A Reconceptualization of Manufacturers' Service Strategies

Raddats, Chris; Kowalkowski, Christian

doi:10.1080/1051712x.2013.857500

Cited by 72 publications

(56 citation statements)

References 62 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For instance, the extant literature uses the concept of categories of service offerings and service strategies more or less interchangeably (Lightfoot & Gebauer, 2011;Matthyssens & Vandenbempt ,2010;Penttinen & Palmer, 2007;Raddats & Easingwood, 2010), and frequently assumes that firms offer one category of services at a time (e.g., product-based services, availability solutions, performance solutions) and pursue a specific service strategy (i.e., role) (cf. Raddats & Kowalkowski, 2014). In contrast, our assumptions emphasize the importance of considering strategies revolving around how the different roles can and should complement and leverage one another, and where to place the emphasis in terms of types of offering.…”

Section: Implications For Theory and Practicementioning

confidence: 88%

What service transition? Rethinking established assumptions about manufacturers' service-led growth strategies

Kowalkowski

Windahl

Kindström

et al. 2015

Industrial Marketing Management

Self Cite

260

276

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research highlights• We challenge the established service transition assumption• We identify 3 service growth trajectories: becoming an availability provider; a performance provider; and an industrializer• Firms should generally downsize and standardize solutions, thus being able to offer them to a greater number of customers• Firms concurrently hold a number of system supplier roles rather than transferring from one role to another• We present a strong platform for further examination of theoretical and managerial implications of the study AbstractBoth academics and practitioners emphasize the importance for product firms of implementing service-led growth strategies. The service transition concept is well established, namely a unidirectional repositioning along a product-service continuum-from basic, product-oriented services towards more customized, process-oriented ones-ultimately leading to the provision of solutions. We challenge this service transition assumption and develop alternative ones regarding how product firms should pursue service-led growth.Using 'problematization methodology', and drawing on findings from thirteen system suppliers, we identify three service-led growth trajectories: (1) becoming an availability provider, which is the focus of most transition literature; (2) becoming a performance provider, which resembles project-based sales and implies an even greater differentiation of what customers are offered; and, (3) becoming an 'industrializer', which is about standardizing previously customized solutions to promote repeatability and scalability. Based on our critical inquiry, we develop two alternative assumptions: (a) firms need to constantly balance business expansion and standardization activities; and (b) manage the co-existence of different system supplier roles. Finally, we consider the implications for implementing service-led growth strategies of the alternative assumptions.

show abstract

Section: Implications For Theory and Practicementioning

confidence: 88%

What service transition? Rethinking established assumptions about manufacturers' service-led growth strategies

Kowalkowski

Windahl

Kindström

et al. 2015

Industrial Marketing Management

Self Cite

260

276

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Similarly, motivations to servitize have also been aligned to service approaches of manufacturers. For example, Raddats and Kowalkowski (2014) introduce: (1) Services Doubters, for whom services are not a strong differentiator (low motivation); (2) Services Pragmatists, for whom services play an important role in product differentiation (average motivation); and (3) Services Enthusiasts, for whom services are both a differentiator and an enabler of growth (high motivation).…”

Section: Relationship (Demand-based Motivations); (2) Product-relatedmentioning

confidence: 99%

Motivations for servitization: the impact of product complexity

Raddats

Baines

Burton

et al. 2016

International Journal of Operations &Amp; Production Management

Self Cite

116

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeTo identify the commonalities and differences in manufacturers' motivations to servitize. Design/methodology/approachUK study based on interviews with 40 managers in 25 companies in 12 sectors. Using the concept of product complexity, sectors were grouped using the Complex Products and Systems (CoPS) typology: non-complex products, complex products, and systems. FindingsMotivations to servitize were categorised as competitive, demand-based (i.e., derived from the

show abstract

“…Although they have different service strategies, three categories of service offerings were identified by Raddats et al (2014): product-attached services, operations services on own products, and vendor independent operations services. Consequently, manufacturers follow different service strategies.…”

Section: Digital Service Provisionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Industrial Challenges

Stary

Neubauer

2016

S-BPM in the Production Industry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recently, the German "Industry 4.0" initiative gained momentum, and sketches a vision for future production industries. This chapter reviews industrial challenges in the area of "Industry 4.0". The findings are structured along the fundamental understanding of production companies as socio-technical systems. Socio-technical systems consist of three important aspects-(i) human, (ii) organizational structures and technology-and, most importantly their mutual relations, and thus, the interdependencies of these aspects. The review reveals that humans need to remain a vital element of future production and need to drive organizational development efforts and continuous workplace improvement. Organizational structures are challenged by changing business models of production companies. Enabling organizational change requires an open organizational culture (e.g., in terms of digital readiness), learning support and digital literacy of all involved stakeholders. In order to create value from Industry 4.0 developments, still technical challenges, in particular vertical and horizontal process integration need be resolved. IntroductionToday's industry needs to survive in a volatile environment. Changing customer demands, high degree of product individualization, increasing digitalization and system integration, effective and efficient manufacturing operations to meet high quality at low cost, well-being of employees, etc., are just some factors that challenge daily work in industry. In general, an industry refers to the production of certain goods or services within an economy (e.g., automotive industry in Germany). Different Industry classification systems like the ISIC (2008), NAICS (2012) or NACE exist that organize companies with respect to production processes or similar products. (cf. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industry_classification). According to the NAICS (2012) Manufacturing "comprises establishments primarily engaged in the chemical, mechanical or physical transformation of materials or substances into new products. These products may be finished, in the sense that they are ready to be used or consumed, or semi-finished, in the sense of becoming a raw material for an establishment to use in further manufacturing. Related activities, such as the assembly of the component parts of manufactured goods; the blending of materials; and the finishing of manufactured products by dyeing, heat-treating, plating and similar operations are also treated as manufacturing activities. Manufacturing establishments are known by a variety of trade designations, such as plants, factories or mills". Compared to the definition of manufacturing, the understanding of "Production" is more generic in terms of any conversion from input to output. This also includes intangible products like the delivery of services in areas as government and health care or even knowledge production.In this book, production companies are understood as complex, socio-technical systems of people, processes and machines that flexibly interact within ...

show abstract

A Reconceptualization of Manufacturers' Service Strategies

Cited by 72 publications

References 62 publications

What service transition? Rethinking established assumptions about manufacturers' service-led growth strategies

What service transition? Rethinking established assumptions about manufacturers' service-led growth strategies

Motivations for servitization: the impact of product complexity

Industrial Challenges

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About