Advertisement

Service Ecosystems Innovation in Systemic Perspective: Transitions and Coevolutions

  • Kyoichi KijimaEmail author
  • Marja Toivonen
  • Sampsa Ruutu
Chapter
Part of the Translational Systems Sciences book series (TSS, volume 6)

Abstract

Service ecosystems refer to such complex service systems that are self-adjusting systems of resource-integrating actors, connected by shared institutional logics and mutual value creation through service exchange with an emphasis on dynamic features like adaptation, viability, and sustainability. In this chapter, focusing especially on social innovation, we first analyze service ecosystems by adopting Panarchy and Transition Management Theory in a systemic perspective. Panarchy is a framework for analyzing ecosystems developed to account for the dual, often conflicting, characteristics of all complex systems, i.e., stability and change. Transition Management Theory has attracted attention as a framework to study the governance of social systems for sustainability. Based on the analysis, we identify adaptive transitions, phase transitions, and coevolution in service ecosystems innovation and derive a Systemic Innovation Model of Service Ecosystem. It describes dynamic behavior of service ecosystems innovation in a comprehensive way. Finally, we illustrate our model by applying it to the paradigmatic changes concerning the nature of the public sector.

Keywords

Service ecosystems innovation Sustainability Systemic innovation approach Panarchy Transition Management Theory Social innovation Public sector paradigms 

References

  1. Allen, C. R., & Holling, C. S. (2013). Discontinuities in ecosystems and other complex systems. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Benington, J., & Hartley, J. (2001). Pilots, paradigms and paradoxes: Changes in public sector governance and management in the UK, International research symposium on public ….Google Scholar
  3. Bossink, B. (2002). The development of co-innovation strategies: Stages and interaction patterns in interfirm innovation. R&D Management, 32(4), 1–1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Caloghirou, Y., Kastelli, I., & Tsakanikas, A. (2004). Internal capabilities and external knowledge sources: Complements or substitutes for innovative performance? Technovation, 24, 29–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chesbrough, H. (2010). Open services innovation. San Francisco: Wiley.Google Scholar
  6. Chesbrough, H. (2013). Open business models. Boston: Harvard Business Press.Google Scholar
  7. Chesbrough, H. W., & Crowther, A. K. (2006). Beyond the high-tech: Early adopters of open innovation in other industries. R&D Management, 36(3), 229–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Christensen, C. (2013). The innovator’s dilemma. Boston: Harvard Business Review Press.Google Scholar
  9. Djalante, R., & Djalante, S. (2012). Transition management, new mode of governance for sustainable development. Natural Hazards, 62(3), 1339–1341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dosi, G. (1988). Technical change and economic theory. Open Publisher: Burns & Oates.Google Scholar
  11. Fuller, R. B. (1975). Synergetics. New York: Macmillan Publishing Co.Google Scholar
  12. Gallouj, F., & Weinstein, O. (1997). Innovation in services. Research Policy, 26(4/5), 537–556.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Giddens, A. (1979). Central problems in social theory. Berkeley: Univ of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gunderson, L. H., & Holling, C. S. (2001). Panarchy: Understanding transformations in human and natural systems. Washington, DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
  15. Harrison, J., et al. (2010). Managing for stakeholders, stakeholder utility functions, and competitive advantage strategic Management. Journal of Strategic Management, 31, 58–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hartley, J. (2005). Innovation in governance and public services: Past and present. Public Money Management, 25(1), 27–34.Google Scholar
  17. Holling, C., Gunderson, L.H., & Ludwig, D. (2014). In search of a theory of adaptive change. In panarchy understanding transformations in human and natural systems. pp. 1–3. Available at: http://www.resalliance.org/index.php/panarchy
  18. Hoyrup, S. (2010). Employee-driven innovation and workplace learning: Basic concepts, approaches and themes. European Review of Labour and Research, 16, 143–154.Google Scholar
  19. Kemp, R., Loorbach, D., & Rotmans, J. (2009). Transition management as a model for managing processes of co-evolution towards sustainable development. International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology, 14(2007), 78–91.Google Scholar
  20. Kline, S. J., & Rosenberg, N. (1986). An overview of innovation. Washington, D.C: National Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
  21. Loorbach, D. (2007). Transition management. Utrecht: International Books.Google Scholar
  22. Lundvall, B.-Å., & Johnson, B. (1994). The learning economy. Journal of Industry Studies, 1(2), 23–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Määttä, H., Ruutu, S., & Toivonen, M. (2014). Revealing the complexities of health care renewal: A system dynamics approach. In Proceedings of the th International conference on Applied Human Factors and Ergonomics AHFE, Krakow, Poland – July. pp. 1–12.Google Scholar
  24. Maglio, P. P., et al. (2009). The service system is the basic abstraction of service science. Information Systems and e-Business Management, 7(4), 395–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Miles, I. (1993). Services in the new industrial economy. Futures, 25(6), 653–672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Newman, J., & Clarke, J. (2009). Publics, politics and power. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  27. Panth, S. (2013). Technological innovation, industrial evolution, and economic growth. Oxford: Routledge.Google Scholar
  28. Pollitt, C., & Bouckaert, G. (2004). Public management reform: A comparative analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Ricciardi, F. (2013). Innovation processes in business networks. Wiesbaden: Springer Science & Business Media.Google Scholar
  30. Rotmans, J., & Loorbach, D. (2009). Complexity and transition management. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 13(2), 184–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Schumpeter, J. A. (1934). The theory of economic development. An inquiry into profits, capital, credit, interest, and the business cycle. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Schumpeter, J. A. (1942). Capitalism, socialism and democracy. New York/London: Harper & Brothers Publishers.Google Scholar
  33. Scott, A. (2006). Encyclopedia of nonlinear science. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  34. Squazzoni, F. (2008). The micro-macro link in social simulation. Sociologica, II(1). doi:  10.2383/26578
  35. Sundbo, J. (2008). Customer-based innovation of knowledge e-services – the importance of after-innovation. International Journal of Services, Technology and Management, 9(3–4), 218–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Sundbo, J., & Toivonen, M. (2011). User-based innovation in services. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Pub.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Toivonen, M. (2013, September). Starting points for the comparison of SDL and neo-Schumpeterian views on innovation. Proceedings of 1st workshop on service innovation research, 18–20, Catanzaro, Italy. pp. 99–104.Google Scholar
  38. Tuomi, I. (2002). Networks of innovation. Change and meaning in the age of the internet. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  39. University of Cambridge & IBM (2008). Succeeding through service innovation.Google Scholar
  40. Vargo, S. (2014). Insights on innovation from an institutional and ecosystem perspective. Presented at 24th annual international RESER conference, Helsinki.Google Scholar
  41. 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
  42. Vargo, S. L., Wieland, H., & Akaka, M. A. (2015). Innovation through institutionalization: A service ecosystems perspective. Industrial Marketing Management, 44, 63–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Wieland, H., et al. (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

Copyright information

© Springer Japan 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Tokyo Institute of TechnologyTokyoJapan
  2. 2.VTT Technical Research Centre of FinlandEspooFinland

Personalised recommendations