Leveraging Disruptive Innovation: An S-D Logic Perspective Dr Linda D. Hollebeek Presentation at LiveWork Studios Oslo, August 2017 ‘Customer engagement’ = Abbreviated by using ‘CE’

Agenda Introduction & research overview Leveraging disruptive innovation through service design Implications, discussion & conclusions 10 publications in this topic area since 2011

2. Leveraging Disruptive Innovation through Service Design S-D logic Influential, guiding meta-theoretical perspective Service Design <-> Cust. Engagement Key mid-range theoretical entities Disruptive Innovation Key mid-range theoretical entity AirBnB, Uber, Service Robots Key micro-theoretical entities (contexts) CE is also a mid-range theoretical entity that has relevance to this line of thought. However, S-D logic’s link to service design, the business model, and disruptive innovation (in particular, service robots) is the key focus here. Vargo & Lusch (2017), IJRM

What is S-D Logic? Vargo & Lusch (2016), JAMS Axioms: Guiding principles of S-D logic

Customer Engagement & S-D Logic CE definition 5 revised FPs of CE Model establishes explicit link between CE and S-D logic, by brining S-D logic terminology into the lexicon of CE. Model adds the importance of Learning and Knowledge Sharing into the conceptual ambit of S-D logic, which are also key for CE. So, what is known is that there is a link between S-D logic and the mid-range concept of CE (JAMS). But, what is not yet known is the way in which an S-D logic perspective of disruptive innovation (enabled thru the business model) drives key actor outcomes, including cocreation and CE (for customers), profits (for organisations), etc. That is what this paper will investigate. Hollebeek et al. (2016), JAMS

Linking S-D Logic/CE to Disruptive Innovation through Service Design Principles of Hollebeek et al.’s (2016) model are transferable, e.g.: Importance of Resource Integration, Learning, Knowledge Sharing and Cocreation in Disruptive Innovation & Service Design But, need shift to a multi (omni)-actor/ecosystem perspective Recognizing all actors involved in successful disruptive innovations, e.g. The company Employees Customers Suppliers, etc. Imp Disruptive innov: Radical, game-changing innovation that changes the way things are done (e.g. smartphones, AirBnB, Uber etc)

What Is Service Design? Key aspects of SD: - Some element of newness (cf. innovation) - Occurs for the purpose of value creation for customers and firms

S-D Logic-Informed Service Design

S-D Logic Hamburger Model of Disruptive Innovation (DI) HOW CAN WE INCORPORATE SERVICE DESIGN TO OPTIMISE THE SUCCESS OF DISRUPTIVE INNOVATIONS? AT THE DISRUPTIVE INNOV DEVELOPMENT LEVEL – WHERE ADJUSTMENTS TO SERVICES ARE DESIGNED/CREATED AND THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE PROCESS, TO ENSURE OPTIMAL CX Broadly, Omni-actor (initial focus on firm), but based on Relationship Marketing principle of mutual gain for all actors involved. Ecosystem-based model: Incorporates a broad range of actor types (bottom), e.g. firm, employees, customers, etc. OUTSIDE of MODEL (WRAPPER OF BURGER): Business Model = Institution (rules, principles & procedures that guide business conduct): Resource mobilization, integration, and utilization map/mechanism for the purpose of omni-actor (with an initial focus on the focal firm) value creation/optimization. Within the business model: Resources -> RBV of the firm: Resources = Foundation of value creation (e.g. Intellectual Resources, Tangible Resources, etc). Resource integration – also important: Learning & Knowledge Sharing (Hollebeek model on earlier slide). In outer ring of model (bottom): Actor types that may be using/deploying particular firm resource types, e.g. firm, employees, customers, suppliers, general public, govt, competitors, intl markets and the media. Above, the cheese/bacon/lettuce on the burger = Business model-enabled Disruptive Innovation (antecedents (e.g. resources), DI process, DI implementation -> DI outcomes (above). In top, outer ring we see the purported benefits/rewards for each actor type that participates in the implementation of the firm’s business model (institution) and DI process (thru institutional arragements), e.g. profit (firm), employee eng. (employees), customer eng/cocreation (customers), Lifetime value (suppliers), wellbeing (general public), policy implementation/change (govt), profit (competitors), market position (intl markets), media reports (media).

The Case of Key sharing economy actors: Key resources: AirBnB engagement platform (EP) Customers/suppliers of rooms Consumers/end users Key resources: Company vision, resources, know-how, etc. People’s private, spare rooms DI development & implementation: Resource integration in line with company/customer objectives -> Cocreation DI: EP as a DIY intermediary platform, bypassing traditional accommodation channels Utilization of spare capacity/fixed cost sharing (dual customer (of EP)/supplier (of room) role) Reduced price, high flexibility (consumer) Key resource: AirBnB CONNECTS these key resources with one another. Similar services: BlaBlaCar (car/ride sharing)

Consumer Engagement Practice Typology in Online Brand Community If these are the eng. Practices, how do we DESIGN services for optimal execution and satisfaction of those practices (on the part of consumers and firms)? Which practices can be used to optimise value creation for the firm, and customers?

Association of Consumer Eng. Practices User centric perspective

Questions? Thank You 