Design for Value Co-Creation: Exploring Synergies Between Design for Service and Service Logic

Abstract

This paper aims to bridge recent work on Service Logic with practice and research in the Design for Service to explore whether and how human-centered collaborative design approaches could provide a source for interpreting existing service systems and proposing new ones and thus realize a Service Logic in organizations. A comparison is made of existing theoretical backgrounds and frameworks from Service Logic and Design for Service studies that conceptualize core concepts for value co-creation: actors, resources, resource integration, service systems, participation, context, and experience. We find that Service Logic provides a framework for understanding service systems in action by focusing on how actors integrate resources to co-create value for themselves and others, whereas Design for Service provides an approach and tools to explore current service systems as a context to imagine future service systems and how innovation may develop as a result of reconfigurations of resources and actors. Design for Service also provides approaches, competences, and tools that enable involved actors to participate in and be a part of the service system redesign. Design for value co-creation is presented using this model. The paper builds on and extends the Service Logic research first by repositioning service design from a phase of development to Design for Service as an approach to service innovation, centered on understanding and engaging with customers' own value-creating practices. Second, it builds on and extends through discussing the meaning of value co-creation and identifying and distinguishing collaborative approaches for the generation of new resource constellations. In doing so, the collaborative approaches allow for achieving value co-creation in designing.

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 — 198 citations exist upstream.

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