Service-dominant logic: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added
Adding recent support for SCML and S-D logic connections
Tags: Reverted Visual edit
style
 
(6 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown)
Line 5:
Service-dominant logic has been developed by [[Stephen Vargo]] and [[Robert Lusch]]. The goal of developing S-D logic is to contribute to the understanding of human value [[co-creation]], by developing an alternative to [[Market economy|traditional logics of exchange]].
 
Since Vargo and Lush published the first S-D logic article, "Evolving to a New Dominant Logic for Marketing",<ref>For this work, Lusch and Vargo have been awarded the Harold H. Maynard Award by the American Marketing Association for "significant contribution to marketing theory and thought" and the Sheth Foundation Award for "long term contributions to the field of marketing."</ref> in 2004, S-D logic has become a collaborative effort of numerous scholars across disciplines and it has been continually extended and elaborated (most frequently by Vargo and Lusch and in doing so, most of their references are their past papers, which should seriously decrease the validity of their papers). Among the most important extensions have been (1) the development of service ecosystems perspective that allows a more holistic, dynamic, and systemic perspective of value creation and (2) the emphasis of institutions and institutional arrangements as coordination mechanisms in such systems.
 
== The core ==
Line 60:
|}
 
The first axiom (FP1) {{'}}''Service is the fundamental basis of exchange''{{'}} is based on the previously introduced definition of service as the application of operant resources (primarily knowledge and skill) for the benefit of another actor. S-D logic argues that it is always fundamentally service, rather than goods, per se, that actors exchange as they strive to become better off. It is important to emphasize that thisThis 'service' (singular), a process, should not be confused with 'services', (usually plural), usually intended to denote a unit of (intangible) output, which is associated with goods dominant (G-D) logic. The first axiom is at the heart of S-D logic, and thus foundational to the other FPs. For example, it implies that (1) goods are distribution mechanisms for service provision (FP3) and (2) all economies are service economies (FP5). It also follows that money, when it is involved in exchanges, represents rights to future service. In other words, money can be viewed as a placeholder for future service and can be understood as a form of indirect service exchange that often masks the fundamental basis of exchange (FP2).
 
The second axiom (FP6), {{'}}''Value is cocreated by multiple actors, always including the beneficiary''{{'}}, contradicts the traditional worldview, in which firms are seen as the sole creator of value. Rather, it suggests that value is something that is always cocreated through the interaction of actors, either directly or indirectly (e.g., through goods). This axiom also enables one to see more clearly that the service-oriented view is inherently relational, because value does not arise prior to exchange transaction, but rather following it, in the use of the exchanged resources, in a particular context and in conjunction with resources provided by other service providers. This value creation is seen as unfolding, over time, with a consequence of continuing social and economic exchange, implicit contracts, and relational norms.
Line 97:
S-D logic was quickly adopted throughout the world of marketing and services research, and also many related research domains. For a complete overview of the [[dissemination]] and [[institutionalisation]] of S-D logic in research, see Ehrenthal, Gruen and Hofstetter (2021).
 
Within marketing, S-D logic has been applied to virtually all of its sub-disciplines. In supply chain management and logistics (SCML), scholars have started to think in terms of value networks and systems and focus on cocreation due to the influence of S-D logic (see e.g. Flint and Mentzer, 2006; Tokman and Beitelspacher, 2011, Yazdanparast, Manuj, and Swartz, 2010; Lindsey-Hall, Qi, Richey, and Patil, 2022<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Lindsey Hall |first=Kristina K. |last2=Qi |first2=Ji (Miracle) |last3=Richey |first3=Robert Glenn |last4=Patil |first4=Ripinka Koli |date=2022-07-01 |title=Collaboration, feedback, and performance: Supply chain insights from service-dominant logic |url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0148296322002922 |journal=Journal of Business Research |language=en |volume=146 |pages=385–397 |doi=10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.03.055 |issn=0148-2963}}</ref>). S-D logic was also linked with branding and brand cocreation early on (Ballantyne and Aitken, 2007, Merz, He and Vargo, 2009) and identified as the natural ally of consumer culture theory (CCT) (Arnould, 2007). S-D logic is shown to facilitate a seamless integration of ethical accountability in marketing decision-making (Abela and Murphy, 2008) and used to guide practitioners to achieve and sustain strategic advantage (Bettencourt, Lusch, and Vargo, 2014). Recently, S-D logic has also been applied to marketing sub-disciplines such as international marketing (Akaka, Vargo, and Lusch, 2013) and social marketing (Luca, Hibbert, and McDonald, 2015; Russell-Bennett, Wood, and Previte, 2013).
 
The S-D logic framework has also found considerable resonance outside of marketing. S-D logic has been applied in such diverse fields as information systems (Alter, 2010), health disciplines (see e.g. Hardyman, Daunt, & Kitchener, 2015; Rehman, Dean, & Pires, 2012), arts philosophy (Boorsma, 2006), tourism management (see e.g. FitzPatrick, Davey, Muller, & Davey, 2013), public management (Osborne, Radnor, and Nasi, 2013) and innovation studies (Michel, Brown, and Gallan, 2008).
Line 203:
 
== Further reading ==
* [http://www.sdlogic.net/publications.html "Selected Publications on Service-Dominant Logic"]
* Gronroos, C. (2006). [http://mtq.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/6/3/317.pdf Adopting a Service Logic for Marketing], ''Marketing Theory'', 6 (3), 317–333.
* Gronroos, C. (2011). [http://mtq.sagepub.com/content/11/3/279.abstract Value co-creation in service logic: A critical analysis], ''Marketing Theory'', 11(3), 279–301.