Subject Embedding, Relationship Interaction, and Resource Integration: The Value Co-Creation Mechanism in Rural Communities
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
3. Theoretical Foundation and Framework Construction
3.1. Service Ecosystems
3.2. Theoretical Framework Construction
4. Research Method and Data Sources
4.1. Research Methods
4.2. Data Selection
4.3. Data Collection
5. Coding Analysis and Model Construction
5.1. Open Coding
5.2. Axial Coding
5.3. Selective Coding
5.4. Model Construction
5.5. Coding Results Test
6. Model Analysis
6.1. Macro Level
6.2. Meso Level
6.3. Micro Level
7. Discussion
8. Conclusions
8.1. Theoretical Implications
8.2. Policy Implications
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Xi, J. Take rural revitalization strategy as the general gripper of “three rural” work in the new era. Social. Forum 2019, 7, 4–6. [Google Scholar]
- Yan, J.; Huang, Y.; Tan, S.; Lang, W.; Chen, T. Jointly Creating Sustainable Rural Communities through Participatory Planning: A Case Study of Fengqing County, China. Land 2023, 12, 187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, Z.; Li, B.; Chen, H. Social entrepreneurship and rural revitalization. Acad. Mon. 2018, 50, 77–88. [Google Scholar]
- Xu, H.; Zhang, Y.; Zhang, H.; Hu, Y. Research on the realization path of corporate social entrepreneurship for rural revitalization under the perspective of value co-creation. Agric. Econ. Issues 2023, 1–13. [Google Scholar]
- Liu, W.; Zhang, Y.; Li, G.; Tian, H. Industrial and commercial capital to the countryside, factor allocation and agricultural production efficiency. Agric. Technol. Econ. 2018, 9, 4–19. [Google Scholar]
- Yang, J.; Zhang, J.; Zhang, Y. Rural spatial production and governance reconfiguration driven by market capital-an empirical observation of Y village in Wuyuan County. Hum. Geogr. 2020, 35, 86–92+114. [Google Scholar]
- Da, L.; Liu, X. Research on poverty alleviation in rural tourism under the perspective of relative deprivation—The case of Wanfenglin community in Xingyi, Guizhou. Reg. Res. Dev. 2019, 38, 124–128. [Google Scholar]
- Vargo, S.L.; Lusch, R.F. From Repeat Patronage to Value Co-creation in Service Ecosystems: A Transcending Conceptualization of Relationship. J. Bus. Mark. Manag. 2010, 4, 169–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Osborne, S.P. From public service-dominant logic to public service logic: Are public service organizations capable of co-production and value co-creation? Public Manag. Rev. 2018, 20, 225–231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shan, L. Optimizing the Supply of Rural Public Services and Enhancing the Effectiveness of Social Governance at the Grassroots Level. Macroecon. Manag. 2022, 10, 61–69. [Google Scholar]
- Su, T.; Wang, K. Value co-creation mechanism of service ecosystem in digital environment—A case study of Shanghai “May 5th Shopping Festival”. Res. Dev. Manag. 2021, 33, 142–157. [Google Scholar]
- Galvagno, M.; Dalli, D. Theory of Value Co-creation. A Systematic Literature Review. J. Serv. Theory Pract. 2014, 24, 643–683. [Google Scholar]
- Voorberg, W.; Bekkers, V.; Tummers, L.A. Systematic Review of Co-creation and Co-production: Embarki ng on the Social Innovation Journey. Public Manag. Rev. 2015, 9, 1333–1357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lusch, R.; Vargo, S. Service-Dominant Logic: Reactions, Reflections and Refinements. Mark. Theory 2006, 3, 281–288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vargo, S.L.; Lusch, R.F. Service-dominant logic: Continuing the evolution. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2008, 36, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vargo, S.L.; Lusch, R.F. Evolving to a new dominant logic for marketing. J. Mark. 2004, 68, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yu, J.; Wen, Y.; Jin, J.; Zhang, Y. Towards a service-dominant platform for public value co-creation in a smart city: Evidence from two metropolitan cities in China. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2019, 142, 168–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hughes, T.; Vafeas, M.; Hilton, T. Resource integration for co-creation between marketing agencies and clients. Eur. J. Mark. 2018, 52, 1329–1354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grönroos, C.; Voima, P. Critical service logic: Making sense of value creation and co-creation. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2013, 41, 133–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lusch, R.F.; Vargo, S.L. Service-Dominant Logic: Premises, Perspectives, Possibilities; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Saha, V.; Goyal, P.; Jebarajakirthy, C. Value co-creation: A review of literature and future research agenda. J. Bus. Ind. Mark. 2022, 37, 612–628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kohtamäki, M.; Rajala, R. Theory and practice of value co-creation in B2B systems. Ind. Mark. Manag. 2016, 56, 4–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McColl-Kennedy, J.R.; Vargo, S.L.; Dagger, T.S.; Sweeney, J.C.; Kasteren, Y.V. Health care customer value cocreation practice styles. J. Serv. Res. 2012, 15, 370–389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, H.H.M.; Van Dolen, W. Creative participation: Collective sentiment in online co-creation communities. Inf. Manag. 2015, 52, 951–964. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, Z.; Chen, Y.; Filieri, R. Resident-tourist value co-creation: The role of residents’ perceived tourism impacts and life satisfaction. Tour. Manag. 2017, 61, 436–442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Breidbach, C.F.; Maglio, P.P. Technology-enabled value co-creation: An empirical analysis of actors, resources, and practices. Ind. Mark. Manag. 2016, 56, 73–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Prahalad, C.K.; Ramaswamy, V. Co-creation experiences: The next practice in value creation. J. Interact. Mark. 2004, 18, 5–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grönroos, C. Value co-creation in service logic: A critical analysis. Mark. Theory 2011, 11, 279–301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Voyer, B.G.; Kastanakis, M.N.; Rhode, A.K. Co-creating stakeholder and brand identities: A cross-cultural consumer perspective. J. Bus. Res. 2017, 70, 399–410. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ling, H.; Jian, Z.; Li, L. Service ecosystems: Origins, core perspectives and theoretical framework. Res. Dev. Manag. 2018, 30, 147–158. [Google Scholar]
- Banoun, A.; Dufour, L.; Andiappan, M. Evolution of a service ecosystem: Longitudinal evidence from multiple shared services centers based on the economies of worth framework. J. Bus. Res. 2016, 69, 2990–2998. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nie, Z.; Zurlo, F.; Camussi, E.; Annovazzi, C. Service Ecosystem Design for Improving the Service Sustainability: A Case of Career Counselling Services in the Italian Higher Education Institution. Sustainability 2019, 11, 1427. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vargo, S.L.; Akaka, M.A. Value cocreation and service systems (re) formation: A service ecosystems view. Serv. Sci. 2012, 4, 207–217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Akaka, M.A.; Vargo, S.L.; Lusch, R.F. The complexity of context: A service ecosystems approach for international marketing. J. Int. Mark. 2013, 21, 1–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chandler, J.D.; Danatzis, I.; Wernicke, C.; Akaka, M.A.; Reynolds, D. How does innovation emerge in a service ecosystem? J. Serv. Res. 2019, 22, 75–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Frow, P.; McColl-Kennedy, J.R.; Payne, A. Co-creation practices: Their role in shaping a health care ecosystem. Ind. Mark. Manag. 2016, 56, 24–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Akaka, M.A.; Koskela-Huotari, K.; Vargo, S.L. Further Advancing Service Science with Service-Dominant Logic: Service Ecosystems, Institutions, and Their Implications for Innovation; Handbook of Service Science; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2009; Volume 2, pp. 641–659. [Google Scholar]
- Vink, J.; Koskela-Huotari, K.; Tronvoll, B.; Edvardsson, B.; Wetter-Edman, K. Service Ecosystem Design: Propositions, Process Model, and Future Research Agenda. J. Serv. Res. 2021, 24, 168–186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Polese, F.; Vesci, M.; Troisi, O.; Grimaldi, M. Reconceptualizing TQM in service ecosystems: An integrated framework. Int. J. Qual. Serv. Sci. 2019, 11, 104–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Su, J. Comparative analysis of social structure change in rural China since reform and opening up. Rural. Econ. Sci. Technol. 2021, 32, 243–245. [Google Scholar]
- Juan, F. Problems and Countermeasures of Rural Community Building in the Context of Rural Hollowing Out. Agric. Econ. 2022, 425, 44–46. [Google Scholar]
- Marks, D.F. Visual imagery differences in the recall of pictures. Br. J. Psychol. 2011, 64, 17–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chandler, J.D.; Vargo, S.L. Contextualization and value-in-context: How context frames exchange. Mark. Theory 2011, 11, 35–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hua, Z.; Wei, J.; Zhou, W.; Yang, Y.; Zhang, W. Research outlook of service science and innovation management in network environment. China Manag. Sci. 2018, 26, 186–196. [Google Scholar]
- Gummerus, J. Value creation processes and value outcomes in marketing theory: Strangers or siblings? Mark. Theory 2013, 13, 19–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yin, R.K. Case Study Research: Design and Methods; Sage: Newcastle upon Tyne, UK, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Yong, X. “Divide” and “merge”: Classification of rural regional villages under the perspective of qualitative research. Shandong Soc. Sci. 2016, 7, 30–40. [Google Scholar]
- Walker, D.; Myrick, F. Grounded theory: An exploration of process and procedure. Qual. Health Res. 2006, 16, 547–559. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Charmaz, K.; Thornberg, R. The pursuit of quality in grounded theory. Qual. Res. Psychol. 2021, 18, 305–327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khandkar, S.H. Open Coding; University of Calgary: Calgary, Canada, 2009; p. 23.2009. [Google Scholar]
- Moghaddam, A. Coding issues in grounded theory. Issues Educ. Res. 2006, 16, 52–66. [Google Scholar]
- Glaser, B.G.; Strauss, A.L. Grounded Theory: Strategies Qualitative Frosting; Huber: Edison, NJ, USA, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Meynhardt, T.; Chandler, J.D.; Strathoff, P. Systemic principles of value co-creation: Synergetics of value and service ecosystems. J. Bus. Res. 2016, 69, 2981–2989. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhiqiang, L.; Qinghua, W. “Structure-function” interoperability theory: A new explanatory framework for innovative social management research in transitional rural areas—Based on the dimension of rural social organizations. J. Nanjing Agric. Univ. 2014, 14, 8–17. [Google Scholar]
- Chunxia, Z. Rural Social Management Innovation under the Threshold of Structural Functionalism—An Empirical Analysis Based on the 2005 CGSS. Southeast Acad. 2012, 3, 49–61. [Google Scholar]
- Frow, P.; McColl-Kennedy J, R.; Hilton, T.; Davidson, A.; Payne, A.; Brozovic, D. Value propositions: A service ecosystems perspective. Mark. Theory 2014, 14, 327–351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Merton, R.K. Social Theory and Social Structure; Simon and Schuster: New York, NJ, USA, 1968; pp. 65–66. [Google Scholar]
- Merton, R.K. Social structure and anomie. Am. Sociol. Rev. 1938, 3, 672–682. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Merton, R.K. The functions of the professional association. Am. J. Nurs. 1958, 26, 50–54. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, X.; Li, H. Motivational Mapping of Public Participation in Cooperative Production and Its Impacts—A Mixed Study under the Perspective of Value Co-Creation. Public Adm. Rev. 2023, 16, 4–24+196. [Google Scholar]
- Asquer, A.; Street, T.; Square, R. Co-Investment in the Co-Production of Public Services: Are Clients Willing to Do It. In Proceedings of the Workshop on “Co-Production in Public Services: The State of the Art”, Corvinus University, Budapest, Hungary, 22–23 November 2012; pp. 22–23. [Google Scholar]
- Pestoff, V. Co-production and third sector social services in Europe: Some concepts and evidence. Volunt. Int. J. Volunt. Nonprofit Organ. 2012, 23, 1102–1118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Osborne, S.P.; Radnor, Z.; Strokosch, K. Co-Production and the Co-Creation of Value in Public Services: A suitable case for treatment? Public Manag. Rev. 2016, 18, 639–653. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McCullough, M.E.; Kilpatrick, S.D.; Emmons, R.A.; Larson, D.B. Is gratitude a moral affect? Psychol. Bull. 2001, 127, 249–266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Letki, N.; Steen, T. Social-psychological context moderates’ incentives to co-produce: Evidence from a large-scale survey experiment on park upkeep in an urban setting. Public Adm. Rev. 2021, 81, 935–950. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Uzochukwu, K.; Thomas, J.C. Who engages in the coproduction of local public services and why? The case of Atlanta, Georgia. Public Adm. Rev. 2018, 78, 514–526. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, X.; Liu, M.; Shang, P.; Wu, X. How to crack the internal and external linkage but internal immobility of rural revitalization—Based on the practical investigation of Arrow Tower Village, Pujiang County, Chengdu City. Agric. Econ. Issues 2023, 3, 51–61. [Google Scholar]
- Hannan, M.T.; Freeman, J. The population ecology of organizations. Am. J. Sociol. 1977, 82, 929–964. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gu, X. Governance embeddedness and the diversity of innovation policies:A reconceptualisation of state-market-society relations. Public Adm. Rev. 2017, 10, 6–32+209. [Google Scholar]
- Beirão, G.; Patrício, L.; Fisk, R.P. Value cocreation in service ecosystems: Investigating health care at the micro, meso, and macro levels. J. Serv. Manag. 2017, 28, 227–249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dai, Y.; Ye, L.; Dong, X. Value co-creation mechanism of innovation ecosystem--a case study based on Tencent Crowd Creative Space. Res. Dev. Manag. 2018, 30, 24–36. [Google Scholar]
Level | Nature and Level of Subjects’ Interactions | Role of Institutions | Resource Integration | Value Creation | Exemplar Studies |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Macro | The research focuses on investigating the wider social structure and all subjects associated with the activity. | Institutions promote and regulate the behavior of social subjects, thus making social life predictable and meaningful | The process of orderly acquisition, allocation, and integration of resources of different levels, sources, and contents by various subjects. | The subjects make the whole ecosystem better through resource synergy, thus realizing value co-creation. | [20,32,34] |
Meso | The research focuses on the meso structures and activities of service ecosystems, such as the interactions of organizations, firms, and other stakeholders. | The institutions act as rules for integrating resources and coordinating the efforts of subjects to achieve value co-creation | Different subjects in the system use the same resources in a collaborative manner to improve the efficiency of resource utilization. | The subjects achieve increased organizational value through resource sharing. | [34,35,40] |
Micro | The focus of the research is individual-centered, concentrating on specific individuals or interconnected individuals in the service ecosystem. | Common institutions arrangements guide individual actions, interactions, and resource integration | Individuals use the resources that they have and new resources to integrate them to increase resource density and realize the best value of the combined resources. | Individuals realize individual benefits through resource integration. | [34,36,38,39] |
I. Outline of the Interview with Village Committees |
a. Could you briefly describe the specifics of the community? |
b. Could you please describe the specific process of co-creation in this community? |
c. What role do you think the village committee plays in co-creation? |
d. Can you tell me how the subsidy policy given by the higher government is applied? |
e. What is the relationship between village committees and social organizations? |
II. Outline of the Interview with Social Organizations |
a. Could you please describe the exact process of co-creation in this community? |
b. Could you briefly describe the process of the establishment of the organization? What is the structure of the organization? |
c. How can ordinary villagers join you? How many people have joined the governance of this village so far? |
d. Can you tell us about your organization’s operational projects? Do you cooperate with other organizations? How? |
e. Can you tell us about the organization’s profits and dividend mechanism? |
III. Outline of the Interviews with Villagers/Volunteers/Entrepreneurs |
a. Have you been involved in co-creation in that neighborhood? What were the barriers to the process? How did you address them? |
b. As a villager, how do you think the changes in this community have affected your life? |
c. As a volunteer, how do you feel about the community? |
d. As a partner organization, why did you choose this community? |
Interview Coding | Total Number of Interviews | Interview Dates | Identity Information |
---|---|---|---|
WW1 | 7 | March 2022–June 2023 | Social Organizations |
WM2 | 3 | April–June 2023 | |
GM3 | 4 | November 2022–June 2023 | |
GM4 | 3 | October 2022–August 2023 | Village Committees |
WM5 | 2 | April–August 2023 | |
GW6 | 3 | November 2022–April 2023 | |
WW7 | 1 | April 2023 | Entrepreneurs |
GM8 | 1 | April 2023 | |
WW9 | 2 | March 2023 | Villagers |
WM10 | 2 | April 2023 | |
GW11 | 2 | November 2022 | |
GM12 | 2 | April 2023 | |
WW13 | 2 | April 2023 | Volunteers |
WW14 | 2 | June 2022 | |
GM15 | 2 | April 2023 |
Secondary Information | Source Channel | Number |
---|---|---|
Wenggong and Gumeng Villages | Public articles | 60 articles (6000 words) |
Press releases | 24 articles (2500 words) | |
Government documents | 8 articles (1500 words) |
Subcategory | Original Data |
---|---|
Target embedding | In response to the policy, our goal is to make the village better and better in terms of environment and hygiene. (GM4) |
Value promotion | We use the village folks to promote it, and through the promotion, it has now also been greatly improved. (GM6) |
Technical support | We publish articles on the Internet about the preservation of intangible cultural heritage and attract people who are interested in it. Internet technology breaks geographical limitations and enables cross-border cooperation. (WW13) |
Internal and external incentives | We’ll give awards to villagers who do well. (GM4) |
Information sharing | Village stewards can get the most realistic information about the outside world and provide feedback. (GM3) |
Resource integration | The basic research results conducted by our joint university provide material for the dissemination of intangible cultural heritage. (WM2) |
Trust construction | The public welfare activities carried out in the village have inspired passion and confidence within me, therefore I believe our village will be better developed. (WM10) |
Multi-layer interaction | We unite social organizations, enterprises, media and villagers, and other subjects to achieve the matching of resource supply and demand (GM8) |
Platform construction | Our traditional culture museum platform promotes local sustainable development. (WM5) |
Subject embedding | I want to preserve intangible cultural heritage while driving local development (WW1) |
… | … |
Main Category | Logic | Subcategory |
---|---|---|
Value proposition | Causal condition | Governance goals |
Phenomenon | Subject embedding | |
Vein | Institutional safeguards | |
Mediating condition | Technical support, incentives | |
Action strategy | Value promotion | |
Result | Cognitive fit | |
Value Communication | Causal condition | Rural community development |
Phenomenon | Value expression | |
Vein | Activity exchange | |
Mediating condition | Value promotion, technical support, value consensus | |
Action strategy | Information interaction, resource integration | |
Result | Multi-layer interaction | |
Value recognition and reconstruction | Causal condition | Difference in perception |
Phenomenon | Herd mentality | |
Vein | Value expression | |
Mediating condition | Technical support, information interaction, incentives | |
Action strategy | Value promotion, trust construct | |
Result | Value consensus | |
Value link | Causal condition | Economic growth, environmental enhancement, value consensus |
Phenomenon | Goal convergence | |
Vein | Public value | |
Mediating condition | Technical support, platform construction | |
Action strategy | Information sharing, technical support, and multi-member participation | |
Result | Resource integration | |
Value creation | Causal condition | Governance goals |
Phenomenon | Resource integration, information sharing | |
Vein | Supply and demand matches | |
Mediating condition | Technical support, institutional safeguards | |
Action strategy | Multi-layer interaction | |
Result | Public value |
Relationship Structure | Relationship Nature | Relationship Structure Connotation |
---|---|---|
Value proposition | Conditions | The value proposition is a prerequisite for value co-creation, and it shapes values and influences social relations. |
Value Communication | Process | Continuous communication facilitates the building of value consensus among subjects |
Value recognition and reconstruction | Through information interaction and other interactive methods, different subjects continuously recognize and reconstruct their values and reach a value consensus. | |
Value link | The realization of value identity among subjects will promote multi-party value linking so that resources can be integrated and matched. | |
Value creation | Results | After the formation of the rural community ecological network, different subjects in the rural community ecosystem for value co-creation, and the realization of public value. |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Wu, Y.; Xu, L.; Lin, J.; Ghani, M.I. Subject Embedding, Relationship Interaction, and Resource Integration: The Value Co-Creation Mechanism in Rural Communities. Systems 2023, 11, 507. https://doi.org/10.3390/systems11100507
Wu Y, Xu L, Lin J, Ghani MI. Subject Embedding, Relationship Interaction, and Resource Integration: The Value Co-Creation Mechanism in Rural Communities. Systems. 2023; 11(10):507. https://doi.org/10.3390/systems11100507
Chicago/Turabian StyleWu, Yingqiu, Lu Xu, Jianwu Lin, and Muhammad Imran Ghani. 2023. "Subject Embedding, Relationship Interaction, and Resource Integration: The Value Co-Creation Mechanism in Rural Communities" Systems 11, no. 10: 507. https://doi.org/10.3390/systems11100507