Search results

The purpose of this paper is to propose a framework for understanding, predicting and analyzing how future service technologies can lead to value co-creation at different stages of a value chain.

For organizations, future service technologies are growing in importance and will become a crucial means to survival. It is clear that future service technologies will increase the opportunity to reduce costs and create efficiency, but it is not equally clear how future service technologies enable value creation for customers and users. On this premise, the study proposes a conceptual framework.

The framework illustrates how future service technologies can lead to value creation for customers. The paper also portrays opportunities and potential pitfalls with future service technologies for organizations.

Several researchers are focusing on innovative technologies. Many business companies are talking about how to implement them and increase their profit. However, less attention is devoted to the ways in which future service technologies will lead to benefits and the experience of service for customers and users using them. This paper represents an original attempt to illustrate that.

The purpose of this study is to explore the expectations and experiences regarding a robotic shower, from a dual user perspective.

This was an explorative qualitative study in which elderly and personnel were interviewed before the robotic shower was installed and again after four or five months of usage.

The elderly participants found the robotic shower empowering. The personnel’s experiences encompassed their own work conditions, as well as the user value for the elderly. A shared experience for both user groups was a more independent shower situation for the elderly.

Low user frequency among the elderly may have affected the results; more frequent use may lead to different user experiences. Understanding whether and to what extent long-term use affects user experience is important for future adoption and implementation.

Implementation of digital assistive technology (DAT) should focus on the user value of the DAT for all possible user groups, as the different users may experience different values over time. In addition, approaching adoption and acceptance issues of DAT from a learned helplessness perspective may help users find value in the DAT and the independence these aim to provide, helping users maintain or increase quality of life.

This study presents a dual user experience of a DAT in an intimate care situation and shows the importance of including both elderly and personnel to fully understand the value of DATs.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the conditions under which a co-design team comprised of in-house professionals and leading-edge service users can generate innovative service design concepts.

The investigation used a field-experimental design to conduct two studies. Observations and open-ended questionnaires were used to examine cross-comparison matrices with experts rating the generated outcomes and t-tests being used to compare the outcome ratings between teams of different compositions.

The outcomes produced by a co-design team seem to be linked to the team diversity – process facilitation relationship. Bringing a variety of knowledge and skills into the team can lead to original outcomes, while a high disparity between members’ backgrounds can require extensive efforts to facilitate a collaborative process. Separation between users’ objectives can result in a user-driven process and outcomes that are too specific for the broader marketplace. Co-design teams that characterize minimum separation, maximum variety, and moderate disparity are likely to produce the most promising results.

The research was restricted to a narrowly defined study setting and samples. Future research should replicate the current study in other service contexts using different team compositions.

Co-design requires the careful selection of users based on their background and motivations, as well as the facilitation of a process that enables the team to collaboratively transform relevant knowledge into innovative outcomes.

The research contributes to a better understanding of the team composition – process facilitation relationship affecting innovation outcomes. Doing so provides a more fine-grained picture of the co-design team composition and the facilitation requirements for service design.

The purpose of this paper is to offer a reflective account of the emergence of new marketing theory as seen through the lens of the Nordic School of Service.

The paper is based on documents and the authors' self‐lived history and current involvement (“management action research”).

Northern European scholars, especially from Finland and Sweden, have felt free to design their own theory, at the same time collaborating internationally. Contributions include an early alert to services and business‐to‐business (B2B) marketing being neglected; dissatisfaction with service quality; that the service economy is more than the service sector; and the insight that relationship marketing and many‐to‐many network marketing better represent service reality. A novel service logic abandoning the divisive goods/services, B2B/B2C (business‐to‐consumer), and supplier/customer categories, based on commonalities and interdependencies is arriving. Nordic School methodology is characterised by induction, case study research, and theory generation, to better address complexity and ambiguity in favour of validity and relevance. In the 2000s, the synthesis provided by service‐dominant (S‐D) logic, IBM's service science, and network and systems theory have inspired a lively international dialogue.

The hegemony of the marketing management of mass‐manufactured consumer goods was challenged when services entered the marketing agenda in the 1970s. During the 1980s and 1990s the differences been goods marketing and service marketing were explored and the understanding for relationships, networks and interaction developed. It gradually laid the ground for the integrated goods/services approach that is now the major challenge for service researchers and practitioners alike.

It is unfortunate if developments of marketing in the USA are perceived as a universal standard for marketing. By studying contributions from many cultures and nations in other countries the paper enhances the understanding of the diversity of marketing. This article presents such a case from Northern Europe.

The purpose of this paper is to understand the differences between proactive and reactive market research techniques during the development of new market offerings. The study focused on the financial and innovative performance of traditional market research techniques, such as focus groups and in‐depth interviews, in comparison to more co‐creation‐oriented techniques that are designed to capture customers' value‐in‐use.

The study was a two‐stage process. Study I, an empirical investigation of 195 development projects in European companies, examined how these companies use different market research techniques and how this relates to the profit margins of new products and services. Study II designed an experiment with 50 users of a consumer good and evaluated the contribution of different market research techniques, based on the degree of originality and customer value.

Significant differences were found, in terms of both content and originality, between the technique based on customer co‐creation and the two traditional market research techniques (Study II). These findings can help to explain why the relationship between the use of market research techniques and profit margin (Study I) is stronger for co‐creation techniques than it is for traditional market research techniques.

Despite empirical evidence that the application of market research techniques based on co‐creation can lead to original ideas, there is a lack of valid studies regarding how co‐creation techniques perform in relation to more traditional methods of collaboration with customers.

The aim is to propose a conceptual framework consisting of research propositions concerning the key strategies required for the successful involvement of customers in the co‐creation of new technology‐based services.

The methodology involves a single case study from which data are derived and analyzed using the grounded theory methodology of “constant comparative analysis.” User‐generated ideas for future mobile phone services are collected from four user involvement projects and analyzed at several workshops attended by senior managers from telecommunications firms.

Seven key strategies are identified as being essential for successful user involvement in new product development. Each strategy is described and illustrated in relation to existing theory and presented as a research proposition.

The exploratory nature of the research means that the findings are tentative and need to be confirmed in other settings by other researchers, including quantitative large‐scale studies.

The results of the study provide management with guidelines for organizing successful user involvement projects with a market‐oriented approach.

Despite the increasing popularity of user involvement, little research has examined the conditions required for successful user involvement in new product development. This study makes an original contribution by proposing strategies critical for a successful outcome.

The purpose of this article is to present the outcome of a co‐creation service innovation project, both to understand the possible outcome when using a process model and to achieve a better understanding of how customers experience participation in co‐creation in an open service innovation project. The article also discusses the outcome of co‐creation in terms of new knowledge concerning customers' needs, both expressed and latent needs compared to the knowledge gained through a regular guest survey.

The study is based on 29 in‐depth interviews that were conducted subsequent to participation as visitors in a service innovation project which involved testing a model for user involved service innovation. In the process model users were asked to be attentive and produce real time documentations. The co‐creation in this case thus occurred when obtaining input for service innovation ideation.

Participants (visitors to a Swedish zoo), had mixed opinions about their participation in the project. Favourable experiences, such as benevolence and deepened relationships, were balanced by unfavourable experiences such as incapability and intrusion. Also a user involved service innovation approach as the one studied provides valuable knowledge about customers suggested to be useful for service innovation. Users presented a wide range of real time documentations; from brief comments about certain aspects of their experience to more detailed suggestions for future services.

The study provides empirical evidence regarding the importance of adopting a user's perspective towards service innovation. This is unlike previous research, which has been limited to the study of how companies perceive and can manage co‐creation in a manner that is beneficial for them. The study also connects to this perspective by suggesting that co‐creation both enhances opportunities for successful service innovation and provides a deeper understanding of customers' needs.

The aim of this article is to propose a framework for a new perspective on the total service experience, which dimensions influence it, and how a service experience is linked to value in use.

The article is conceptual and suggests a new theoretical frame of reference describing value in use through service experience in technology‐based services.

According to this article, a service experience is the total functional and emotional value of a consumed service. The service experience is unique to every individual customer and the service consumption situation. Value in use is the cognitive evaluation of the service experience.

The framework is discussed in the context of technology‐based services and will provide a basis for future research. Empirical studies are called for concerning service experiences in different kinds of service contexts.

This article contributes a new framework, illustrating the service experience, which dimensions influence the service experience, and how it is linked to value. The framework is placed in a context of technology‐based services. Unique to these kinds of services is a lack of personal interaction between the service producer and the customer.

Customer co‐creation is becoming increasingly popular among companies, and intensive communication with customers is generally seen as a determinant of the success of a new service or product. The purpose of this study is to analyze customer co‐creation based on four dimensions of communication – frequency, direction, modality, and content – in order to understand the value of customer co‐creation in service innovation. One of the key aims of the study is to investigate whether all dimensions of customer co‐creation have an effect on product and market success, and if the effect depends on the degree of innovativeness of a development project.

The authors conducted a study including 334 managers with experience in new service and product development to examine how development projects applied customer co‐creation in terms of communication in order to address future customer needs. Data were analyzed using partial least squares (PLS). The first analysis was performed with a sub‐sample of 207 development projects regarding incremental innovations. A subsequent analysis was performed with a sub‐sample of 77 development projects on radical innovations.

A total of three of the four dimensions of customer co‐creation (frequency, direction, and content) have a positive and equally significant effect on product success when developing incremental innovations. For radical innovations, frequency has a positive effect and content has a negative significant effect on product success. These findings suggest that co‐creation and innovation can be combined, but that the choice of methods for co‐creation differs depending on whether incremental or radical innovations are developed.

Despite a general consensus that co‐creation with customers is beneficial, there is a lack of agreement regarding how and why. The present article addresses this shortcoming and shows that co‐creation is largely about communicating with customers in order to understand their future needs. On the other hand, a company working on radical innovations may wish to limit customer input that is too concrete or solution based.