Table 2.

Overview of the review process

StepDescriptionActivityActorAdditional information
1Summer 2020Search in ISI Web of ScienceSearch for articles citing Vargo and Lusch (2004)OR (2008) OR (2016)Lead author3,927 unique hits
2Complementary search in the five main academic databasesSearch for articles that contain the WORD “Vargo” OR “Lusch” ANYWHERE in the article from ABI/INFORM Complete (ProQuest), Business Source Complete (EBSCO), Emerald, SAGE Journals, and ScienceDirect (Elsevier) using the delimiters described in Step 3 where possibleLead authorAdditional literature searches to ensure the review’s comprehensiveness7,755 hits altogether
3Data inclusion/exclusion 1Exclusion of duplicatesExclusion of conference articlesExclusion of editorialsExclusion of book chaptersExclusion of articles in languages other than EnglishLead author4,481 articles remain (exclusion of 3,274 articles in Step 3)
4Data inclusion/exclusion 2Exclusion of non-SDL articles exclusion of articles by Vargo and/or LuschLead authorArticles referring to, e.g. Lusch’s previous, non-SDL-oriented research and articles in which Lusch or Vargo refer to other Lusch and/or Vargo than the SDL originators 4,371 articles remain (exclusion of 110 articles in Step 4)
5Year 2021Document retrievalRetrieval of PDFs of the articles for screeningOne student coder
6Data screeningScreening the articles to exclude those that do not contain instances of text referring to value co-creationAuthors and one student coderSemantic expressions of the terms that manifest value co-creation, e.g. value, creation, co-production, value-in-use in their different forms 2,960 articles for analysis (exclusion of 1,411 articles in Step 6)
7Constructing the review datasetCreation of a Microsoft Excel document containing the article information: author(s), year of publication, article title, journal, journal AJG ranking, corresponding author affiliation, article citations (total/yearly)Authors and one student coderAcademic Journal Guide (AJG) used to indicate the development of dominant discourses
8Year 2022Creation of the coding scheme for the AC of value co-creation use (AC)Argumentation of the rules according to which the article falls into any of the AC categories defined in Figure 1 AuthorsAC of value co-creation use:unclear collaboration on value propositionsDetermination of value-in-useSynthesis of collaboration on value propositions andDetermination of value-in-use
9Test round of data codingCoding of a random sample of 200 articles by two coders and comparison of their results (including articles from different journals, years, authors and topics)Lead author and one student coderValidation of the AC coding reliability and identification of a need to code the role of value co-creation in the articles
10Creation of the coding scheme for the role of value co-creation in the articlesArgumentation of the rules according to which the article falls into any of the role categories defined based on Step 9AuthorsRole of value co-creation in the article:Central focusBuilds perspectiveOnly mentioned
11Year 2023First round of data coding for the AC and role of value co-creationManual search for instances of text in the articles that feature elements of value co-creation in its broad sense as comprising “service”; “co-production”; “interaction”; “value proposition”; “value”; “emergence”; “determination”; and “value-in-use” in their different variationsSix student coders and lead authorManually one-by-one for each article by two independent coders, engaging six codersLead author control checks of student coder work
12Development of second round coding scheme for additional codingCoding for the appearance of value co-creation in different sections of the article, definitions given, number of paragraphs devoted to value co-creation in the article, type of article (qualitative/quantitative/conceptual)Six student coders and lead authorObtain elements to evaluate the conducted coding of AC and role of value co-creationLead author control checks of student coder work
13Mismatch and inter-coder reliability analysisMismatch analysis to compare the coding results of the coders and calculation of inter-coder reliabilityAuthorsIdentification of high inter-coder reliabilityAssessment of the nature of the mismatches
14Third coder intervention for resolving conflicting codes between the codersThe third coder compares the coding by a pair of coders, identifies inconsistencies, resolves inconsistencies and then makes the final coding decisionLead author and six student codersAssurance of reliability of the coding process and conclusion of the final coding dataset for analysis2,960 articles analyzed
15Year 2024Reporting the resultsAuthors
Source(s): Authors’ own work

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal