Conceptual underpinnings for transformative research in a service ecosystems context to resolve social issues – framework foundations and extensions

Abstract

A number of services within society are designed to improve the wellbeing of its members and transform lives. Some services focus on protection and support of vulnerable members of society, for example, those suffering the effects of drug use, mental health conditions, violence, or poverty. Clients of such social services may also come from minority or marginalised cultural backgrounds. Typically, social services aim to reduce disparities and enhance individual and population wellbeing. A major challenge for social policy makers and social service providers is to establish and maintain constructive engagement between the social services and those they are intended to serve. Some of these vulnerable clients are deemed 'hard-to-reach' (HTR) by policy makers and service providers. Yet, the transformation of lives requires the involvement of the focal actor (client) and their service or activity system, as well as the engagement of other actors, such as the social worker embedded in their service or activity system. This paper aims to further unpack a novel approach, called integrative transformative service framework. It extends its conceptualisation which fuses mainly three different approaches, namely Transformative Service Research (TSR), (Cultural-Historical) Activity Theory (CHAT) as well as (Regulatory) Engagement Theory (RET). By focusing on TSR, the paper identifies theoretical gaps in the framework and highlights the requirements of HTR which necessitate the inclusion of the two other concepts. Hence, the present paper continues 3 theory development. It parallels in more detail the three concepts to highlight their emergent links. This is to further establish the foundations for this novel approach and to amend its conceptual shortcomings. This leads to an extension of the framework to assist scholars and practitioners concerned with the transformation of actors' lives who face social issues.

The dark side of the sharing economy: Balancing value co‐creation and value co‐destruction

“…Transformative Service Research (TSR) proposes a coherent approach to framing Airbnb research. It identifies and models the determinants of well‐being that services are meant to achieve for communities and formalizes service theory at the middle level of theory development (Anderson, Ostrom, & Bitner, 2011; Blocker & Barrios, 2015; Finsterwalder et al, 2017). TSR has conceptual parallels with the service‐dominant logic (S‐D logic; Vargo & Lusch, 2008).…”

The transformative service paradox: the dilemma of wellbeing trade-offs

“…Second, this study contributes to TSR by focusing on socially and emotionally isolated people (Rosenbaum, 2008). TSR emphasizes the well-being of individuals and society at large (Finsterwalder et al, 2017;Kuppelwieser and Finsterwalder, 2016) where loneliness is regarded an indicator of well-being (Cacioppo and Patrick, 2008). Therefore, the developed integrative framework introduces the roles of personal assistant, relational peer and intimate buddy as three potential roles that companion robots can fulfill to mitigate feelings of loneliness (i.e.…”

The COVID-19 response system and collective social service provision. Strategic network dimensions and proximity considerations

“…These systems can be labeled as social ecosystems (Fisk et al 2016 ). This social service ecosystem comprises a complex relational structure of organizations, institutions, and relationships through which social services are funded, coordinated, and delivered (Finsterwalder et al 2017 ).…”

“…Service research has increasingly found its way into the domain of social services to protect and support against vulnerability (e.g., Fisk et al 2016 ). Social services comprise a wide spectrum of programs developed by the different stakeholders of a territory for collectives that need assistance or address complex societal outbreaks (Finsterwalder et al 2017 ). Within an increased demand for social services due to an unexpected shock, the development of networks between public, non-profit and private organizations providing essential social services seems crucial to produce collective and cooperative actions (Sanzo et al 2015 ).…”