Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 884

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 14 of the 14 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Theory of value co-creation: a systematic literature review

Galvagno, Marco, Dalli, Daniele·2014·Managing Service Quality

Abstract

Purpose: – The purpose of this paper is to summarize and classify extant research and to better understand the past, present, and future state of the theory of value co-creation. Its main objectives are: to identify the different theoretical perspectives and research streams that characterize and define the co-creation literature, and to highlight the connections between them; to look for emerging trends and gaps in the literature by comparing the most recent papers with those representing the field's core. Design/methodology/approach: – The paper relies on bibliometric data: co-citation techniques were employed to select, analyze, and interpret citation patterns within the co-creation literature. Findings: – The paper identified two main clusters, as well as specific research streams and common themes, representing scholarly journals’ publications on co-creation over the past years. These research streams and themes apply three different theoretical perspectives: service science, innovation and technology management, and marketing and consumer research. Data from the most recent publications has been used to verify if and how the original streams and themes are reflected in the contemporary debate. Research limitations/implications: – Inevitably, the findings of the analysis have limitations related to the research design, the databases, and the applied bibliometric methods. Practical implications: – From a practical perspective, the research impacts on theory building, management decision making, and teaching. Originality/value: – This study depicts the remarkable development of the literature on co-creation and shows the latent structure underlying its different research streams. To the best knowledge, this study is the first to determine co-citation frequencies from both the SSCI and Scopus databases.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1108/msq-09-2013-0187

Cites

14 of 14 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 14 references

Cited by

See all 884

Metadata

Authors
Galvagno, M., & Dalli, D.
Venue
Managing Service Quality
Publisher
Emerald
Published
2014-11-04
Volume
24
Issue
6
Pages
643-683
ISSN
0960-4529 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2041178121
Cited by
884
References
14
FWCI
22.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Theory of value co-creation: a systematic literature review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1108/msq-09-2013-0187
The paper
Galvagno, M., & Dalli, D. (2014). Theory of value co-creation: a systematic literature review. Managing Service Quality. https://doi.org/10.1108/msq-09-2013-0187

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.