Social practices as units of value creation: theoretical underpinnings and implications

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to conceptually examine how value is created in (social) practices in which consumers use offerings as operand resources. Design/methodology/approach Drawing on service‐dominant logic, practice and consumer culture theories, this paper conceptualizes the operational logic of value creation in practices and draws implications to marketing theory and practice. The approach to markets is “markets as practices” in value networks. Findings Value is tied to practices, not to offerings. Therefore, a key research unit for examining value creation is a practice. Value creation is socially constructed because a practice‐specific meaning structure, influenced by the context and consumer resources, configures consumers' activities. Guided by it, consumers do what makes best sense to do in the practice in the specific moment. As the context and consumer resources are unfixed, fragmented consumers emerge. Therefore, segmentation of value‐creating practices offers a valid description of value creation. Originality/value The paper extends the examination of value creation from use to practices. Drawing on marketing and other social sciences, it conceptualizes the operational logic of value creation in a practice: it defines practice elements, their roles and interdependencies in the value‐creation process. The operational logic introduces meaning structures as value‐creation mediators: influenced by the context and consumer resources, they steer consumer participation in the practice (including the use of offerings) and experienced value. Understanding meaning structures helps firms to identify value improvement opportunities which can be transferred to improved or new value propositions. Finally, the paper proposes segmentation of practices in the presence of fragmented consumers.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 62 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.