No abstract

Within contemporary discourse around service-dominant logic, phenomenologically (experientially) determined value has been placed at the center of value discussion. However, a systematic characterization of value in the experience has not been presented to date. In this article, the authors outline four theoretical propositions that describe what value in the experience is, which are then illustrated using a narrative data set. The propositions consider both lived and imaginary value experiences and posit that current service experiences are influenced by previous and anticipated service experiences. The article contributes to the service literature by characterizing value in the experience as an ongoing, iterative circular process of individual, and collective customer sense making, as opposed to a linear, cognitive process restricted to isolated service encounters. The authors recommend that service researchers should consider the use of interpretive methodologies based on the four theoretical propositions outlined in order to better understand the many ways that service customers experience value in their lifeworld contexts, which extend well beyond the service organization’s zone of influence. Service managers should also consider how a richer understanding of past, current, and imaginary value in the context in service customers’ individual lifeworld contexts might generate novel insights for service innovations.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to distinguish experiences from practices and relate this distinction to current developments in value research within service‐dominant (S‐D) logic and the broader service domain.Design/methodology/approachThe paper provides a conceptual overview of how experiences and practices have been characterized in the literature to date, how they differ from each other, and if and where they intersect. Following this, the epistemological and methodological differences between practices and experiences are illustrated using narrated experiences and practical observations of car‐washing.FindingsWhile practices are primarily routinized patterns of behaviour, experiences focus more on individuals' value determinations in different contexts. Thus, different types of methodology are needed to observe customers' behaviour in value‐creating practices and interpret customers' sense making of value experiences.Research limitations/implicationsBoth phenomenological value experiences and value co‐creation practices contribute to value research: while practices are the shared possession of the collective, internal and individual differentiation is included in practices. Practices may change or evolve over time, possibly resulting in improved value outcomes or experiences. Opportunities and challenges should be considered by value researchers including the temporal nature of practices and experiences, evidence about value, and the intersubjectivity of social relations.Practical implicationsTo better facilitate individual experiences and collective practices, service providers need to understand both experiences and practices in order to co‐create value with individuals and their networks.Originality/valueThis study is the first systematic attempt in service research to present an analysis of the distinction between experiences and practices, and to analyze the relevance of this distinction for value research.