4.1 Review

Facilitators and inhibitors of value co-creation in the industrial services environment

Journal

JOURNAL OF SERVICE THEORY AND PRACTICE
Volume 30, Issue 6, Pages 609-642

Publisher

EMERALD GROUP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1108/JSTP-03-2020-0061

Keywords

Value co-creation; Industrial service; Facilitators; Inhibitors; Business-to-Business

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose The purpose of this study is to recognize the facilitators and inhibitors of value co-creation in the industrial service environment. Design/methodology/approach First, a systematic literature review (SLR) based on the systematic search flow (SSF) method was conducted, using six databases. Then, the content analysis proposed by Bardin (2011) was used to analyze the selected papers from SLR. Findings The authors identified a total of 11 facilitators and four inhibitors of value co-creation in industrial services. The findings show that concerning facilitators, the involvement of actors and synergy among participants reported a higher presence. As for the inhibitors, incompatibility among actors and actors' inexperience in the context of value co-creation were the ones that registered the most frequency. Research limitations/implications Even though the SLR covered a large proportion of the studies available, this research may not have enabled a complete coverage of all existing peer-reviewed papers in the field of value co-creation in industrial services. Practical implications This study assists managers in enhancing the performance of the value co-creation process. This is because, by knowing both the facilitators and inhibitors, managers can have an improved understanding of this process, thereby pondering these elements on the elaboration of their strategies and decision-making. Originality/value This study is one of the first attempts to recognize both the facilitators and inhibitors of value co-creation in industrial services.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available