PurposePatients, when using healthcare services, (co)create value by integrating their own resources with those of a range of stakeholders. These resource integration activities, however, require different types of skills and effort from the patients, and different types of interactions with stakeholders, while also having different effects on patients' well-being. The purpose of the present study is to develop a better understanding of why some patients are better able or willing to perform resource integration activities that impact their well-being. To reach this objective, barriers and facilitators of these activities in their interactions with various stakeholders were identified.Design/methodology/approachThe study uses a multiple case study design. Individual patients having received a lung transplant, together with their entourage (family, medical professionals, other patients) each represent a case. In-depth interviews were conducted with the patients and with various categories of stakeholders in their service delivery network who were relevant to their experience and with whom they integrated their resources.FindingsThe study identifies three levels on which barriers and facilitators of the resource integration process occur: the individual, relational and systemic level. Factors on these levels affect different aspects of the process.Originality/valueThis study takes a systems perspective and investigates how various systemic factors and stakeholders conduce or inhibit healthcare service users to perform resource integration activities, especially focusing on those activities that strongly affect their well-being.

Purpose This study aims to develop a better understanding of how online health community (OHC) members with different health literacy (HL) levels benefit from their participation, through the analysis and comparison of their resource integration (RI) processes. It investigates through a RI lens how the vulnerability of community members – captured as their level of HL – affects the benefits they derive from participation. Design/methodology/approach Quantitative and qualitative methods were used to investigate the effects of healthcare service users’ vulnerability. Data were collected about their profiles and levels of HL. Furthermore, 15 in-depth interviews were conducted. Findings The study demonstrates how low levels of HL act as a barrier to the integration of available online health resources. Participation in OHCs appears less beneficial for vulnerable users. Three types of benefits were identified at the individual level, namely, psychological quality-of-life, physical quality-of-life and learning. Benefits identified at the community level were: content generation and participation in the development of the community. Originality/value This study has implications for the understanding of how service users’ activities affect their own outcomes and how the vulnerability of users could be anticipated and considered in the design of the community.

This paper addresses a major gap in reported research on open innovation (OI) literature: How do service firms adopt open innovation? This research focuses on data from eighteen service SMEs in Belgium from high-tech and knowledge-intensive service industries. Based on analysis, we find new insights regarding open innovation practices (i.e., inbound and outbound) and sub-practices (i.e., acquiring, sourcing, selling and revealing) for service firms. More specifically, the study showed that service SMEs are more inclined to use inbound practices due to reasons associated with firm size, industry, and knowledge intensity in the market, whereas the decision about which sub-practice to adopt seems to be strongly influenced by the type of actor, the firm’s vulnerability and internal managerial skills, and the existence of complementarities. Thus, we contribute to OI literature as well as capability literature through providing initial insights regarding the adoption of OI by service firms.

No abstract