4.4 Article

Systems, networks, and ecosystems in service research

期刊

JOURNAL OF SERVICE MANAGEMENT
卷 27, 期 4, 页码 652-674

出版社

EMERALD GROUP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1108/JOSM-09-2015-0268

关键词

Systems thinking; Service ecosystems; Service systems; Service networks; Viable systems approach

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to create awareness on the need for lifting up the level of analysis in service research by focusing on systems, networks, and ecosystems to contribute to the research expansion of the traditionally narrow view of service. Design/methodology/approach - This conceptual paper is built upon three blocks. First, the viable systems approach is revised to highlight the survival, viability, and complexity of service systems. Second, the dynamics of service networks is discussed using an ecological view of service with a nested, networked configuration. Third, these two previous perspectives are integrated using the fundamentals of ecosystems thinking. Findings - This paper outlines a novel, tri-level approach reorienting and reframing our thinking around systems, networks, and ecosystems. Some research challenges and directions that could expand the body of knowledge in service research are also discussed. Research limitations/implications - The tri-level approach proposed in this conceptual paper could be enriched with other theoretical perspectives and empirical explorations. Practical implications - Lifting the level of analysis by focussing on service systems, service networks, and service ecosystems would allow practitioners to expand their business perspective to better face the challenges of complex business settings, enabling them to co-create value for all their stakeholders. Originality/value - The paper contributes to set the foundation for the next stage of service research by going beyond dyadic interactions to address dynamic systems, networks, and ecosystems across different interaction patterns in complex business configurations.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据