“…Given that customers and suppliers often share knowledge that differ from the ones exist inside a service firm (Franke et al, 2010), exploitative learning may stifle absorbing diverse knowledge from customers and suppliers (Mazloomi et al, 2017). Second, we adopt the premise that the intensifying competition and emergence of new technologies (e.g., data-driven and cloud-based services) drive many service firms to adapt to market changes by developing new services that address emerging market needs (Perks et al, 2012;Huang & Rust;2013). Innovating new services forces firms to learn new knowledge and explore emerging technologies through collaboration with their business partners (Perks et al, 2012;Mazloomi et al, 2017).…”
Section: Knowledge Management and Learning Mechanismsmentioning
Service innovativeness represents a key source of competitive advantage and a research priority. However, empirical evidence about how service firms successfully offer novel and meaningful services is scarce, particularly in the context of business-to-business (B2B) service firms. Drawing on the B2B collaborative perspective and KBV, we aim to investigate when customer and supplier collaboration are more beneficial to drive service novelty and meaningfulness. Using data of 186 B2B service firms, the results reveal that collaboration with customers and suppliers are not equally beneficial to drive both novelty and meaningfulness and their outcomes can be amplified or lost under specific conditions. Customer collaboration is more beneficial to increase novelty in the presence of exploratory learning and employee collaboration. Contrary, supplier collaboration drives novelty only at higher levels of exploratory learning. Further, supplier collaboration is more beneficial to improve meaningfulness at higher levels of employee collaboration. Finally, the positive outcomes of both customer and supplier collaboration disappear in the presence of knowledge tacitness. Our findings provide new insights about drivers and contingencies that affect different aspects of service innovativeness.
“…Given that customers and suppliers often share knowledge that differ from the ones exist inside a service firm (Franke et al, 2010), exploitative learning may stifle absorbing diverse knowledge from customers and suppliers (Mazloomi et al, 2017). Second, we adopt the premise that the intensifying competition and emergence of new technologies (e.g., data-driven and cloud-based services) drive many service firms to adapt to market changes by developing new services that address emerging market needs (Perks et al, 2012;Huang & Rust;2013). Innovating new services forces firms to learn new knowledge and explore emerging technologies through collaboration with their business partners (Perks et al, 2012;Mazloomi et al, 2017).…”
Section: Knowledge Management and Learning Mechanismsmentioning
Service innovativeness represents a key source of competitive advantage and a research priority. However, empirical evidence about how service firms successfully offer novel and meaningful services is scarce, particularly in the context of business-to-business (B2B) service firms. Drawing on the B2B collaborative perspective and KBV, we aim to investigate when customer and supplier collaboration are more beneficial to drive service novelty and meaningfulness. Using data of 186 B2B service firms, the results reveal that collaboration with customers and suppliers are not equally beneficial to drive both novelty and meaningfulness and their outcomes can be amplified or lost under specific conditions. Customer collaboration is more beneficial to increase novelty in the presence of exploratory learning and employee collaboration. Contrary, supplier collaboration drives novelty only at higher levels of exploratory learning. Further, supplier collaboration is more beneficial to improve meaningfulness at higher levels of employee collaboration. Finally, the positive outcomes of both customer and supplier collaboration disappear in the presence of knowledge tacitness. Our findings provide new insights about drivers and contingencies that affect different aspects of service innovativeness.
“…For instance, Floh et al [41] adopted a multi-dimensional conceptualization of value that includes functional, economic, emotional, and social value. Traditionally, valuations have included product or service attributes, pricing, and elements of the delivery process [42], emphasizing the functional and economic aspects of value, while the multi-dimensional approach overcomes traditional approaches' over-concentration on economic value [43]. Nevertheless, this study is limited in focus to functional and economic value because the other constructs such as emotional and social values are difficult to measure before a product or service is widely diffused.…”
Abstract:As user-centric innovation has recently emerged as a successful way of developing new products, services, and concepts, it is worth considering the perspectives of potential technology users during R&D project selection processes. Nevertheless, little effort has been made to reflect customer-perceived value in establishing selection criteria, with the focus mainly on technological potential instead. Therefore, this study aims to develop an R&D project selection model incorporating not only technological potential but also customer-perceived value. For this purpose, a new R&D project evaluation model and process is proposed, and its feasibility is tested by potential users in a real scenario. The automobile industry is suitable for our evaluation model because it is a B2C and system-based industry where customer needs are critical to market success and a number of R&D projects are proposed every year. Finally, a supporting tool is developed to help interact with various evaluators and visualize the evaluation results, as customer involvement is recommended for accurate project evaluation from the perspective of technology users. This study is one of the earliest attempts to reflect customer-perceived value in R&D project selection, and practically, the research outputs are expected to be useful to automobile manufacturers in creating value from R&D projects.
“…First, there is a need to work with multiple actors that span the supplier firm, the customer firm and the broader network (Hakanen, 2014;Windahl & Lakemond, 2006). Second, business solutions implementations require high technical proficiency in many cases since they are typical in industries such as IT, telecommunications, construction, engineering and professional services (Biggemann, Kowalkowski, Maley, & Brege, 2013;Li, 2011;Prior, 2013). Third, business solutions generally involve capital projects and are, therefore, high in monetary value while also being high in risk (Scott-Young & Samson, 2008;Töllner, Blut, & Holzmüller, 2011).…”
Section: Service Worker Stress and Business Solutionsmentioning
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.