Search results

This paper presents a new conceptualization of digital service anchored in a coconstitutive ontology of digital “x” phenomena, illuminating the pivotal role of the digital qualifier in the service context. Our objective is to provide a theoretically grounded conceptualization of digital service and its impact on the nature of the value cocreation process that characterizes digital phenomena.

Drawing from scholarly works on digital phenomena and fundamental principles of service-dominant logic, this paper delineates the essence of digital service based on the interplay between digitization and digitalization as well as the operational dynamics of generativity and its constitutive dimensions (architecture, community, governance).

The paper defines digital service as a sociotechnical process of value cocreation, where participants dynamically architect, govern and leverage digital resources. This perspective highlights the organic development of digital service and the prevalence of decentralized control mechanisms. It also underscores how the intersection between generativity’s dimensions—architecture, community and governance—shapes the dynamic evolution and outcomes of digital services.

Our conceptual framework sheds light on our understanding of digital service, offering a foundation to further explore its nature and implications for research and practice, which we illustrate using the case of ChatGPT.

The study analyzed how the service-learning (SL) methodology can become a university social responsibility (USR) strategy that generates shared value for the university and its stakeholders.

This qualitative and exploratory–descriptive research had a nonexperimental field and cross-sectional design that used field techniques such as focus groups and in-depth interviews with the participants of the USR program “MIPyME vs COVID-19” in two Latin American countries.

This study revealed the perceptions of students who participated in the USR program on how a virtual service-learning (vSL) strategy related to the use of technology generates a positive impact on the development of shared learning between students and micro-entrepreneurs from a global and Latin American perspective, as well as for the internationalization of their study plans.

The field study was conducted in only two Latin American countries; however, the USR program has been implemented in eight universities from eight Latin American countries with very similar social, political and health contexts.

It is one of the first studies on SL used in a strategic and articulated way in universities with a USR approach. It analyzed traditional evaluations of this methodology, incorporating others such as virtuality (produced by the effects of the COVID-19), which led the authors to generate methodological innovations based on new ways of connecting, linking and generating shared learning and value for all.

The purpose of this study is to describe latent classes explaining the innovation logic in the Finnish construction companies. Innovativeness is a driver of competitive performance and vital to the long-term success of any organisation and company.

Using finite mixture structural equation modelling (FMSEM), the authors have classified innovation logic into latent classes. The method analyses and recognises classes for companies that have similar logic in innovation activities based on the collected data.

Through FMSEM analysis, the authors have identified three latent classes that explain the innovation logic in the Finnish construction companies – LC1: the internal innovators; LC2: the non-innovation-oriented introverts; and LC3: the innovation-oriented extroverts. These three latent classes clearly capture the perceptions within the industry as well as the different characteristics and variables.

The presented latent classes explain innovation logic but is limited to analysing Finnish companies. Also, the research is quantitative by nature and does not increase the understanding in the same manner as qualitative research might capture on more specific aspects.

This paper presents starting points for construction industry companies to intensify innovation activities. It may also indicate more fundamental changes for the structure of construction industry organisations, especially by enabling innovation friendly culture.

This study describes innovation logic in Finnish construction companies through three models (LC1–LC3) by using quantitative data analysed with the FMSEM method. The fundamental innovation challenges in the Finnish construction companies are clarified via the identified latent classes.

This paper addresses the growing fragmentation between traditional and digital service innovation (DSI) research and offers a unifying metatheoretical framework.

Grounded in service-dominant (S-D) logic's service ecosystems perspective, this study builds on an institutional and systemic, rather than product-centric and linear, conceptualization of value creation to offer a unifying framework for (digital) service innovation that applies to both physical and digital service provisions.

This paper questions the commonly perpetuated idea that DSI fundamentally changes the nature of innovation. Instead, it highlights resource liquification—the decoupling of information from the technologies that store, transmit, or process this information—as a distinguishing characteristic of DSI. Liquification, however, does not affect the relational and institutional nature of service innovation, which is always characterized by (1) the emergence of novel outcomes, (2) distributed governance and (3) symbiotic design. Instead, liquification makes these three characteristics more salient.

In presenting a cohesive service innovation framework, this study underscores that all innovation processes are rooted in combinatorial evolution. Here, service-providing actors (re)combine technologies (or more generally, institutions) to adapt their value cocreation practices. This research demonstrates that such (re)combinations exhibit emergence, distributed governance and symbiotic design. While these characteristics may initially seem novel and unique to DSI, it reveals that their fundamental mechanisms are not limited to digital service ecosystems. They are, in fact, integral to service innovation across virtual, physical and blended contexts. The study highlights the importance of exercising caution in assuming that the emergence of novel technologies, including digital technologies, necessitates a concurrent rethinking of the fundamental processes of service innovation.

Humanity and all life depend on the natural environment of Planet Earth, and that environment is in acute crisis across land, sea and air. One of a set of commentaries on how service can address the UN’s sustainable development goals (SDGs), the authors focus on environmental goals SDG 13 (climate action), SDG 14 (life below water) and SDG 15 (life on land). This paper aims to propose a conceptual framework that incorporates the natural environment into transformative services.

The authors trace the evolution of service thinking about the natural environment, from a stewardship perspective of the environment as a set of resources to be managed, through an acknowledgement of nonhuman organisms as actors that can participate in service exchange, towards an emergent concept of ecosystems as integrating human social actors and other biological actors who engage fully in value co-creation.

The authors derive a framework integrating human and other life forms as co-creating actors, drawing on shared natural resources to achieve mutualism, where each actor can have a net benefit from the relationship. Future research questions are posited that may help services research address SDGs 13–15.

The framework integrates ideas from environmental ecosystem literature to inform the nature of ecosystems. By integrating environmental actors and ecological insights into the understanding of service ecosystems, service scholars are well placed to make unique contributions to the global challenge of creating a sustainable future.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the distinction between human-delivered service and technology-based, automated customer assistance.

This is a conceptual paper. There is no methodology.

The concept of service is primarily delivered when a human helps another. When technology is infused into the process and becomes the major component of delivering the aid that is requested, the process is automated customer assistance. Thus, “self-service” is not service. It is automated customer assistance.

The definition of service is refined to describe the process of a human helping another person. When technology is used to provide the needed aid, it is no longer a service. Instead, it is automated customer assistance. The implication is that researchers should closely examine how users assess and perceive the two separate approaches to providing the needed aid.

The definition of service is refined to describe the process of a human helping another person. When technology is used to provide the needed aid, it is no longer a service. Instead, it is automated customer assistance. Researchers should closely examine how users assess and perceive the two separate approaches. Industry professionals should be mindful of the distinction between the delivery of service, which requires staff, and the provisioning of technology to provide assistance, which requires little to no staff. Intentionality should drive when customers are better helped by a human or by technology.

The value provided helps both providers create and users express when human-based service is needed versus assistance provided by technology.

The study aims to promote the use of qualitative methods in service research by investigating how these methods are reported in service journals, how the level of reporting has evolved and whether methodological reporting influences the downloads or citations received by qualitative articles.

Methodological reporting practices were identified through content analysis of 318 qualitative articles published in three major service research journals and comparison with prior methodological literature. Regression analysis was used to test how the level of methodological reporting influences article downloads and citations.

The study identifies 29 reporting practices related to 9 key methodological reporting areas. The overall level of methodological reporting in published qualitative articles has increased over time. While differences in the level of reporting between service journals persist, they are narrowing. The level of methodological reporting did not influence downloads or citations of qualitative articles.

Service scholars using qualitative methods should pay attention to methodological reporting as it can improve the chances of being published. Factors such as theoretical contributions are likely to have a greater influence on article impact than methodological reporting.

No prior study has explored methodological reporting practices across different qualitative methodologies or how reporting influences article impact. For authors, reviewers and editors, the study provides an inventory of reporting practices relevant for evaluating qualitative articles, which should lower barriers for qualitative methods in service research by providing practical guidelines on what to focus on when reporting and assessing qualitative research.

To explain how technology will replace a great deal of human labor in knowledge markets using a theory of reasoned action applied to demand and theories of procedural rationality, cost structure and system dynamics applied to supply.

Two illustrative scenarios are presented. The first is a third-party Best Treatments site, and its effect on the expert advice pharmaceutical representatives provide doctors. The second scenario is an online higher education business course module with embedded AI.

Both scenarios demonstrate the advantages of online expertise and teaching platforms over the in-person alternative in variable and marginal cost, ease and convenience of use, quality conformance, scalability, knowledge reach and depth and most importantly, speed of evolutionary adaptability. Despite such overwhelming advantages, a number of reasons why the substitution might be slowed are presented, and some strategies firms might adopt are discussed. Opportunities for service scholars to confirm, challenge and extend the conclusions are presented throughout the paper.

Increasing cost structure and adaptability advantages of online technology and AI over in-person delivery of expertise and training services are demonstrated. It is also demonstrated that the innovation-imitation cycle is accelerating because of exogenous innovation in knowledge access and online influence networks and an endogenous effect where imitators accelerate their innovation that drives innovators to accelerate their innovation, which drives imitators to further accelerate their imitation.

Digital service innovation (DSI) is a type of technological innovation that is recognized in practice in the innovation structure of companies. Given the breadth of digital technologies that enable digital services and the variety of these services, analysis is needed to discern the nature of these services, as well as the process that culminates in co-innovation. The literature on DSI is fragmented and spread across multiple research areas. This fragmentation impedes conceptualization of the elements that constitute DSI. This paper describes the nature of DSI through the process and elements of initiation, adoption and routinization of DSI in the context of digital service platforms (DSPs).

This paper presents a single exploratory case study of a provider of a leading digital solution in customer relations. The data analysis is based on abductive reasoning.

The paper conceptualizes the nature of DSI and describes the process and elements of DSI (phases, actors, functions and interactions). It contributes to building a common language for DSI research in service management. The analysis shows that DSI in DSPs is synonymous with co-innovation. This paper offers insight into how co-innovation occurs, using hybrid agile methodologies with the coordination of multiple actors and multilateral interactions.

The originality and value of the study reside in its conceptualization and analysis of what is meant by DSI. The components of the service and the technological requirements for not only provision but also ideation and development appear to be inseparable. The study unveils the mechanisms that turn a digital service solution into a co-innovative proposal. This knowledge can facilitate scalability in digital services.

This paper aims to provide researchers and practitioners with a consumer-focused alternative for considering the integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into services.

The paper reviews and critiques the most popular frameworks for addressing AI in service. It offers an alternative approach, one grounded in social psychology and leveraging influential concepts from management and human–computer interaction.

The frameworks that dominate discourse on this topic (e.g. Huang and Rust, 2018) are fixated on assessing technology-determined feasibility rather than consumer-granted permissibility (CGP). Proposed is an alternative framework consisting of three barriers to CGP (experiential, motivational and definitional) and three responses (communicate, motivate and recreate).

The implication of this research is that consistent with most modern marketing thought, researchers and practitioners should approach service design from the perspective of customer experience, and that the exercise of classifying service occupation tasks in terms of questionably conceived AI intelligences should be avoided.

Indicative of originality, this paper offers an approach to considering AI in services that is nearly the polar opposite of that widely advocated by e.g., Huang et al., (2019); Huang and Rust (2018, 2021a, 2021b, 2022b). Indicative of value is that their highly cited paradigm is optimized for predicting the rate at which AI will take over service tasks/occupations, a niche topic compared to the mainstream challenge of integrating AI into service offerings.