A new positioning framework for organizational value: Juxtaposing organizational value positions with customer centricity

Abstract

In recognizing the distinct positions that have occupied value research to‐date, distinct and overlapping positions have been identified which (when juxtaposed with customer versus company‐centric orientations) produce an original positioning framework. “Value” is worthy of study as it determines success for leaders, provides competitive advantage, and contributes to economic prosperity. Value may be a superordinate concept that has “upstaged” previous research areas such as service quality, service satisfaction, and relationship marketing. Little research exists on evaluating whether more than one organizational value position exists.

How improved understanding of what constitutes “value” may lead to better underpinning of corporate social responsibility (CSR)

“…the two states may co-exist simultaneously, one where value is created and determined afterwards and the other where value creation and determination are simultaneous (Korkman et al , 2010). This duality resonates with the Schrodinger’s cat scenario found in other value-related papers (Richardson and Cassop Thompson, 2019).…”

“…As with Smythe & Spence, both Authors' hermeneutic journey (Fig 2) started with reading each other's doctoral theses (Cassop Thompson, 2010;Richardson, 2015). The ensuing abductive process (from 2013 to present) featured weekly discussions which contributed to value and CSR-related outputs (Richardson et al, 2015;Richardson, 2018;Richardson & Cassop Thompson, 2019;Richardson, 2020). Many articles were read, not all of which are captured herein.…”

“…The ensuing abductive process (from 2013 to present) featured weekly discussions, which contributed to value and CSR-related outputs (Richardson et al , 2015; Richardson, 2019; Richardson and Cassop Thompson, 2019; Richardson, 2020). Many articles were read, not all of which are captured herein.…”

How new sustainability typologies will reshape traditional approaches to loyalty

“…Subsequently, the definition has been expanded (see Oliver, 1997) however the basic concept remains unchanged. The literature on loyalty recognises how it derives from satisfying customers seeking benefits (Parasuraman et al, 1991;Bitner, 1995;Mercadé-Melé et al, 2018) and values including co creation of value (Coppola et al, 2020;Richardson & Cassop Thompson, 2019). The literature suggests loyal customers may increase income, buy additional products or services, generate Word of Mouth (or 'Word of Mouse' online), reduce costs and allow companies to amortise marketing (and sales) costs across the CLTV.…”

“…Hence, this study will (critique and) develop the traditional building blocks of loyalty by viewing them through the lens of TBL-based sustainability. In doing so, this paper contributes to those who seek to look beyond the question of why firms adopt SM and instead consider how they do so by investigating the mechanisms that enable effective (SM) adoption (Clarkson, 1995;Gosnay & Richardson, 2008;Musgrave & Raj, 2009;Mitchell et al, 2010Mitchell et al, , 2013Crittenden et al, 2011Crittenden et al, , 2013Garcia et al, 2014;Wiscicka-Fernando, 2018;Richardson & Cassop Thompson, 2019;White et al, 2019;Legere & Kang, 2020). Finally, two goals of this paper are to offer a TBL-based segmentation framework and loyalty ladder to facilitate sustainability adoption.…”