Search results

This paper aims to provide an examination of the use of the concept of resilience and its use in service organisation, ecosystem-related literature and the wider social sciences.

This paper provides a critical review and commentary on the resilience literature in the social and business sciences and its relevance to service organisations.

Two main approaches towards resilience are identified (engineering and socio-ecological resilience) with each having different assumptions about the nature of resilience with corresponding implications for policymaking, indicator selection and application in a service context. These approaches operate at different scales and possess different properties with respect to the likelihood of enacting transformative service marketing.

Different conceptualisations of resilience have profound implications for resilience-related policymaking as well as understanding change and adaptation in service ecosystems and organisations.

The transformative possibilities of resilience are connected to the active enhancement and construction of social capacity by service organisations and the persistent resilience of the resilience concept.

This paper highlights the importance of clearly defining the resilience concept and its implications for research and transformative service organisations.

Designing and developing responsible business practices can create various tensions for service organizations. The purpose of this research is to develop a deeper understanding of the relationship between customer engagement (CE) and responsible business practices (e.g. environmental, social and/or governance [ESG], corporate social responsibility [CSR] and diversity, equity, and inclusion [DEI]) and explore customer engagement tensions that service organizations may face.

This research develops a list of CE-related responsible business practice tensions and empirically explores their relevance through in-depth interviews with nine ESG professionals.

This paper makes three important contributions. First, we find support for nine distinct but related tensions with implications for CE that organizations must navigate when pursuing responsible business practices. Second, interview participants provide some suggestions for tackling these tensions, which we support with relevant theories. Finally, we develop a conceptual framework that may stimulate future service research and inform the implementation of ESG strategies.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this research is the first to conceptualize and empirically explore the tensions that emerge between responsible business practices and CE. The authors develop a novel analysis of the CE-related tensions that emerge when pursuing an ESG strategy.

The findings are based on a small sample of ESG professionals. Future research may take a quantitative approach to further evaluate the role that these tensions play in engaging customers.

This research provides a conceptual framework that may guide ESG professionals in understanding, framing and navigating CE-related tensions when pursuing responsible business practices.

A social benefit may be found when service organizations are better able to successfully navigate CE-related tensions when pursuing responsible business practices.