Search results

The purpose of this study is to explore how value creation and transformative service research (TSR) are interconnected at the base of the pyramid (BoP). To do so, the study seeks consumers’ perceptions of changes in well-being from value creation and the means by which these changes become transformative.

A qualitative, longitudinal design was used, involving a community education project in Indonesia. Data collection consisted of interviews with Etawa goat farmers and village leaders after one year (n = 21), and a further three years (n = 10).

Findings from the study are used to advance a model for value creation and TSR at the BoP, which identifies three critical change periods within consumers. These periods suggest that creating improvements in well-being of consumers requires their initial recognition of value outcomes, realisation of agency and a new vision for the future.

Research in other contexts is warranted to confirm the model, to further explore well-being from service at the BoP and to identify issues that diminish consumers’ confidence and stall transformation. Methodological challenges at the BoP also present avenues for insightful work.

Transformative service at BoP requires an emphasis on suitable structures, collaborative processes and management skills to facilitate consumers gaining agency and control, so that they can use their new and existing resources effectively and/or differently.

Participants highlighted positive changes to well-being at both individual and collective levels. Notably, some changes were not directly related to initial service provision but reflected improvements, such as employment for women, and better hygiene, health and education of families.

By exploring the interconnection between transformative service and value creation, this study addresses the issue of when value creation becomes transformative and vital for poverty alleviation at the BoP. The proposed model incorporates TSR, service logic and other literature, illustrates a process moving from value determination to value expansion and highlights three critical intrasubjective change periods within actors.

The aim of this conceptual paper, predicated on a hermeneutic literature review, is to improve understanding of the nature of value continues to be extensively studied with its ability to create competitive advantage. Understanding what constitutes value improves corporate social responsibility (CSR) comprehension, including managerial CSR values. This paper aligns with studies into value and/or CSR, whether hermeneutic or otherwise.

This study provides a reflexively critical understanding of the value literature. It focuses on the “identifying” stage of a hermeneutic circle (identifying central terms, core journals and seminal authors). A hermeneutic helix is proposed to better reflect the need of constant re-interpretation of the relevant literature.

Themes include value location (value in exchange, value in use, value in meaning and value in context); architecture (pathways, constellations and networks); creation versus determination; and value types.

This paper neither seeks to define value nor delve into the overarching value discourses. It does, however, refer to the antecedents for these areas. As a hermeneutic literature review, it lacks empirical testing.

CSR practices are strongly influenced by personal values. Hence, CSR practitioners must identify the processes involved and differentiate between the sought value and value types.

The paper could engender better understanding gaps between stakeholder attitudes and practices, i.e. consumers self-identifying as “green” may not engage in ecologically sound practices. As discussed herein, the value sought by university students influences where (and what) to study.

Outdated notions such as value propositions are widely used; value may be proposed; however, only stakeholders can take value. What constitutes value is under-represented in the CSR literature. Hence, terms such as value and values (i.e. value types) are incorrectly used interchangeably.

In this introduction we clarify the nature and scope of value in service-dominant (S-D) logic, as well as briefly discuss how the essays in this volume relate to this framework. We also share some thoughts on the need for, and S-D logic's role in, the further theory development about value and value cocreation, in general, and marketing, in particular.

Management buyout (MBO) is a specialized form of acquisition with different motives. Sometimes, there are initiatives taken by the senior management to bailout the firm from sickness. The predominant agency theory focuses only on the governance issues in the MBO firms and this theory can be applied to understand how managerial discretion can play vital roles in mitigating value destruction in the post-MBO firm. A CEO-led MBO is presumed to be greed-driven (Bebchuk, L., Cremers, M., & Peyer, U. (2011). The CEO pay slice. Journal of Financial Economics, 102, 199–221.). But a senior management team-led MBO is said to be a socialistic move. By default, MBOs are debt-driven, unless the buying management team is financially affluent, which may be rare, considering the price for the buyout. Private equity (PE) players play a dominant role in providing and or arranging funds in the form of equity and or debt. There is a notion that the PE investors help promote entrepreneurial and modern management practices. The MBO target firm has to ensure returning the entire money back to the sponsors within the shortest possible time out of the operational cash flow. Therefore, various issues like identifying a target firm, sourcing mix of finance, MBO price determination, value creation and value delivery to all stakeholders are all important for understanding the subject. This chapter attempts to construct a robust model for structuring MBO to ensure value fairness to all parties involved in the transaction.

The collective, interactive aspects of service experience are increasingly evident in contemporary research and practice, but no integrative analysis of this phenomenon has been conducted until now. The purpose of this paper is to conceptualize service experience co-creation and examines its implications for research and practice.

To map the multi-approach research area of service experience co-creation, the study draws on literature in the fields of service management, service-dominant logic and service logic, consumer culture theory, and service innovation and design, together with invited commentaries by prominent scholars.

A conceptualization is developed for “service experience co-creation,” and multiple dimensions of the concept are identified. It is postulated that service experience co-creation has wider marketing implications, in terms of understanding experiential value creation and foundational sociality in contemporary markets, as well as in the renewal of marketing methods and measures.

The authors call for cross-field research on service experience, extending current contextual and methodological reach. Researchers are urged to study the implications of increasing social interaction for service experience co-creation, and to assist managers in coping with and leveraging the phenomenon.

For practitioners, this analysis demonstrates the complexity of service experience co-creation and provides insights on the aspects they should monitor and facilitate.

As the first integrative analysis and conceptualization of service experience co-creation, this paper advances current understanding on the topic, argues for its wider relevance, and paves the way for its future development.

This paper explores the design dimensions that foster identity construction, legitimation, and growth of digitally mediated platform ecosystems.

A midrange theorizing approach was adopted to assimilate and induct the extant literature on ecosystems, platform business models and innovation, yielding testable propositions on ecosystem design for empirical testing.

The paper suggests that decentralized governance, partner engagement and shared context are three dimensions of criticality for designing a distinct platform ecosystem. These design dimensions nurture interactions, transactions, relationships between platform participants and external actors to make ecosystems authentic and legitimate. Decentralization is relevant for inducing flexibility and autonomy of participants on the platform. Engagement impacts the intensity of relationships the platform has with other firms in the ecosystem, while shared context is essential for creating knowledge and harnessing innovation on the platform.

The paper identifies a set of three testable propositions on ecosystem design for further empirical analysis by ecosystem researchers.

To achieve future readiness, organizations must become resilient to the market environment. With that intent, traditional businesses are revising their operating models to become more collaborative, integrative and efficient. Adoption of digital initiatives for redesigning towards platform ecosystems will make traditional models more relevant as markets evolve. But as a new organization form, platform ecosystem faces the challenge of legitimacy. Author suggests that managers use the organization design lever to meet the challenge.

Emergence of platform-based businesses and transformation of existing models to platform ecosystems are impacting today's competitive environment. During initial phases of evolution, ecosystems aim for identity and legitimacy. The authors contribute to organizational aspects of the platform ecosystem design literature by identifying decentralization of governance, engagement and shared context as dimensions of criticality for future-ready platforms. Secondly, these dimensions are associated with identity and legitimation of platform ecosystems. Decentralization is relevant for supply-side producers of goods and services on the platform, engagement has impact on both supply and demand-side participants of platforms, and shared context is essential for knowledge creation and harnessing innovation.

The purpose of this study is to deepen the understanding of consumers value collaboration with a service provider, specifically, how consumer self-determination affects value co-creation outcomes.

Self-determination theory (SDT) need-based motivational factors were operationalized in co-creation as commitment to resources (autonomy), feedback (competence) and collectives (relatedness). A between–within factorial experimental design (3 × 2 × 4) was conducted using online scenarios depicting value co-creation in a destination resort setting. Respondents were randomly and equally assigned to strong and weak SDT factor conditions. Next, they were exposed to scenarios depicting four types of value co-creation: co-innovation, co-creation of marketing, co-creation of experience and co-recovery, followed by an assessment of their co-created value (CCV), well-being, satisfaction and service advantage perceptions.

Results revealed that overall strong SDT conditions produce better outcomes. Consumers’ relatedness showed the strongest difference between strong and weak SDT conditions on the CCV dimensions. Further analysis revealed that autonomy and relatedness are crucial for collaboration. CCV meaningfulness is central for customers to improve their well-being, satisfaction and competitive advantage perceptions through co-creation.

The study contributes to a line of research on successful voluntary value co-creation processes between consumers and a company. The integration of service-dominant logic (SDL), axiology of value (AOV) and SDT, uniquely operationalized as commitment to resources as autonomy, feedback as competence and co-creation collective as relatedness offers a better understanding of how customers appraise the dimensions of CCV and outcomes of well-being, satisfaction and competitive advantage.

The international integrated reporting framework encourages organisations to disclose material information that affects their ability to create value. This paper aims to investigate the challenges and techniques preparers of integrated reports use to determine the materiality of non-financial information.

This paper uses an exploratory interpretive thematic analysis and an archival research approach. Qualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted with 55 integrated reporting (IR) preparers in 12 publicly listed companies, supported by the perusal of the companies’ integrated annual reports over a three-year period.

IR preparers find materiality determination for non-financial information challenging. This study found that preparers convert challenges into opportunities by using materiality disclosures as image-enhancing marketing tools, which causes concerns regarding weak accountability and a deviation from the International Integrated Reporting Council’s objective of improving information quality. This study found that IR preparers use various techniques in conjunction to determine materiality levels, as well as whether to disclose non-financial information in their integrated reports. The institutional isomorphism lens used in the study highlighted the issues IR preparers faced in their determined efforts of IR materiality levels under mimetic and normative isomorphism pressures.

The challenges and techniques identified can contribute to the development of a framework for materiality level determination for non-financial information.

Regulators who are concerned with ensuring sufficient information to improve investor decision-making will be interested in the techniques IR preparers use to determine materiality levels for non-financial information, to improve their regulations and frameworks.

This study contributes to the literature regarding challenges with materiality level determination in integrated reports and techniques used by IR preparers. The application of an institutional isomorphism lens led to greater insight and understanding of IR preparers’ challenges and techniques in materiality determination. This paper makes a number of significant contributions to the IR literature. First, it identifies the usefulness of material information for decision-making and the influence stakeholders have on the materiality determination of non-financial information, which have not been mentioned in the prior literature. Second, the literature is silent on how organisations relate materiality to value creation for the purposes of determining the materiality content of an integrated report; this research provides empirical evidence of the use of value creation criteria in materiality determination. Third, the study highlights that materiality is a combination of efforts that involves everyone in an organisation. Further, the strategy should be linked to IR and preparers have indicated that integrated thinking is required for materiality determination.

Indigenous entrepreneurship and hybrid venture creation represents a significant opportunity for Indigenous peoples to build vibrant Indigenous-led economies that support sustainable economic development and well-being. It is a means by which they can assert their rights to design, develop and maintain Indigenous-centric political, economic and social systems and institutions. In order to develop an integrated and comprehensive understanding of the intersection between Indigenous entrepreneurship and hybrid ventures, this chapter adopts a case study approach to examining Indigenous entrepreneurship and the underlying global trends that have influenced the design, structure and mission of Indigenous hybrid ventures. The cases present how Indigenous entrepreneurial ventures are, first and foremost, hybrid ventures that are responsive to community needs, values, cultures and traditions. They demonstrate that Indigenous entrepreneurship and hybrid ventures are more successful when the rights of Indigenous peoples are addressed and when these initiatives are led by or engage Indigenous communities. The chapter concludes with a conceptual model that can be applied to generate insights into the complex interrelationships and interdependencies that influence the formation of Indigenous hybrid ventures and value creation strategies according to three dimensions: (i) the overarching dimension of indigeneity and Indigenous rights; (ii) indigenous community orientations and (iii) indigenous hybrid venture creation considerations.