The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Co-creation and co-destruction: A practice-theory based study of interactive value formation
Open accessAbstract
Drawing on an empirical study of public transport, this paper studies interactive value formation at the provider—customer interface, from a practice—theory perspective. In contrast to the bulk of previous research, it argues that interactive value formation is not only associated with value co-creation but also with value co-destruction. In addition, the paper also identifies five interaction value practices — informing, greeting, delivering, charging, and helping — and theorizes how interactive value formation takes place as well as how value is intersubjectively assessed by actors at the provider—customer interface. Furthermore, the paper also distinguishes between four types of interactive value formation praxis corresponding with four subject positions which practitioners step into when engaging in interactive value formation.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Evolving to a New Dominant Logic for Marketing
Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2004) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1509/jmkg.68.1.1.24036 · Cited by 14,779
Service-dominant logic: continuing the evolution
Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2008) · Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science · doi:10.1007/s11747-007-0069-6 · Cited by 7,824
Sociomaterial practices: exploring technology at work
Orlikowski, W. J. (2007) · Organization Studies · doi:10.1177/0170840607081138 · Cited by 3,248
How Brand Community Practices Create Value
Schau, H. J., Muñiz, A. M., & Arnould, E. J. (2009) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1509/jmkg.73.5.30 · Cited by 2,444
Bagozzi, R. P. (1975) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.2307/1250593 · Cited by 1,648
Cited by
Service research priorities in a rapidly changing context
Ostrom, A. L., Parasuraman, A., Bowen, D. E., Patrício, L., & Voss, C. A. (2015) · Journal of Service Research · doi:10.1177/1094670515576315 · Cited by 1,469
Customer dominant value formation in service
Heinonen, K., Strandvik, T., & Voima, P. (2013) · European Business Review · doi:10.1108/09555341311302639 · Cited by 353
Customer-to-customer co-creation practices in tourism: Lessons from Customer-Dominant logic
Rihova, I., Buhalis, D., Gouthro, M. B., & Moital, M. (2018) · Tourism Management · doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2018.02.010 · Cited by 287
Zooming out: actor engagement beyond the dyadic
Alexander, M. J., Jaakkola, E., & Hollebeek, L. D. (2018) · Journal of Service Management · doi:10.1108/josm-08-2016-0237 · Cited by 259
Business model innovation and value-creation: the triadic way
Andreassen, T. W., Lervik-Olsen, L., Snyder, H., Van Riel, A. C. R., Sweeney, J. C., & Van Vaerenbergh, Y. (2018) · Journal of Service Management · doi:10.1108/josm-05-2018-0125 · Cited by 160
Metadata
- Authors
- Echeverri, P., & Skålén, P.
- Venue
- Marketing Theory
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2011-09
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 351-373
- ISSN
- 1470-5931 (ISSN-L)
- 1741-301X
- OpenAlex
- W2098408912
- Cited by
- 895
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 72.69
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
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.