Extant literature is almost unanimous in suggesting that managers in goods-dominant firms should integrate services into their core market offers. Furthermore, in actual practice, numerous firms are striving with mixed results to become “solutions providers” by adding services to their portfolio of tangible goods. The literature does not, however, describe what factors to consider when adding services and how the factors should be designed to enhance organizational performance. The purpose of this study was to isolate and characterize factors that enable the formation of successful business-to-business (B2B) services in goods-dominant firms. Using a multicase research design, this study highlights four substantive cases of Fortune 500 firms in which B2B service development was a process of aligning strategy with a highly complex market. The study then illustrates how firms that demonstrate a record of successful B2B service development adapt several factors of organization to align with the newly formed strategy.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper was to isolate and characterize organizational factors that enable the formation of high‐performing business services in product manufacturing firms.Design/methodology/approachThis study employed a case research design. In total, 32 depth interviews were conducted with 11 different managers from a Global 100 information technology manufacturing firm. These managers were directly responsible for forming a highly successful business service. All interviews were tape‐recorded, transcribed, and the resulting 500 pages of interview data were open‐coded in QSR NUDIST. A case report was reviewed by study participants to enhance construct validity.FindingsThe general conclusion is that forming high‐performing business services in product manufacturing firms stems largely from managers' ability to create internal alignment among several organizational factors that collectively “fit” conditions in the market.Research limitations/implicationsThis study does not provide the statistical generalization to a larger population offered by a large‐sample study. In addition, all data were collected from individuals who were directly involved in the formation of the focal business service.Practical implicationsThe insights from this study can help managers design within a product manufacturing firm an organization that supports the formation of complex business services.Originality/valueWhile product manufacturers' expansion into services is very prevalent in practice, the development has received sparse academic research attention.

Pedagogical strategies can be thought of as a set of stimuli placed in students' environment to influence their cognition, affect, and behavior. The design of strategies such as group assignments and a comprehensive understanding of their consequences for students should then include an analysis of all three of these elements and the interrelationships that exist among them. As such, this study investigated the unintended cognitive, affective, and behavioral consequences of group assignments experienced by undergraduate business students. The discovery-oriented method of grounded theory was used. Data were gathered from a sample of 32 undergraduate marketing and management students by combining the Zaltman Metaphor Elicitation Technique with in-person interviews. Findings indicate that students do experience several cognitive and affective consequences that are contrary to the broad range of benefits consistently highlighted in academic literature. Findings also highlight prevalent behaviors that motivate the cognitive and affective consequences. The study should give educators reason to seriously consider the extent to which group assignments contribute to or detract from the value of undergraduate business education.

This study investigates the way in which and the extent to which students engage in social categorization during the process of self-selecting team members for a team assignment. The discovery-oriented method of grounded theory was used. Data were gathered from a sample of 38 undergraduate marketing and management students using the Zaltman Metaphor Elicitation Technique. Results indicate that, when faced with having too little information about classmates, students use a variety of social cues to cognitively categorize classmates, and then make a series of inferences about their personality, values, and trustworthiness based on the category in which they are placed. In addition, students use the inferences to help make decisions about who to approach and who to avoid during the self-selection process. Making inferences about classmates based on the social category in which they are placed, rather than on individual merit, is stereotyping. Behaving differently toward classmates based on the social category in which they are placed is discrimination. All 38 students who participated in this study reported that they have used social cues to help decide who to approach and who to avoid during team formation, and 13 reported doing so every time they have self-selected team members.

This article presents two studies aimed at understanding consequences of giving students complete decision-making authority to select team members for a team assignment. Study 1 concludes that students place a high level of importance on cognitively categorizing their classmates as those to approach and avoid when self-selecting teams, and they put forth a good deal of effort to actually approach some classmates and avoid others. The approach category forms for most students as they develop a team assignment social network comprised of classmates who are highly trusted and believed to be high in trustworthiness. Study 2 finds evidence that, in the absence of network members and prior knowledge of each other, students use social cues (style of dress) to cognitively categorize classmates and make inferences about their trustworthiness based on the category in which they are placed. Study 2 also finds that style of dress influences students' trust in their classmates, preference for who they want on their team, and effort they would put forth to approach some classmates and avoid others. Implications and opportunities for future research are discussed.