Foundations of Service Research and Service-Dominant Logic

  • Marja ToivonenEmail author
  • Christian Kowalkowski
Part of the World Forests book series (WFSE, volume 24)


This chapter discusses the central arguments of service-dominant logic (S-D logic) and their implications to the development of the forest sector and forest sciences. The chapter starts from a short summary of earlier studies that have promoted an integrated analysis of different economic sectors and fostered the perspective of customers and users. Then we examine S-D logic as a further advancement of these studies and point out that S-D logic is not a traditional service theory, but a theory of value co-creation in actor systems. We analyze the contextual and experiential nature of value creation and the central role of the integration of resources. More practically oriented constructs—value propositions and business models, and ecosystems and institutions—are also included. Together these analyses create a basis for the application of S-D logic in the forest sector, which we discuss in the end of the chapter. In the current development stage of this sector, there is need for understanding, not only services as add-ons to material products (servitization), but first and foremost the co-creation of value between different stakeholders, among which users play a crucial role. From the academic viewpoint, the systemic and multi-level perspective included in S-D logic is well in line with the emerging view of forest sciences as an integral part of the research into sustainability and ecological thinking.


Business models Ecosystems Resource integration Service-dominant logic Value co-creation Value propositions 


  1. Anderson, J. C., & Narus, J. A. (1998, November–December). Business marketing: Understanding what customers value. Harvard Business Review, pp. 5–15.Google Scholar
  2. Barras, R. (1986). Towards a theory of innovation in services. Research Policy, 15(4), 161–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Battilana, J., & D’Aunno, T. (2009). Institutional work and the paradox of embedded agency. In T. Lawrence, R. Suddaby, & B. Leca (Eds.), Institutional work: Actors and agency in institutional studies of organizations (pp. 31–58). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1967). The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
  5. Braat, L. C., & de Groot, R. (2012). The ecosystem services agenda: Bridging the worlds of natural science and economics, conservation and development, and public and private policy. Ecosystem Services, 1(1), 4–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chandler, J. D., & Lusch, R. (2015). Service systems: A broadened framework and research agenda on value propositions, engagement, and service experience. Journal of Service Research, 18(1), 6–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chandler, J. D., & Vargo, S. L. (2011). Contextualization and value-in-context: How context frames exchange. Marketing Theory, 11(1), 35–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Coombs, R., & Miles, I. (2000). Innovation, measurement and services: The new problematique. In J. S. Metcalfe & I. Miles (Eds.), Innovation systems in the services economy: Measurement and case study analysis (pp. 85–103). Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Davies, A., & Brady, T. (2000). Organizational capabilities and learning in complex product systems: Towards repeatable solutions. Research Policy, 29(7–8), 931–953.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Demil, B., & Lecocq, X. (2010). Business model evolution: In search of dynamic consistency. Long Range Planning, 43(2–3), 227–246.Google Scholar
  11. Edvardsson, B., Gustafsson, A., & Roos, I. (2005). Service portraits in service research: A critical review. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 16(1), 107–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Edvardsson, B., Tronvoll, B., & Gruber, T. (2011). Expanding understanding of service exchange and value co-creation: A social construction approach. Journal of Academy of Marketing Science, 39(2), 327–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ehrlich, P., & Ehrlich, A. (1981). Extinction: The causes and consequences of the disappearance of species. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  14. Fisher, B., Turner, R. K., & Morling, P. (2009). Defining and classifying ecosystem services for decision making. Ecological Economics, 68, 643–653.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Frow, P., McColl-Kennedy, J. R., Hilton, T., Davidson, A., Payne, A., & Brozovic, D. (2014). Value propositions: A service ecosystems perspective. Marketing Theory, 14(3), 327–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gallouj, F. (1994). Economie de l’innovation dans les services. Paris: Editions L’Harmattan, Logiques, Économiques.Google Scholar
  17. Gallouj, F. (2002). Innovation in the service economy: The new wealth of nations. Cheltenham and Northampton: Edward Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gallouj, F., & Weinstein, O. (1997). Innovation in services. Research Policy, 26(4/5), 537–556.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gebauer, H. (2008). Identifying service strategies in product manufacturing companies by exploring environment-strategy configurations. Industrial Marketing Management, 37, 278–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gershuny, J. I., & Miles, I. D. (1983). The new service economy: The transformation of employment in industrial societies. London: Frances Pinter Publishers.Google Scholar
  21. Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. Berkeley and Los Angeles: California University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Goe, W. R. (1990). Producer services: Trade and social division of labour. Regional Studies, 24(4), 327–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Grönroos, C. (1990). Service management and marketing: Managing the moments of truth in service competition. Lexington, MA.Google Scholar
  24. Grönroos, C. (2008). Service logic revisited: Who creates value? And who co-creates? European Business Review, 20(4), 298–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Grönroos, C. (2011). A service perspective on business relationships: The value creation, interaction and marketing interface. Industrial Marketing Management, 40(2), 240–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Grönroos, C., & Voima, P. (2013). Critical service logic: Making sense of value creation and co-creation. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 41(2), 133–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Häyrinen, L., Mattila, O., Berghäll, S., Närhi, M., & Toppinen, A. (2016). Exploring the future use of forests: Perceptions from non-industrial private forest owners in Finland. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research, 32(4), 327–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Heinonen, K., Strandvik, T., Mickelsson, K.-J., Edvardsson, B., Sundström, E., & Andersson, P. (2010). A customer-dominant logic of service. Journal of Service Management, 21(4), 531–548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Helkkula, A., Kelleher, C., & Pihlström, M. (2012). Characterizing value as an experience: Implications for service researchers and managers. Journal of Service Research, 15(1), 59–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hoover, W. E., Eloranta, E., Holmström, J., & Huttunen, K. (2001). Managing the demand-supply chain: Value innovations for customer satisfaction. New York: Wiley Inc.Google Scholar
  31. Hujala, T., Pykäläinen, J., & Tikkanen, J. (2007). Decision making among Finnish non-industrial private forest owners: The role of professional opinion and desire to learn. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research, 22(5), 454–463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hyytinen, K., & Toivonen, M. (2015). Future energy services: Empowering local communities and citizens. Foresight, 17(4), 349–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Iansiti, M., & Levien, R. (2004). The keystone advantage: What the new dynamics of business ecosystems mean for strategy, innovation, and sustainability. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
  34. Illeris, S. (1989). Producer services: The key sector for future economic development? Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 1(3), 267–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Johnson, M. W., Christensen, C. M., & Kagermann, H. (2008). Reinventing your business model. Harvard Business Review, 86(12), 59–67.Google Scholar
  36. Kim, W. C., & Mauborgne, R. (1999). Strategy, value innovation, and the knowledge economy. Sloan Management Review, 41–54.Google Scholar
  37. Kleinaltenkamp, M., Brodie, R., Frow, P., Hughes, T., Peters, L. D., & Woratschek, H. (2012). Resource integration. Marketing Theory, 12(2), 201–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Kowalkowski, C. (2011). Dynamics of value propositions: Insights from service-dominant logic. European Journal of Marketing, 45(1/2), 277–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Kowalkowski, C., & Ulaga, W. (2017). Service strategy in action: A practical guide for growing your B2B service and solution business. Scottsdale, AZ: Service Strategy Press.Google Scholar
  40. Kowalkowski, C., Kindström, D., & Carlborg, P. (2016). Triadic value propositions: When it takes more than two to tango. Service Science, 8(3), 282–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Lanning, M. (1998). Delivering profitable value: A revolutionary framework to accelerate growth, generate wealth and rediscover the heart of business. New York, NY: Perseus.Google Scholar
  42. Lawrence, T. B., & Suddaby, R. (2006). Institutions and institutional work. In S. R. Clegg, C. Hardy, T. B. Lawrence, & W. R. Nord (Eds.), Handbook of organization studies (pp. 215–254). London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Levitt, T. (1972). Production-line approach to service. Harvard Business Review, 50(5), 41–52.Google Scholar
  44. Löbler, H., & Hahn, M. (2013). Measuring value-in-context from a service-dominant logic’s perspective. Review of Marketing Research, 10(1), 255–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Lounsbury, M., & Crumley, E. T. (2007). New practice creation: An institutional perspective on innovation. Organization Studies, 28(7), 993–1012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Lusch, R., Vargo, S. L., & Tanniru, M. (2010). Service, value networks and learning. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 38(1), 19–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Maes, J., Egoh, B., Willemen, L., Liquete, C., Vihervaara, P., Schägner, J. P., et al. (2012). Mapping ecosystem services for policy support and decision making in the European Union. Ecosystem Services, 1(1), 31–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Maglio, P. P., & Spohrer, J. (2008). Fundamentals of service science. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 36(1), 18–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Maglio, P. P., & Spohrer, J. (2013). A service science perspective on business model innovation. Industrial Marketing Management, 42(5), 665–670.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Martinez, V. (2010). Challenges in transforming manufacturing organisations into product-service providers. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 21(4), 449–469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Mathieu, V. (2001). Product services: From a service supporting the product to a service supporting the client. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 16(1), 39–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. McColl-Kennedy, J. R., Danaher, T. S., Vargo, S. L., & van Kasteren, Y. (2012). Health care customer value cocreation practice styles. Journal of Service Research, 15(4), 370–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Nelson, R. R., & Nelson, K. (2002). Technology, institutions, and innovation systems. Research Policy, 31(2), 265–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Nenonen, S., & Storbacka, K. (2010). Business model design: Conceptualizing networked value co-creation. International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences, 2(1), 43–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Nordlund, H. (2009). Constructing customer understanding in front end of innovation. Tampere: Acta Universitatis Tamperensis.Google Scholar
  56. Normann, R., & Ramirez, R. (1998). Designing interactive strategy: From value chain to value constellation. Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
  57. Oliva, R., & Kallenberg, R. (2003). Managing the transition from products to services. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 14, 160–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Palomäki, K., Valkokari, K., & Ryyppö, M. (2014). Mapping value network and multiple stakeholder values for developing a new service: An industrial case study. In M. Toivonen (Ed.), Services and new societal challenges: Innovation for sustainable growth and welfare (pp. 1129–1138). Proceedings of the 24th annual RESER Conference, 11–13 September. Helsinki, Finland: RESER & VTT. ISBN 978-951-38-7436-0.Google Scholar
  59. Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1985). A conceptual model of service quality and its implications for future research. Journal of Marketing, 49(4), 41–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Payne, A., Storbacka, K., & Frow, P. (2008). Managing the co-creation of value. Academy of Marketing Science Journal, 36(1), 83–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Pelli, P., Haapala, A., & Pykäläinen, J. (2017). Services in the forest-based bioeconomy—Analysis of European strategies. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research, 32(7), 559–567.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Peters, L. D., Löbler, H., Brodie, R. J., Breidbach, C. F., Hollebeek, L. D., Smith, S. D., et al. (2014). Theorizing about resource integration through service-dominant logic. Marketing Theory, 14(3), 249–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Preissl, B. (2000). Service innovation: What makes it different? Empirical evidence from Germany. In J. S. Metcalfe & I. Miles (Eds.), Innovation systems in the services economy: Measurement and case study analysis (pp. 125–148). Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Ramaswamy, V. (2010). It’s about human experiences … and beyond, to co-creation. Industrial Marketing Management, 40(2), 195–196.Google Scholar
  65. Ramirez, R. (1999). Value co-production: Intellectual origins and implications for practice and research. Strategic Management Journal, 20(1), 49–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Read, S., Dew, N., Sarasvathy, S. D., Song, M., & Wiltbank, R. (2009). Marketing under uncertainty: The logic of an effectual approach. Journal of Marketing, 73(3), 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Scott, W. R. (1995). Institutions and organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  68. Seo, M.-G., & Creed, W. E. D. (2002). Institutional contradictions, praxis and institutional change: A dialectical perspective. Academy of Management Review, 27(2), 222–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Seppänen, M., & Mäkinen, S. (2007). Towards a classification of resources for the business model concept. International Journal of Management Concepts and Philosophy, 2(4), 389–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Slater, S. F., & Narver, J. C. (1994). Market orientation, customer value, and superior performance. Business Horizons, 37(2), 22–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Storbacka, K., Windahl, C., Nenonen, S., & Salonen, A. (2013). Solution business models: Transformation along four continua. Industrial Marketing Management, 42(5), 705–716.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Teece, D. (2010). Business models, business strategy and innovation. Long Range Planning, 43(2–3), 172–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Schuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Thornton, P. H., Ocasio, W., & Lounsbury, M. (2012). The institutional logics perspective: A new approach to culture, structure and process. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Toivonen, M., & Caru, A. (2016). Prospects and policies in the development of knowledge-intensive business services in Europe. In J. Ferreira, M. Raposo, C. Fernandes, & M. Dejardin (Eds.), Knowledge intensive business and regional competitiveness (pp. 301–326). London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  76. Toppinen, A., Wan, M., & Lähtinen, K. (2013). Strategic orientations in the global forest sector. In E. Hansen, R. Panwar, & R. Vlosky (Eds.), The global forest sector: Changes, practices, and prospects (pp. 405–428). Boca Raton: CRC Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Ulaga, W., & Reinartz, W. J. (2011). Hybrid offerings: How manufacturing firms combine goods and services successfully. Journal of Marketing, 75(6), 5–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Vandermerwe, S., & Rada, J. (1988). Servitization of business: Adding value by adding services. European Management Journal, 6(4), 314–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Vargo, S. (2009). Toward a transcending conceptualization of relationship: a service-dominant logic perspective. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 24(5/6), 373–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2004). Evolving to a new dominant logic for marketing. Journal of Marketing, 68(1), 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2008). Service-dominant logic: Continuing the evolution. Journal of the Academic Marketing and Science, 36(1), 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2011). It’s all B2B … and beyond: Toward a system perspective of the market. Industrial Marketing Management, 40(2), 181–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2016). Institutions and axioms: An extension and update of service-dominant logic. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 44(1), 5–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Vargo, S. L., Wieland, H., & Akaka, M. A. (2015). Innovation through institutionalization: A service ecosystems perspective. Industrial Marketing Management, 44(1), 63–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Viljakainen, A., Toivonen, M., & Aikala, M. (2013). Industry transformation towards service logic: A business model approach. University of Cambridge, Working Paper Series.Google Scholar
  86. Wieland, H., Vargo, S., & Akaka, M. A. (2016). Zooming out and zooming in: Service ecosystems as venues for collaborative innovation. In M. Toivonen (Ed.), Service innovation—Novel ways of creating value in actor systems (pp. 35–50). Japan: Springer.Google Scholar
  87. Wieland, H., Hartmann, N. N., & Vargo, S. L. (2017). Business models as service strategy. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 45(6), 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Zott, C., & Amit, R. (2010). Designing your future business model: An activity system perspective. Long Range Planning, 43, 216–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of HelsinkiHelsinkiFinland
  2. 2.Linköping UniversityLinköpingSweden

Personalised recommendations