This document discusses issues and misunderstandings related to service-dominant logic (SDL). It identifies 4 issues with SDL: its use of goods-dominant terminology, its managerial focus, its oversimplification of value creation processes, and its lack of consideration for phenomenological experiences of value. It also describes 3 common misunderstandings of SDL: that it only applies to service economies, that it only considers dyadic exchanges, and that it ignores social/non-profit contexts. The document outlines 9 modifications made to SDL's foundational premises to address these issues and misunderstandings. It concludes that these modifications open new opportunities for developing theories aligned with SDL.

1. OBJECTIVES
•TO DISCUSS ISSUES RELATED TO SDL.
•TO DISCUSS MISUNDERSTANDINGS ABOUT SDL
•TO DESCRIBE THE MODIFICATIONS MADE IN THE
SDL ARTICLE

2. ISSUES OF SDL
• S-D logic’s G-D lexicon
• The managerial phrasing of S-D logic
• Interactive and networked nature of value
creation
• The phenomenological/experiential nature of
value

3. Issue 1
S-D logic’s G-D lexicon
Terms used in describing SDL are taken from
GDL like producer, consumers, production etc.

4. Issue 2
The managerial phrasing of S-D logic
• S-D logic is apparently oriented towards
managerial dimensions and do not address
other orientations.

5. Issue 3
Interactive and networked nature of
value creation
• Value creation in S-D logic has described a
very simple phenomenon and does not
address interactive and networked nature .

6. Issue 4
The phenomenological/experiential
nature of value
• S-D logic has not described phenomenological
or experimental nature of value to its real
soul.

7. Misunderstandings of SDL
• The “Services Economy” justification of S-D
logic
• S-D logic as a dyadic, firm/customer, exchange
perspective
• Accommodation of social and non-profit
marketing and ethics

8. Misunderstanding no 1
The “Services Economy” justification
of S-D logic
critics say that SDL is applicable only because
world is moving towards services economy
but we believe that service is the foundation
of all economic exchanges

9. Misunderstanding no 2
S-D logic as a
dyadic, firm/customer, exchange
perspective
• It is believed about SDL that is focuses on
dyadic exchange and ignores other factors of
networking etc but actually SDL states that
value creation takes place between systems at
aggregate levels.

10. Misunderstanding no 3
Accommodation of social and nonprofit marketing and ethics
• It is said about SDL that it ignores non profit
marketing and ethics. It is not in fact. SDL
describes services as base of exchange and
service itself defines its meanings towards
ethics as service is a mean of solving problems
of people.

11. modifications in SD logic

12. FP1
• The application of specialized skill(s) and
knowledge is the fundamental unit of
exchange
TO
• “service is the fundamental basis of
exchange.”

13. FP 2
• Indirect exchange masks the fundamental unit
of exchange
TO
• Indirect exchange masks the fundamental
basis of exchange

14. FP 3
• Goods are a distribution mechanism for
service provision
TO
• Goods are a distribution mechanism for
service provision

15. FP 4
• Knowledge is the fundamental source of
competitive advantage
TO
• Operant resources are the fundamental
source of competitive advantage

16. FP 5
• All economies are services economies
TO
• All economies are service economies

17. FP 6
• The customer is always a co-producer
TO
• The customer is always a co-creator of value

18. FP 7
• The enterprise can only make value
propositions
TO
• The enterprise cannot deliver value, but only
offer value propositions

19. FP 8
• A service-centered view is customer oriented
and relational
TO
• A service-centered view is inherently
customer oriented and relational

20. FP 9
• Organizations exist to integrate and transform
micro specialized competences into complex
services that are demanded in the
marketplace
• TO
• All social and economic actors are resource
integrators

21. CONCLUSION
• New horizons are readily set by this approach
which will help to develop new theories.