1992
DOI: 10.1177/0092070392202003
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A General Framework for Explaining Internal vs. External Exchange

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

2
96
0

Year Published

1994
1994
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 51 publications
(98 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
2
96
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The success of co-created products is in fact strongly dependent on the ability of manufacturers to involve knowledgeable participants in the different phases of the co-creation process (design, development, production, etc.) [61]. Especially in innovative settings, it has been ascertained that consumers' perception of product quality provided by user-driven firms is lower than that delivered by trusted providers (i.e., traditional car manufacturers) [78].…”
Section: Discussion Managerial Implications and Hints For Future Resmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The success of co-created products is in fact strongly dependent on the ability of manufacturers to involve knowledgeable participants in the different phases of the co-creation process (design, development, production, etc.) [61]. Especially in innovative settings, it has been ascertained that consumers' perception of product quality provided by user-driven firms is lower than that delivered by trusted providers (i.e., traditional car manufacturers) [78].…”
Section: Discussion Managerial Implications and Hints For Future Resmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…With specific reference to co-design and development, as well as co-production, the customer involvement and participation extent is claimed to depend on various factors [61]: (1) expertise, in that expert customers are more likely to participate in co-production; (2) control, when beneficiaries want to "codirect outcomes", co-production is more likely to happen; (3) tangible capital, when actors have the tangible capital to perform the desired coproduction activities, this can more easily happen; (4) risk taking, co-production involve some kind of risk-i.e., physical, psychological and/or social-and the beneficiary, depending on the situation, can enhance or reduce it; (5) psychic benefits, which represent the primary motive to collaborate in a context where value co-creation and coproduction cannot be easily distinguished; and (6) economic benefits, co-production can more easily happen when actors think that co-production rewards them adequately, considering the time spent in collaborating [60].…”
Section: Value Co-creationmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…However, the assumption of greater customization under co-production may hold only when the customer has the expertise to craft a good or service to his or her liking (Lusch, Brown, and Brunswick 1992). Furthermore, perceived expertise may affect the customer's psychological responses to co-production.…”
Section: Conclusion and Directions For Further Researchmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Source: modified from Lusch et al 1992 The importance of the characteristics of the customer in the co-production process is highlighted in proposition 5 as shown in table 1. Lusch et.al (1992) identify six main factors that determine the extent of the customer"s role in co-production (table 2).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%