Zooming out: actor engagement beyond the dyadic

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

There is a lack of research addressing how actors maintain balance between multiple engagement objects.

“Lack of research addressing how actors maintain balance between multiple engagement objects.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based). May combine two claims.

Engagement research to date has been largely conceptual or focused around dyadic settings at the micro level.

“As Table 1 illustrates, engagement research to date, has been largely conceptual or focused around dyadic settings (micro level).”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

There is a lack of research exploring how engagement transitions across multiple engagement objects.

“Lack of research exploring how engagement transitions across multiple engagement objects.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

There is a lack of research addressing the broader category or industrial context of the engagement object.

“Lack of research addressing the broader category or industrial context of the engagement object.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based). May combine two claims.

Given the predominant micro-level focus of extant engagement research, institutional contexts, as well as the existence of multiple, parallel engagement contexts, have not yet been addressed.

“This analysis suggests that given the predominant micro level focus of extant engagement research, institutional contexts - as well as the existence of multiple, parallel engagement contexts - have not yet been addressed.”

May combine two claims.

The creation of a macro-level system precipitates a downward influence on lower (meso and macro) levels over time and varies with each particular context.

“Crucially, the creation of a macrolevel system is precipitates a downward influence on lower (meso and macro) levels over time and varies with each particular context (Lusch & Vargo, 2014).”

• cites Lusch & Vargo, 2014Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

An assessment of the extent to which others engage in a specific behavior plays an important role in an individual actor's decision-making process.

“Lapinski and Rimal (2005) note that an assessment of the extent to which others engage in a specific behavior plays an important role in an individual actor's decision-making process.”

• cites Lapinski and Rimal (2005)Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

Engagement is increasingly recognized as an important mid-range concept bridging the empirical domain of knowledge with the meta-theoretical lens of Service-Dominant Logic.

“engagement is increasingly recognized as an important mid-range concept bridging the empirical domain of knowledge with the meta-theoretical lens of Service-Dominant Logic (S-D Logic; Vargo & Lusch, 2017; Brodie et al ., 2011b).”

• cites Vargo & Lusch, 2017Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

• cites Brodie et al., 2011bNot checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

One cannot fully understand activity at one level without viewing it from another.

“Based on Vargo and Lusch's (2017, p. 13) observation that 'one cannot fully understand the activity at one level without viewing it from another,'”

• cites Vargo and Lusch's (2017, p. 13)Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

May combine two claims.

Institutions potentially more relevant for AEB are specific to the meso-level (e.g. brand community), while broader macro-level institutions include rules and norms such as legislation and cultural practices.

“institutions potentially more relevant for AEB are specific to the meso-level (e.g. brand community), while broader macro-level institutions include rules and norms, such as legislation and cultural practices (cf. Vargo & Lusch, 2016).”

• cites Vargo & Lusch, 2016Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

May combine two claims.

Actor engagement behaviors can be positively or negatively valenced, potentially diminishing other actors' engagement.

“This influence may be positively valenced (e.g. through the focal actor making favorable object-related investments), or negatively valenced (e.g. with the focal actor making undesirable brand-related investment, e.g. by expressing negative word of mouth; Bowden et al ., 2017; Hollebeek & Chen, 2014), potentially diminishing other actors' engagement (Naum”

• cites Bowden et al., 2017Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

• cites Hollebeek & Chen, 2014Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

• cites Naumann et al., 2017Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

May combine two claims.

Micro-level interactions give rise to a meso-system which, in turn, creates a broader macro-level structure.

“Micro-level interactions give rise to a meso-system which, in turn creates a broader macro-level structure (Lusch and Vargo, 2014).”

• cites Lusch and Vargo, 2014Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

The micro view focuses on the dyadic relationship between the individual actor and the engagement object.

“In sum, the micro view focuses on the dyadic relationship between the individual actor and the engagement object.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

Values and norms embedded in diverse engagement contexts can affect actor groups' needs and motivations.

“Firms need to understand the values and norms embedded in diverse engagement contexts which can affect actor groups' needs and motivations.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

Broadening the scope of engagement research from customers to actors, from dyads to networks, and from micro to meso or macro levels of aggregation is increasingly called for.

“Indeed, broadening the scope of engagement research from customers to the broader notion of actors; from dyads to networks; and from micro to meso, or macro, level of aggregation is increasingly called for (e.g. Brodie et al ., 2016; Storbacka et al., 2016; Breidbach & Brodie, 2017; Li et al ., 2017).”

• cites Brodie et al., 2016Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

• cites Storbacka et al., 2016Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

• cites Breidbach & Brodie, 2017Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S4 (based).

The four broad categories of customer engagement behaviors are likely to have applicability to the broader actor engagement context.

“These broad categories are also likely to have applicability to the broader actor engagement context;”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

Conforming to a specific social norm is often deemed the most appropriate course of action and serves as a form of decision-making heuristic.

“Conforming to a specific social norm is often deemed the most appropriate course of action and serves as a form of decision-making heuristic (Lapinski & Rimal, 2005).”

• cites Lapinski & Rimal, 2005Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

May combine two claims.

Group membership is a key determinant of behavior, with individuals acting in accordance with a frame of reference produced by the groups to which they belong.

“In social science, group membership is recognized as a key determinant of behavior with individuals acting 'in accordance with a frame of reference produced by the groups to which they belong' (Bearden & Etzel, 1982).”

• cites Bearden & Etzel, 1982Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Social norms affecting an individual can be classified into collective norms, injunctive norms, and descriptive norms.

“Lapinski and Rimal (2005) refer to different levels of social norms (i.e. institutions) that affect an individual.”

• cites Lapinski and Rimal (2005)Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

The influence of social norms is stronger when there is ego-involvement, a motivational state induced by an association between an activated attitude and some aspect of the self.

“and when there is ego-involvement , a motivational state induced by an association between an activated attitude and some aspect of the self.”

• cites Lapinski and Rimal (2005)Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

Previous engagement research defines customer engagement as resource contributions.

“Previous engagement research defines customer engagement as ' resource contributions ' as is apparent in the following definitions:”

• cites Jaakkola & Alexander 2014Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

• cites Harmeling et al., 2016Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

• cites Hollebeek et al. 2016Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

Actor engagement behaviors and actor disengagement behaviors co-evolve with their surrounding service ecosystem and its associated sub-structures, including focal institutions and institutional arrangements.

“and their co-evolution with their surrounding service ecosystem and its associated sub-structures, including focal institutions and institutional arrangements.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Ecosystems encompass other smaller ecosystems, giving a nested view.

“Ecosystems thus encompass other (smaller) ecosystems, giving a 'nested' view (Klijn, 1994).”

• cites Klijn, 1994Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable). May combine two claims.

Actor engagement behaviors and actor disengagement behaviors are dynamic and inherently systemic in nature.

“By zooming out, researchers can highlight the dynamic, inherently systemic nature of AEBs and ADB”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

Engagement behaviors are influenced by, and can influence, networks of actors and wider institutions.

“The confluence of S-D Logic and AEB indicates how engagement behaviors are influenced but, crucially, can influence, networks of actors and wider institutions.”

May combine two claims.

Institutional arrangements not only shape, but are also shaped by, actors' activities.

“Institutional arrangements, consequently, not only shape, but are also shaped by, actors' activities.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

When actors engage with multiple institutions simultaneously, they face demands, requirements and responsibilities deriving from the institutions and institutional arrangements particular to each context.

“When actors engage with multiple institutions simultaneously, they face demands, requirements and responsibilities deriving from the institutions and institutional arrangements particular to each context.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based). May combine two claims.

Customers transition in and out of focal engagement contexts, or shift resources from one context to another.

“This research also highlights the value of considering engagement behaviors as a finite or temporal resource with customers transitioning in and out of focal engagement contexts, or shifting resources from one context to another.”

May combine two claims.

Applying structuration theory to engagement research acknowledges that interdependency (duality) exists between structure and agency: while structure, to some extent, governs actor behavior, individuals' actions not only are enforcing, but also changing the structure.

“Applying structuration theory to engagement research acknowledges that interdependency (duality) exists between structure and agency: While structure, to some extent, governs actor behavior, individuals' actions not only are enforcing, but also changing the structure (Battilana et al. 2009; Vargo & Lusch 2016).”

• cites Battilana et al. 2009Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

• cites Vargo & Lusch 2016Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

The service ecosystem definition highlights the important role of institutions and institutional arrangements.

“The service ecosystem definition above highlights the important role of institutions and institutional arrangements.”

May combine two claims.

While AEB are dictated by their institutional context, the behaviors themselves can work upwards and influence both meso- and macro-levels of the ecosystem.

“For while AEB are dictated by their institutional context, the behaviors themselves can work upwards and influence both mesoand macro-levels of the ecosystem.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

As each actor is simultaneously occupying multiple engagement contexts, they are in the intersections of multiple institutional arrangements.

“As each actor is simultaneously occupying multiple engagement contexts, they are in the intersections of multiple institutional arrangements.”

May combine two claims.

An individual actor's engagement behavior, as a form of institutional work, either reinforces or maintains the institution or enforces institutional change through disruption.

“Put in an engagement context, an individual actor's engagement behavior, as a form of institutional work, either reinforces or maintains the institution or enforces institutional change through disruption (cf. Battilana et al ., 2009; Koskela-Huotari et al ., 2016)”

• cites Battilana et al., 2009Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

• cites Koskela-Huotari et al., 2016Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

Actors are often forced to inhabit and balance the demands of multiple engagement contexts, resulting in tensions through reference groups or role conflict.

“Finally, this paper is among the first to recognize that actors are often forced to inhabit and balance the demands of multiple engagement contexts, resulting in such tensions through reference groups or role conflict.”

May combine two claims.

Extant research has generated both conceptual and empirical insight into customer engagement as an actor's psychological state and its behavioral manifestations, focusing almost exclusively on consumers.

“Thus far, extant research has generated both conceptual and empirical insight into customer engagement as an actor's psychological state, as well as its behavioral manifestations, focusing almost exclusively on consumers (see Table 1).”

• cites Table 1Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

May combine two claims.

For S-D Logic, the service ecosystem is the principal unit of analysis and offers a suitable lens for developing a broader understanding of actor engagement.

“For S-D Logic, the service eco-system is the principal unit of analysis (Vargo & Lusch, 2017) and offers a suitable lens for developing a broader understanding on actor engagement as it allows its embedded and interconnected nature as well as underlying structures to emerge.”

• cites Vargo & Lusch, 2017Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based). May combine two claims.

A service ecosystem approach informed by structuration suggests that the formation of ecosystems is both a bottom up (micro configurations coalesce into meso-level, and so on) but also, top down (macro-level 'terms of engagement' affect the meso- and micro-levels).

“A service ecosystem approach informed by structuration suggests that the formation of ecosystems is both a bottom up (micro configurations coalesce into meso-level, and so on) but also, top down (macro-level 'terms of engagement' affect the meso- and micro-levels).”