Breakdown of categories and sub-categories with representative examples
| Category | Intended meaning | Representative examples | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Advance service studies | Contributions citing Vargo and Lusch (2004) to advance service studies | ||
| 1.0 | Strictly advance service studies | Contributions using Vargo and Lusch (2004) to advance service research in general, without focusing on a particular perspective | “The service logic or service-dominant logic make the active role of the consumer, and thus the impact of communication, even more significant (Grönroos, 2008; Payne et al., 2008; Vargo and Lusch, 2004, 2008a, b)” (Holmqvist and Grönroos, 2012, p. 430) | |
| 1.1 | Advance SDL | Contributions using Vargo and Lusch (2004) to advance SDL (NB: This is a parent category only) | ||
| 1.1.1 | Self-advance | Includes advances in SDL authored by Vargo and Lusch (either by both of them or by both of them together with other authors) or contributions authored by only Vargo or Lusch | “As we have further discussed and elaborated our view of S-D logic since ‘Evolving…’ (Vargo and Lusch, 2004) was published, we have caught and corrected some of the more critical lexicographic slips that had become apparent” (Vargo and Lusch, 2008a, p. 2) | |
| 1.1.2 | Conceptual advances by other authors | Includes conceptual advances in SDL by other authors, but also by Vargo or Lusch with other authors | “The dominant logic of marketing is shifting from a firm-centric view of value creation to one that examines how customers engage themselves in the value-creation process (Prahalad and Ramaswamy, 2003; Vargo and Lusch, 2004). The goal of this chapter is to advance a model that is better suited to dialectical value creation and a customer-centric orientation of the firm” (Arnould et al., 2006, p. 91) | |
| 1.1.3 | Empirical advances by other authors | Includes empirical advances in SDL by other authors, but also by Vargo or Lusch with other authors | “According to Vargo and Lusch (2004), the value of an experiential service can only be determined by the user in the ‘consumption’ of the service; however, the findings of the present study would suggest that, in the case of ‘test drives’, some value is derived from the pre-service experience of the ‘test drive’. The customer appears to infer a certain potential value that might subsequently be obtained from the ‘real’ service experience. The present study suggests that this potential value could be referred to as value in pre-use” (Edvardsson et al., 2010, p. 321) | |
| 1.2 | Advance contrasting perspectives | Contributions using Vargo and Lusch (2004) to advance perspectives that somehow contrast SDL, e.g. service logic or customer-dominant logic (CDL) | “CDL takes an entirely different focus on customers […]. SDL is systems dominant with generic actors (Vargo and Lusch, 2004; Lusch and Vargo, 2014), while SL is focused on the dyadic process of value co-creation and the interaction between the provider and the customer (Grönroos, 2006,- Grönroos and Gummerus, 2014)” (Heinonen and Strandvik, 2015, pp. 474–475) | |
| 1.3 | Advance other perspectives | Contributions using Vargo and Lusch (2004) to advance other perspectives within service research, e.g. viable systems perspective (VSA) | “Overall then, this first step in our proposed framework, at the system level, acknowledges that service implies systemic processes; the most recent service views, such as the service-dominant logic (SDL; Vargo and Lusch, 2004), appear intrinsically oriented toward systems thinking. The VSA makes this orientation explicit and builds on its implications, highlighting implications for service research” (Barile et al., 2016, p. 657) | |
| 2 | Propagate | Contributions citing Vargo and Lusch (2004) to propagate and discuss SDL | ||
| 2.0 | Discuss | Contributions using Vargo and Lusch (2004) to generally debate and discuss SDL | “The emerging dominant logic has many implications, but they are not entirely the ones that V &L have in mind. Vargo and Lusch believe that marketing should be at the center of the integration and coordination of the cross-functional processes of a service-centered business model, but this depends on what is meant by ‘marketing.’” (Day et al., 2004, p. 19) | |
| 2.1 | Debate against | Contributions using Vargo and Lusch (2004) to criticize, contrast, and contradict SDL, or to highlight its obscure sides | “Our first criticism lies in the definition of services ‘as the application of specialized competences (knowledge and skills) through deeds, processes, and performances for the benefit of another entity or the entity itself’ (Vargo and Lusch, 2004, p. 2)” (O'Shaugnessy and O'Shaugnessy, 2009, p. 785) | |
| 2.2 | Fertilization – pollination | Contributions using Vargo and Lusch (2004) to inoculate other fields with SDL, or vice versa | “The unfavourable experience that is outside the customers' normal experience must be understood as being beyond the boundary of what is acceptable or within the range of objectionability. The basis of this understanding can be found in adaptation-level theory, prospect theory and social-judgement theory (for more discussions, see, e.g. Sherif et al., 1965; Kahneman and Tversky, 1979; Vargo and Lusch, 2004; Tronvoll, 2007)” (Tronvoll, 2012, p. 290) | |
| 2.3 | Set research agenda | Contributions using Vargo and Lusch (2004) to propose research agendas, not exclusively within SDL | “Vargo and Lusch (2004) offer a new dominant logic for marketing that is better suited for today's service economy than is the traditional model of exchange adapted from economics. The traditional model of exchange is based on manufactured, tangible resources with embedded value that are exchanged between buyer and seller via transactions. The new paradigm in marketing incorporates intangible resources whose value is co-created by both buyer and seller through relationships, not exchange. The differences between a contemporary view of marketing that better reflects the ‘new economy’ and the historical economic approach pose challenges when applying lean principles to a sales engagement versus a manufacturing setting” (Barber and Tietje, 2008, p. 157) | |
| 3 | Position | Contributions citing Vargo and Lusch (2004) to position the contribution | ||
| 3.0 | Positioning | Contributions using Vargo and Lusch (2004) to generally position the contribution | “There have been many developments and research streams within the customer perceived value domain. One of the most recent conceptualizations, drawing from the service-dominant logic (Lusch and Vargo, 2011; Vargo and Lusch, 2004, 2008a), is value co-creation (Payne et al., 2008)” (Arslanagic-Kalajdzic and Zabkar, 2015, p. 88) | |
| 3.1 | Literature review | Contributions whose literature reviews are mainly, but not always solely, based on Vargo and Lusch (2004) and SDL | “Vargo and Lusch (2004, 2006) extended these conceptions of the value-delivery sequence by involving the customer as a co-creator of value, with the role of firm being reduced to that of a ‘value proposition maker’. Other recent studies have also argued for the importance of the proactive involvement of customers in the value-creation process (Prahalad and Ramaswamy, 2004; Payne, 2006; Grönroos, 2006)” (Mele, 2007, p. 244, within literature review as its significant part) | |
| 3.2 | Framing the contribution | Contributions using Vargo and Lusch (2004) to frame the perspective on the contribution | “Despite these contributions important research gaps remain, in particular with respect to the conceptual association of CE vis-à-vis other theoretical entities, including service dominant (S-D) logic and its associated lexicon (Vargo and Lusch, 2004, 2008a, 2016), thus limiting our understanding of CE and its theoretical interconnections” (Hollebeek et al., 2019, p. 2) | |
| 3.3 | Justify an element of the research | Contributions using Vargo and Lusch (2004) to justify one or some elements of the research, e.g. part(s) of the research framework, the purpose, or the discussion | “In sum, learning, publicity and compatibility belong to the intangible operant resources, echoing what Vargo and Lusch (2004) famously pronounced, ‘resources are not; they become’ (p. 2). As the factor that contributed to the highest amount of variance (19%), F1 connotes a palpable relational and long-term emphasis as a paramount BPS dimension” (Lee et al., 2010, p. 611; justifying an element of their findings) | |
| 4 | Default citations | Contributions citing Vargo and Lusch (2004) for other purposes | ||
| 4.1 | Paying homage to the originators | Contributions using Vargo and Lusch (2004) to explicitly pay homage to the article or recognize its seminal role | “The catalyst for this interest has been the publication of an award-winning article by Vargo and Lusch in the Journal of Marketing (2004) entitled ‘Evolving to a New Dominant Logic for Marketing’” (Aitken et al., 2006, p. 275) | |
| 4.2 | A general citation | Contributions referring to Vargo and Lusch (2004) in broad, general terms | “Business literature now proposes that customers ‘co-create value’ with companies (Payne et al., 2009; Tynan and McKechnie, 2009; Prahalad and Ramaswamy, 2004; Vargo and Lusch, 2004), while current cultural policy locates value in the public's estimation of culture” (Rumbold, 2010, pp. 314–315) | |
| Category | Intended meaning | Representative examples | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Advance service studies | Contributions citing | ||
| 1.0 | Strictly advance service studies | Contributions using | “The service logic or service-dominant logic make the active role of the consumer, and thus the impact of communication, even more significant ( | |
| 1.1 | Advance SDL | Contributions using | ||
| 1.1.1 | Self-advance | Includes advances in SDL authored by Vargo and Lusch (either by both of them or by both of them together with other authors) or contributions authored by only Vargo or Lusch | “As we have further discussed and elaborated our view of S-D logic since ‘Evolving…’ ( | |
| 1.1.2 | Conceptual advances by other authors | Includes conceptual advances in SDL by other authors, but also by Vargo or Lusch with other authors | “The dominant logic of marketing is shifting from a firm-centric view of value creation to one that examines how customers engage themselves in the value-creation process ( | |
| 1.1.3 | Empirical advances by other authors | Includes empirical advances in SDL by other authors, but also by Vargo or Lusch with other authors | “According to | |
| 1.2 | Advance contrasting perspectives | Contributions using | “CDL takes an entirely different focus on customers […]. SDL is systems dominant with generic actors ( | |
| 1.3 | Advance other perspectives | Contributions using | “Overall then, this first step in our proposed framework, at the system level, acknowledges that service implies systemic processes; the most recent service views, such as the service-dominant logic (SDL; | |
| 2 | Propagate | Contributions citing | ||
| 2.0 | Discuss | Contributions using | “The emerging dominant logic has many implications, but they are not entirely the ones that V &L have in mind. Vargo and Lusch believe that marketing should be at the center of the integration and coordination of the cross-functional processes of a service-centered business model, but this depends on what is meant by ‘marketing.’” ( | |
| 2.1 | Debate against | Contributions using | “Our first criticism lies in the definition of services ‘as the application of specialized competences (knowledge and skills) through deeds, processes, and performances for the benefit of another entity or the entity itself’ ( | |
| 2.2 | Fertilization – pollination | Contributions using | “The unfavourable experience that is outside the customers' normal experience must be understood as being beyond the boundary of what is acceptable or within the range of objectionability. The basis of this understanding can be found in adaptation-level theory, prospect theory and social-judgement theory (for more discussions, see, e.g. | |
| 2.3 | Set research agenda | Contributions using | “ | |
| 3 | Position | Contributions citing | ||
| 3.0 | Positioning | Contributions using | “There have been many developments and research streams within the customer perceived value domain. One of the most recent conceptualizations, drawing from the service-dominant logic ( | |
| 3.1 | Literature review | Contributions whose literature reviews are mainly, but not always solely, based on | “ | |
| 3.2 | Framing the contribution | Contributions using | “Despite these contributions important research gaps remain, in particular with respect to the conceptual association of CE | |
| 3.3 | Justify an element of the research | Contributions using | “In sum, learning, publicity and compatibility belong to the intangible operant resources, echoing what | |
| 4 | Default citations | Contributions citing | ||
| 4.1 | Paying homage to the originators | Contributions using | “The catalyst for this interest has been the publication of an award-winning article by Vargo and Lusch in the Journal of Marketing ( | |
| 4.2 | A general citation | Contributions referring to | “Business literature now proposes that customers ‘co-create value’ with companies ( | |
As a benefit of your subscription, you can share temporary access to restricted articles.
Each link will stop working after 30 days or 10 uses. You may create up to 10 links in a 30 day period.
Please sign in to your personal account to gift article access.
As a benefit of your subscription, you can share temporary access to restricted articles.
Each link will stop working after 30 days or 10 uses. You may create up to 10 links in a 30 day period.
Gift articles remaining: --
Each link will stop working after 30 days or 10 uses. You may create up to 10 links in a 30 day period.
Gift articles remaining: --
As a benefit of your subscription, you can share temporary access to restricted articles.
Each link will stop working after 30 days or 10 uses.
You have reached the limit of 10 links within a 30 day period.
Sharing content requires targeting cookies to be enabled. Please update your cookie preferences to use this feature.