服务主导逻辑 论文

/Journal of Service Research/content/15/1/21The online version of this article can be found at:DOI: 10.1177/10946705114256972012 15: 21 originally published online 13 November 2011Journal of Service Research Ingo O. Karpen, Liliana L. Bove and Bryan A. LukasService-Dominant OrientationLinking Service-Dominant Logic and Strategic Business Practice: A Conceptual Model of aPublished by: On behalf of:Center for Excellence in Service, University of Maryland can be found at:Journal of Service Research Additional services and information for/cgi/alerts Email Alerts:/subscriptions Subscriptions: /journalsReprints.nav Reprints:/journalsPermissions.nav Permissions:/content/15/1/21.refs.html Citations:What is This?- Nov 13, 2011OnlineFirst Version of Record- Feb 17, 2012Version of Record >> by guest on February 7, 2014 Downloaded fromLinking Service-Dominant Logicand Strategic Business Practice:A Conceptual Model of aService-Dominant OrientationIngo O.Karpen1,Liliana L.Bove2,and Bryan A.Lukas2AbstractService-dominant(S-D)logic can function as a strategic business logic that portrays creating superior value in conjunction with—rather than for—customers as a source of competitive advantage for organizations.From this perspective,strategy is about making choices in terms of how to best facilitate and enhance value cocreation for mutual and long-term betterment.While the literature has pointed out the managerial merits of cocreating value,less is known about the organizational capabilities necessary to execute S-D logic in practice.This article devises an S-D orientation,specified as a portfolio of six strategic capabilities,namely individuated,relational,ethical,empowered,developmental,and concerted interaction capability.In combination,these six strategic capabilities constitute a cocreation capability.The authors develop the conceptual model of S-D orientation through (a)an in-depth literature review and(b)input from21expert academics.Conceptualizing S-D orientation provides a foundation for bridging S-D logic and strategy research with a more general framework,and for guiding much-needed empirical research that will inform managers.From a managerial point of view,S-D orientation provides a holistic approach to align the organization with its value network partners.The article also sets out an agenda for future research.Keywordsservice-dominant orientation,service-dominant logic,value cocreation,cocreation capability,interaction capabilitiesIntroductionService-dominant(S-D)logic(Vargo and Lusch2004,2006, 2008b)describes service as the core purpose of exchange and provides a theoretical understanding of how firms,customers, and other market actors cocreate value through their service interactions with each other.A central implication of S-D logic is that the notion of superior value cocreation replaces the more prevalent one of superior value provision as the cornerstone of business strategy.Therefore,from an S-D logic perspective,the capabilities that facilitate and enhance value cocreation pro-cesses are strategic capabilities central to an organization’s competitive advantage.Although the managerial merits of different notions of value cocreation have been discussed in the literature(e.g.,Day and Moorman2010;Madhavaram and Hunt2008;Payne,Stor-backa,and Frow2008;Porter and Kramer2011;Prahalad and Ramaswamy2004;Ramaswamy and Gouillart2010;Ramı´rez 1999;Womack and Jones2005b),less research attention has been paid to the actual portfolio of capabilities required to enact S-D logic.Consequently,managers only have limited guidance in the literature for implementing S-D practices.The purpose of this article is to devise a conceptual framework, which we call S-D orientation,to bridge S-D logic and S-D practice.An S-D orientation represents a set of strategic capabilities that enable an organization to cocreate value in service exchanges with what the S-D logic literature calls‘‘value net-work partners,’’such as customers,intermediaries,suppliers,or employees.While we consider our conceptualization to be rel-evant with respect to these different value network partners,in this article we concentrate on a firm’s interactions with busi-ness customers(B2B)and private customers(B2C),hereafter referred to simply as customers.Our focus on customers echoes their importance for a firm’s success from a strategy perspec-tive(Priem2007)and their value contribution role from an S-D logic perspective(Vargo and Lusch2008b).We interpret an S-D orientation as a cocreation capability, resulting from a firm’s individuated,relational,ethical, empowered,developmental,and concerted interaction capabil-ities.Our conceptual model is informed by(a)an in-depth 1RMIT University,Melbourne,Victoria,Australia2The University of Melbourne,Melbourne,Victoria,Australia Corresponding Author:Ingo O.Karpen,RMIT University,School of Economics,Finance and Marketing, Building108,Level12,239Bourke Street,Melbourne3000,Victoria,Australia Email:ingo.karpen@.auJournal of Service Research15(1)21-38ªThe Author(s)2012Reprints and permission:/journalsPermissions.navDOI:10.1177/1094670511425697by guest on February 7, 2014 Downloaded fromreview of S-D logic research and underlying literature streams and(b)S-D logic evaluations solicited from expert academics. Because we specify S-D orientation as a higher order concept, we also consider the independent and combinatory nature of the construct’s components and the implications for future modeling and measurement.Our research responds to the call for conceptualizing a cocreation capability(Madhavaram and Hunt2008)and contributes toward the development of middle range level theory in the context of S-D logic that can facilitate subsequent empirical investigations(Brodie,Saren, and Pels2011b).We discuss the theoretical foundation of S-D logic first,and demonstrate the connection between S-D logic and service-based business strategy.Then,we conceptualize an S-D orien-tation,discuss the concept’s research implications,and suggest future research directions.Fundamentals of S-D LogicS-D logic is a thinking framework at a pretheoretic stage that conceptualizes business exchanges from a service-based per-spective(Vargo2011;Winklhofer,Palmer,and Brodie 2007).To date,10foundational S-D logic premises(FPs)have been established in the literature(Vargo and Lusch2008b)with further premises evolving(see Williams and Aitken2011). These premises form the building blocks of an emerging school of thought or research paradigm(Brodie,Saren,and Pels 2011b).The first premise is that market actors interact and collabo-rate for the capabilities of the other party that renders service, thereby making a distinction between goods and services redundant(FP1).The actual service can be rendered either directly through a firm’s relieving activities or indirectly through enabling service platforms(FP3)such as goods or Internet websites(e.g.,Gummesson1993).According to these premises,a firm’s goods are valuable and relevant resources to the degree that they can be used as inputs to lever the custom-er’s own value creation processes and experiences(Gro¨nroos 2006a;Normann and Ramı´rez1993).Ultimately,service defines all economies(FP5)but this view might be masked by service intermediaries such as goods,money,or institutions (FP2;Vargo and Lusch2008b).Service-based logic further highlights that value is not what is inherent in or added to a product,but what customers get out of a product(Gro¨nroos2006b).Accordingly,value cannot be distributed or delivered by firms(FP7).Rather,firms facilitate the actualization and determination of value that network part-ners derive from their experiences(Vargo and Lusch2008b); this is also referred to as value-in-context(FP10).Value cocreation requires all network partners to interact with,and integrate,resources(FP9)to achieve mutual betterment(Gro¨n-roos2008;Vargo,Maglio,and Akaka2008).As S-D logic has been characterized as an open and evolving process(Vargo and Lusch2008b),Williams and Aitken(2011)propose a new pre-mise for consideration in this context that highlights the impor-tance of personal and societal values in determining desired value and value cocreation priorities(FP11).Vargo and Lusch (2008b)further indicate that creating value in concert with—rather than for—customers within a relational context(FP8), indicates the operant and cocreative nature of network partners (FP6)as active resources in value creation processes.Finally,a firm’s own and accessible operant resources(e.g.,employee competencies,network service capabilities),rather than oper-and resources(e.g.,goods,materials),play a central role for competitive success(FP4).As organizations specialize in exchanging service,superior operant resources such as strategic capabilities become important levers for actualizing value-in-context with network partners.These operant resources can be a source of competitive advantage(Madhavaram and Hunt 2008;Vargo and Lusch2008b).From S-D Logic Toward an S-DOrientationStrategic ConsiderationsThe notion of cocreating value refers to assisting customers in co-constructing and engaging in superior experiences.Each value network partner brings their own unique resource access and accommodation into that process(see Vargo and Lusch 2008a).As we illustrate below,this conceptualization has crit-ical implications for the role of the firm and subsequent inter-actions with customers as central value network partners.When customers are viewed as an integral part of value cre-ation,the role of the firm becomes that of a facilitator,sup-porter,and co-constructor of value rather than a supplier of value(Firat and Dholakia2006;Gro¨nroos2008;Michel, Vargo,and Lusch2008;Normann2001;Payne,Storbacka,and Frow2008;Ramı´rez1999;Vargo and Lusch2008b).In turn, the strategic focus of the firm shifts toward understanding how it can better assist individual customers to get more out of its direct service activities and/or service platforms so that their daily routines,processes,and experiences are improved in a meaningful way(see Payne,Storbacka,and Frow2008;Praha-lad and Ramaswamy2004).Communication is therefore dialo-gical between value network partners,which enriches the process of learning together(Ballantyne and Varey2006). Overall,firms prioritize valuable interaction experiences and outcomes of reciprocal resource integration efforts,rather than focusing on products per se,thereby forming the basis for suc-cessful future strategies.The strategy literature,in particular the resource-based view (RBV)stream,has been pointing toward the value potential of resources and customer value creation processes as a main driver of organizational performance(e.g.,Bowman and Ambrosini2000;Mol and Wijnberg2010;Priem2007).From an S-D logic perspective,strategy is about making choices about how best to facilitate and enhance value cocreation with network partners such as customers for mutual and long-term betterment.That is,optimizing interdependent resource inte-gration processes to capitalize on superior value propositions and value potential realizations.This collaborative and22Journal of Service Research15(1)by guest on February 7, 2014Downloaded frominterconnected nature of value creation highlights the need for a more network-oriented strategic approach (Gummesson 2006),seeking benefits for all value network partners,which Gummesson (2008a)calls ‘‘balanced centricity.’’Conceptual Foundations of an S-D OrientationTo become actionable,S-D logic requires specific strategic behaviors that are enabled by underlying capabilities.Strategic behaviors have been examined through the concept of a firm’s orientation,while the literature provides different views regarding the notion of ‘‘orientation.’’In line with previous suggestions (e.g.,Day 1994;Foley and Fahy 2009;Kandemir,Yaprak,and Cavusgil 2006;Ramani and Kumar 2008),the position taken in this article is that a firm’s strategic orientation refers to a capability or skill portfolio that enables,and mani-fests in,organizational behaviors.For example,Kandemir,Yaprak,and Cavusgil (2006,p.325)‘‘[...]conceptualized [what they call]alliance orientation as a firm’s skill portfolio of superior capabilities that help it scan its environment for partnering opportunities,coordinate its alliance strategies,and learn from its alliance experiences.’’Such a capabilities per-spective offers the opportunity to direct managerial attention to the development of actual skills that foster service-driving behaviors and support the development of prescriptive approaches to business strategy (Foley and Fahy 2009).Figure 1illustrates the conceptual relationships between S-D logic and S-D orientation proposed in this article.S-D logic provides service-driven premises that are reflected in S-D thinking.In contrast,S-D orientation directs firms’attention to strategic capabilities that are service-driving and manifested in organizational actions.We now turn to identifying these strategic capabilities that correspond to the premises of S-D logic,and the associated strategic themes specified in the following.Strategic Themes Associated With S-D LogicVargo and Lusch (2004,p.11)emphasize that ‘‘[i]nteractivity,integration,customization,and coproduction are the hallmarks of a service-centered view and its inherent focus on the cus-tomer and the relationship.’’S-D logic ‘‘points almost directlyto normative notions of investment in people (operant resources),long-term relationships,quality service flows,and only somewhat less directly toward notions of symmetric rela-tions,transparency,ethical approaches to exchange,and sus-tainability’’(Lusch and Vargo 2006b,p.283).Others have highlighted an S-D logic focus on ‘‘communicative interaction,reciprocal servicing,resource sharing,solution orientation,and the co-creation of value’’(Ballantyne and Aitken 2007,p.368).Overall,S-D logic accentuates ‘‘a commitment to collaborative processes with customers,partners,and employees’’(Lusch,Vargo,and O’Brien 2007,p.5).Based on these illustrative characteristics of S-D logic and an in-depth literature review,Table 1presents the six resulting S-D themes with normative strategic relevance.The table also relates the identified themes to respective S-D logic premises,strategic implications,and potential customer consequences.The six strategic themes reflect the understanding that mean-ingful interaction and reciprocal resource integration with cus-tomers as value network partners requires:(a)value-in-context focus—understanding value as a contextual and phenomenolo-gical outcome determined by the individual customer;(b)rela-tion focus—understanding customers as social relationship partners,not isolated targets,with whom collaborative rela-tions are favorable;(c)values 1focus—understanding customer interaction and resource integration to benefit from ethical considerations for the long-term,joint betterment;(d)copro-duction focus—understanding customers as effect-capable resources able to contribute to service processes for enhanced outcomes;(e)operant resource focus—understanding custom-ers’accessible operant resources as the basis for effective resource integration and value realization;and (f)process flow focus—understanding service as interlinked processes of resource integration within and among value networks of which customers are a part.Each theme is strategically relevant in that it deals with the conditions for meaningful and mutually beneficial resource integration;from value propositions to value actualizations in reference to the premises of S-D logic.Conceptualization of an S-D OrientationIn conceptualizing service as a value cocreating process (Vargo and Lusch 2008b),interaction becomes the defining aspect of resource integration efforts and subsequent value-driving experiences (Prahalad and Ramaswamy 2004).That is,value is jointly realized in interaction experiences through a rela-tional process (Berthon and John 2006;Gummesson 2008b;Kowalkowski 2011;Schembri 2006).The importance of inter-action requires ‘‘that all co-creative management processes be enabled and supported by interaction-centric capabilities’’(Ramaswamy 2009,p.37).The strategically relevant themes linked to the premises of S-D logic,as outlined in Figure 2,help us understand the type of interaction capabilities that facilitate and enhance value cocreation with customers.Our analysis of the literature in association with two rounds of review by academic experts in S-D logic 2led to the identification of the followinginteractionFigure 1.Conceptual relationships between S-D logic and S-D orientation.Karpen et al.23by guest on February 7, 2014 Downloaded fromT a b l e 1.L i n k i n g S -D L o g i c P r e m i s e s ,S t r a t e g i c T h e m e s ,I m p l i c a t i o n s ,a n d O u t c o m e sS t r a t e g i c T h e m e sI l l u s t r a t e d F o u n d a t i o n a l P r e m i s e s (F P )S t r a t e g i c I m p l i c a t i o n s C u s t o m e r C o n s e q u e n c e sV a l u e -i n -c o n t e x t (G r o¨n r o o s 2006b ;V a r g o a n d L u s c h 2004,2008b ;W i k s t r o ¨m 1996)V a l u e i s u n i q u e l y a n d p h e n o m e n o l o g i c a l l y d e t e r m i n e d b y t h e i n d i v i d u a l c u s t o m e r (s e e F P 7,10)U n d e r s t a n d i n g i n d i v i d u a l c u s t o m e r s ’r e s o u r c e i n t e g r a t i o n p r o c e s s e s ,c o n t e x t s ,a n d d e s i r e s I n d i v i d u a l c i r c u m s t a n c e s c a n b e b e t t e r a n t i c i p a t e d ,u n d e r s t o o d ,a n d d e s i r e d e x p e r i e n c e s b e t t e r s e r v e d R e l a t i o n s (B a l l a n t y n e a n d V a r e y 2006;G r o¨n r o o s 2007;G u m m e s s o n 2008b ;L u s c h ,V a r g o ,a n d M a l t e r 2006;T u l i ,K o h l i ,a n d B h a r a d w a j 2007)C u s t o m e r s a r e s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s h i p p a r t n e r s n o t i s o l a t e d t a r g e t s ,w i t h w h o m c o l l a b o r a t i v e r e l a t i o n s a r e f a v o r a b l e (s e e F P 6,7,8)C o m m u n i c a t i n g w i t h a n d r e l a t i n g t o i n d i v i d u a l c u s t o m e r s f a c i l i t a t i n g s o c i o e m o t i o n a l c o m f o r tD i a l o g u e a n d s o c i a l i n t e r a c t i o n h e l p c u s t o m e r s t o b o n d a n d i d e n t i f y w i t h t h e f i r mV a l u e s (A b e l a a n d M u r p h y 2008;L u s c h a n d V a r g o 2006a ;W i l l i a m s a n d A i t -k e n 2011)E t h i c a l s t a n d a r d s o f i n t e r a c t i o n s u p p o r t s u s t a i n a b l e a n d t r a n s p a r e n t e x c h a n g e w i t h c u s t o m e r s f o r t h e l o n g -t e r m b e n e f i t (s e eF P 1,10,11)E n g a g i n g w i t h i n d i v i d u a l c u s t o m e r s i n f a i r a n d n o n o p p o r t u n i s t i c w a y sI n d i v i d u a l c u s t o m e r s c a n d e v e l o p g r e a t e r t r u s t a n d e n g a g e m e n t t o t h e f i r mC o p r o d u c t i o n (C o v a a n d S a l l e 2007,2008;L u s c h ,V a r g o ,a n d O ’B r i e n 2007;P r a h a l a d a n d R a m a s w a m y 2004)C u s t o m e r s a r e o p e r a n t r e s o u r c e s t h a t a r e a b l e t o c o n t r i b u t e t o t h e i m p r o v e m e n t o f r e s o u r c e s a n d d e s i r e d s o l u t i o n s (s e e F P 6,9)E m p o w e r i n g i n d i v i d u a l c u s t o m e r s t o i n f l u e n c e t h e s e r v i c e p r o c e s s e s a n d o u t c o m e sT h e p o t e n t i a l f o r c o p r o d u c t i o n e n h a n c e s t h e a c h i e v e m e n t o f d e s i r e d f u n c t i o n s ,g o a l s ,a n d m e a n i n g sO p e r a n t R e s o u r c e s (M o¨l l e r 2006;N o r m a n n a n d R a m ı´r e z 1993;V a r g o a n d L u s c h 2008b )C u s t o m e r s ’a b i l i t y t o c o c r e a t e v a l u e d e p e n d s o n t h e i r o w n a c c e s s t o k n o w l e d g e a n d s k i l l s (s e e F P 4,6,9)H e l p i n g i n d i v i d u a l c u s t o m e r s t o d e v e l o p t h e i r o w n c a p a b i l i t i e s a n d k n o w l e d g eI n d i v i d u a l c u s t o m e r s c a n g e t m o r e o u t o f t h e i r u s a g e /i n t e r a c t i o n e x p e r i e n c e a s t h e y b e t t e r k n o w h o w /w h a t t o d o w i t h t h e o f f e r i n g P r o c e s s f l o w s (F l i n t a n d M e n t z e r 2006;L a m b e r t a n d G a r c ı´a -D a s t u g u e 2006;V a r g o a n d L u s c h 2004,2008b )S e r v i c e m a n i f e s t s i t s e l f i n i n t e r l i n k e d v a l u e c o c r e a t i o n p r o c e s s e s w i t h i n a n d a m o n g n e t w o r k s t h a t c u s t o m e r s a r e p a r t o f (s e e F P 1,6,9)C o o r d i n a t i n g a n d i n t e g r a t i n g t h e s e r v i c e f l o w s t o w a r d i n d i v i d u a l c u s t o m e r sI n d i v i d u a l c u s t o m e r s e x p e r i e n c e l e s s v a l u e d r a i n s a s v a l u e c o c r e a t i o n c o n s t e l l a t i o n s o p e r a t e s m o o t h l yO v e r a l l f o c u s :s e r v i c i n g e x p e r i e n c e s (F l i n t 2006;P r a h a l a d a n d R a m a s w a m y 2004;V a r g o a n d L u s c h 2008b )S e r v i c e m e a n s a s s i s t i n g p a r t n e r s i n a c h i e v i n g m u t u a l b e t t e r m e n t (s e e F P 1–11)F a c i l i t a t e a n d e n h a n c e t h e d i r e c t /i n d i r e c t i n t e r a c t i o n p r o c e s s e s f o r m i n g t h e b a s i s f o r e f f e c t i v e a n d e f f i c i e n t r e s o u r c e i n t e g r a t i o nI n d i v i d u a l c u s t o m e r s c a n r e a l i z e t h e f u l l v a l u e p o t e n t i a l a s s o c i a t e d w i t h r e s o u r c e s a n d i n t e r a c t i o n e x p e r i e n c e s24by guest on February 7, 2014 Downloaded fromcapabilities:(a)individuated interaction capability—under-standing individual customers’service processes,contexts,and desired outcomes;(b)relational interaction capability—enhan-cing the connection of social and emotional links with custom-ers in service processes;(c)ethical interaction capability—supporting fair and nonopportunistic customer service pro-cesses;(d)empowered interaction capability—enabling cus-tomers to shape the nature and content of service processes;(e)developmental interaction capability—assisting customers’own knowledge and competence development in service pro-cesses;and (f)concerted interaction capability—facilitating coordinated and integrated service processes that include cus-tomers.The six capabilities are discussed and justified in greater detail below.‘‘In S-D logic,service is defined as the application of spe-cialized competences (operant resources—knowledge and skills),through deeds,processes,and performances for the ben-efit of another entity or the entity itself’’(Vargo and Lusch 2008c,p.26).An S-D orientation,in turn,specifies capabil-ities 3that organizations may prioritize to achieve a competitive advantage through superior service and mutual betterment.Based on the preceding analysis,we define an S-D orientation as a portfolio of organizational capabilities that facilitate and enhance the reciprocal integration of resources through indi-viduated,relational,ethical,developmental,empowered,and concerted interaction.Essentially,an S-D orientation repre-sents a set of operant resources that help customers and other value network partners achieve greater value-in-context through the resulting interaction and resource integration pro-cesses.We interpret S-D orientation as a higher-order cocrea-tion capability,constituted by the following six lower-order interaction capabilities.Capability 1:Individuated interaction capability.Individu-ated interaction capability is defined as an organization’s ability to understand the resource integration processes,contexts,and desired outcomes of individual customers and other value network partners.S-D logic shifts the focus from value-in-exchange to value-in-context (Vargo and Lusch 2008b);that is,from embedded and distributable value to potential value that is actualized in a col-laborative effort between value network partners.In order to better support and assist customers with their own value fulfill-ment,firms need to understand what it is that customers want to get out of these processes.Gro ¨nroos (2008,p.307),in line with Sheth,Sisodia,and Sharma (2000),adds that a thorough under-standing of customers’everyday practices ‘‘has to be the starting-point for developing a customer-centric offering based on a service logic.’’The more that firms are aware of their cus-tomers’resource integration goals,preferences,requirements,desired experiences,usage situations,and experience environ-ments,the better value propositions and outcomes can be cocreated.As value is a subjectively perceived phenomenon and individually determined (Holbrook 2006),it is considered phenomenological and context-dependent in S-D logic (Vargo and Lusch 2008b).Accordingly,customers must be examined at the individual level (Hoekstra,Leeflang,and Wittink 1999)in addition to the aggregate level.The need to move away from mass and segment-based marketing toward individuals (e.g.,Ramani and Kumar 2008;Sheth,Sisodia,and Sharma 2000;Tuli,Kohli,and Bharadwaj 2007;Womack and Jones 2005b)and an ‘‘experience of one’’(Prahalad 2004,p.175)has been highlighted with respect to business practice.In this context,Table 2provides:(a)a selection of associated S-DlogicFigure 2.Aligning S-D logic and S-D orientation.Karpen et al.25by guest on February 7, 2014 Downloaded fromliterature suggesting an individuated interaction capability;(b) illustrative organizational behaviors;and(c)examples of firms with this capability.Capability2:Relational interaction capability.Relational interaction capability is defined as an organization’s abil-ity to enhance the connection of social and emotional links with customers and other value network partners. According to S-D logic,exchange is by its very nature rela-tional(Vargo and Lusch2004).However,the quality and inten-sity of the relationship will vary depending on the interpersonal connections and efforts between the value network partners. Treating customers as commodities,or forcing customers into a relationship that they do not want,or may not even perceive to exist is inconsistent with S-D logic.Taking an S-D logic per-spective,the traditional notion of firm-controlled customer relationship management(CRM),moves toward a more service-driven notion of dealing with value creation partners. The relationship must be seen and approached from the customer’s point of view,and the firm’s role lies in facilitating an environment conducive to social interaction at the customer’s desired frequency and intensity.The concept of customers involves human beings,even if it is organizations that are dealing with each other.Human beings are social interactors(Varey2008)whose emotions contribute to the perceived value of an interaction.Hence,firms with an S-D orientation will support the social and emotional links between interacting partners as these shape the cocreated expe-rience.In turn,‘‘[...]aspects of interpersonal communication must be taken into consideration in researching exchange pro-cesses from an interaction/network perspective[...as]rela-tional issues cannot be separated from communicational occurrences’’(Olkkonen,Tikkanen,and Alajoutsija¨rvi2000, pp.404-405).In particular,two-way communication and meaningful dialogue are key manifestations of social encoun-ters and relational interaction(Ballantyne and Varey2006; Varey2002).As Varey(2002,p.54)states:‘‘Communicating people are relating people.’’S-D logic literature has consis-tently pointed toward dialogue as a desired marketing practiceTable2.Individuated Interaction CapabilityS-D logic-associated references‘‘Understanding how the customer uniquely integrates and experiences service-relatedresources(both private and public)is a source of competitive advantage through innova-tion’’(Lusch,Vargo,and O’Brien2007,p.8)‘‘The service-centered view of marketing[...]means more than simply being consumeroriented;it means collaborating with and learning from customers and being adaptive totheir individual and dynamic needs’’(Vargo and Lusch2004,p.6).‘‘The premise of this model is that experience is the basis of value,experience is co-created,and exchange[or interaction]represents the locus of value creation.The end point is not a‘segment of one’but rather an‘experience of one’’’(Prahalad2004,p.175).‘‘[...]the organization needs to use the experience of individuals as the starting point,ratherthan its own products and services.In addition,the development of compelling experienceswith individuals requires that they be allowed to engage in interactions of their ownchoosing’’(Ramaswamy and Gouillart2010,p.7)‘‘S-D logic identifies that an enterprise can only offer VPs[value propositions],but value itselfis created during in-use experience.The implication within the context of stakeholdermarkets is the requirement for understanding and managing the in-use experience[...]’’(Frow and Payne2011,p.235)Illustrative organizational behaviors To learn how value network partners intend to integrate offered resources and how they may fit into their processes and livesTo provide a value proposition that responds to value network partners’desired and prioritized experiencesTo grasp the environmental influences and contextual factors that impact individual value network partners’resource integration processesExample organizations The Australian Red Cross Blood Service(.au)has introduced a‘‘Reengi-neering Our Supply and Service’’(RoSS)program to better meet the needs and contexts ofindividual Approved Health Providers(AHPs),for example,blood bank scientists,pathol-ogy laboratory scientists,and general practitioners.This program involves understandinghow each AHP defines service and how value can be best realized in their own processesand usage patternsAmazon()analyzes search and purchase patterns in order to betterunderstand an individual’s interest portfolio.Based on this knowledge as well as referencegroup or reference item comparisons,Amazon is then able to make meaningful recom-mendations or provide notifications responding to an individual customer’s context andpreferences.Similarly,supermarkets like Woolworths in Australia(www.woolworths.co-m.au)are able to filter individual customer information based on their purchase history tobetter understand their unique consumption habits and contexts26Journal of Service Research15(1)by guest on February 7, 2014Downloaded from。