmap for scholars, practitioners and policymakers to develop a deeper understanding of the opportunities from adopting circular services.

The authors explore the concept of circular service management by drawing upon existing literature on sustainability, circularity and service research. Strategies of circular service management and research priorities emerge on the basis of industry best practice examples and research on sustainability challenges and opportunities.

Service researchers have largely ignored the concept and role of circularity for service businesses. Extant research on the topic nearly exclusively features in non-service journals and/or does not seek to advance service theory through circularity. This article argues that circular service management enables the implementation of service thinking in the pursuit of sustainability and outlines four types of circular service management strategies.

The authors introduce the concept of circular service management and highlight the role of service research for designing and managing circular systems and operations. This article also offers a research agenda connecting managerial challenges and opportunities with key service research priorities for circular service management. This provides a roadmap for scholars, practitioners and policymakers to develop a deeper understanding of pursuing circular services, thereby contributing to a more sustainable future.