Search results

An important task for all strategy leaders contemplating the use of co-creation is to determine how well the numerous co-creation project-design choices available to them align with their strategic priorities.

In order to implement co-creation, firms need to assess how their projects or initiatives support their strategic commitments and priorities. To this end, the authors offer managers a practical, easy-to-use assessment framework.

Executives should consider their approach to co-creation in terms of crafting and managing a portfolio of initiatives to be categorized and managed differently according to their strategic significance – high, medium or low.

A six-question assessment framework was inductively derived from an extensive literature review (113 articles) focusing on practices associated with co-creation and stakeholder involvement. Though they do not represent an exhaustive list of categories for assessment, they do, however, identify strategically important choices involved in designing co-creation ventures.

The six-question assessment framework is applied to the case of the Xerox-P&G co-innovation partnership, which illustrates how such significant co-creation initiatives might be profiled, and their main design choices analyzed.

The purpose of this paper is to make a contribution to co‐creation theory by integrating conceptual insights from the management and marketing literatures that are both concerned with co‐creation phenomena. It aims to develop a reference model for comparing how different organizations organize and manage their co‐creation ventures. It also aims to apply the authors' framework to four distinct cases that illustrate the differences in co‐creation practice within different co‐creation environments.

The authors compare four different companies based on case profiles. Each company is employing its own distinct approach to co‐creating. The authors employ a method mix including literature analysis, structured interviews, document and web site analysis, as well as participation.

The reference model offers a set of useful dimensions for case‐based inquiry. The case comparisons show how firms may decide to systematise and manage a mix of co‐creation activities within B2B versus B2C contexts, utilising either crowd‐sourced or non‐crowd‐sourced approaches. Further, the case comparisons suggest that there are less differences in B2B versus B2C co‐creation as compared with crowd‐sourced versus non‐crowd‐sourced approaches. Ultimately, implementation decisions in one dimension of co‐creation design (e.g. whom to involve in co‐creation) will affect other dimensions of implementation and governance (e.g. how much intimacy) and thus how co‐creation needs to be managed.

The paper presents case comparisons utilising B2B versus B2C, as well as crowd versus non‐crowd‐sourcing examples of co‐creation and an original decision support framework for assessing and comparing co‐creation choices.

This case study of a fashion-design company aims to show how a co-creation initiative produces competitive advantage by nurturing creativity, expanding the company’s innovation capabilities and enabling it to engage with both taste-making customers and designers from anywhere in the world.

In 2009, Fronteer Strategy, a Netherlands-based market-analysis firm published a conceptual framework for identifying specifically how a firm’s processes and initiatives employ co-creation. This case looks at how this theoretical framework compares with the actual complexities of the co-creation process developed by Own Label.

Own Label’s co-creation approach is a hybrid model that utilizes more than one type of co-creation across its fashion-design process.

What makes co-creation in design-intensive industries a disruptive approach is the democratization of the process by which design choices are made.

Own Label is utilizing its hybrid models of co-creation in order to strategically position its self in niche markets, adapt faster to trends, as well as to be a design leader.

The purpose of this paper is to develop and validate a scale for measuring a customer’s perception of customer relationship management (CRM) initiatives of a bank. Based upon resource-based view, CRM technology capability has been conceptualized as a multidimensional construct comprising of technology, people and business resource (process). This study aims to develop a comprehensive scale for performance measurement of CRM technology capability, customer orientation and co-creation from the customer perspective.

A systematic scale development process was adopted consisting of three phases, a qualitative inquiry which included item generation through literature review, expert opinion and focus group study, scale purification and refinement using item analysis and exploratory factor analysis, and scale validation using confirmatory factor analysis. The study sample consisted of 324 respondents, with a usable response rate of 68 percent.

The findings of the empirical study resulted in a 42-item scale that measures CRM technology capability (technology, people and process), customer orientation, co-creation and relationship quality and outcome (RQO) (satisfaction, trust, commitment and loyalty). The predictive validity assessment model suggested that CRM technology capability has a higher impact on RQO. The empirical findings also suggest that technology is found to be the most important factor compared to people and process for CRM technology capability. The findings are aligned with literature review and expert opinion that the evolving collaborative-technologies-enabled CRM technology capability has changed the customer relationship paradigm.

The study focused on a scale specific to the banking sector to avoid conjoint factors, whereas a more generalized scale would have wider applicability across industries. The current study sought to broaden the coverage by including a large number of banks who have implemented CRM.

This reliable and valid scale can help practitioners in measuring the effectiveness of their CRM implementation from the customer’s perspective, and provide insights that will help them in bridging the gap between their intended objective and actual implementation. They can also use this study to measure pre- and post-CRM implementation to see the effectiveness. This study also provides relevance of customer orientation and offers insight about co-creation which has taken the center stage because of the emergence of collaborative technologies.

This will help in measuring perception of the customer which is an important stakeholder in the engagement. This can help organizations in proactively taking care of customer’s rights and measuring the level of satisfaction proactively, which has become a regulatory requirement in many economies.

This study is possibly one of the first to develop a psychometrically valid scale to measure the customer’s perception of CRM using direct measures. The findings provide insight into the factors that contribute to the effectiveness of CRM practices in the banking sector. This study demonstrates that CRM technology capability, customer orientation and co-creation play a very critical role.

Disruptive innovations have the potential to fundamentally change how businesses operate. This study aims to propose a five-step framework to help firms develop disruptive innovations and to offer a scale for evaluating their disruptive potential. This scale can also be applied to identify the disruptive potential of innovations introduced to the market by competitors.

The framework was designed on the basis of criteria chosen to identify the disruptive potential of innovations at early stages of development based on a theoretical understanding of disruptive innovation, its challenges and holistic consideration of innovation as a dynamic process. It consists of steps that could serve as a reference model during the process of developing innovations with disruptive potential. A case study is discussed in detail to demonstrate the applicability of the framework.

A simple yet comprehensive assessment framework for disruptive innovation has been developed, which can help develop innovations with disruptive potential in existing settings of incumbent firm. A case study of the Wii demonstrates that Nintendo could have planned its disruptive product using the proposed framework.

Most research works in this area have focused on difficulties experienced by firms facing disruption and failed to highlight its opportunities; this study argues that firms can intentionally create disruptive innovations. The results of this study offer firms a tool that facilitates a proactive approach, helping develop new disruptive innovations and identify those from competitors.

Adopting a qualitative research design and following a single case study research methodology 21 semi-structured interviews with asset integrity project managers (PM), project sponsors (PS) and members of the project management office (PMO) were conducted. These were complemented with company’s project management framework documents and tools and direct observation by the researcher’s observation.

The data on the value creation in the mining asset integrity and improvement project portfolio was collected through 21 interviews with PM, PS and members of the PMO and complemented by observational data and the analysis of the Australian mining company process documentation.

The study finds that establishing a culture of delivering value supported by functional governance is critical for effective value creation practice in asset integrity and improvement project portfolios. In addition, early engagement of the key stakeholders with clearly defined roles and utilisation of project value management artifacts, enables effective value delivery throughout the project lifecycle.

The research offers an empirically grounded framework to facilitate value creation throughout the project lifecycle in asset integrity and improvement project portfolios drawing on a benchmarking case of an Australian mining company.

Drawing on the service-dominant logic and the institutional theory, this paper aims to explore the value-creating mechanisms of branding in the destination context and the brand co-creation process at and between different levels of a service ecosystem.

An exploratory research design was used to generate qualitative data from 18 in-depth interviews with important stakeholders and investigate how and why brand co-creation is fostered in the service ecosystem.

The study proposes a stepwise process of strategic imperatives for brand co-creation in the destination context. It presents the multi-directional flows of the brand meaning across levels of the tourism ecosystem and thereby interprets stakeholders’ efforts to co-create sustainable brands that gain prominence in the global tourism arena.

Future research might validate the framework in a quantitative research setting. The extended analysis of the value-creating ecosystem could investigate the role of institutions and brand value propositions across levels.

Acknowledging their limited control over the brand co-creation process, tourism practitioners are offered step-by-step guidance to help shape a destination brand that may retain relevance in the tourists’ minds. Critical insights are provided into resource sharing between actors and subsequent responsibilities for a sustainable destination branding strategy.

The paper considers the significance of the various levels in the ecosystem and the underlying mechanisms of brand co-creation in a somewhat neglected branding domain.