Search results

This study aims to explain the value co-creation and co-destruction practices of older adults in an online community (OC).

Adopting practice theory and service-dominant logic as a theoretical perspective, this paper examined an OC of older adults by conducting an inductive thematic analysis of the interactions of the participants in the community.

The analysis revealed older adults engage with three value co-creation plus one value co-destruction practices in the OC including, communal coping practices, happiness creation practices, social capital generation practices and disparaging practices for older adults.

Illustrated in a conceptual model, this study extends previous work evidencing OCs serve as a platform for value co-creation and value co-destruction activities in the context of older adults. Further, it suggests OCs facilitate resilience of older adults through value co-creation practices. Recognition of value co-destruction in OCs is critical as it is detrimental to the resilience of older adults. This study provides the needed foundation to advance knowledge on the use of OCs by older adults and suggests future research directions.

Identifying co-creation and co-destruction practices of older adults in OCs enables service providers (e.g. caregivers) to engage better in online value co-creation practices. Further, the findings of this study address one of the main priorities of service science to investigate the impact of value co-creation on well-being.

Despite the significant engagement of older adults in OCs, there is a lack of enough knowledge in the literature regarding value co-creation and co-destruction practices of older adults in OCs. This study addressed this gap by explaining how older adults co-create and co-destruct value in online spaces.

Digital transformations represent an increasingly salient empirical phenomena for institutionalists studying the processes by which institutions evolve, erode, or otherwise change. Yet, there have been few meaningful attempts to engage with insights from the information systems (IS) literature, despite digital innovation and diffusion falling squarely within its domain. This essay makes an initial attempt at integration by offering a two-by-two framework which crosses salient theoretical categories within the IS and institutional literatures. From the former, we draw on concepts of system acceptance and resistance, and from the latter, we draw on concepts of institutional maintenance and change. Each quadrant in our framework represents user responses happening because of, in reaction to, or toward various institutional dynamics. We illustrate each quadrant with data collected as part of a study of digital transformation in the field of public healthcare in Australia. We use our illustrative case to open up research questions which researchers might use to frame their own studies of digital transformations as a form of institutional change. We conclude with a discussion of what other theoretical advances or insights might be yielded from greater collaboration between institutionalists and IS scholars. This essay contributes to the nascent study of digital transformations as a form of institutional change through examining how complementary concepts of the IS and institutional literatures might be used simultaneously to understand the intersection of digital innovation and diffusion and the institutional arrangements governing the fields which they change.

This chapter discusses the relevance of a community of practice (CoP) for a reflexive gender equality policy and reflects on the different approaches taken within TARGET. It is based on the literature on CoPs and structural change as well as on experiences in transferring this approach to the context of implementing gender equality plans (GEPs) within different types of research organisations. While the notion of the CoP was coined in the 1990s, literature on gender and such communities remained scarce until a recent wealth of research looked at the role played by inter-institutional CoPs in advancing structural change in research organisations. In this chapter, we examine whether and how an institutional CoP approach has been a useful vehicle for gender equality plan development and how the different configurations of internal and external stakeholders within the CoPs have impacted GEP implementation.