Three frameworks for service research: Three frameworks for service research: exploring multilevel governance in exploring multilevel governance in

nested, nested, networked systemsnetworked systems

The 2011 Naples Forum on Service - Service Dominant logic, The 2011 Naples Forum on Service - Service Dominant logic, Network & System Theory and Service Science: integrating Network & System Theory and Service Science: integrating

three perspectives for a new service agendathree perspectives for a new service agenda

Capri, June 14-17, 2010 Capri, June 14-17, 2010

James Spohrer, Paolo Piciocchi and Clara BassanoJames Spohrer, Paolo Piciocchi and Clara Bassano

spohrer@almaden.ibm.com, p.piciocchi@unisa.it, clara.bassano@uniparthenope.it spohrer@almaden.ibm.com, p.piciocchi@unisa.it, clara.bassano@uniparthenope.it

Why and How Multilevel Governance?

Policy-makers, business consultants, and service researchers try to envision better systems of rules (Ostrom, 2005; Williamson, 1996)

to solve political and business problems (Sterman, 2000; Friedman, 2008)

Better frameworks for crossing disciplines, systems and cultures are needed, as real world problems rarely respect

discipline boundaries (IfM and IBM, 2008)

Purpose

Integration of the three frameworks to expand awareness in the service research community of multilevel governance or a shared system of

rules in complex social systems*

* nations, states, cities, universities, hospitals, hotels, homes, or nested,network Holistic Service Systems (HSS)

Are some entity architectures (ЄN) better than others?

Complex social system frameworks (FN) provide Complex social system frameworks (FN) provide professionals with ways to delineate innovative professionals with ways to delineate innovative

entity architectures (ЄN) entity architectures (ЄN)

Are some frameworks (FN) better than others?

Frameworks (FN) and Entity Architectures (ЄN)Frameworks (FN) and Entity Architectures (ЄN)

SSME + D(Spohrer & Maglio)

All refer to integrated multi-disciplinary perspectives

all emphasize the importance of governance mechanisms, government, and rules

all illustrate how value is co-created through governance interaction

VSA(Golinelli & Barile)

IAD(Ostrom)

Holistic Service System

& Whole Service

Viable

System

Polycentric

System

The SSME+D frameworkThe SSME+D framework

58

How entities (service systems) interactIncentives & Rules

Ecology(Populations & Diversity)

Entities(Service Systems)

Interactions(Service Networks)

Outcomes(Value Changes)

Value PropositionBased Interactions (Incentives)

Governance MechanismBased Interactions (Rules)

Access Rights(Relationships)

Measures(Rankings of Entities)

Resources(Roles in Processes)

Stakeholders(Perspectives)

win-win

lose-lose win-lose

lose-win win-win

lose-lose win-lose

lose-win

Identity(Aspirations/Lifecycle)

Reputation(Opportunities/Variety)

Resources: People, Technology, Information, OrganizationsStakeholders: Customers, Providers, Authorities, CompetitorsMeasures: Quality, Productivity, Compliance, Sustainable InnovationAccess Rights: Own, Lease, Shared, Privileged

Service Systems exist for value co-creation Holistic Service Systems

Both can be represented in terms of multilevel governance and component interaction

Overall value co-creation depends on the capability of governance to produce shared competence for the development of Whole Service

Whole Service (WS) integrates the value propositions of Holistic Service Systems (HSS) through multilevel governance mechanisms

Multilevel Governance

Entity architectures include a shared

system of rules

Regional

Components

Based on shared socio-economic

and cultural planning

Overall Value Co-Creation

Governance of related capability

to produce shared competences

for

the development of

Whole Service

Holistic Services Systems (HSS) integrated Holistic Services Systems (HSS) integrated within a Whole Service (WS) perspectivewithin a Whole Service (WS) perspective

The VSA The VSA conceptual frameworkconceptual framework Golinelli & Barile

VSA is a model for observing and interpreting the viability of complex business and social phenomena through general interpretative

patterns

New levels of complexity require new types of decision making based not on stochastic methods but on the VSA Informative Variety Model (Barile, 2009)

Value

Categories

Interpretative Patterns

Value

Categories

Interpretative Patterns

Consonance between

Value Categories

Consonance between Interpretative patterns

Informative UnitsInformative Units

Variety of Viable System (a) Variety of Viable System (b)

The viability of a system depends on its capability for compacting and compressing (synthesizing) the

pressures deriving from the structural and functional variety of its synergic components (consonance)

The viability of The viability of complex social systemscomplex social systems

Governance for consonance has to interpret, mediate and synthesize to

guarantee the efficiency, adequacy and equi-finality of related systems

The Institutional Analysis The Institutional Analysis and Development and Development (IAD) framework(IAD) framework

(1) attributes of the physical world(2) attributes of a given community(3) rules that create incentives and constraints(4) Interactions with individuals

Cited in the 2009 Nobel Prize award in the area of economics(Ostrom, 2005) Analyzes:

The core concepts of this framework focus on the rules and the mutual influence of polycentric systems underpinning governance as a whole

In Ostrom’s view, the governance of polycentric systems depends on the capacity for structural change on the part of institutions

Service Science view,

the systems capacity to run-

transform-innovate

(Spohrer et al., 2009);

March’s terminology,

exploitation and

exploration

(March, 1991);

Viable Systems Approach language,

adaptation-transformation- restructuring

(Golinelli, 2010)

Capacity to ensure conditions of elasticity and

flexibility within the collective system

(Piciocchi & Bassano, 2009).

The Institutional Analysis The Institutional Analysis and Development and Development (IAD) core concepts(IAD) core concepts

Findings: Entity Architectures (ЄN)Findings: Entity Architectures (ЄN) Frameworks (FN)Frameworks (FN)

Entity architectures (ЄN) broadly speaking are nested, network systems which can be envisaged as holistic service systems (HSS)

(SSME +D)(VSA)(IAD)

e.g. nations, states, cities, universities, remote research outposts, hospitals,

luxury hotels, cruise ships, family homes, and even space craft and

space stations

are complex social system frameworks (FN) for analyzing the provision of

Whole Service (WS) by Holistic Service Systems (HSS) at multiple levels

Value is co-created through multilevel governance interaction

If value derives from shared aims (consonance), then improving consonance means maximizing value co-creation

(resonance) of integrated HSS

Findings: By merging SSME+D, VSA and IAD Findings: By merging SSME+D, VSA and IAD FrameworksFrameworks

The capability to co-create service value depends on the capability of multilevel governance (government and/or top decision makers and/or policy makers) to

interpret, mediate and synthesize contexts in a “Whole Service” (WS) perspective

Multilevel governance can be conceived as a directional evolving process which facilitates value co-creation for new knowledge and

innovation (Spohrer, Piciocchi & Bassano, 2012, forthcoming)

Service researchers can benefit from innovative frameworks to advance the understanding of complex

social systems that:

integrate disciplines, systems and cultures

improve multilevel shared governance

move beyond dyads to nested, networked systems

Practical implicationsPractical implications

The Smarter Planet The Smarter Planet ЄЄNN: FN(: FN(PRWPRW)→ {R)→ {RЄЄ}}

Innovated entity architectures (ЄN) for holistic service systems (HSS)

to provision “whole service”

Improvedframeworks (FN) for professionals

to analyze real-world problems (PRW)

Improvedmultilevel governancerecommendations {RЄ}

Our project commenced with:- the analysis of entity

architectures and frameworks- we merged ЄЄN and N and : FN(: FN(PRWPRW))

- in an attempt to - improve multilevel

governance recommendations - {R{RЄЄ}}

Our outcome being a “Smarter Planet” (i.e.

more environmentally and economically sustainable)

shared governance approach -ЄЄNN: FN(: FN(PRWPRW) → {R) → {RЄЄ}}

Thanks for your attention

15

E. Gummesson 2011

NETWORKS AND SYSTEMSIN MARKETING & SERVICE