Factors Enabling and Hindering Value Co-Creation in Continuous Service Development: A Systematic Literature Review

Abstract

This paper presents a systematic literature review (SLR) investigating the factors that enable and hinder value co-creation in organizations' continuous service development processes. Employing the lens of servicedominant (S-D) logic, we classify the identified factors into three interrelated dimensions: institutions, resources, and service exchange. Our systematic findings may inform organizations' efforts to support the emergence of positive rather than negative value outcomes when implementing continuous practices in their service development. In addition, we outline avenues for further research in this emerging topic area.

Co-Opetition and the Industrial Internet of Things: A Strategic Framework for Operational Efficiency in the Portuguese Ornamental Stone Sector

“…Technology plays a central role in co-opetition networks as an initiator and facilitator of actions among actors (Elo et al 2024). Providers, driven by the prospect of heightened benefits, may share and integrate their resources with others, including competitors, to partake in service exchanges that enrich resource density and enhance value cocreation (Lusch and Nambisan 2015).…”

“…Its integration into the network amplifies resource density, propelling value and developing innovative resources designed to enhance the quality of life for all network actors ). Technology's unique combination and application in co-opetition networks underlines its essential role in advancing competitive collaboration for mutual and ecosystem-wide benefits (Elo et al 2024).…”

“…This perspective suggests that all actors within the network are value cocreators (Silva and Gil 2020). Customers assume the pivotal role of evaluators, assessing offerings based on their experiences, while providers act as facilitators of value cocreation (Elo et al 2024). Co-opetitors contribute through resource sharing (Bicen et al 2021), competitors function as independent entities competing for customer attention (Akaka and Vargo 2014), and authorities serve as regulatory bodies ensuring sustainable and equitable interactions within the network (Vargo and Lusch 2016).…”

“…The notion of micro-exchange within these vast ecosystems suggests that customers and providers represent just a fraction of the entire network, including numerous actors engaging in reciprocal resource exchange to create value (Chandler and Vargo 2011). Such complex dynamics require a level of coordination facilitated by endogenously created institutionscomprising rules, norms, symbols, and practices that aid collaboration-and institutional arrangements (Elo et al 2024), which are interdependent collections of these institutions, manifesting even at a societal scale (Meynhardt et al 2016).…”

“…As the S-D Logic literature emphasizes, facilitating these aspects necessitates a systemic perspective on assemblages and architectural modules designed for service interaction (Vargo and Lusch 2016). Institutions and institutional arrangements facilitate this coordination (Elo et al 2024).…”