Cited by 6AI in Service InteractionsService and Product InnovationRobotic Process Automation Applications

GenAI-Infused Service Delivery: Micro-Level Augmentation Patterns at the Service Frontline

Open access
Reinhard, Philipp, Li, Mahei Manhai, Peters, Christoph, Janson, Andreas, Leimeister, Jan Marco·2026·Journal of Service Research

Abstract

The infusion of generative AI (GenAI) is already disrupting established services. This technology’s generative and agentic nature challenges the design and management of service routines, which have been previously handled primarily by frontline service employees. Guided by organizational routines theory, our longitudinal study (2020–2024) examines how the infusion of GenAI changes routines in customer support services. We gathered interview data from 41 employees, managers, and AI experts in two phases, pre- and post-GenAI . Based on the analysis of the qualitative data, we revealed seven recurring micro-level augmentation patterns, illustrating how GenAI-infused service routines function. The results show that GenAI is primarily embedded in the backstage of knowledge-intensive services, from which it then permeates the frontstage. We contribute to the literature on hybrid human–AI service delivery by identifying augmentation patterns and conceptualizing service permeation via two mechanisms: (1) simultaneous service permeation , which unfolds as employees leverage GenAI in real-time and integrate GenAI’s responses, recommendations, and adaptations into the frontstage; (2) sequential service permeation , which emerges as employees perform new routines of documentation and AI feeding to facilitate GenAI’s adaptability in frontstage and backstage operations. The MAPs and service permeation mechanisms guide practitioners in integrating GenAI into service routines and managing novel employee-GenAI collaborations.

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 · 10.1177/10946705251414283

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Authors
Reinhard, P., Li, M. M., Peters, C., Janson, A., & Leimeister, J. M.
Affiliations
  • University of Kassel (DE)
  • Universität der Bundeswehr München (DE)
  • University of St.Gallen (CH)
Corresponding author
Reinhard, Philipp
Venue
Journal of Service Research
Published
2026-03-02
ISSN
  • 1094-6705 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-7379
OpenAlex
W7133333066
Cited by
6
References
8
Citations by year
2026: 6
FWCI
20.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Service Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Alexandria (UniSG) (University of St.Gallen) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (02K18D060)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI in Service Interactions
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Service and Product Innovation
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering › Robotic Process Automation Applications
Keywords
generative AI, customer support services, frontline service employees, knowledge-intensive services

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