Unmanned, not unmanaged: phygital service design for enhanced retail experience and well-being

Retail’s automation wave has accelerated the spread of unmanned, phygital stores that fuse digital layers with physical places (Grewal et al., 2020; Kopalle et al., 2024; Mende and Noble, 2019; Varma et al., 2024; Benoit et al., 2024). To understand this shift, this study situates itself within the emerging Phygital Service Research (PSR) paradigm (Batat, 2025). PSR extends Foundational Service Research (FSR) and Transformative Service Research (TSR) by offering a Human-First Logic (HFL) for designing experiences within hybrid physical-digital ecosystems (Batat, 2025; Heinonen, 2025). Unlike earlier omnichannel frameworks that focus on seamless transitions (Verhoef et al., 2015; De Keyser et al., 2015), PSR views the store not merely as a channel, but as a holistic ecosystem where value is poly-created by multiple actors (customers, algorithms, remote staff) through phygital phenomenology, specifically hybrid embodiment, contextual fluidity and multidimensional entanglement (Batat, 2025; Mele and Russo-Spena, 2022; Pusceddu et al., 2023). This perspective keeps the servicescape and its social cues center stage, as physical ambience, legibility and perceived guardianship continue to shape behavior and affect even when staff are absent (Bitner, 1992; Bolton et al., 2018).

Within these environments, shoppers increasingly undertake tasks previously handled by staff: access, scanning, payment, troubleshooting and stewardship of shared space. This role is conceptualized as the customer-as-worker, a form of directed self-production where execution is delegated to the consumer by design (Dujarier, 2014; Picot-Coupey and Tahar, 2015). However, distinct from trained “partial employees” or “coproducers” who are often supervised (Bendapudi and Leone, 2003; Dong, 2015; Manolis et al., 2001; Tat Keh and Wei Teo, 2001), the competence to perform this work is not given; it must be socially constructed and recognized by the firm (Bonnemaizon and Batat, 2011). As noted in Service-Dominant Logic (SDL), customers are resource integrators who must apply operant resources (skills, knowledge) to the firm’s operand resources (systems) to create value-in-use (Vargo and Lusch, 2004, 2008; Lusch and Vargo, 2006). When this recognition fails, customers face competence shocks, raising critical questions about trust, autonomy and inclusion in staff-light settings (Bonnemaizon and Batat, 2011; De Keyser et al., 2015). From a PSR perspective, these shocks represent a failure of human-first design, where technology mediation compromises experiential authenticity and well-being.

Despite substantial work on Self-Service Technology (SST) and customer participation, existing research lacks a clear account of how this delegation functions when human supervision is removed entirely. Traditional SST frameworks typically focus on task efficiency, convenience and interface satisfaction (Meuter et al., 2000; Collier and Kimes, 2013), reflecting an FSR transactional logic. However, they fail to address the commons problems, such as diffused responsibility and deviance, that arise when customers must act as stewards of a shared physical space (Ostrom, 1990; Hardin, 1968). Theoretically, SST assumes service recovery is available; yet, PSR reveals that in unmanned phygital settings, recovery must be proactively designed via human connectors and governance mechanisms. Furthermore, unlike passive kiosks (e.g. ATMs), unmanned stores function with AI agency and surveillance, creating an “uncanny” dynamic closer to service robot interaction than traditional self-service, which fundamentally alters perceived risk and trust (Mende and Noble, 2019; Kopalle et al., 2024; Kozinets and Gretzel, 2021; Huang and Rust, 2018; Guo et al., 2020).

Effective stewardship requires a sense of psychological ownership, yet current automated designs often fail to foster this connection (Peck et al., 2021; Fombelle et al., 2020). To bridge this gap, unmanned formats are reconceptualized as phygital organizations that must balance autonomy with assurance. It is proposed that trust-by-design (e.g. assistive transparency, predictive help) and human-digital synergy (e.g. remote concierge) are preconditions for viability (Batat, 2025; Jacob et al., 2023). While convenience drives initial adoption, research indicates that recovery options, specifically the ability to reach a human during failure, are the primary drivers of sustained use and well-being (Collier et al., 2017; De Keyser et al., 2015). Aligning with PSR’s transformative goals, this study operationalizes well-being into specific dimensions: perceived competence (ability to complete tasks), autonomy (freedom from friction/surveillance) and security (physical safety and data privacy). By integrating the PSR framework (Batat, 2025) with competence-as-recognition (Bonnemaizon and Batat, 2011), specific mechanisms are identified, namely, assistive transparency and behavioral regulation, that sustain the experience and mitigate the risks of the unmanaged commons.

Empirically, a multi-actor, multisource qualitative design is employed, combining operator interviews, subjective personal introspection, and netnography to surface these dynamics (Holbrook, 2006; Kozinets, 2015; Heinonen and Medberg, 2018). This methodological pluralism aligns with PSR’s call for dual-plane inquiry capable of capturing phygital phenomenology (Batat, 2025). This paper aims to explain how this customer-as-worker model shapes trust and service outcomes, and identifies human-digital mechanisms that resolve the autonomy-assurance tension. Specifically, this paper develops a conceptual model of phygital governance and well-being that moves beyond descriptive richness to theoretical explanation:

Unmanned and technology-intensive formats extend a long trajectory in services marketing from customer participation to customer production of value and even execution of firm-relevant tasks. Early self-service research showed that technology can shift activity from employees to customers, with convenience and control balanced against perceived risk and recovery access (Meuter et al., 2000; Collier and Kimes, 2013; Dabholkar et al., 2003; Eastlick et al., 2012; Lin, 2022). More recent work problematizes the governance of that shift, how retailers’ script, steer and control customers’ work at the interface (Picot-Coupey and Tahar, 2015), and how social and physical cues in the servicescape still anchor experience when technology is foregrounded (Bolton et al., 2018). To address the complexity of these hybrid environments, this study situates itself within the emerging PSR paradigm (Batat, 2025). PSR extends FSR and TSR by offering a HFL for designing experiences within hybrid physical-digital ecosystems. Phygital formats intensify these dynamics by blending digital layers and physical places, calling for new theorization of roles, trust and stewardship through the lens of phygital phenomenology (hybrid embodiment, contextual fluidity and multidimensional entanglement).

Customers as workers is defined as customers who undertake operational (e.g. access, scanning, payment), cognitive (navigation, troubleshooting), emotional (self-reassurance at breakdowns) and stewardship tasks (order maintenance, incident reporting) that directly shape service delivery and outcomes. Treating the customer as a “partial employee” or human resource within the service organization is an established concept (Bowen, 1986); however, unmanned settings escalate this dynamic to full delegation. This clarifies levels of involvement beyond generic participation and distinguishes co-conception, coproduction, co-creation and directed self-production, execution delegated to customers by design (Vargo and Lusch, 2008; Dujarier, 2014; Grönroos and Voima, 2013; Lember, 2017). Crucially, customer competence is not innate: it is socially constructed and recognized (or not) by firms, which decide when and how customers are allowed or expected to work, with consequences for inclusion, stress, trust and value-in-use (Bonnemaizon and Batat, 2011). From a PSR perspective, this role represents value poly-creation, where customers act as resource integrators within a hybrid ecosystem rather than mere users. Retailers can and do control this work via scripts, technologies and rules (Picot-Coupey and Tahar, 2015), but over-delegation without support risks frustration, errors and abandonment (Meuter et al., 2000; Collier and Kimes, 2013).

A phygital lens moves beyond channel logics (multi/cross/omni) to Phygital Customer Experience (PH-CX), a holistic ecosystem comprising connectors (human, digital, physical, media) and pillars that coproduce value across the journey (Batat, 2024). Aligning with PSR’s emphasis on methodological pluralism and human-centricity, this study focuses on the pillars most critical to unmanned governance: technicality, affectivity and the human connector (trust anchor).

Within PH-CX, human connectors, on-site or remote, operate as trust anchors: positive human contact can repair deficits in digital/physical/media connectors, whereas negative human contact is difficult to offset technologically (Batat, 2024; Schultze, 2003). Design-science work on phygital journeys similarly argues for orchestration of assistive technologies with escalation paths that keep experiences intelligible and reassuring (Jacob et al., 2023). This places human-digital synergy (e.g. remote concierge plus predictive help) at the heart of unmanned formats rather than treating automation as sufficient.

SDL positions customers as resource integrators and value as value-in-use; operant resources (skills, knowledge, time) dominate operand resources (things) (Vargo and Lusch, 2004, 2006, 2008). In staff-light settings, outcomes depend less on the technology per se than on recognizing and building customer competence through onboarding, assistive transparency, clear role scripts and fast escalation to human help (Bonnemaizon and Batat, 2011). SDL therefore complements PH-CX by explaining why competence-building and competence-recognition are central to inclusion and well-being when customers are effectively “at work.” This aligns with PSR’s goal of enhancing individual well-being through human-first design.

Trust is shaped by interface clarity, convenience and the availability of recovery, especially under failure (Meuter et al., 2000; Collier and Kimes, 2013; Collier et al., 2017). Servicescape cues such as lighting, layout, visibility of help (Bitner, 1992), continue to frame risk and comfort even when automation dominates. In unmanned stores, responsibility for shared space can diffuse, creating “commons” problems (e.g. unreported spills, disorder) unless stewardship is supported by social cohesion (in rural contexts) (Hardin, 1968; Ostrom, 1990). Psychological ownership can foster such stewardship when roles are clear, and customers feel authorized to care for the space (Peck et al., 2021).

Theoretically, this study differentiates itself from traditional SST frameworks. While SST focuses on efficiency and assumes service recovery is available (Meuter et al., 2000), PSR reveals that in unmanned phygital settings, recovery must be proactively designed via human connectors and governance mechanisms. Furthermore, SST treats the customer as a user, whereas this model recognizes the customer as a steward within a phygital commons.

In this framework, positive marketplace experiences are defined not merely by process efficiency, but by the maintenance of customer autonomy and inclusion. To achieve this, this paper conceptually bridges employee well-being and quality of work life (QWL) literatures (Sirgy, 2012; Sirgy et al., 2001; Sonnentag, 2015) with TSR (Anderson et al., 2013). Because unmanned formats require the customer to “work,” technological failures do not just cause dissatisfaction; they cause psychological “resource depletion” (Hobfoll, 1989; Sonnentag, 2015). Grounded in Self-Determination Theory (Ryan and Deci, 2000) and aligning with PSR’s transformative goals, well-being is operationalized into three specific dimensions:

1. Perceived Competence (ability to complete tasks);

2. Autonomy (freedom from friction/surveillance); and

3. Security (physical safety and data privacy).

When the firm recognizes the customer’s labor through support tools, well-being is enhanced, whereas ignoring it depletes resources, leading to anxiety and competence shocks. To foster positive marketplace experiences, retailers should adopt trust-by-design:

• Provide assistive transparency that explains what the system is doing and why;

• Offer predictive guidance at known failure points; and

• Ensure rapid human escalation, all orchestrated within a coherent PH-CX architecture (Batat, 2024).

Table 1 positions working consumers along a continuum from digital to physical to phygital retail, illustrating how the depth of labor and the support required co-vary by context. It highlights the theoretical gap: pure digital and physical contexts rely on established SST or staffed recovery, whereas phygital unmanned contexts require PSR-aligned human-digital synergy.

In pure digital settings, the “working consumer” (Dujarier, 2014), typically executes end-to-end journeys within rigid platform scripts. Value flows from convenience and price transparency, while frictions arise from opaque automation and the “uncanny” nature of AI interactions (Mende and Noble, 2019; Meuter et al., 2000). Design levers here concentrate on assistive transparency and low-effort escalation to restore perceived competence without abandoning autonomy (Vargo and Lusch, 2008).

In staffed physical stores, customers act as “partial employees” who support the service encounter, navigating layouts and using self-checkout, yet frontline staff remain the primary “human connector” (Bitner, 1992; Hilton et al., 2013). Success here often hinges on the customer’s technology readiness (Parasuraman et al., 2005); where readiness is low, visible help and fair queuing stabilize expectations (Collier et al., 2017).

The phygital (unmanned/hybrid) column clarifies the distinctive contribution of this study: customers shoulder the broadest and riskiest bundle, spanning operational, cognitive and emotional work, plus the stewardship of the shared space (Picot-Coupey and Tahar, 2015). Because responsibility can diffuse, creating “commons problems” (Ostrom, 1990), viability depends on human-digital synergy: SSTs must be paired with trust anchors (remote/episodic presence) and stewardship nudges (Batat, 2024; De Keyser et al., 2015). Crucially, outcomes rely on competence-as-recognition: rather than assuming proficiency, firms must actively build user capability through inclusive design and graded access (Bonnemaizon and Batat, 2011).

To ensure precision in this emerging domain, the definitions of the core constructs discussed above are formalized specifically distinguishing the ‘customer-as-worker’ from generic participation:

• Working consumers/customer-as-worker: Customers who perform firm-relevant operational, cognitive, emotional and stewardship labor without employment status, with direct effects on service delivery and outcomes. Example: A customer scanning items (operational labor), figuring out why an item won’t scan (cognitive labor), managing frustration during a glitch (emotional labor), and reporting a spill to remote support (stewardship labor).

• Directed self-production: Firm-designed processes delegate execution to customers (access, scanning, payment, troubleshooting) in lieu of frontline staff; execution is scripted into the service architecture. Example: A customer must use a specific app to unlock the store door, follow a strict sequence to scan barcodes at a kiosk, and finalize payment digitally, all without the option of handing cash to an employee.

• Phygital customer experience (PH-CX): An integrated ecosystem where physical spaces and digital layers coproduce value via connectors and pillars; phygital is not mere channel integration. Example: A physical store environment that uses sensors (physical layer) to track inventory and feed that data instantly to the customer’s mobile app (digital connector), ensuring the digital shopping list matches physical reality in real-time.

Having defined the constructs, it is necessary to operationalize the distinct intensity of labor in unmanned retail compared to other formats. Table 2 summarizes four levels of customer involvement in retail and clarifies how ‘customer-as-worker’ differs by labor depth and support needs across physical, digital and phygital settings.

The four levels in Table 2 differentiate customer “work” by depth of labor and by the support required to keep experiences positive and inclusive in staff-light settings:

1. Co-conception (ideas/feedback). Work is cognitive and optional; risk is misalignment if firms fail to capture and close the loop. Lightweight idea capture and visible “you said → we did” cycles mitigate this.

2. Coproduction (joint execution with staff). Work is bounded by role scripts and immediate human backup; risks are throughput bottlenecks and inconsistency if support is thin. Queue design and escalation of service level agreement (SLAs) are critical.

3. Co-creation (value-in-use). Risk is fragile trust, if frictions persist or recovery is hard, satisfaction and loyalty drop. Designers should ensure journey coherence, affective cues and low-effort recovery (Meuter et al., 2000; Collier et al., 2017).

4. Directed self-production (delegated execution). Distinctive of unmanned phygital contexts; exposure to competence shocks, commons problems and safety anxiety is highest without support. Hence assistive transparency, predictive help, one-tap human concierge and stewardship nudges/rewards are required (Batat, 2024; Bonnemaizon and Batat, 2011; Ostrom, 1990; Peck et al., 2021).

Conceptually, these levels map onto SDL (customers as resource integrators; value realized as value-in-use) and competence-as-recognition (firms must build and acknowledge capability rather than assume it) (Vargo and Lusch, 2008; Bonnemaizon and Batat, 2011).

Synthesizing the perspectives of the customer-as-worker (Section 2.1) and the PH-CX ecosystem (Section 2.2), the theoretical framework posits that successful delegation relies on orchestrating specific trust anchors. This leads to the proposed Conceptual Model of Phygital Governance and Well-being (Figure 1) shown in the results section.

To build trust in staff-light phygital stores, assistive transparency should be embedded throughout the journey, explaining system actions and reasons and surfacing predictive guidance at failure-prone steps. This links the technicality pillar to affectivity/sensoriality, so “cold” automation becomes comprehensible and reassuring (Batat, 2024).

Hybrid touchpoints then provide human-digital synergy: strategic use of human connectors (remote concierge, episodic presence) repairs deficits in other connectors efficiently; importantly, the reverse rarely holds, as technology alone struggles to substitute for positive human contact (Batat, 2024; Collier et al., 2017). Finally, competence building for inclusion operationalizes competence-as-recognition: graded novice → expert flows, one-tap help, and, where feasible, alternative access for customers without smartphones. These mechanisms function as causal antecedents to trust and well-being outcomes (competence, autonomy, security), moderated by boundary conditions such as location, social cohesion and tech maturity.

To capture how unmanned, phygital formats redistribute work to customers and how retailers design for trust and positive marketplace experiences, a multi-actor, multisource qualitative design was adopted. This approach aligns with the PSR paradigm’s call for methodological pluralism and dual-plane inquiry capable of capturing phygital phenomenology (Batat, 2025). The design integrates:

• Managerial interviews with operators/retailers;

• Subjective Personal Introspection to document the researcher’s lived experience of “becoming a worker” in staff-light stores; and

• Netnography of public online discussions about unmanned retail and secondary materials from retail trade press, blogs and company communications for contextual triangulation.

This triangulation aligns with the PSR view of phygital experience as a holistic ecosystem of connectors and pillars (Batat, 2024) and echoes design-science arguments for orchestrating human-digital touchpoints across the journey (Jacob et al., 2023). SPI follows the introspective tradition in consumer research that treats the researcher as an instrument for thick, first-person description (Holbrook and Hirschman, 1982), offering a form of phyginographic immersion across physical and digital planes. Netnography provides naturalistic accounts of experience formation in online communities (Kozinets, 2015; Heinonen and Medberg, 2018). Together, the sources allow triangulation on the customer-as-worker role and on trust/recovery mechanisms in staff-light flows, supporting theory-building rather than mere description.

The study focuses on unmanned grocery formats in Sweden, which provide digitally enabled, staff-light shopping via access control (BankID), mobile apps and remote monitoring. Formats range from fully unmanned to hybrid (manned at peaks, unmanned off-peak) and operate in urban, suburban and rural localities. Operators report operational challenges such as misuse, vandalism and theft, that sometimes compress opening hours and threaten the 24 / 7 value proposition. This heterogeneity of technology, format and risk profile offers a fertile context to examine role delegation to customers and design responses consistent with PSR (Batat, 2025) and with stewardship concerns around shared spaces (Ostrom, 1990; Peck et al., 2021).

(A) Managerial perspective: operators and retailers. 15 semi-structured interviews were conducted with owners, franchisees, CEOs/founders, establishers, and a head-office role across nine unmanned brands. The set varies by store size, level of automation (fully unmanned vs hybrid), technology (e.g. Bank-ID/app, cameras/sensors) and location (urban/rural). Sampling followed a theoretical replication logic to ensure diverse operational contexts (urban vs rural) and ceased when theoretical saturation was reached, defined as the point where additional interviews yielded no new failure modes, recovery mechanisms or stewardship behaviors. Table 4 details the sample, highlighting the diversity of business models and technological configurations.

(B) Consumer perspective: Subjective Personal Introspection (SPI). Following introspective methods in consumer research, the lead author conducted repeated unmanned-store journeys: onboarding, access, scanning, payment, error recovery and small acts of stewardship (e.g. reporting spills). Fieldnotes captured task load, affect, micro-breakdowns, repair attempts, privacy signals and trust cues, complemented by time-stamped journey sketches and reflexive memos (Holbrook and Hirschman, 1982; Holbrook, 2006). SPI yields thick descriptions of the customer-as-worker role and provides a consumer-side counterpoint to managerial accounts, essential for validating causal claims about competence shocks.

(C) Public discourse and contextual materials: netnography and secondary. A nonparticipatory netnography was conducted using publicly accessible Swedish forum threads and social posts on unmanned stores (access friction, scanning/payment issues, safety, store condition), treating posts as naturalistic narratives of trust in automation, human-digital escalation and stewardship norms. Observation was noninterventionist, and all excerpts were anonymized (Kozinets, 2015). In parallel, secondary materials including trade-press articles, company blogs, press releases and operators’ social-media posts were assembled to triangulate events (e.g. incident-driven hour reductions), technology narratives and community responses. This blend aligns with the PSR emphasis on mixed/immersive evidence and journey orchestration across connectors and pillars (Batat, 2024; Jacob et al., 2023).

Across sources, managerial interviews remain the core data set; SPI, netnography and secondary materials act as complementary lenses that validate/contrast operator perspectives and locate trust, inclusion and well-being issues in lived journeys. Table 3 summarizes the data sources, coverage, RQs addressed, focal constructs, and each source’s triangulation role.

Interviews. A semi-structured guide was used (∼60 min). Topics included technology implementation, role expectations and training, service failures and recovery, environmental management, stewardship and deviance, and perceived trust/inclusion outcomes. Interviews were conducted in person or via video, consented, audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Table 4 provides an overview of the interview participants, their roles and store contexts.

SPI protocol. Repeated store visits were conducted at varied times (day/evening; weekday/weekend) see Table 5, executed common tasks (enter, select, scan, pay, exit), common errors were simulated, such as a scanning mistake, whenever it was safe and legal to do so. The researchers also documented their personal reactions, identified minor system failures, and observed the process of seeking help from digital tools versus human staff. This aligns with PSR pillars and connectors (Batat, 2024).

Netnography protocol. A purposive sampling strategy was employed targeting threads on Sweden’s two largest public discussion forums (Flashback, Familjeliv) and local community Facebook groups. Platforms with distinct user cultures was prioritized to ensure data variety: Facebook discussions were selected for their focus on affectivity gaps (e.g. “creepy” feelings), while Flashback threads were included for their detailed peer-to-peer advice on Technicality and “tricking” sensors. Ethical guidelines were followed; the researchers did not intervene, and sensitive excerpts were anonymized (Kozinets, 2015). The researchers queried the specific term “obemannade butiker” (unmanned stores) alongside keywords like “BankID,” “stöld” (theft) and “trygghet” (safety) within the last 24 months.

Secondary data were gathered continuously to contextualize timeline events and cross-check operator claims (e.g. security upgrades, temporary closures), then linked to interview timelines.

A reflexive thematic analysis was conducted moving abductively between data and theory (Braun and Clarke, 2006), to develop a conceptual model. While the lead author conducted primary coding, thematic refinement involved iterative interpretive discussions among researchers to ensure conceptual depth. The material was analyzed in three iterative passes. First, open coding within each corpus was conducted (interviews, SPI, netnography), developing codes and analytic memos. Next, axial clustering across sources was carried out to connect recurrent mechanisms such as role clarity, assistive transparency, human escalation and stewardship nudges. Finally, pattern coding was used to align the emergent themes with the theoretical frame (customer-as-worker, competence-as-recognition and PSR connectors/pillars).

To enhance analytic transparency and justify causal logic, an illustrative coding path is:

• Raw Data: “I stood there for 10 minutes because the app said, ‘door open’ but nothing happened.”

• Initial Code: Access Friction/App Disconnect.

• Theme: Assistive Transparency Gap.

• Theoretical Dimension: Technicality Pillar Failure/Competence Shock.

• Causal Justification: This link was validated across SPI (researcher frustration) and Netnography (user abandonment reports), supporting the proposition that opacity causally precedes competence shocks.

To deepen the thematic analysis, data was explicitly contrasted across the distinct digital cultures of the selected platforms. Facebook discussions (often family-oriented) were the primary source for identifying gaps in the affectivity Pillar, revealing intense emotional codes like “creepy” or “unsafe.” Conversely, Flashback threads (often technically oriented) provided the richest data for the technicality Pillar, specifically informing Theme 4 by exposing detailed peer-to-peer advice on “tricking” entrance sensors, insights that were largely absent from operator interviews.

To ensure trustworthiness and move beyond descriptive coding, rigor was operationalized through three reflexive strategies. First, negative-case analysis was employed to challenge the emerging themes, particularly regarding the “commons problem” (theme 3). By specifically isolating two rural store data sets that showed zero vandalism, the researchers were forced to nuance the findings; this negative evidence contradicted the initial code of “inevitable disorder,” leading us to refine theme 4 to include social cohesion as a critical boundary condition rather than claiming all unmanned spaces naturally degrade.

Finally, the theme refinement followed an abductive trajectory, oscillating between data and theory. For instance, theme 5 evolved significantly through this iteration. It was initially coded deductively as “service recovery” using standard SST logic. However, the intense emotional language in the netnographic data (e.g. users expressing “panic” followed by “relief” upon hearing a voice) prompted an inductive return to PSR theory. The theme was consequently refined to “the human connector effect,” expanding the definition beyond functional fixing to include the “trust anchor” and psychological safety dimensions that standard service recovery literature often overlooks.

All interviewees provided informed consent; transcripts were anonymized and stored securely. SPI visits respected store policies and public access; no identifiable images of other customers were retained. Netnography analyzed publicly accessible content; usernames were not quoted, and sensitive passages were paraphrased. Finally, given the subjective nature of SPI, the researchers explicitly reflected on researcher positionality (Holbrook and Hirschman, 1982). The author approached the field as a digitally literate, urban-based researcher. This positionality initially biased the interpretation of technical friction as a “system failure” (efficiency loss). However, comparative analysis with rural users revealed that they often framed the same friction as a necessary trade-off for community access. Analytic memos were used throughout the coding process to challenge this efficiency-centric bias and ensure rural perspectives were accurately represented. This reflexive stance aligns with PSR’s emphasis on ethical grounding and human-centric inquiry (Batat, 2025).

Drawing on interviews (I), SPI researcher journeys (SPI), netnography of public discussions (N) and secondary materials (S), the findings presented is organized around the causal structure of the conceptual model (Figure 1). The results demonstrate how role delegation via SST (antecedent) activates two core mechanisms, assistive transparency and concierge and behavioral governance, that shape trust and well-being outcomes (perceived competence, autonomy, security), moderated by boundary conditions (location, social cohesion, tech maturity). For each causal pathway, data sources are triangulated to synthesize emergent propositions, which are then fully explored and connected back to existing theory in the discussion.

Figure 1 illustrates the Conceptual Model of Phygital Governance and Well-being, grounded in human-first/PSR Logic. The model shows how role delegation via SST (encompassing operational, cognitive, emotional and stewardship tasks) activates assistive transparency and concierge (with human connector as trust anchor), which enables behavioral governance, ultimately shaping trust and well-being outcomes. These relationships are moderated by location (urban/rural), social cohesion and tech maturity.

The evidence confirms that unmanned formats delegate a comprehensive bundle of work to customers spanning four task categories. Operators described this delegation as systematic. One CEO noted, Customers do everything, enter with their app, scan as they shop, pay digitally and even report problems (I, CEO). However, this delegation varies in depth: operational tasks (access, scanning, payment), cognitive tasks (troubleshooting, understanding system logic), emotional tasks (self-reassurance during failures) and stewardship tasks (reporting spills, maintaining order).

SPI fieldnotes revealed the intensity of this labor bundle. During a single 15-minute visit, the researcher performed 6 distinct tasks typically handled by staff in traditional stores, including Bank-ID authentication, app navigation, barcode scanning, weight verification, payment processing and exit confirmation. Netnography threads show customers articulating this workload. One user posted, You’re basically working for them, scanning, bagging, troubleshooting, and they save on labor costs (N).

The mechanism underlying this antecedent is that role delegation creates the structural condition for all subsequent dynamics. When delegation is explicit and supported, it enables autonomy; when assumed without support, it triggers competence shocks. This finding addresses RQ1 by specifying the configuration of the customer-as-worker role.

Pattern P, antecedent: The breadth and depth of delegated labor (operational plus cognitive plus emotional plus stewardship) distinguish phygital unmanned formats from both pure-digital SST and staffed physical stores, creating unique demands for competence recognition and support.

The evidence shows that opaque system behavior during role delegation produces sudden drops in perceived capability. Operators described a pervasive communication vacuum. One franchise owner stated, We’re not there to explain anything, and we can’t just fill the store with signs (I, franchise owner). Another reflected, We are not communicators. Should there be a voice? Music? A scent? (I, CEO).

SPI fieldnotes documented how silent failures trap users. During first-time entry, the app displayed door unlocking for 3 min with no progress indicator or error message, creating escalating anxiety. Where on-screen explanations (try moving the barcode closer) were present, perceived stress dropped markedly, and customers recovered or escalated quickly (SPI). Netnography threads report app lockouts, Bank-ID re-auth loops and mystery declines (N), with users expressing frustration. One user noted, The app just says error, no explanation, no way to fix it (N).

The causal mechanism is that assistive transparency (explaining what the system is doing and why) functions as a necessary condition for sustaining role performance. Without it, the delegation antecedent produces competence shocks rather than empowerment.

Pattern P1: In staff-light flows, assistive transparency plus rapid human escalation is a necessary condition for preventing competence shocks and sustaining role performance.

The evidence demonstrates that human connectors (remote concierge or episodic on-site presence) function as trust anchors that repair deficits in digital/physical connectors. Operators consistently reported performance lifts when human presence was visible. One franchise owner said, When we’re there, sales are higher. There’s such a big difference when we are not (I, franchise owner). A CEO said, People come in when we’re around; they feel more welcome (I, CEO).

SPI entries noted immediate reassurance when a human voice appeared within approximately 30-60 s during failure versus abandonment when help was absent. One fieldnote read, Hearing a real person say I see the issue, let me reset your session, transformed panic into relief within seconds (SPI). Netnography contains praise for quick help and frustration with no one to talk to (N), with one user noting, I’d pay more for a store where I know a human will answer within a minute (N).

The mechanism is that human connectors activate the affectivity pillar of PH-CX, providing relatedness and recovery assurance that technology alone cannot supply. This supports the causal link from mechanism 1 to outcomes (trust/well-being).

Pattern P2: Hybrid models with SLA-backed human connectors (remote or episodic) deliver higher trust and smoother recovery than fully unmanned models, confirming the human connector as a trust anchor in the PSR framework.

The evidence reveals that without behavioral governance mechanisms, responsibility for store stewardship diffuses across users, creating commons problems. Operators voiced ambiguity. One owner stated, Unless someone calls, I don’t know if there’s a problem in the store (I, owner). A franchisee noted, We have a phone number and a broom (I, franchisee). Another owner said, I go there a couple of times a week to clean and restock, but otherwise I won’t see the condition of the store (I, owner).

SPI observed unreported spills and mis-shelved items persisting across multiple visits, with fieldnotes indicating, I saw a coffee spill near aisle 3 on Tuesday; it was still there Friday. No one reported it, and I didn’t either, felt like not my job (SPI). Netnography includes complaints about store condition and unclear reporting channels (N).

The mechanism is that responsibility diffusion occurs when role clarity is absent and reporting friction is high, leading to servicescape degradation.

Where operators introduced behavioral governance tools, stewardship increased. Secondary materials showed that one-tap report buttons with visible report-to-fix timers improved resolution times from 48 h to less than 4 h (S). Operators noted, When we added the Report Issue button with a confirmation message, reports tripled (I, head-office).

The causal mechanism is that behavioral governance (nudges, one-tap reporting, micro-rewards) enables the transition from mechanism 1 (transparency/concierge) to positive outcomes by making stewardship easy and valued. This addresses RQ2’s focus on governance practices.

Pattern P3: Behavioral regulation via low-friction reporting, visible resolution feedback, and micro-rewards raises stewardship and protects the servicescape, confirming the causal link from mechanism 2 to well-being outcomes.

The evidence shows that when mechanisms function effectively, three well-being dimensions emerge.

SPI fieldnotes documented competence growth across visits. One note read, first visit: 3 errors, high stress. Third visit: 0 errors, felt like an expert (SPI). Operators confirmed this trajectory. A franchisee said, After like 2 successful visits, customers stop calling for help, they’ve built the skill (I, franchisee). Netnography shows users sharing competence markers. One post advised, Pro tip: hold the scanner 2 inches away, not touching (N).

Where transparency and human backup existed, autonomy was experienced positively. One user noted, I like doing it myself because I know help is there if I need it (N). Where mechanisms failed, autonomy became abandonment. Another user stated, You’re on your own, and that’s not freedom, it’s neglect (N).

SPI notes showed security perceptions shifting with human connector presence. One fieldnote read, alone at 10 PM: anxious. Saw Remote Help Available sign: calmer (SPI). Operators in rural areas noted, good neighbors alert us if lights are out, that social connection matters more than cameras (I, owner).

Secondary materials showed sales lifts in hybrid versus fully unmanned formats (S), indicating that well-being outcomes translate to firm performance. Operators confirmed, Happy customers come back more often and spend more (I, CEO).

Pattern P4: Effective mechanisms (assistive transparency plus human connector plus behavioral governance) produce measurable gains in perceived competence, autonomy, security and value co-creation, validating the outcome structure of the conceptual model.

The evidence shows location moderates the relationship between role delegation and outcomes. Urban operators reported higher deviance. A franchise owner said, In the city center, we had to install additional cameras and restrict night access (I, franchise owner). Rural operators noted lower theft but higher isolation concerns. One rural owner stated, In our village, vandalism is rare, everyone knows everyone. But if the system fails, help is 30 min away (I, rural owner).

Negative-case analysis revealed that social cohesion moderates the commons problem. Two rural stores with zero vandalism contrasted sharply with urban locations. Operators explained, “In tight-knit communities, customers feel ownership, they report issues immediately” (I, owner). Netnography showed rural users defending stores online. One post read, people trash-talk our unmanned store, but locals love it, it keeps shopping local (N).

The evidence shows tech maturity moderates the competence-building trajectory. Operators noted, Younger users figure it out in one visit; older adults need 3-4 visits or they quit (I, founder). SPI revealed that novice users experienced higher friction with store access app updates, while expert users navigated seamlessly.

Pattern P5: Boundary conditions (location, social cohesion, tech maturity) significantly moderate the strength of relationships between antecedents, mechanisms and outcomes, explaining variance in deviance rates, adoption speed and well-being outcomes across contexts.

Across sources, the data validate the causal structure of Figure 1. First, role delegation (antecedent) activates the need for mechanisms. Second, assistive transparency and concierge (mechanism 1) prevent competence shocks and enables trust. Third, behavioral governance (mechanism 2) enables stewardship and protects well-being. Fourth, together, mechanisms produce trust and well-being outcomes (competence, autonomy, security). Fifth, boundary conditions (location, social cohesion, tech maturity) moderate all relationships.

Where mechanisms are missing or weak, customers face competence shocks, responsibility diffuses and outcomes degrade, prompting operators to reintroduce human presence or curtail access. Where mechanisms are strong, even high role delegation produces positive well-being and performance outcomes. These patterns confirm the model’s explanatory power and motivate the discussion’s theoretical integration with PSR framework.

Unmanned formats are reconceptualized as phygital organizations that systematically outsource operational, cognitive, emotional and stewardship micro-tasks to customers, what is termed the customer-as-worker (Dujarier, 2014; Picot-Coupey and Tahar, 2015). The headline benefits such as speed, 24 / 7 reach, and lower labor cost, materialize only when firms design for role clarity, assistive transparency, fast human escalation, and behavioral regulation that sustains stewardship. Across triangulated sources (interviews, SPI, netnography, secondary), a central paradox emerges, removing staff increases the need for human signals. A human-in-the-loop (episodic on-site or remote) combined with trust-by-design resolves the autonomy-assurance tension and underpins positive marketplace experiences within a PH-CX ecosystem (Batat, 2024).

Figure 1 depicts a causal model explaining how unmanned phygital stores function when customers are asked to “work” operationally, cognitively, emotionally, and as stewards of the shared space. Grounded in the PSR paradigm’s human-first logic, the model moves beyond efficiency-focused SST frameworks to emphasize well-being, trust and governance as primary outcomes (Batat, 2025). The model specifies three core components:

1. an antecedent (role delegation via SST);

2. two sequential mechanisms (assistive transparency and concierge enabling behavioral governance); and

3. outcomes (trust and well-being), with relationships moderated by boundary conditions (location, social cohesion, tech maturity).

The model initiates with directed self-production, where a four-part labor bundle is delegated to customers: operational tasks (access, scanning, payment), cognitive tasks (troubleshooting, system logic), emotional tasks (self-reassurance) and stewardship tasks (order maintenance, incident reporting). This delegation distinguishes phygital unmanned formats from both pure-digital SST (which lacks physical stewardship) and staffed physical stores (where employees retain frontline work). The antecedent creates the structural condition for all subsequent dynamics: when supported, delegation enables autonomy; when assumed without support, it triggers competence shocks.

The first mechanism activates when role delegation creates potential for failure. Assistive transparency (explaining what the system is doing and why) combined with human connectors (remote concierge or episodic presence) functions as a trust anchor that repairs deficits in digital/physical connectors (Batat, 2024). The evidence shows this mechanism causally precedes behavioral governance: users must first understand the system and trust that help is available before they will engage in stewardship behaviors. The inward arrow from mechanism 1 to mechanism 2 represents this enabling relationship: transparency and human access restore competence, which then enables users to take on governance responsibilities. This finding extends SST recovery literature by showing that human connectors are not merely fallback options but essential preconditions for sustained role performance in staff-light contexts.

Enabled by assistive transparency, the second mechanism, behavioral governance involves automated monitoring and nudging that makes stewardship easy and valued. Sensors and telemetry trigger behavioral regulation (e.g. “thank you for closing the door” audio cues, one-tap reporting buttons, visible “report-to-fix” timers) that normalizes prosocial acts and counters responsibility diffusion (Ostrom, 1990; Peck et al., 2021). The causal sequence is critical: without mechanism 1 establishing trust and competence, mechanism 2’s nudges are perceived as surveillance rather than support. Where both mechanisms function together, stewardship becomes frequent and timely, protecting the servicescape and reducing the phygital commons problems.

The model specifies three well-being dimensions that emerge when mechanisms function effectively:

1. Perceived competence (ability to complete tasks successfully);

2. Autonomy (freedom from friction and excessive surveillance); and

3. Security (physical safety and data privacy).

These outcomes align with PSR’s transformative goals (Batat, 2025), demonstrating that unmanned formats can enhance individual well-being when designed with human-first logic rather than pure efficiency optimization.

The model integrates three boundary conditions that moderate relationships between antecedents, mechanisms and outcomes. Location (Urban/Rural) shapes deviance risk and social cohesion levels: rural stores benefit from community guardianship but face isolation challenges, while urban stores confront higher anonymity and theft clusters. Social Cohesion moderates the commons problem: in tight-knit communities, customers feel psychological ownership and report issues immediately, whereas low-cohesion contexts require stronger governance mechanisms. Tech maturity moderates the competence-building trajectory: novice users require graded flows and extended support, while expert users navigate seamlessly. These moderators explain variance in outcomes across contexts and justify why uniform policies underperform.

Overall, the model demonstrates that unmanned formats work only when delegation is matched with assistive transparency and reliable human access (mechanism 1), which then enables behavioral governance (mechanism 2), producing trust and well-being outcomes. Boundary conditions shape the strength of these relationships. This causal structure clarifies RQ2 and provides mechanism-based levers for designing positive marketplace experiences in staff-light retail.

• The findings specify the phygital role bundle delegated to customers: access, scanning, payment, troubleshooting, emotional self-regulation and stewardship of shared spaces. This extends “partial employee” arguments by showing greater role breadth and depth than in manned or pure digital settings (Picot-Coupey and Tahar, 2015). From SDL, outcomes depend less on technology per se than on how firms recognize and build customer competence as an operant resource (Vargo and Lusch, 2008; Bonnemaizon and Batat, 2011). Where competence is assumed, customers suffer competence shocks and abandon the journey; where competence is cultivated, autonomy converts to value-in-use. One important takeaway from this is to treat customer capability as designed, not given; make explicit the work expected of customers and the supports that enable it.

• Theme-linked evidence shows that opaque errors, silent failures and unclear next steps are primary triggers of stress and drop-off, consistent with SST work on complexity and transparency (Meuter et al., 2000; Collier and Kimes, 2013). This is interpreted as a trust formation problem: without assistive transparency and predictive guidance at failure-prone points, customers cannot sustain a sense of capability. Mapped to PH-CX, effective designs connect technicality/practicality to affectivity/sensoriality (e.g. concise on-screen rationales, one-tap escalation), so that cold automation becomes comprehensible and reassuring (Batat, 2024; Jacob et al., 2023). Therefore, it is important to manage transparency and escalation as core service features with SLAs, not as optional help layers.

• Across sites, even brief, guaranteed access to a human (remote or scheduled presence) delivered faster recovery, higher perceived safety and sales uplift. Within PH-CX, human connectors act as trust anchors that can repair deficits in digital/physical/media connectors; the reverse rarely holds (Batat, 2024; De Keyser et al., 2015). The model positions this effect as mechanism 1, causally preceding behavioral governance and enabling well-being outcomes. Budget remote concierge with response-time guarantees and visible presence windows as core capabilities, not contingencies.

• Commons governance: making stewardship easy and valued. Responsibility for minor maintenance and incident reporting diffuses in staff-light spaces, classic commons dynamics (Ostrom, 1990; Hardin, 1968). Where reporting is cumbersome or invisible, stores drift into disorder; where firms deploy one-tap reporting, micro-rewards and “report-to-fix” timers, stewardship becomes frequent and timely. These mechanisms also leverage psychological ownership, signaling that customers’ actions matter (Peck et al., 2021). The model shows this as mechanism 2, enabled by mechanism 1 and directly shaping well-being outcomes. Pair explicit role scripts with low-friction reporting and visible resolution to normalize prosocial acts and protect the servicescape.

• Deviance clusters by location, time window and social cohesion. Uniform rules (e.g. 24/7 access everywhere) create avoidable loss and perceived unfairness. Findings support risk-tiered operations (context-dependent hours, planograms, access controls) combined with privacy-preserving deterrence and community engagement. The model integrates these as moderators (location, social cohesion, tech maturity), explaining variance in outcomes across contexts. Treat operating policies as adaptive, not fixed; instrument stores to learn and adjust (telemetry-to-policy loops).

• Synthesizing the mechanisms with PSR clarifies how to achieve positive marketplace experiences in unmanned settings. Role delegation must be explicit; customer competence must be scaffolded; human access should be guaranteed; stewardship coregulated; and operations must adapt to context. Orchestrated together, these steps align PH-CX connectors and pillars, preserving a value continuum across touchpoints and transforming the customer-as-worker from a liability into a source of resilient value-in-use. This positions the model within the PSR paradigm’s Human-First Logic, advancing beyond FSR’s transactional focus and SST’s efficiency logic toward transformative well-being outcomes (Batat, 2025).

1. RQ1. How is the customer-as-worker configured and supported? Unmanned formats delegate a four-part bundle of work: operational, cognitive, emotional and stewardship. When this delegation is assumed rather than recognized, customers encounter “competence shocks” that erode trust. Where firms make competence visible and buildable (via clear scripts, graded paths and guaranteed escalation), autonomy converts into reassurance. In PH-CX terms, experience quality improves when technicality/practicality are explicitly tied to affectivity/sensoriality (Batat, 2024).

2. RQ2. Which human-digital configurations and behavioral governance practices mitigate risks? Three configurations recur:

   • Trust-by-design: assistive transparency and predictive guidance reduce effort;

   • Human connectors as trust anchors: remote concierge and episodic presence lift recovery and safety; and

   • Commons governance: one-tap reporting and micro-rewards counter responsibility diffusion, supported by risk-tiered operations that adapt to local context. These mechanisms instantiate the conceptual model of phygital governance and well-being, with boundary conditions (location, social cohesion, tech maturity) moderating their effectiveness.

Based on the findings, a phygital retail experience framework is proposed (see Table 6) that organizes design interventions around five mutually reinforcing pillars aligned with PSR’s human-first logic (Batat, 2025). First, to ensure efficiency and flow, operators should treat the access-scan-pay sequence as a single, instrumented system equipped with proactive error handling and predictive prompts that keep customers in-flow rather than ejecting them at the first sign of friction. Second, trust and transparency must be built into the journey by explaining what the system is doing and why, while providing visible escalation routes with guaranteed response times (SLAs) to reduce anxiety. Third, stores should deploy sensory and atmospheric cues, such as adaptive atmospherics (lighting, sound), to signal that the space is “attended” and safe, even when staff-light. Fourth, regarding behavioral regulation, designers should make stewardship easy and valued via low-friction mechanisms like one-tap reporting and environmental cues that foster psychological ownership, directly addressing the “commons problem” of shared spaces. Finally, to ensure community and inclusion, the framework emphasizes designing for context fit, leveraging local partnerships and accessible user experience to widen participation across diverse user groups, with operations adapted to local social cohesion and deviance risk levels.

This study makes four primary contributions to phygital service research, specifically advancing the PSR paradigm’s call for human-first theorizing in hybrid ecosystems (Batat, 2025).

First, the phygital working-consumer role bundle is specified, extending “partial employee” arguments to include stewardship and role depth specific to unmanned settings. Unlike traditional SST contexts where recovery is assumed, this paper shows that unmanned formats delegate a comprehensive four-part labor bundle (operational, cognitive, emotional and stewardship) that creates unique vulnerability to competence shocks. This clarifies the theoretical gap between SST’s efficiency logic and PSR’s human-first logic, demonstrating that over-delegation without recognition erodes trust rather than enhancing convenience.

Second, a parsimonious causal conceptual model is contributed, moving beyond descriptive themes to theoretical explanation. Using two core mechanisms (assistive transparency and concierge; behavioral governance), a sequential causal structure is specified: role delegation (antecedent) activates transparency (mechanism 1), which enables behavioral governance (mechanism 2), ultimately shaping trust and well-being (outcomes). This address calls for mechanism-based theorizing in phygital research by clarifying how and why design features translate into human outcomes, rather than merely correlating them.

Third, well-being is operationalized within the PSR framework across three specific dimensions (perceived competence, autonomy, security). These well-being dimensions are shown to result from effective assistive transparency (mechanism 1) and behavioral governance (mechanism 2), which provide the scaffolding necessary to recognize user capability and secure the shared servicescape. By positioning well-being as a first-order outcome rather than a byproduct of efficiency, the study demonstrates that automation can enhance rather than erode human welfare when designed with assistive transparency and human connectors. This differentiates the model from FSR/SST frameworks that prioritize task completion over experiential authenticity and psychological safety.

Fourth, boundary conditions are integrated as theoretical moderators, showing how location (urban/rural), social cohesion and tech maturity alter the strength of relationships between delegation and outcomes. This advances beyond uniform SST assumptions by proving that phygital viability is context-dependent; what works in high-cohesion rural settings may fail in anonymous urban contexts without adjusted governance. This contextual sensitivity aligns with PSR’s emphasis on liquid ontology and contextual fluidity.

Societally, tensions are surfaced around labor displacement and unpaid customer work, arguing for transparent delegation and community well-being as ethical imperatives. By positioning unmanned retail within PSR’s human-first logic, this study demonstrates that automation serves society best when it recognizes customers as resource integrators rather than mere users, ensuring that efficiency gains do not come at the cost of inclusion or dignity.

Unmanned does not mean unmanaged. The evidence shows that staff-light formats reconfigure the service organization by making customers phygital workers who must perform operational, cognitive, emotional and stewardship tasks for the encounter to succeed. When firms acknowledge this role explicitly and design for competence, emotion and fairness through assistive transparency, rapid human escalation and low-friction stewardship, automation’s promised efficiencies can be achieved without eroding well-being or inclusion. This study contributes the conceptual model of phygital governance and well-being (Figure 1), which moves beyond descriptive themes to specify causal pathways: role delegation via SST (antecedent) activates assistive transparency and concierge (mechanism 1), which enables behavioral governance (mechanism 2), ultimately shaping trust and well-being outcomes (perceived competence, autonomy and security), moderated by boundary conditions (location, social cohesion and tech maturity).

In PSR terms, positive marketplace experiences arise when technicality and practicality are orchestrated with affectivity and sensoriality, and when human connectors (remote or episodic on-site) anchor trust across the journey (Batat, 2024, 2025). This aligns with PSR’s human-first logic, emphasizing well-being and governance over pure efficiency optimization. Extending competence-as-recognition, the results underline that capability is built and validated by organizations rather than assumed; where competence is recognized and supported, autonomy translates to value-in-use, whereas unsupported delegation yields competence shocks, abandonment and commons drift (Bonnemaizon and Batat, 2011). Theoretically, this differentiates phygital unmanned retail from traditional SST frameworks by showing that recovery must be proactively designed via human connectors and governance mechanisms, not merely assumed as available. In short, hybrid human-digital models and trust-by-design convert consumer work from a hidden cost into a resilient asset of phygital retail, validating the PSR paradigm’s call for ethically grounded, human-centric ecosystem design.

Several avenues follow from this reframing, organized by methodological, theoretical and societal trajectories aligned with PSR’s call for methodological pluralism (Batat, 2025). First, future studies should use field experimentation to test the causal pathways in the conceptual model. For example, researchers could test adaptive, AI-driven retail designs, such as context-aware concierges that decide when to surface human help based on real-time telemetry, to validate the assistive transparency → trust pathway. Testing loss-aware planograms and learning policies for opening hours, with outcomes tracked on trust, incidents and well-being, would validate the risk-tiered findings regarding the location and social cohesion moderators. Complementing this, longitudinal research is needed on how recognition pathways develop into capability over time, specifically examining how customers transition from novice to expert modes (tech maturity) and the equity implications for digitally vulnerable groups who may struggle to achieve recognized status.

Second, the intersection of advanced technology and behavioral science offers fertile ground for extending the behavioral governance mechanism. Metaverse-integrated pre-journeys, such as AR/VR rehearsals of store access or scanning, could build competence upstream, shifting in-store role depth and altering anxiety/delight profiles. PSR offers a natural lens for testing such human-digital sequences across dual planes. Simultaneously, combining behavioral economics with service engineering could test nudges and gamified stewardship, such as hazard reporting or order maintenance, linked directly to store KPIs. A critical question is whether fostering psychological ownership via app features reduces vandalism more effectively than surveillance, addressing the commons problem without compromising privacy.

Finally, an ethics and “good work” agenda, traditionally applied to employee automation and algorithmic management (Kellogg et al., 2020; Roto et al., 2019), must be extended to clarify what counts as acceptable customer work within the PSR paradigm. Future research must examine how to disclose and, where appropriate, compensate this labor (e.g. via rewards or lower prices), and identify where it is ethically necessary to reintroduce paid human roles to preserve societal value and inclusion. This aligns with PSR’s emphasis on ethical reflexivity and positive impact across individual, organizational and community levels. By pursuing these avenues, scholars can further validate the conceptual model of phygital governance and well-being and advance the human-first design of hybrid service ecosystems.

This research was conducted as part of the American Phygital Association Summit 2025, sponsored by the American Institute of Business Experience Design (AIBXD) - New York. The submitted research was not funded, and there are no conflicts of interest to declare. The author sincerely appreciate the valuable feedback provided by anonymous reviewers, editors, colleagues and Dr. Wided Batat on an earlier version of this work.

AI tools have been used strictly as a copy-editing tool.