Co-creation strategy in peer-to-peer accommodation in Bandung tourism context
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.26740/bisma.v12n2.p140-153Keywords:
collaborative economy, service-dominant logic, service management, service scienceAbstract
Abstract
Collaborative economy refers to social and economic sharing activities that make entities (customer and peer provider) in-service ecosystem can access services through technology or digital platform. This research aims to give a better understanding of activities and interaction between entities that can potentially elevate the existence of peer-to-peer (P2P) accommodation in Indonesia. Although research regarding the collaborative economy has been accelerating, there has not been a formal conceptualization of interaction from a broadening perspective as a service ecosystem in the context of co-creation. Preliminary study becomes crucial and relevant with the raising of the collaborative economy, based on the consideration that no previous research is considered to be able to explain the dynamics of interaction by using a perspective of Service-Dominant Logic (S-D Logic). This study seeks to answer two research questions, what interactions occur outside consumers, peer providers, platform providers, and how co-creation might be created in the P2P service ecosystem. This conceptual paper draws on the interaction from the perspective of co-creation between entities and stakeholders as a lens by using the systematic-qualitative approach. In general, this study uses the Soft System Methodology (SSM) precisely defining an unstructured situation in the real world. This study tries to initiate the development of phases of co-creation between entities in the service ecosystem. The outcomes of this study enrich the body of knowledge of service science, especially on the way to apply the framework value co-creation. The development of a better service ecosystem across particular engagement remains critical.
References
Brodie, R. J., Saren, M., & Pels, J. (2011). Theorizing about the service-dominant logic: The bridging role of middle-range theory. Marketing Theory, 11, 7591. http://doi.org/10.1177/1470593110393714
Burge, S. (2015). An Overview of the Soft Systems Methodology. In System Thinking: Approaches and Methodologies (pp. 114). Retrieved from http://www.burgehugheswalsh.co.uk/Uploaded/1/Documents/Soft-Systems-Methodology.pdf
Chandler, J. D., & Vargo, S. L. (2011). Contextualization and value-in-context: How context frames exchange. Marketing Theory, 11, 3549. http://doi.org/10.1177/1470593110393713
Checkland, P. (2000). Soft Systems Methodology: A Thirty Year Retrospective. Systems Research and Behavioural Science, 17, 1158. http://doi.org/10.1002/1099-1743(200011)17:1+<::AID-SRES374>3.0.CO;2-O
Checkland, P., & Scholes, J. (1990). Soft Systems Methodology in Action. John Wiley.
Flood, R. L. ., & Jackson, M. C. (1991). Creative Problem Solving. John Wiley.
Galvagno, M., & Dalli, D. (2014). Theory of value co-creation: A systematic literature review. Managing Service Quality, 24, 643683. http://doi.org/10.1108/MSQ-09-2013-0187
Holwell, S. (2000). Soft Systems Methodology: Other Voices. Systemic Practice and Action Research, 13(6), 773797. http://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026479529130
Kijima, K., & Arai, Y. (2016). Value Co-creation Process and Value Orchestration Platform. In Global Perspectives on Service Science: Japan (pp. 137154). http://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-3594-9
Klijn, F., & Haes, H. A. U. De. (1994). A hierarchical approach to ecosystems and its implications for ecological land classification. Landscape Ecology, 9, 89104. Retrieved from https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF00124376
Mehregan, M. R., Hosseinzadeh, M., & Kazemi, A. (2012). An application of Soft System Methodology. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 41, 426433. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.04.051
Novani, S., Putro, U. S., & Hermawan, P. (2014). An Application of Soft System Methodology in Batik Industrial Cluster Solo by Using Service System Science Perspective. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 115, 324331. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.02.439
Prahalad, C. K., & Ramaswamy, V. (2000). Co-Opting Customer Competence. Harvard Business Review. http://doi.org/10.1086/250095
Prahalad, C. K., & Ramaswamy, V. (2004). Co-creation experiences: The next practice in value creation. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 18, 514. http://doi.org/10.1002/dir.20015
Putriya, A. R., Hermawan, P., Novani, S., & Putro, U. S. (2018). Peer-to-Peer Accomodation Service Process: A Framework of Service Blueprint. In Advances in Economics, Business, and Management Research, 72, 211217. http://doi.org/10.2991/icbmr-18.2019.35
Ramaswamy, V., & Chopra, N. (2014). Building a culture of co-creation at Mahindra. Strategy and Leadership, 42, 1218. http://doi.org/10.1108/SL-01-2014-0005
Ramli, D. (2015, July 20). Telstra, Airbnb battle over œBelong tagline. The Sydney Morning Herald, p. business. Sydney. Retrieved from https://www.smh.com.au/business/telstra-airbnb-battle-over-belong-tagline-20150720-gig6d6.html
Shaw, G., Bailey, A., & Williams, A. (2011). Aspects of service-dominant logic and its implications for tourism management: Examples from the hotel industry. Tourism Management, 32, 207214. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2010.05.020
Tussyadiah, I. P., & Zach, F. (2017). Identifying salient attributes of peer-to-peer accommodation experience. Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing, 34, 636652. http://doi.org/10.1080/10548408.2016.1209153
Uchiyama, K. (2009). A Concise Theoretical Grounding of Action Research¯: Based on Checklands Soft Systems Methodolog and Kimuras Phenomenological Psychiatry. General Systems.
Vargo, S. L., Koskela-Huotari, K., Baron, S., Edvardsson, B., Reynoso, J., & Colurcio, M. (2017). A systems perspective on markets Toward a research agenda. Journal of Business Research, 79, 260268. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.03.011
Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2004). Evolving to a New Dominant Logic for Marketing. Journal of Marketing, 68, 117. http://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.68.1.1.24036
Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2008). Service-dominant logic: Continuing the evolution. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 36(1), 110. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-007-0069-6
Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2014). Inversions of service-dominant logic. Marketing Theory, 14, 239248. http://doi.org/10.1177/1470593114534339
Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2016). Institutions and axioms: an extension and update of service-dominant logic. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 44, 523. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-015-0456-3
Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2017). Service-dominant logic 2025. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 34, 4667. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2016.11.001
Vargo, S. L., Wieland, H., & Akaka, M. A. (2015). Innovation through institutionalization: A service ecosystems perspective. Industrial Marketing Management, 44, 6372. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2014.10.008
Walker, D. H. T., & Steinfort, P. (2013). Using an improved rich pictures approach to improve project situational analysis in complex aid reconstruction development projects. International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment, 4, 182198. http://doi.org/10.1108/IJDRBE-12-2011-0043
Zervas, G., Proserpio, D., & Byers, J. W. (2017). The Rise of the Sharing Economy: Estimating the Impact of Airbnb on the Hotel Industry. Journal of Marketing Research, LIV, jmr.15.0204. http://doi.org/10.1509/jmr.15.0204
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright Notice.
The copyright of the received article once accepted for publication shall be assigned to the journal as the publisher of the journal. The intended copyright includes the right to publish the article in various forms (including reprints). The journal maintains the publishing rights to the published articles.
Abstract views: 466
,
PDF Downloads: 303
