2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.intmar.2017.01.002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Atypical Shifts Post-failure: Influence of Co-creation on Attribution and Future Motivation to Co-create

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
52
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 52 publications
(59 citation statements)
references
References 117 publications
0
52
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Co-creation with customers refers to the active involvement of customers in the information production, information management, and experience production processes (Etgar, 2008). The companies' need for reaching the environmental resources and the technological developments are main factors in the development of the co-creation with customers in practice (Arnould, 2008;Sugathan et al, 2017). The technological developments have made it easy for businesses to reach the environmental resources through cooperation, interaction, and communication.…”
Section: Co-creation Value Co-creation and Customer Citizenship Behamentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Co-creation with customers refers to the active involvement of customers in the information production, information management, and experience production processes (Etgar, 2008). The companies' need for reaching the environmental resources and the technological developments are main factors in the development of the co-creation with customers in practice (Arnould, 2008;Sugathan et al, 2017). The technological developments have made it easy for businesses to reach the environmental resources through cooperation, interaction, and communication.…”
Section: Co-creation Value Co-creation and Customer Citizenship Behamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The basic assumption in these studies is that the co-creation with customers produces a value and this value has an effect on the service outputs such as quality (Grissemann & Stokburger-Sauer, 2012;Prebensen et al, 2013;Bell & Babyak, 2018), satisfaction (Namasivayam & Guchait, 2013;Flores & Vasquez-Parraga, 2015;Prebensen & Xie, 2017;Assiouras et al, 2019), re-purchase (Fitzpatrick et al, 2013;Park & Ha, 2016;Arıca & Kozak, 2018), and customer citizenship behavior (Yi & Gong, 2013;Assiouras et al, 2019;Gong & Yi, 2019). Likewise, some researchers argue that in the tourism sector, the information shared between the business and customers nourish each other by means of the value co-creation with customers, thereby developing the service outputs through improving and personalizing services (Ford & Heaton, 2000;Chan & Guillet, 2011;Sugathan et al, 2017;Arıca & Kozak, 2019). On the other hand, some researchers emphasize that the co-creation with customers may cause negative effects on the quality of the service outputs due to the following: complexity in the service processes and performance management; economic burdens; risk of failure to manage customer expectations and relationships; making it difficult to control strategic plans; and complicating the business management (Kelley et al, 1990;Ford & Heaton, 2000;Hoyer et al, 2010).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Recent research has turned its attention to how the customer and the service firm cocreate service recovery to achieve a favorable customer experience. As in previous research, a number of different theories have been applied to explore this dyadic relationship and the perceived fairness of the outcome from the customer's perspective, including justice theory (Gohary et al 2016a, b) and attribution theory (Sugathan et al 2017). In contrast with the firmand customer-oriented approaches, the dyadic orientation focuses on how the customer and the service firm cocreate value during the service recovery process (Roggeveen et al 2012, Xu et al 2014b).…”
Section: The Dyadic Orientationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The contemporary service landscape requires a broader view, because multiple actors collaborate in shaping the recovery process and therefore the customer experience. Dyadic research typically conceptualizes service recovery encounters as single interactions in which the customer and service firm integrate their resources (Xu et al 2014a, Dong et al 2016, Sugathan et al 2017). However, the concept of corecovery introduced by Dong et al (2008) illustrated that current theorizing is problematic.…”
Section: Limitations Of Previous Approachesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation