Pathologies and Paradoxes of Co-Creation: A Contribution to the Discussion about Corporate Social Responsibility in Building a Competitive Advantage in the Age of Industry 4.0

Abstract

Research problem: Revolution Industry 4.0. forces companies to face specific competence-related, technological, organizational and even ethical challenges. The use of innovative “tools” associated with that revolution not only brings new technological challenges, opportunities to build new competitive advantages, new areas of activity, and new types of business benefits but also doubts, questions, or even pathologies and paradoxes. Sometimes, entities that do not fully understand the essence of the new concepts, methods, or techniques use them incorrectly or abuse them for private goals and expose themselves to criticism—sometimes even social condemnation. These are examples of the lack of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) of these organizations. This situation also has reached co-creation. In theory, it is a very positive concept, aimed at building competitiveness, or various types of competitive advantages of companies by creating value for clients with their participation. In economic practice, unfortunately, it is not always successful. Purpose: The main purpose of this paper is to identify and characterize the key paradoxes and areas of potential pathologies of creating competitive advantage based on co-creation without CSR in the case of companies operating in the age of Industry 4.0. Originality/value of the paper: A theoretical study based on the extensive literature review describing paradoxes, ethical and CSR problems of co-creation in organizations creating competitive advantage in the age of the Fourth Industrial Revolution and a qualitative methodology of research. This study attempts to systematize paradoxes of co-creation and the areas and industries in which the related pathologies of co-creation occur particularly often and distinctively in economic practice. The empirical studies were conducted as a review of case studies of companies that use the concept of co-creation in an irregular way (paradoxical or with pathologies). This study identified and characterized the key 31 paradoxes and pathologies of creating competitive advantage based on co-creation in the case of 14 companies operating in the age of Industry 4.0. Implications: The identification of main dilemmas, paradoxes and pathologies of co-creation; signaling the role of governance and CSR in processes of the valuable use of co-creation in the age of Industry 4.0. Based on the observations described in the paper, it is worth recommending that when becoming involved in co-creation, one should observe ethical standards and assumptions of CSR, and require the same from partners and other parties involved. Otherwise, the risk is that instead of co-creation, the result achieved will be exactly the opposite to that intended, which is co-destruction, and condemnation instead of glory. This is why it is worth considering the paradoxes that are key to co-creation and approaching solutions in a conscious way.

CSR, Co-Creation and Green Consumer Loyalty: Are Green Banking Initiatives Important? A Moderated Mediation Approach from an Emerging Economy

“…The content is integrated and co-designed with stakeholders and organizations, and creates a favorable environment for CSR research, as the actual value is based on both the participants and their relationships [69]. Adamik and Nowicki [70] argue that the creation of sustainable value by an organization for its members involves the examination of the ways in which co-responsibility can be incorporated into a coherent value chain. Shared responsibility and co-creation assumes that companies should not only take responsibility as a priority in the overall strategy of the organization, but that other stakeholders involved in the value chain should contribute to the ethical development and economic dimensions of the joint venture [71].…”

Research streams in corporate social responsibility literature: a bibliometric analysis

“…In the future, 'environmental CSR as a source of competitive advantage' could be analyzed from a more dynamic perspective and with focus on social network relations. For instance, Zhao et al ( 2019) consider the mediating effects of dynamic capabilities and social capital on the relation between CSR and competitive advantages In future research, qualitative in-depth studies might enrich this discourse such as Adamik and Nowicki's (2019) study on CSR problems and paradoxes of co-creation in generating competitive advantages.…”

Mediating Effect of Customer Skill on Educating and Co-Creation on Higher Education (Conceptual Paper)

“…Co-creation is about running a business with the thrill of being a consumer in real time. This is a continuous dialogue about the possibility of cocreation, something new, innovative, personalized co-creation experience and its environment [12].…”