Advocating for consumers experiencing vulnerability: a typology and research agenda

Abstract

Purpose This paper aims to introduce a typology of service advocates to address a gap in existing literature regarding how transformative service mediators (TSMs) manage both access to resources and empowerment for consumers experiencing vulnerability. The typology focuses on the role of advocates within service ecosystems and provides the illustrative case of young adults with psychosocial disabilities seeking employment to demonstrate the application of the typology. Design/methodology/approach Drawing on the Dialogue, Access, Risk Assessment and Transparency model, the paper expands existing classifications of TSMs. The research also uses an illustrative case to show how four types of service advocates - policymakers, gatekeepers, supporters and champions – work together to ameliorate vulnerability within a government-funded employment project for young adults with psychosocial disabilities. Findings The paper conceptualizes how the interplay between the roles and responsibilities of different service advocates influences empowerment and access to resources within a service ecosystem. The discussion focuses on how service advocates at different levels (macro, meso and micro) within a service ecosystem must collaborate to reduce consumer vulnerability. An illustrative case is used to show how effective service ecosystems build on the capabilities of different advocates to support consumers experiencing vulnerability, and how this outcome is sometimes undermined by conflicts and tensions embedded in the institutional logics of different service advocates. Originality/value This paper fills a critical gap in transformative service research by offering a more nuanced understanding of how service advocates manage empowerment and access to resources. A research agenda is provided to guide future research exploring opportunities for how the different types of service advocates can overcome obstacles to prevail in the fight against vulnerability.

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 — 12 citations exist upstream.

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