Change search
Refine search result
1 - 15 of 15
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Rows per page
  • 5
  • 10
  • 20
  • 50
  • 100
  • 250
Sort
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
Select
The maximal number of hits you can export is 250. When you want to export more records please use the Create feeds function.
  • 1.
    Akaka, Melissa A.
    et al.
    Daniels College of BusinessUniversity of Denver.
    Koskela-Huotari, Kaisa
    Karlstad University, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (starting 2013), Service Research Center (from 2013). Karlstad University, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (starting 2013), Karlstad Business School (from 2013).
    Vargo, Stephen L.
    Shidler College of BusinessUniversity of Hawai’i at Mānoa.
    Further Advancing Service Science with Service-Dominant Logic: Service Ecosystems, Institutions, and their Implications for Innovation2019In: Handbook of Service Science, Volume II / [ed] Maglio, P. P., Kieliszewski, C. A., Spohrer, J. C., Lyons, K., Patricio, L. & Sawatani, Y., New York: Springer, 2019, Volume II, p. 641-659Chapter in book (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Service-dominant (S-D) logic has been recognized as a theoretical foundation for developing a science of service. As the field of service science advances the understanding of value cocreation in service systems, S-D logic continues to evolve as well. Recent updates and consolidation of the foundational premises establish five core axioms of S-D logic and outline a pathway for understanding the role of institutions in value cocreation in general, and innovation in particular. This chapter overviews the evolution of S-D logic and its service ecosystems view, which can contribute to the furthering the development of service science and advancing the study of innovation in service systems. Future research directions are proposed.

  • 2.
    Edvardsson, Bo
    et al.
    Karlstad University, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (starting 2013), Service Research Center (from 2013).
    Frow, Pennie
    Discipline of Marketing, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
    Jaakkola, Elina
    Department of Marketing, Turku School of Economics, University of Turku, Turku, Finland.
    Keiningham, Timothy Lee
    Department of Marketing, Peter J. Tobin College of Business, St John’s University, New York, New York, USA and Rockbridge Associates Inc., Great Falls, Virginia, USA.
    Koskela-Huotari, Kaisa
    Karlstad University, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (starting 2013), Service Research Center (from 2013).
    Mele, Cristina
    Department of Economics, Management and Institutions, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.
    Tombs, Alastair
    Business School, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
    Examining how context change foster service innovation2018In: Journal of Service Management, ISSN 1757-5818, E-ISSN 1757-5826, Vol. 29, no 5, p. 932-955Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to explore the role of context in service innovation by developing a conceptual framework that illuminates the key elements and trends in context change.

    Design/methodology/approach – The paper adopts a service ecosystem lens for understanding how elements and trends in context foster service innovation. A conceptual framework identifying the role of context change in fostering service innovation is developed and justified through illustrations across industry settings of health, retailing, banking and education.

    Findings – Context change is conceptualized by three trends – speed, granularity and liquification – that provide an analytical foundation for understanding how changes in the elements of context – space, resources and institutional arrangements – can foster service innovation. The analysis indicates emerging patterns across industries that allow exploring scenarios, grounded in emerging trends and developments in service innovation toward 2050.

    Practical implications – Managers are offered a framework to guide service innovation and help them prepare for the future. The paper also suggests areas for further research.

    Originality/value – The paper contributes with a new conceptualization of context change to identify and explain service innovation opportunities. Managers are offered a framework to guide service innovation and help them prepare for 2050. The paper also suggests areas for further service innovation research, zooming in on contextual changes to prepare for 2050.

  • 3.
    Koskela-Huotari, Kaisa
    Karlstad University, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (starting 2013), Service Research Center (from 2013).
    Dimensions and dynamics of markets as value cocreation solutionsManuscript (preprint) (Other academic)
  • 4.
    Koskela-Huotari, Kaisa
    Karlstad University, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (starting 2013), Service Research Center (from 2013). Karlstad University, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (starting 2013), Karlstad Business School (from 2013).
    The evolution of markets - A service ecosystems perspective2018Doctoral thesis, comprehensive summary (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    This conceptual dissertation aims to build an integrative and transdisciplinary framework of market evolution by reconnecting the study of innovations and markets, with help from the service ecosystems perspective. The service ecosystems perspective offers a processual, systemic, and institutional view on value creation, which is grounded in the axiomatic assumptions of service-dominant (S-D) logic. Hence, the dissertation departs from the premise that value, when perceived, is always cocreated by multiple, institutionally guided actors in service ecosystems through service exchange and the integration of resources. The dissertation extends the conceptualizations of innovations and markets from a service ecosystems perspective, with the help of institutional theory. The resulting transcending conceptualizations are then used to reconcile the paradoxical tensions identified in the conceptualizations of innovations within service research and markets within marketing literature in order to synthesize their substantial contributions into a cohesive framework of market evolution. By connecting insights from five appended papers and the reconciled literatures, the dissertation develops a recursive four-phase process model of market evolution as institutional dynamics of multi-dimensional value cocreation structures. The model explains how innovations as proto-institutional value cocreation structures emerge and how markets as institutionalized value cocreation structures evolve through institutional work carried out by multiple actors aiming to either maintain or disrupt a prevailing market. By beginning to unravel the institutional processes and market shaping strategies contributing to market evolution, the dissertation provides guidance to actors who are interested in markets and their development.

  • 5.
    Koskela-Huotari, Kaisa
    et al.
    Karlstad University, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (starting 2013), Service Research Center. VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland, Oulu, Finland.
    Edvardsson, Bo
    Karlstad University, Faculty of Economic Sciences, Communication and IT, Service Research Center.
    Jonas, Julia
    Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nürnberg, Germany.
    Sörhammar, David
    Uppsala University.
    Witell, Lars
    Karlstad University, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (starting 2013), Service Research Center. Linkoping Univ, SE-58183 Linkoping, Sweden.
    Innovation in service ecosystems - Breaking, making, and maintaining institutionalized rules of resource integration2016In: Journal of Business Research, ISSN 0148-2963, E-ISSN 1873-7978, Vol. 69, no 8, p. 2964-2971Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Drawing on service-dominant logic and institutional theory, this paper examines innovation as a process that unfolds through changes in the institutional arrangements that govern resource integration practices in service ecosystems. Four cases are used to illustrate the interdependent patterns of breaking, making and maintaining the institutionalized rules of resource integration occurring on multiple levels of institutional context. Such institutional work allows actors to cocreate value in novel and useful ways by a) including new actors, b) redefining roles of involved actors and c) reframing resources within service ecosystems. Our findings show that while the efforts of breaking and making the institutionalized rules are required for such changes to occur, at the same time, institutional maintenance is also important for these changes to institutionalize, that is, to become an integral part of the institutional structure coordinating value cocreation.

  • 6.
    Koskela-Huotari, Kaisa
    et al.
    Karlstad University, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (starting 2013), Service Research Center (from 2013). Karlstad University, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (starting 2013), Karlstad Business School (from 2013).
    Edvardsson, Bo
    Karlstad University, Faculty of Economic Sciences, Communication and IT, Service Research Center. Karlstad University, Faculty of Economic Sciences, Communication and IT, The Service and Market Oriented Transport Research Group. Karlstad University, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (starting 2013), Service Research Center (from 2013). Karlstad University, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (starting 2013), Karlstad Business School (from 2013).
    Tronvoll, Bård
    Karlstad University, Faculty of Economic Sciences, Communication and IT, The Service and Market Oriented Transport Research Group. Karlstad University, Faculty of Economic Sciences, Communication and IT, Service Research Center. Karlstad University, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (starting 2013), Service Research Center (from 2013). Karlstad University, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (starting 2013), Karlstad Business School (from 2013).
    Resource integration and the emergence of novel resources2018In: The SAGE Handbook of Service-Dominant Logic / [ed] Vargo, S. L. and Lusch, R. F., London: Sage Publications, 2018, p. 372-387Chapter in book (Refereed)
  • 7.
    Koskela-Huotari, Kaisa
    et al.
    Karlstad University, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (starting 2013), Service Research Center (from 2013).
    Siltaloppi, Jaakko
    Aalto University, Finland.
    Vargo, Stephen L.
    University of Hawaii at Manoa, Hawaii.
    Designing Institutional Complexity to Enable Innovation in Service Ecosystems2016In: Proceeding of Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences 2016 / [ed] Bui, Tung X. and Sprague Jr., Ralph H., IEEE, 2016, p. 1596-1605Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    In this paper we build on a view of change and innovation stemming from institutional complexity in service ecosystems, that is, institutionally enabled and constrained systems of service systems, and give suggestions on how such conditions can be designed to facilitate innovation. We conceptualize service ecosystems as near-decomposable complex systems in which change is enabled through the co-existence of alternative, overlapping and conflicting institutionalized views on problems and solutions, and draw from social network theory to understand how such institutional complexity emerges both between and within actors in service systems. We then connect these theoretical insights with practice and give guidance on how institutional complexity can be created and how opportunities for interaction and collaboration between diverse and conflicting views on problems and solutions can be fostered.

  • 8.
    Koskela-Huotari, Kaisa
    et al.
    Karlstad University, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (starting 2013), Service Research Center.
    Siltaloppi, Jaakko
    Aalto University.
    Vargo, Stephen L.
    University of Hawaii at Manoa.
    Understanding institutional complexity in service ecosystems: insights from social network theory and systems thinking2015In: Service Dominant Logic, Network and Systems Theory and Service Science: Integrating three Perspectives for a New Service Agenda / [ed] Gummesson, E., Mele, C., Polese, F., 2015Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Purpose – The paper aims to synthesize some key insights from social network theory and systems thinking to better understand the existence and dynamics of institutional complexity – the source of institutional change and innovation – in service ecosystems.

    Design/Methodology/approach – This conceptual paper integrates insights from social network theory (e.g., Burt, 1992; Granovetter, 1973) and systems thinking (e.g. Simon, 1996) to elaborate the service ecosystems perspective on institutional complexity and innovation.

    Findings – S-D logic and its service ecosystem perspective (Lusch and Vargo, 2014; Vargo and Akaka, 2012; Vargo et al., 2015) imply that value is created by systems consisting of actors who fundamentally do the same thing: cocreate value by exchanging and integrating resources (Vargo and Lusch, 2011). This view results in a systemic notion of value cocreation that highlights the role of institutions as the ‘glue’ of service ecosystems that both enables and constrains value cocreation (Edvardsson et al., 2014; Vargo and Akaka, 2012). In this paper, we extend the service ecosystems perspective on innovation as institutional change in value cocreation by elaborating the dynamics of institutional complexity – the coexistence and interaction of numerous and partially conflicting institutional arrangements – crucial for agency and change in service ecosystems (Siltaloppi et al., 2014). Building on the notions of ‘weak ties’, ‘structural holes’ and ‘near-decomposability’ as well as the triadic view inherent in them, the paper argues that service ecosystems can be seen as complex systems characterized by near-decomposability. This implies that parts or subsystems of service ecosystem(s) interact with one another with varying frequency and tie ‘strengths’ resulting in inconsistencies and incompatibility of institutional arrangements between the subsystems that causes institutional complexity especially as actors can be simultaneously embedded in several subsystems and their respective institutional arrangements.

    Research implications – The paper highlights the importance of 1) triads as a unit of analysis, 2) complexity in institutional arrangements, actors’ role constellations and mutual interactions, and 3) varying density of interaction between subsystems of service ecosystem for building a better understanding of institutional complexity, change and innovation in service ecosystems.

    Originality/value – This paper is among the first to integrate insights from social network theory and systems thinking to elaborate institutional complexity in service ecosystems.

    Key words – Service ecosystems, Institutions, Innovation, Social Network theory, Systems thinking, Triads

    Paper type – Conceptual paper 

  • 9.
    Koskela-Huotari, Kaisa
    et al.
    Karlstad University, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (starting 2013), Service Research Center. VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland .
    Skålén, Per
    Karlstad University, Faculty of Economic Sciences, Communication and IT, Service Research Center.
    Markets as evolving institutional problem-solution configurations2016In: What's ahead in service research?: New perspectives for business and society / [ed] Russo-Spena, T & Mele, C, Naples: Univ Naples Federico II, Dept Econ Mgmt & Inst , 2016, p. 618-627Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    The purpose of this work-in-progress paper is to further the understanding of how markets function and evolve. We do so by elaborating and extending the recent conceptualization of markets as institutionalized solutions of value cocreation proposed by service-dominant (S-D) logic. To better understand how markets as institutionalized solutions evolve, we draw on literature that connects institutional change to the process of framing. We contribute by theorizing how micro-level changes - i.e. organization-specific differences in framing of e.g. a resource or a role - can become amplified and result in macro-level transformation such as market evolution. We develop a theoretical framework describing how markets as institutionalized solutions evolve as actors use institutional complexity - the existence of multiple institutional arrangements and the corresponding patterns of value cocreation - to create alternative frames to interpret situations and guide individual action and then diffuse the novel frames with the help of different types of frame alignment processes. We also describe how we plan to complement our theoretical inquiry with empirical research that we have recently begun.

  • 10.
    Koskela-Huotari, Kaisa
    et al.
    Karlstad University, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (starting 2013), Service Research Center. VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland, Oulu, Finland,.
    Vargo, Stephen L.
    University of Hawaii at Manoa.
    Institutions as resource context2016In: Journal of service theory and practice, ISSN 2055-6225, E-ISSN 2055-6233, Vol. 26, no 2, p. 163-178Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine the role of institutions and institutional complexity in the process through which resources-in-context get their “resourceness.”

    Design/methodology/approach – To shed light on the process of potential resources gaining their “resourceness,” the authors draw from two streams of literature: the service ecosystems perspective and institutional theory.

    Findings – The authors combine the process of resources “becoming” with the concept of institutions and conceptualize institutional arrangements, and the unique sets of practices, symbols and organizing principles they carry, as the sense-making frames of the “resourceness” of potential resources. In service ecosystems, numerous partially conflicting institutional arrangements co-exit and provide actors with alternative frames of sense-making and action, enabling the emergence of new instances of “resourceness”.

    Research limitations/implications – The paper suggests that “resourceness” is inseparable from the complex institutional context in which it arises. This conceptualization reveals the need for more holistic, systemic and multidisciplinary perspectives on understanding the implications of the process of resources “becoming” on value co creation, innovation and market formation.

    Practical implications – As the “resourceness” of potential resources arises due to the influence of institutions, managers need a more profound understanding of the complimentary and inhibiting institutional arrangements and the related practices, symbols and organizing principles that comprise the multidimensional context in which they operate.

    Originality/value – This paper is one of the first to focus specifically on the process of resources “becoming,” using a systemic and institutional perspective to grasp the complexity of the phenomenon.

    Paper type Conceptual paper 

  • 11.
    Koskela-Huotari, Kaisa
    et al.
    Karlstad University, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (starting 2013), Service Research Center (from 2013). Karlstad University, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (starting 2013), Karlstad Business School (from 2013).
    Vargo, Stephen L.
    Shidler College of BusinessUniversity of Hawai’i at Mānoa.
    Why Service-Dominant Logic?2018In: The SAGE Handbook of Service-Dominant Logic / [ed] Vargo, S. L. and Lusch, R. F., London: Sage Publications, 2018, p. 40-57Chapter in book (Refereed)
  • 12.
    Koskela-Huotari, Kaisa
    et al.
    Karlstad University, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (starting 2013), Service Research Center.
    Wieland, Heiko
    California State University, Monterey Bay.
    The role of institutions and interpretive flexibility in the perception and determination of value2015Conference paper (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    ABSTRACT

    Purpose – We investigate the tension between unique and collective value perceptions using an institutional perspective. In particular, we aim to provide a deeper understanding of value evaluation processes and point to the systemic nature of these processes by conceptually integrating the notions of interpretive flexibility and institutional work into a service ecosystems framework. 

    Design/Methodology/approach – The paper, based on recent developments in S-D logic, conceptually revisits the topic of value perceptions. More specifically, it draws on a service ecosystems framework and its inherent institutional view (Lusch and Vargo, 2014; Vargo and Akaka, 2012; Vargo and Lusch, 2011; Vargo et al. 2014), and the concepts of interpretive flexibility (Pinch, 2008; Pinch and Bijker, 1984) and institutional work (Lawrence and Suddaby, 2006; Lawrence et al., 2009) to provide a deeper understanding of determining value-in-context. 

    Findings – Service-dominant (S-D) logic describes value perceptions as contextual and phenomenologically determined (Chandler and Vargo, 2011; Vargo and Lusch, 2008). At the same time, value perceptions are neither random nor unstructured (Lusch and Vargo, 2014). Culture, for example, can greatly influence how value is perceived. More specifically, institutional configurations – socially constructed systems of norms, values, and beliefs – guide the evaluation of value outcomes in the same way that they enable and constrain the process of value co-creation (c.f. Edvardsson et al. 2011; Lusch and Vargo, 2014; Vargo et al. 2014). By integrating the concepts of interpretive flexibility and institutional work into the service ecosystem framework, we not only show how institutional configurations influence value perceptions, but how multiple actors co-create institutions that influence value perceptions through multiple iterations of institutional developments until common institutional templates become diffused. 

    Research implications – This paper highlights the importance of developing a more systemic and institutional understanding of the perception and determination of value. 

    Practical implications – The systemic view adopted in this paper points to the notion that nested contradictions and inconsistencies are foundational to all institutional configurations and, thus, to value perceptions. We will show that actors resolve these contradictions and inconsistencies through systemic and discursive processes, which means that market communication needs to be reconceptualized from unidirectional communication flows directed at customers to the co-creation of narrative infrastructures. 

    Originality/value – This paper is among the first to explicitly connect the notions of institutional work and interpretive flexibility with value perceptions and their change overtime.

    Key words – Value-in-context, Value evaluation, Institutions, Service ecosystems, Interpretive flexibility 

    Paper type – Conceptual paper

  • 13.
    Siltaloppi, Jaakko
    et al.
    Aalto University School of Science.
    Koskela-Huotari, Kaisa
    Karlstad University, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (starting 2013), Service Research Center (from 2013).
    Vargo, Stephen L.
    University of Hawai’i at Manoa.
    Institutional Complexity as a Driver for Innovation in Service Ecosystems2016In: Service Science, ISSN 2164-3962, E-ISSN 2164-3970, Vol. 8, no 3, p. 333-343Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This paper extends research on innovation as institutional change within service science and service-dominant (S-D) logic by conceptualizing the emergence of novel solutions in service ecosystems. We pay particular attention to how actors (individuals and organizations) are able to create new solutions that change the very institutional arrangements that guide and constrain them. We propose that institutional complexity—the multiplicity of institutional arrangements confronting actors with conflicting prescriptions for action—drives the emergence of novelty. Institutional complexity reduces the influence of prevailing institutions by activating conscious problem solving and making available multiple institutional “toolkits.” These dynamic toolkits consist of the cultural norms and meanings, as well as material practices, associated with specific institutional arrangements, with which actors can jointly reconstruct and change value cocreation practices and advance change in the institutional arrangements of service ecosystems. This paper contributes to service science and S-D logic by providing a more comprehensive understanding of innovation driven by institutional complexity, in which the stability of institutional arrangements is reconciled with the actor-driven creation of novel solutions constitutive of institutional change. 

  • 14.
    Vargo, Stephen L.
    et al.
    Shidler College of Business, University of Hawai'i at Manoa, USA.
    Koskela-Huotari, Kaisa
    Karlstad University, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (starting 2013), Service Research Center (from 2013).
    Baron, Steve
    University of Liverpool Management School, United Kingdom.
    Edvardsson, Bo
    Karlstad University, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (starting 2013), Service Research Center (from 2013).
    Reynoso, Javier
    Tecnologico de Monterrey, EGADE Business School, Mexico.
    Colurcio, Maria
    University of Catanzaro Magna Graecia, Italy.
    A systems perspective on markets – Toward a research agenda2017In: Journal of Business Research, ISSN 0148-2963, E-ISSN 1873-7978, Vol. 79, p. 260-268Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This paper addresses the implications of an emerging, increasingly important way of thinking about markets: systems thinking. A market is one of the most foundational abstractions in marketing and business research; yet, it often receives too little attention. As a result, the taken-for-granted assumptions about markets spur from over-simplified conceptualizations of neoclassical economics that depict markets as static and mechanistic. Systems thinking represents a major change in perspective that involves transcending this mechanistic worldview and thinking instead in terms of wholes, relationships, processes, and patterns. We argue that building a theory of markets based on systems thinking, would enable scholars to develop more realistic models that correspond with fast-changing business environment and therefore, increase both the rigor and relevance of future research. To further this aim, we identify the main implications of systems thinking and formulate them into a research agenda to further the systemic understanding of markets. 

  • 15.
    Wieland, Heiko
    et al.
    California State University, USA.
    Koskela-Huotari, Kaisa
    Karlstad University, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (starting 2013), Service Research Center.
    Vargo, Stephen L.
    Univ Hawaii Manoa, USA.
    Extending actor participation in value creation: An institutional view2016In: Journal of Strategic Marketing, ISSN 0965-254X, E-ISSN 1466-4488, Vol. 24, no 3-4, p. 210-226Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This article explores how seemingly distinct actors contribute to value creation and evaluation in a fundamentally similar way. It shows that the division of actors into dichotomies such as producers€™ and €˜consumers, ˜paying€™ and non-paying€™ customers, and adopters and non-adopters, is based on narrow, unidirectional, transactional, and dyadic views on value creation and delivery. The article highlights the limitations of these views and draws on a service ecosystems perspective and its broader notion of co-created and contextual value to overcome these limitations. More specifically, the article, by connecting two frameworks (markets-as-practice and institutional work), extends a generic actor-to-actor conceptualization of value creation, in showing that all economic and social actors participate in value creation in a fundamentally similar way. That is, they enact value co-creation practices and simultaneously shape these practices by creating, maintaining and disrupting the institutions that guide their (re)enactment. Thus, the article proposes a unified view on actors’ participation in value creation that not only points to the involvement of broader actor categories in value creation and market formation processes, but also provides important strategic implications in the form of a research agenda.

1 - 15 of 15
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf