Collaborative public management: coordinated value propositions among public service organizations

Abstract

Drawing from collaborative public management, this article seeks to contribute to public service logic by focusing on what precedes the public service user's realization of value: the value proposition. A new care model for elderly people with multiple chronic diseases shows that coordinators with an inter-organizational mission, vertical and horizontal supporting structures, trust established through relationships, and recognition of service systems' embeddedness in social systems are pivotal for the ability of public service organizations to develop coordinated value propositions. The contribution to policy and practice is an increased understanding of a coherent, rather than fragmented, welfare system for users/citizens.

Continuing the development of the public service logic: a study of value co-destruction in public services

“…The service ecosystem has become a key concept in understanding multi-actor resource integration in service research, but it has only recently been rigorously introduced into the PSL by Petrescu (2019). Our paper, together with the work of Eriksson et al (2019), is the first to show the usefulness of the concept to PSL through empirical research. Figure 2 serves to illustrate how both harmonious and disharmonious processes are based on resource integration between actors, set in a broader service ecosystem.…”

“…Petrescu (2019), in a recent conceptual paper, has followed their lead and has explicitly integrated the notion with PSL, thus suggesting that value is co-created through the combined efforts of PSOs, employees, users, political parties, and other relevant stakeholders. In another recent study, Eriksson et al (2019) demonstrate the usefulness of applying a systems perspective to empirical PSL-informed research. However, PSL studies drawing on the notion of the service ecosystem are still scarce.…”

“…The value co-creation of actors in service ecosystems may end up in stable resource configurations, referred to as value propositions, which may be enacted by users in order to create value-in-use (Eriksson et al 2019;Vargo and Lusch 2008). Value propositions are referred to as promises of value since it is the users who subjectively assesses the value-in-usea provider never embeds value in products or services during the production process (Grönroos and Voima 2013).…”

“…Consequently, it is the PSO that must be added to the equation as a co-creator of value, not the service user (Osborne 2018, 5). Users create value on the basis of the value propositions offered by the PSO alone, or combined with other value propositions made by actors within the service ecosystem (Eriksson et al 2019), and by drawing on their own and/or other users' resources (Skålén et al 2018;Trischler and Charles 2019). Grönroos (2011Grönroos ( , 2019 and Grönroos and Voima (2013) offer an illuminating micro-level conceptualization of the resource integration process, suggesting that it can be understood in relation to three different spheres: (i) users' value creation, (ii), the co-creation of value in direct interaction, and (iii) PSOs' value facilitation.…”

“…While the framework offered by Grönroos (2011Grönroos ( , 2019 and Grönroos and Voima (2013) is useful in its simplicity, it has been criticized for being too simple in not taking the wider service ecosystem into account (e.g. Eriksson et al 2019). Furthermore, the framework also presupposes that actors have fixed roles, which is not always the case; a PSO can take on the role of a user creating value on the basis of the value propositions being offered by another PSO while a user can be a value-facilitator giving feedback to a PSO as regards how to improve its value propositions.…”