A dignity-vulnerability approach framework to maximize well-being outcomes by transformative service initiatives (TSIs)

Abstract

Purpose This paper aims to explore how service organizations can improve the effectiveness of well-being creation efforts given the pressing societal issues and global crises. In this paper, the authors examine two essential dimensions (dignity and vulnerability approach) to develop a theoretical framework. This framework can be used to increase the effectiveness of well-being outcomes created by transformative service initiatives (TSIs) and minimize their negative unintentional consequences. Design/methodology/approach Drawing on social marketing and humanistic management literature, this paper develops a framework for TSIs based on whether human dignity is recognized or ignored and whether a deficit-based or strength-based approach to vulnerability is used. This framework explains different types of TSIs and provides real-life examples. Findings The framework developed in this paper discusses four different types of TSIs: (1) exclusionary, a deficit-based approach where dignity is ignored; (2) opportunistic, a strength-based approach where dignity is ignored; (3) paternalistic, a deficit-based approach where dignity is recognized; and (4) humanistic, a strength-based approach where dignity is recognized. The paper also identifies five pathways that service organizations could use to implement these approaches, including two traps (utility and charity) and three opportunities (resourcing, humanizing and full awakening) embedded within these pathways. Practical implications This paper provides examples of service industries and specific companies to exemplify the framework developed. Also, it discusses the well-being implications and potential well-being outcomes associated with each type of TSI. Social implications This paper offers a novel framework based on two dimensions that are relatively new to the service literature, i.e. dignity and vulnerability approach. This paper also highlights the importance of including these two dimensions in future service research. Originality/value This paper offers a novel framework based on two relatively new dimensions to the service literature: dignity and strengths-based approach. This paper also highlights the importance of including these two dimensions in future service research.

Empowering families traveling with young children: a transformative service research perspective

“…TSR-based tourism innovation can occur when interdependencies are assessed, adapted and accepted for greater well-being of individuals and communities (Narduzzo and Volo, 2018). This perspective may nurture family tourism practices where children are considered competent value co-creators over harmful value co-destructors, enhancing the dignity and strength of family tourists (Kabadayi et al , 2023).…”

A 5C model of responsible service leadership: learning from living systems to play the infinite game

“…Third, although many scholars approach leadership solely as a process of social influence, responsible leadership theories posit the question “influence for what and for whom?”. Service literature has long focused on the idea of well-being co-creation, viewing the service encounter as an opportunity to move from power over toward power with dynamic (Kabadayi et al. , 2023), in which the well-being of service providers and consumers are mutually amplified.…”

Editorial: Stop saying “vulnerable consumers/customers”!

“…It demonstrates a lack of organisational integrity, empathy and education, which for consumers/customers, may result in a deterioration of trust and perpetuate feelings of guilt, shame and stress at being held responsible for factors beyond their control. Consumers/customers may sense they are being judged and not supported by an organisation or other people (Glavas et al , 2020; Snipstad, 2022; Kabadayi et al , 2023).…”

“…Understanding that people experience vulnerability as a result of marketplace interactions is important for marketers and policy/program developers alike, and it is heartening to see the broadening of focus by some marketing scholars (see, e.g. Bedggood et al , 2023; Fisk et al , 2023; Kabadayi et al , 2023). We adopt Ozyoruk’s (2022) position and refer to consumer vulnerability as a general way to “refer to the many difficult circumstances consumers face” (p.32).…”