Core to developing a general theory of markets, service-dominant (S-D) logic suggests that service is the fundamental basis of exchange (Vargo and Lusch, 2004). In turn, 'Service provision implies the ongoing combination of resources, through integration, and their application' (Vargo and Lusch, 2010: 4); hence the central role of resource integration as the means through which resource integrators (actors) co-create phenomenologically determined value. We identify five themes relevant to gaining a clearer understanding of the role of social and economic factors in resource integration. The themes and the broad relationships between them are conceptualized in Figure 1. Here we identify actors who possess appropriate resources which they are allowed and able to share, co-creating value using collaborative and integrative processes. Their evaluation of each experience occurs within the context of each specific engagement and provides continuous input into future collaborations. The resulting value may impact both the ability of actors to exercise agency and the processes involved in integrating resources. Resource integrators The modified foundational premise (FP9): 'All social and economic actors are resource integrators' (Vargo and Lusch, 2008) recognizes the role of multiple actors in networks. It follows that there is a need to better understand 'the commonalities of the activities of actors that constitute the

Access from the University of Nottingham repository:http://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/33321/1/the%20role%20of%20shared%20intentions%20in %20the%20emergence%20of%20service%20ecosystems.pdf Copyright and reuse:The Nottingham ePrints service makes this work by researchers of the University of Nottingham available open access under the following conditions. This article is made available under the Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial No Derivatives licence and may be reused according to the conditions of the licence. For more details see: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/ A note on versions:The version presented here may differ from the published version or from the version of record. If you wish to cite this item you are advised to consult the publisher's version. Please see the repository url above for details on accessing the published version and note that access may require a subscription. synthesize the contribution, this study uses a case to illustrate a conceptual framework in which the sharing of intentions among interdependent actors drives service ecosystem emergence step-by-step across distinct dynamic levels.

Purpose. There are heightened concerns that the theory-praxis gap is widening, despite decades of academic literature addressing the issue. We propose that one viable solution to this challenge is involving practitioners in research processes as active, reflective and empowered participants. Most extant discussions addressing the inclusion of managers as partners in theorizing restrain themselves to an 'if' question, arguing whether or not it is possible to create sufficiently rigorous knowledge in collaboration with practitioners. This leaves the 'how' question unanswered, i.e., how should such gap-bridging research be conducted in practice. Thus, the aim of this paper is to investigate how academic researchers in management and marketing can theorize with managers in order to generate results that are both academically rigorous and managerially relevant.Design/methodology/approach. Based on a literature review of collaborative theorizing processes, we develop a conceptual framework highlighting the main research design decisions when theorizing with managers. The use of the framework is illustrated with four research program examples.Findings. Most accounts of theorizing with managers use -explicitly or implicitlyabduction as the main mode of inference. In addition to this philosophical commonality, our literature review identified twelve themes that should be considered when designing collaborative research processes. The four illustrative examples indicate that theorizing with managers is an effective way of producing and socializing both academically sound and 3 managerially relevant knowledge. On the other hand, collaborative theorizing processes are time-consuming and studies using abductive reasoning may be more challenging to publish in top-tier journals.Originality/value. This paper makes two contributions. First, we go beyond the extensive academic literature which provides a plethora of explanations and ideas for potential remedies for bridging the theory-praxis gap by offering a detailed description how one particular solution, theorizing with managers, unfolds in practice. Second, we ground collaborative theorizing processes in the philosophy of science and put abduction forward as a common nominator for such studies.

Resource integration, as it relates to value creation, has recently been a key aspect of the discussions about service-dominant (S-D) logic. However, the majority of research pays relatively little explicit attention to the process of theorizing and the epistomological and ontological assumptions upon which the theorizing process is based. This article addresses these issues. The processes that relate to theorizing and developing strong theory are discussed. We then examine how to conceptualize 'resources' and 'resource integration' following differing ontological and epistemological assumptions that guide the theorizing process. Research recommendations to help navigate through the finer details underlying the theorizing process and to advance a general theory of resource integration are developed.

The purpose of this paper is to critique the adequacy of efforts to capture the complexities of customer experience (CE) in a business-to-business (B2B) context using input-output measures. The paper introduces a strategic customer experience management framework to capture the complexity of B2B service interactions and discusses the value of outcomesbased measurement. Design/Methodology/ApproachThis is a theoretical paper that reviews extant literature related to B2B customer experience and asks fresh questions regarding B2B customer experience at a more strategic network level. FindingsThe paper offers a reconceptualisation of B2B customer experience, proposes a strategic customer experience management framework, and outlines a future research agenda. Research Limitations/ImplicationsThis paper is conceptual and seeks to raise questions surrounding the under-examined area of B2B customer experience. It offers a framework that is propositional in nature and will thus benefit from further empirical interrogation. Practical ImplicationsExisting measures of customer experience are problematic when applied in a B2B (services) context. Rather than adopting input-and output-based measures, widely used in a businessto-consumer (B2C) context, a B2B context requires a more strategic approach to capturing and managing customer experience. Focusing on strategically important issues should generate opportunities for value co-creation and are more likely to involve outcomes-based measures. Social ImplicationsImproving understanding of customer experience in a B2B context should allow organisations to design better services and consequently enhance the experiences of their employees, their customers and other connected actors. This paper critiques the current approach to measuring customer experience in a B2B context, drawing on contemporary ideas of value-in-use, outcomes-based measures, and 'big data' to offer potential solutions to the measurement problems identified. Originality/Value