124,600 research outputs found
Technology enabled resource integration in service ecosystems
No full textIntroduction
Activities and interactions enabled by technology affect how actors (e.g. customers) experience the service (Åkesson, Edvardsson and Tronvoll 2014). For business, information technology, digitalization, and big data metrics and analytics have created technology-enabled resource integration opportunities and service platforms are changing many businesses (Rust & Huang 2014; Hartmann et al. 2016; Kunz et al. 2017; Colurcio et al., 2017). Interactive technologies challenge traditional logic of creating value and enable new modes of resource integration (e.g. online contest) driving customized service and new modes of experiencing value (Caridà et al., 2018). For customers, Internet based technologies, including self-service technologies (SSTs), are a key strategic driver of changes in customer behavior (Kandampully, 2012), as enable self-customization and socially-embedded consumption experiences (Mathwick, Wiertz and De Ruyter, 2008; Prahalad and Ramaswamy, 2000, 2004).
The widespread use of technology changes the nature and definition of service and suggests a new form of consumer–firm relationship that relates more to the process of serving instead of the concept of service as output (Grönroos, 1984; Lusch, Vargo and Wessels, 2008). Indeed, the technological advancement, digitalization and data analytics, on one hand, weakean the traditional face-to-face contact between companies and end-users and highlight the relevance of the functional dimension of services (e.g. ease and speed of achieving a task effectively and conveniently: Pura, 2005; service excellence, price and time savings: Overby and Lee 2006), whereas, on the other hand, they boost the deep engagement of customers within the companies’ service ecosystem (Lusch and Nambisan, 2015) and underline the relevance of the relational and the experential dimension of services (Holbrook and Hirschman,1982; Prahalad and Ramaswamy, 2004) as an holistic and meaning-laden experiences based on social identity and cultural processes (Caridà et al., 2018).
Recently, scholars disclose the dynamic and transformative power of technology by emphasizing its dual roles (facilitator or enabler and initiator or actor) in the service context (Caridà et al., 2017; Lusch and Nambisan, 2015; Löbler, 2013). As pointed out above, the technological advancement and scaling-up of technology use allow for new coordinating mechanism of resource integration, such as the online contest (Caridà et al., 2017), which are designed to: i) support the dialogue among actors (human - non human and human - human), ii) allow for the easy access to additional resources and iii) optimize the actors limited abilities to successful co-create and capture value. In this latter, technology discloses the critical role of resource integration within the interactive value formation system by potentially enhance the successful transfer and activation of the actors’ resources in the company service creating process, as well as, the successful operation on available resources to mutually reinforce and transform resources for a shared purpose and shared meanings (e.g. value creation: Caridà et al., 2018).
Although web based technology, including social media discloses a high potential for boosting resource integration, its mere adoption is not synonymous with positive value creation. Indeed, only the intended use of technology (Lusch and Nambisan, 2015) provides the broad service ecosystem (Vargo and Akaka, 2012) with new opportunities to successful integrate resources and thus to co-create, assess and capture positive value (Caridà et al., 2017).
The aim of the paper is to theorize beyond the concept of resource integration as the antecedent of value creation (Edvardsson and Tronvoll, 2013; Lusch and Webster, 2011), as a theoretical concept, to theorize on resource integration in dynamic business practice in the context of service ecosystems. We will explore who and why the engaged actors collaborate and establish dynamic and enabling or inhibiting relationships (e.g. market relationships) by inspiring and driving them toward more effective resource integration and value co-creation outcomes; that is value-in-context (Chandler and Vargo 2011).
According to Edvardsson et al. (2014), resource integration relates to the methods through which resources are integrated and used by colaborating actors and implies cooperative and relational processes that result in attractive outcomes for all engaged actors. In such vein and according to the aim of the paper, the study focussed on online contests, we reffered to as a business practices and a resource integration coordinating mechanisms that through the intended use of technology drives the market dynamic relations.
This study adopts the Caridà, Edvardsson and Colurcio (2018) conceptualization of resource integration and broadens it to the next level of the dynamics of the market relations within the more complex service ecosystem context.
Literature Review
As research on resource integration are in an early stage of development (Colurcio et al.2017) some scholars have called for a more solid theory about resource integration as a construct per se and not only as a key concept within the value co-creation issue (Kleinaltenkamp et al., 2012; Peters et al., 2014). Indeed this topic is still relatively unexplored and is conceptually subordinate to value co-creation.
With the exception of some recent contributions (Caridà et al.2018), studies on how integrate available resources and on how design and manage the integration processes lack. Resource integration emerges as , central process embedded into the interactive value-formation system (Caridà, Edvardsson and Colurcio, 2018) that is not only driven and shaped by actors’ use of knowledge and skills but also implies a social and cultural process that enables the networking of actors (Gummesson and Mele, 2010) within the service ecosystem (Lusch and Nambisan, 2015; Vargo and Akaka, 2012).
Resource integration is accomplished and by multiple actors within asymmetric relationships in a continuous process of integrating and coordinating activities performed by actors (Payne, Storbacka, and Frow, 2008). It occurs through a specific set of interactions and forms of collaboration between actors and available resources (Ballantyne and Varey, 2006; Peters et al., 2014) and emerges through a sequence of three phases – matching, resourcing and valuing – that are interdependent and have a powerful mutual influence (Caridà et al.2018): “during the first two phases, actor’s resources interact, match and become. They transform themselves from basic operant resources (BORs) into composite operant resources (CORs) and interconnected operant resources (IORs). Finally, during the last phase, actors interpret the social context and determine the value outcomes they co-create within and through it” (pp. 5-6).
Technology is a booster of such a matching-resourcing-valuing process as it enables both resource liquefaction and resource density (Lusch and Nambisan, 2015) and empowers the actors’ awareness of resource potential (Koskela-Huotari et al., 2016).
Methodology
This article is conceptual in nature; it adopts a qualitative research approach and an empirical contextualization strategy (Ketokivi and Mantere, 2010; McInnis, 2011) to refine and upgrade existing theories rather than inventing entirely new ones. According to Ketokivi and Mantere, (2010), in our contextualization exercise, we reinterpreted well-known online contests cases in the light of the literature we propose to match and bridge theory and business practice.
The research process followed the research planning and the literature review, and the selection and interpretation of empirical contextualization. In this latter, the narratives we built are based on data and information we gathered from previous studies; their reinterpretation allows us to observe specific dynamics featuring online contests as resource integration coordinating mechanism that, on one hand, enhances the convergence between the functional and the experiential dimensions of service(s), and on the other, shapes the market as a long-time, recursive and valuable relationship.
Findings
The study sets online contest as a resource integration coordinating mechanism that is multi-actor, flexible and valuable for all the service ecosystem actors. In this line, online contest is the main mechanism triggering the systemic networking, the strengthening of existing market relationship and the development of new ones for the integration and the join creation of value for the whole service system. Accordingly, the online contest doesn’t appear as a one time activity but is a crowdsourcing practice that is socially and culturally embedded within the company business model. It goes beyond the relationship between company and customers to mobilize and foster higher resource density and resource renewal through the service ecosystem. Accordingly, online contest shapes the service context by affecting the market relationships dynamics.
Conclusion and Implication
This paper contributes to the ongoing theorizing and conversation on resource integration in service ecosystems. It contributes by extending the understanding of the mechanisms that are enabling or inhibiting resource integration in practice for engaged actors. One specific contribution has to do with elaborating on how diffeent actors are engaged to extract different value but benefit form establishing collaborative relationships with each other. The very reason for collaborating and forming relationships is that other actors are invited since they have someting the focal actor have not but find attractive and useful for creating business or social value. This sometimes requires the breaking of existing modes of resorce integration to enable the making of new and more effective processes for resource integration and at the same time maintaining supportive and institutionlized practices and relationsips (Koskela-Huotari et al., 2016). This will be further elaborated on in the final version of the paper, empasizing asymmetric resource integration drivers.
On the managerial perspective, this study provides useful insigts to better manage online contest as a resource integration coordinating mechanism to design collaborative business model enabling the successful co-creation of holistic and meaning-laden experiences through which actors (e.g. service ecosystem actors) assess and capture positive value
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
No full textThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Creating harmony through a plethora of interests, resources and actors: the challenging task of orchestrating the service ecosystem
No full textPurpose: There is a need to understand value co-creation in service ecosystems that engage multiple actors with different goals. This study aims to extend the understanding of value co-creation by considering the orchestration of service ecosystems with reference to resource-integration processes. Design/methodology/approach: An exploratory case study approach is used to analyze actors' roles in resource orchestration within a service ecosystem, gathering data from the macro, meso and micro levels of an Italian hospitality and tourism services ecosystem. Findings: A framework is devised that highlights the intersection between orchestration and resource integration for value co-creation processes across the macro, meso and micro levels in service ecosystems. This extends the understanding of service ecosystem dynamics, especially how new value co-creation structures emerge, by emphasizing the circular causality between system levels. Findings show how orchestrating resource integration activities initiate and institutionalize non-linear value co-creation processes. Practical implications: Resource integration orchestration within and between ecosystem levels is a possible response to societal challenges and for creating economic, cultural and social value across the community. The study offers policymakers insights into developing new competencies for developing actions according to a logic of socially and sustainable value. Originality/value: This study advances the understanding of service orchestration by expanding the concept and the feasibility of service ecosystem orchestration. It offers insights into the importance of orchestrating resource integration to the emergence and vitality of service ecosystems themselves. The study responds to the need for empirical studies on value co-creation
Smart Resource Integration
No full textSmart Resource Integration. Introduction
The Internet of Things (IoT) is a hot topic in the technological and cybernetic fields as well as in the application practice. IoT concerns networked everyday objects that- due to the digital sensors equipment interconnect to each other (Li et al., 2011) - can become active participants in business processes. The IoT has a potential transformative power as – concerning the collection and the combination of data from different and interconnected sources –affects all kinds of industries and may have an impact on decisions and actions of firms (Michel, 2014). Recent management studies (Leminen et al., 2012) emphasized the ecosystem approach stressing that the core IoT elements include the concept of “the ecosystem” and “the business model” as platforms, technologies and processes form the ecosystem core whereas the members of the ecosystem (companies, public institutions and individuals) create business models. This stretched concept of the IoT highlights the role of collaboration and networking between actors and alignment of institutions (Edvardsson et al., 2014)
Investigation of the correlation between plasma leptin, craving and relapse risk in subjects with opioid addiction undergoing pharmacological agonist treatment
No full textDispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts
No full textWe conducted a full-scale evaluative citation analysis study of scholars in the XML research field to explore just how different from each other author rankings resulting from different citation counting methods actually are, and to demonstrate the capability of emerging data and tools on the Web in supporting more realistic citation counting methods. Our results contest some common arguments for the continued
use of first-author citation counts in the evaluation of scholars, such as high correlations between author rankings by first-author citation counts and other citation
counting methods, and high costs of using more realistic citation counting methods that are not well-supported by the ISI databases. It is argued that increasingly available digital full text research papers make it possible for citation analysis studies to go beyond what the ISI databases have directly supported and to employ more
sophisticated methods
TIME COURSES OF CLOZAPINE RESPONSE AND CLOZAPINE PLASMA LEVELS: A ONE-YEAR PROSPECTIVE STUDY IN DRUG RESISTANT SCHIZOPHRENIC PATIENTS
No full text
- …
