Level of success inputs for service innovations in the same firm

Abstract

A review shows most of these studies are case or industry specific, address the basic nature of service, are limited to consumer services, or address specific components of the service delivery area. Two exceptions to this are:(1) empirical finding of a dependence on innovations in service industries (Parasuraman and Varadarajan, 1988); and (2) the application of concept testing to new service development (Murphy and Robinson, 1981). However, our review suggests that none of these addresses the process itself and the impact of what goes on in the process to contribute to success or failure. Conversely, the product innovation literature generally considers services as merely an element in the goods and services mix (Booz, Allen and Hamilton, 1982; Crawford, 1991, p. 12; Kotler, 1988, pp. 477-8).We conclude that new services development can be considered an underdeveloped research and theory area, including the delineation of possible reasons for success or failure. However, the evolution by organizations towards major dependence on services plus an increasing intensity of competition and changes in technology lends support to the importance of innovation as a key ingredient for services management.The more robust research concerning product innovations has centred on success or failure by concentrating outside the development process itself

Employee involvement in ideation and healthcare service innovation quality

“…Based on S-D logic, Ordanini and Parasuraman (2011) propose a conceptual framework of service innovation, and empirically verify the effects of frontline employee involvement on the outcomes of organizations' service innovation programs. Prior research has also found that frontline employee involvement improves new service development outcomes (de Brentani, 2001;Martin & Horne, 1995). For instance, Hartline (2010, 2013) verify its effect on service marketability, which is one aspect of these outcomes.…”

“…Studies on frontline employee involvement in innovations are primarily situated in the field of service innovation or new service development. They have indicated the relationship of frontline employee involvement with innovation outcomes, such as innovation success (de Brentani, 2001;Martin & Horne, 1995), and innovation volume and radicalness (Ordanini & Parasuraman, 2011), but not with innovation quality. Research of top management involvement in innovations has covered the domains of service innovation and NPD.…”

How Designed Communication Supports New Product & Service Development

“…Innovation is presumed to be the sole province of service producing enterprises, even though the interaction with the customer -as described above -is an important part of the service innovation process and, of course, a key success factor of new services [30,31]. This suggests that new NSD models should incorporate the mechanism of customer-producer interactions as well as strategies to be successfully implemented [32] within value innovative new services.…”

Changing roles. Role theoretical approach to customer involvement in industrial service development

“…The collaborative dimension captures the extent to which the customer is participating in the creation of the offering (Alam, 2002;Ives & Olson, 1984;Marsden & Littler, 1996;Martin & Horne, 1995). In service innovation, Martin and Horne (1995) separate two constructs in customer participation: direct customer participation in the process, and indirect participation, in which the internal information about the customer is used.…”

“…However, despite a widespread recognition in the literature, companies still fail to integrate the customer into the innovation process (Martin & Horne, 1995;Matthing, Kristensson, Gustafsson, & Parasuraman, 2006;Olson & Bakke, 2001) and customers are mainly given a passive role: the service provider is expecting them to do little beyond buying and consuming offerings (Heinonen et al, 2010;Prahalad & Ramaswamy, 2000;Sanders & Stappers, 2008).…”