Co-creation and co-destruction: A practice-theory based study of interactive value formation
read more
Citations
Applying survival analysis to investigate mobile retail applications from a customer perceived value perspective
Neue Wertschöpfung braucht ein erweitertes Qualitätsverständnis zur Gestaltung von Smart Service-Systemen
Entrancing ourselves with YouTube: emotion-producing practices amplify the impact of branded video
Co-creation Behavior in Shared Service System: Influencing Factors
References
Case Study Research: Design and Methods
Building theories from case study research
Building theories from case study research.
Outline of a Theory of Practice
Related Papers (5)
Critical service logic: making sense of value creation and co-creation
Frequently Asked Questions (10)
Q2. What future works have the authors mentioned in the paper "A practice-theory based study of interactive value formation" ?
Their paper suffers from several limitations which need to be addressed in future research. Future research needs to more closely observe interactions between providers and customers. Future research needs to study whether or not their conclusions are generalizable to other contexts, e. g. long-lasting relationships in business-to-business contexts or in e-commerce contexts. Future research needs to have a broader scope.
Q3. What is the co-creative dimension of the practice of delivering?
the co-creative dimension of the practice of delivering appears when employees remain flexible towards organizational instructions, and when customers voluntarily simplify the work of the employees, adapting to the flow of service production.
Q4. What does Warde (2005) argue that practices comprise?
Warde (2005) argues that practices comprise a temporally unfolding and spatially dispersed nexus of behaviours that include practical activities, performances, and representations or talk.
Q5. What was the reason for interviewing instructors and managers?
The reason for interviewing instructors and managers was that these influence the practice of interactive value formation within the organization by means of different management activities, e.g. coaching and monitoring of service interactions in the field.
Q6. What made us sensitive to observable interactions in public transport?
the concept of practice in practice-theory and the constant comparison of interview-narratives made us sensitive to observable interactions central to service encounters in public transport.
Q7. What did the driver and the customer do to improve their understanding of the procedure of charging?
the driver and the customer worked towards levelling out their understandings with regard to charging, resulting in positive engagements and congruent elements in the practice of charging.
Q8. What do the authors argue about the different types of praxis?
The authors also argue that, in order for practitioners (both driver and customer in their case) to be able to carry out these different kinds of praxis, they need to step into specific subject positions and play certain roles.
Q9. What is the common way of displaying disappointment about poor performance?
More generally, their findings suggest that the co-destructive dimension of this practice is displayed when interactants disagree with each other, obstruct responses, misinterpret or keep information to themselves, displaying disappointment about poor performance.
Q10. What was the purpose of the initial group interviews?
These initial group interviews were rather unstructured and were aimed at getting an overview of the organization and identifying the locus of the value formation processes.