Advertisement

Further Advancing Service Science with Service-Dominant Logic: Service Ecosystems, Institutions, and Their Implications for Innovation

  • Melissa Archpru AkakaEmail author
  • Kaisa Koskela-Huotari
  • Stephen L. Vargo
Chapter
Part of the Service Science: Research and Innovations in the Service Economy book series (SSRI)

Abstract

Service-dominant (S-D) logic has been recognized as a theoretical foundation for developing a science of service. As the field of service science advances the understanding of value cocreation in service systems, S-D logic continues to evolve as well. Recent updates and consolidation of the foundational premises establish five core axioms of S-D logic and outline a pathway for understanding the role of institutions in value cocreation in general, and innovation in particular. This chapter overviews the evolution of S-D logic and its service ecosystems view, which can contribute to the furthering the development of service science and advancing the study of innovation in service systems. Future research directions are proposed.

Keywords

Service-dominant logic Service ecosystems Institutions Innovation 

References

  1. Abernathy, W. J., & Clark, K. B. (1985). Innovation: Mapping the winds of creative destruction. Research Policy, 14(1), 3–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Akaka, Melissa Archpru, and Jennifer D. Chandler (2011). “Roles as resources: A social roles perspective of change in value networks.” Marketing Theory 11(3), 243–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Akaka, Melissa Archpru, and Stephen L. Vargo (2014). “Technology as an operant resource in service (eco) systems.” Information Systems and e-Business Management 12(3), 367–384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Arthur, W. B. (2009). The nature of technology: What it is and how it evolves: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
  5. Barile, S., & Polese, F. (2010). Linking the viable system and many-to-many network approaches to service-dominant logic and service science. International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences, 2(1), 23–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1967). The social construction of reality - A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. New York, NY: Anchor Books.Google Scholar
  8. Chandler, J. D., & Vargo, S. L. (2011). Contextualization and value-in-context: How context frames exchange. Marketing Theory, 11(1), 35–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. De Gregori, T. R. (1987). Resources are not; they become: An institutional theory. Journal of Economic Issues, 21(3), 1241–1263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. De Haan, J. (2006). How emergence arises. Ecological Complexity, 3(4), 293–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. DiMaggio, P. j., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Collective rationality and institutional isomorphism in organizational fields. American sociological review, 48(2), 147–160.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 the Academy of Marketing Science, 39(2), 327–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Friedland, R., & Alford, R. R. (1991). Bringing society back in: Symbols, practices and institutional contradictions. In W. W. Powell & P. J. Dimaggio (Eds.), The new institutionalism in organizational analysis (pp. 232–263). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  14. Georgiou, I. (2003). The idea of emergent property. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 54(3), 239–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. Berkeley, LA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  16. Harper, D. A., & Lewis, P. (2012). New perspectives on emergence in economics. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 82(2–3), 329–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hauser, J., Tellis, G. J., & Griffin, A. (2006). Research on innovation: A review and agenda for marketing science. Marketing science, 25(6), 687–717.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Koskela-Huotari, K. (2018). The evolution of markets - A service ecosystems perspective. (PhD dissertation), Karlstad University, Karlstad University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Koskela-Huotari, K., Edvardsson, B., Jonas, J. M., Sörhammar, D., & Witell, L. (2016). Innovation in service ecosystems—Breaking, making, and maintaining institutionalized rules of resource integration. Journal of Business Research, 69(8), 2964–2971.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Koskela-Huotari, K., & Vargo, S. L. (2016). Institutions as resource context. Journal of Service Theory and Practice, 26(2), 163–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lawrence, T. B., Hardy, C., & Phillips, N. (2002). Institutional effects of interorganizational collaboration: The emergence of proto-institutions. Academy of management journal, 45(1), 281–290.Google Scholar
  22. Lawrence, T. B., & Suddaby, R. (2006). Institutions and institutional work. In S. R. Clegg, C. Hardy, T. Lawrence, & W. R. Nord (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Organization Studies (pp. 215–254). London: SAGE Publications Ltd.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lovelock, C. H. (1983). Classifying services to gain strategic marketing insights. The Journal of Marketing, 47(3), 9–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lusch, R. F., & Vargo, S. L. (2014). Service-dominant logic: Premises, perspectives, possibilities. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Maglio, P. P., Kieliszewski, C. A., & Spohrer, J. (Eds.). (2010). Handbook of Service Science. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  26. Maglio, P. P., & Spohrer, J. (2008). Fundamentals of service science. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 36(1), 18–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Maglio, P. P., & Spohrer, J. (2013). A service science perspective on business model innovation. Industrial Marketing Management, 42(5), 665–670.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Maglio, P. P., Vargo, S. L., Caswell, N., & Spohrer, J. (2009). The service system is the basic abstraction of service science. Information Systems and e-Business Management, 7(4), 395–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Mokyr, J. (2002). The gifts of Athena: Historical origins of the knowledge economy: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Ng, I., Badinelli, R., Polese, F., Di Nauta, P., Löbler, H., & Halliday, S. (2012). S-D logic research directions and opportunities: The perspective of systems, complexity and engineering. Marketing Theory, 12(2), 213–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Ng, I., Maull, R., & Smith, L. (2011). Embedding the new discipline of service science. In H. Demirkan, J. Spohrer, & V. Krishna (Eds.), The science of service systems (pp. 13–35). Boston, MA: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. New York, NY: Cambridge university press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Ostrom, Elinor (2010). “Beyond markets and states: polycentric governance of complex economic systems.” American economic review 100(3), 641–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Penrose, E. (1959/2011). The theory of the growth of the firm (F. edition Ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Schumpeter, J. (1934). The theory of economic development. An inquiry into profits, capital, credit, interest, and the business cycle. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Scott, W. R. (2014). Institutions and organizations: Ideas, interests, and identities. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Inc.Google Scholar
  37. Siltaloppi, J., Koskela-Huotari, K., & Vargo, S. L. (2016). Institutional Complexity as a Driver for Innovation in Service Ecosystems. Service Science, 8(3), 333–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Simon, H. A. (1996). The sciences of the artificial (Vol. 3). Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT press.Google Scholar
  39. Spohrer, J., & Maglio, P. P. (2010). Toward a science of service systems. In P. P. Maglio, C. A. Kieliszewski, & J. C. Spohrer (Eds.), Handbook of service science (pp. 157–194). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Spohrer, J., Maglio, P. P., Bailey, J., & Gruhl, D. (2007). Steps toward a science of service systems. Computer, 40(1).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Suddaby, R., Viale, T., & Gendron, Y. (2016). Reflexivity: The role of embedded social position and entrepreneurial social skill in processes of field level change. Research in Organizational Behavior, 36, 225–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Thornton, P. H., Ocasio, W., & Lounsbury, M. (2012). The institutional logics perspective: Wiley Online Library.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Vargo, S. L. (2008). Customer integration and value creation: Paradigmatic Traps and Perspectives. Journal of Service Research, 11(2), 211–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Vargo, S. L., & Akaka, M. A. (2009). Service-dominant logic as a foundation for service science: clarifications. Service Science, 1(1), 32–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Vargo, S. L., & Akaka, M. A. (2012). Value Cocreation and Service Systems (Re)Formation: A Service Ecosystems View. Service Science, 4(3), 207–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Vargo, S. L., Akaka, M. A., & Vaughan, C. M. (2017). Conceptualizing Value: A Service-ecosystem View. Journal of Creating Value, 3(2), 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2004). Evolving to a new dominant logic for marketing. Journal of Marketing, 68(1), 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2008). Service-dominant logic: continuing the evolution. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 36(1), 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2011). It's all B2B…and beyond: Toward a systems perspective of the market. Industrial Marketing Management, 40(2), 181–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 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(4), 5–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Vargo, S. L., Lusch, R. F., & Akaka, M. A. (2010). Advancing Service Science service science with Service-Dominant Logic service-dominant logic. In P. P. Maglio, C. A. Kieliszewski, & J. C. Spohrer (Eds.), Handbook of service science (pp. 133–156). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Vargo, S. L., Maglio, P. P., & Akaka, M. A. (2008). On value and value co-creation: A service systems and service logic perspective. European Management Journal, 26(3), 145–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Vargo, S. L., Wieland, H., & Akaka, M. A. (2015). Innovation through institutionalization: A service ecosystems perspective. Industrial Marketing Management, 44, 63–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Whitehead, A. N. (1911). An introduction to mathematics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  55. Wieland, H., Hartmann, N. N., & Vargo, S. L. (2017). Business models as service strategy. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science.Google Scholar
  56. Wieland, H., Koskela-Huotari, K., & Vargo, S. L. (2016). Extending actor participation in value creation: an institutional view. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 24(3–4), 210–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Wieland, H., Polese, F., Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2012). Toward a Service (Eco)Systems Perspective on Value Creation. International Journal of Service Science, Management, Engineering, and Technology, 3(3), 12–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Wilden, R., Akaka, M. A., Karpen, I. O., & Hohberger, J. (2017). The Evolution and Prospects of Service-Dominant Logic: An Investigation of Past, Present, and Future Research. Journal of Service Research, 20(4), 345–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Zeithaml, V. A., Parasuraman, A., & Berry, L. L. (1985). Problems and strategies in services marketing. The Journal of Marketing, 49(2), 33–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Zietsma, C., & McKnight, B. (2009). Building the iron cage: institutional creation work in the context of competing protoinstitutions. In T. B. Lawrence, R. Suddaby, & B. Leca (Eds.), Institutional work: Actors and agency in institutional studies of organizations (pp. 143–177). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Melissa Archpru Akaka
    • 1
    Email author
  • Kaisa Koskela-Huotari
    • 2
  • Stephen L. Vargo
    • 3
  1. 1.Daniels College of BusinessUniversity of DenverDenverUSA
  2. 2.Karlstad UniversityKarlstadSweden
  3. 3.Shidler College of BusinessUniversity of Hawai’i at MānoaHonoluluUSA

Personalised recommendations