Vii 1 Resource Service System

642 views

Published on

A Conceptual Model of Service Exchange in Service-Dominant Logic
Geert Poels
Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University

Published in: Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
642
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
24
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Vii 1 Resource Service System

  1. 1. A
Conceptual
Model
of
Service
 Exchange
in
Service‐Dominant
Logic
 Geert
Poels
 Faculty
of
Economics
and
Business
 AdministraBon,
Ghent
University
 19‐2‐2010
 IESS
1.0
Geneva
17‐19
February
2010
 1

  2. 2. Outline
 •  Service‐Dominant
Logic
 •  Service
System
 •  Service
system
modelling
=
business
modelling
 •  The
Resource‐Event‐Agent
conceptual
model
 •  The
Resource‐Service‐System
conceptual
 model
 •  Open
issues,
challenges,
future
research
 19‐2‐2010
 IESS
1.0
Geneva
17‐19
February
2010
 2

  3. 3. Service‐Dominant
Logic
 •  Service‐Dominant
Logic
(Vargo
&
Lusch)
 
‘’Service
Science
embraces
the
world
view
of
the
service‐dominant
 logic.’’

(Cambridge
SSME
symposium,
July
2007)
 •  Main
ideas
 –  Service
is
the
applicaBon
of
competences
(skills,
knowledge)
for
the
 benefit
of
another
party
 –  All
economic
exchanges
are
service
exchanges:
service
is
exchanged
 for
service
on
the
basis
of
voluntary
economic
reciprocity
 –  Goods
are
involved
in
this
process
as
appliances
for
service
provision:
 they
are
conveyors
of
competences
 –  SDL
represents
a
shi
in
thinking
about
value
in
terms
of
 •  Operand
resources
(‘D‐resources’):
passive
resources
that
require
acBon
to
 make
them
valuable
 to
 •  Operant
resources
(‘T‐resources’):
acBve
resources
that
embody
competences
 and
that
can
act
on
other
resources
to
make
them
valuable

 19‐2‐2010
 IESS
1.0
Geneva
17‐19
February
2010
 3

  4. 4. Comparing
the
‘new’
and
‘old’
logics
 •  Goods‐Dominant
Logic
 •  Service‐Dominant
Logic
 –  Services
are
seen
as
units
 –  Service
is
seen
as
a
process
 of
output
 –  Value
in
use:
value
is
 –  Value
in
exchange:
value
is
 created
through
resources
 created
through
transfer
of
 acBng
upon
other
 resources
 resources
 –  One
party
produces
the
 –  Each
party
brings
in
or
 services
and
another
party
 makes
accessible
its
own
 consumes
the
services
 resources
and
both
parBes
 co‐create
value
for
the
 service
beneficiary
 Service‐Dominant
Logic
represents
a
shi<
in
logic
of
exchange,
 not
just
a
shi<
in
type
of
product
that
is
under
invesCgaCon.
 19‐2‐2010
 IESS
1.0
Geneva
17‐19
February
2010
 4

  5. 5. Service
System
 •  DefiniBon
(Maglio,
Vargo,
Caswell,
Spohrer)
 ‘’an
open
system
(1)
capable
of
improving
the
 state
of
another
system
through
sharing
or
 applying
its
resources
(i.e.,
the
other
system
 determines
and
agrees
that
the
interacBon
has
 value),
and
(2)
capable
of
improving
its
own
state
 by
acquiring
external
resources
(i.e.,
the
system
 itself
sees
value
in
its
interacBon
with
other
 systems)’’
 19‐2‐2010
 IESS
1.0
Geneva
17‐19
February
2010
 5

  6. 6. •  Key
characterisBcs
 –  A
service
system
is
a
configuraBon
of
resources,
of
which
 at
least
one
operant
resource
 •  physical
resources
with
legal
rights
(people)
 •  conceptual
resources
with
legal
rights
(organizaBons)
 •  conceptual
resources
treated
as
property
(shared
informaBon)
 •  physical
resources
treated
as
property
(technology)
 –  Service
is
the
applicaBon
or
sharing
of
resources
for
the
 benefit
of
another
system
 •  At
least
one
operant
resource
that
embodies
competences
is
 applied
or
shared
 –  Service
entails
an
interacBon
with
another
service
system
 •  Service
is
co‐creaBon
of
value
rather
than
producBon
by
one
party
 •  The
other
party
needs
to
bring
in
or
make
accessible
its
resources
 –  There
is
an
economic
moBve
for
service
systems
to
interact
 •  A
service
leads
to
another
service
that
benefits
the
service
system
 19‐2‐2010
 IESS
1.0
Geneva
17‐19
February
2010
 6

  7. 7. Service
system
modelling
=
 business
modelling
 •  Service‐Dominant
Logic
assumes
an
economic
context
 for
service
exchanges
 –  Enterprises
are
a
major
category
of
service
system
 –  The
business
logic
of
an
enterprise
is
expressed
in
a
 business
model
 →
modelling
an
enterprise
as
a
service
system,
emphasizing
 the
applicaBon
of
its
resources
for
the
benefit
of
another
 system
in
the
context
of
economic
exchange,
is
business
 modelling
 •  Business
modelling
knowledge
has
been
specified
and
 formalized
in
business
model
ontologies,
which
offer
 concepts
in
terms
of
which
business
models
can
be
 arBculated
 19‐2‐2010
 IESS
1.0
Geneva
17‐19
February
2010
 7

  8. 8. Resource‐Event‐Agent
Model
 REA
takes
a
Goods‐Dominant
Logic
perspecCve
on
economic
exchange
 as
services
are
a
subtype
of
Economic
Resource
 •  Services
are
economic
resources
that
can
be
transferred,
i.e.
control
over
the
 services
can
be
transfered
from
one
person
to
another.
 •  The
provider
‘produces’
the
services
(i.e.
creates
value)
and
the
receiver
 ‘consumes’
the
services
(i.e.
destroys
value)
 •  The
value
of
the
services
is
determined
through
the
economic
exchange,
usually
 in
terms
of
what
is
being
paid
for
them
 •  To
model
the
transfer
an
economic
event
is
needed,
e.g.
a
services
transfer,
 provision
or
delivery
event.
 19‐2‐2010
 IESS
1.0
Geneva
17‐19
February
2010
 8

  9. 9. Example:
a
car
change
oil
service
 Economic
resources
 Economic
event
 Economic
agents
 19‐2‐2010
 IESS
1.0
Geneva
17‐19
February
2010
 9

  10. 10. 19‐2‐2010
 IESS
1.0
Geneva
17‐19
February
2010
 10

  11. 11. Resource‐Service‐System
Model
(1)
 Basic
Resource/Service/System
ConstellaCon
 In
a
Service‐Dominant
Logic
interpretaCon
of
REA,
service
maps
to
 economic
event,
not
to
economic
resource
 19‐2‐2010
 IESS
1.0
Geneva
17‐19
February
2010
 11

  12. 12. Example
revisited
again
 Operant
Resource
 Operand
Resources
 Service
 Service
systems
 19‐2‐2010
 IESS
1.0
Geneva
17‐19
February
2010
 12

  13. 13. Resource‐Service‐System
Model
(2)
 Service
Exchange
View
 19‐2‐2010
 IESS
1.0
Geneva
17‐19
February
2010
 13

  14. 14. 19‐2‐2010
 IESS
1.0
Geneva
17‐19
February
2010
 14

  15. 15. Resource‐Service‐System
Model
(3)
 Service
System
ComposiCon
View
 19‐2‐2010
 IESS
1.0
Geneva
17‐19
February
2010
 15

  16. 16. Resource‐Service‐System
Model
(4)
 Service
Accountability
View
 19‐2‐2010
 IESS
1.0
Geneva
17‐19
February
2010
 16

  17. 17. 19‐2‐2010
 IESS
1.0
Geneva
17‐19
February
2010
 17

  18. 18. Future
research
 •  Extend
conceptual
model
to
accommodate
 –  Process
structure
of
service:
service
lifecycle
 model
 –  Service
(system)
component
structure:
service
 composiBon
model
 •  Model
tesBng
 •  Ontology
development
 •  Ontology
alignment
 19‐2‐2010
 IESS
1.0
Geneva
17‐19
February
2010
 18

  19. 19. Auxiliary
slides
 19‐2‐2010
 IESS
1.0
Geneva
17‐19
February
2010
 19

  20. 20. MoBvaBon
–
Service
Science
 •  New
,
disBnct
field
based
on
an
interdisciplinary
 approach
to
research
 •  IniBaBve
launched
in
2004
by
IBM,
intending
to
 integrate
separate
service
research
areas
 •  DefiniBons
(Maglio
et
al.)
 –  ‘’Service
science
is
the
study
of
the
applicaBon
of
the
 resources
of
one
or
more
systems
for
the
benefit
of
 another
system
in
economic
exchange.’’
 –  ‘’NormaCve
service
science
is
the
study
of
how
one
 system
can
and
should
apply
its
resources
for
the
mutual
 benefit
of
another
system
and
of
the
system
itself.’’
 –  ‘’Service
science,
management,
and
engineering
(SSME)
is
 the
applicaBon
of
normaBve
service
science.’’
 19‐2‐2010
 IESS
1.0
Geneva
17‐19
February
2010
 20

  21. 21. PRINCIPLES:
 ‐
Service
systems
interacCng
in
a
service
take
on
provider
or
client
roles
 ‐
The
provider
takes
responsibility
for
transforming
or
operaCng
on
a
service
 target
that
is
owned
by
the
client
 ‐
The
interacCon
of
both
systems
is
required
to
create
value
for
the
client
 19‐2‐2010
 IESS
1.0
Geneva
17‐19
February
2010
 21

  22. 22. The
need
for
modelling
service
systems
 •  Modeling
helps
studying
service
systems
and
 their
interacBons

 •  A
recommendaBon
for
research
made
at
the
 Cambridge
SSME
symposium
(July
2007)
 –  ‘’create
modelling
and
simulaBon
tools
for
service
 systems’’
 •  A
challenge
for
Service
Science
research
 –  ‘’Chief
among
the
challenges
that
lay
ahead
is
the
 challenge
of
developing
a
shared
vocabulary
that
can
 be
used
across
disciplines
to
describe
the
great
variety
 of
service
systems.’’
 19‐2‐2010
 IESS
1.0
Geneva
17‐19
February
2010
 22

  23. 23. The
need
for
modelling
service
systems
–
 citaBons
from
Service
Science
literature
 •  ‘’someday
service
scienBsts
may
work
with
formal
models
 of
service
systems”
 •  “Models
and
analyBcal
methods
for
service
systems
will
 allow
us
to
find
opportuniBes
for
efficiency
gains
and
to
 create
new
informaBon‐based
services.”
 •  ‘’understanding
service
and
service
innovaBon
requires
 new
ways
of
thinking
(worldviews
or
logics)
and
new
 abstracBons’’
 •  ‘’Perhaps
more
than
any
other
subjects,
advancement
in
 Service
Science
depends
on
models
and
simulaBons
of
 alternaBve
service
systems
designs.’’
 •  “Formal
representaBon
and
measurement
of
work
in
 service
systems
is
a
grand
challenge
for
the
services
 economy”
 19‐2‐2010
 IESS
1.0
Geneva
17‐19
February
2010
 23

  24. 24. Independent
view
REA
model
 19‐2‐2010
 IESS
1.0
Geneva
17‐19
February
2010
 24

  25. 25. REA‐Based
service
ontologies
 19‐2‐2010
 IESS
1.0
Geneva
17‐19
February
2010
 25

  26. 26. Example
revisited
 19‐2‐2010
 IESS
1.0
Geneva
17‐19
February
2010
 26

  27. 27. FoundaBonal
Ontology
for
Service
 Science
 •  ‘’It
seems
legiBmate
to
assume
that
goods
are
 objects
(endurants,
in
DOLCE’s
terms),
while
 services
are
events
(perdurants)’’
 ⇒ 
Conform
with
Service‐Dominant
Logic
 (‘service
as
a
process’)
 ⇒ 
A
service
is
not
transferable
 ⇒ 
The
disBncBon
between
a
service
economic
 resource
and
a
service
(transfer)
economic
 event
is
not
supported
 19‐2‐2010
 IESS
1.0
Geneva
17‐19
February
2010
 27

  28. 28. Resource‐Service‐System
Model
(5)
 Service
Process
View
 19‐2‐2010
 IESS
1.0
Geneva
17‐19
February
2010
 28


×