Commentary: “Back to the future” or “trapped in the future”? The future of services practice and research

IF 3.8 4区 管理学 Q2 BUSINESS Journal of Services Marketing Pub Date : 2023-10-24 DOI:10.1108/jsm-09-2023-0341
Thomas Hollmann
{"title":"Commentary: “Back to the future” or “trapped in the future”? The future of services practice and research","authors":"Thomas Hollmann","doi":"10.1108/jsm-09-2023-0341","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose The aim of this commentary is to encourage service researchers to reflect on the state of the field as it pertains to the academia–industry intersection. The author puts forth a call to action to continue the work of the field’s founders in developing the foundations of the field and to carry the models and frameworks of the field deeper into industry practice. Design/methodology/approach Personal reflections and in-depth interviews. Findings The services discipline is based on foundational theories, models and frameworks developed, in part, as a response to needs expressed by industry. The development of these frameworks has not progressed to the level and format needed by industry, and the field is increasingly operating in silos. Resultantly, the services marketing domain has not developed its foundations to the level of depth needed to answer the call for “assistance” made by Shostack (1977). Research limitations/implications The author encourages researchers to build a next set of paradigmatic foundations that broaden the field as a truly interdisciplinary endeavor and deepen its impact in industry. To accomplish these goals, it will be necessary to question original theoretical frameworks and show situations in which they require modification. Originality/value This work suggests that researchers may be overemphasizing the silo aspects of the field and underestimating the lack of completeness of the service science field.","PeriodicalId":48294,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Services Marketing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Services Marketing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jsm-09-2023-0341","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Purpose The aim of this commentary is to encourage service researchers to reflect on the state of the field as it pertains to the academia–industry intersection. The author puts forth a call to action to continue the work of the field’s founders in developing the foundations of the field and to carry the models and frameworks of the field deeper into industry practice. Design/methodology/approach Personal reflections and in-depth interviews. Findings The services discipline is based on foundational theories, models and frameworks developed, in part, as a response to needs expressed by industry. The development of these frameworks has not progressed to the level and format needed by industry, and the field is increasingly operating in silos. Resultantly, the services marketing domain has not developed its foundations to the level of depth needed to answer the call for “assistance” made by Shostack (1977). Research limitations/implications The author encourages researchers to build a next set of paradigmatic foundations that broaden the field as a truly interdisciplinary endeavor and deepen its impact in industry. To accomplish these goals, it will be necessary to question original theoretical frameworks and show situations in which they require modification. Originality/value This work suggests that researchers may be overemphasizing the silo aspects of the field and underestimating the lack of completeness of the service science field.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
评论:“回到未来”还是“困在未来”?未来服务的实践与研究
这篇评论的目的是鼓励服务研究人员反思该领域的现状,因为它涉及到学术界和工业界的交集。作者呼吁采取行动,继续该领域创始人的工作,发展该领域的基础,并将该领域的模型和框架深入到行业实践中。设计/方法/方法个人反思和深度访谈。服务学科建立在基础理论、模型和框架的基础上,这些理论、模型和框架在一定程度上是对行业需求的回应。这些框架的发展尚未发展到工业所需的水平和格式,而且该领域越来越孤立地运作。结果,服务营销领域并没有将其基础发展到回应肖斯塔克(1977)所提出的“援助”呼吁所需的深度。作者鼓励研究人员建立下一套范例基础,拓宽该领域,使其成为真正的跨学科努力,并加深其对工业的影响。为了实现这些目标,有必要质疑原来的理论框架,并指出它们需要修改的情况。这项工作表明,研究人员可能过分强调了该领域的竖井方面,低估了服务科学领域缺乏完整性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
20.50%
发文量
63
期刊介绍: ■Customer policy and service ■Marketing of services ■Marketing planning ■Service marketing abroad ■Service quality Capturing and retaining customers in a service industry is a vastly different activity to its product-based counterpart. The fickle nature of today"s consumer is a vital factor in understanding the factors which determine successful holding of market share - and the intense competition within the sector means practitioners must keep pace with new developments if they are to outwit competitors and develop customer loyalty.
期刊最新文献
Cite me! Perspectives on coercive citation in reviewing Editorial: Embracing the future of services marketing Customer churn analysis using feature optimization methods and tree-based classifiers Low-income consumers’ informal and formal financial service experiences: perceptions of access, inclusion, and social dependence Enhancing customer engagement behaviors via customer-to-customer interactions and identification
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1