The origin and evolution of the concept of servitization: a co-word and network analysis

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to analyze the origins and evolution of the concept of servitization by studying the definitions of servitization provided in the literature. Servitization represents an academic field that has grown rapidly since its inception. However, the conceptualization of servitization varies greatly, in part because of the number of studies on this topic and the fact that it has been analyzed in a range of disciplines using a number of theoretical approaches. There is a need to standardize the vocabulary to create a general definition that can support the development of theory in this domain and help legitimize servitization as a research area. Design/methodology/approach This study conducts a systematic, quantitative analysis of a broad set of definitions of servitization. Specifically, this study performs content analysis (combining co-word analysis and social network analysis) and consensus analysis. This study develops a strategic diagram to represent the morphology of the research network. Findings The definitions of servitization are deconstructed and analyzed in depth to create a comprehensive picture of the research on this topic. This analysis reveals the origins and evolution of this research area. The results show a low degree of consensus among scholars regarding the concept of servitization. This study proposes a definition that should be widely accepted thanks to its inclusion of the core terms from other definitions. Explicit recognition of multiple approaches to defining the term can help practitioners and researchers. Predictions about future progress in this area are discussed. Originality/value A universal definition of servitization is proposed based on the results of co-word and network analysis. This definition unifies a range of multidisciplinary viewpoints. From a practical perspective, the key vocabulary in servitization research is highlighted.

A systematic review for organizing servitization by multi-actor collaborations: lenses, factors and outcomes

“…First, this study is one of the earliest review articles to explore the servitization issues with a multi-actor collaboration perspective. The previous servitization reviews have focused on the facets of conceptualizations (Pinillos et al , 2021), performance (Feng et al , 2021) or business model (Suppatvech et al , 2019), etc. Differing from them, this study concerned this domain’s emerging but significant topic, multi-actor collaboration and synthesized the related empirical studies through a systematic literature review (SLR).…”

“…Numerous studies have proposed a group of synonymous terminologies to figure this lens, such as service transition (Ferreira et al , 2013), integrated solution development and provision (Hedvall et al , 2019) or PSS development and delivery (Durugbo and Riedel, 2013). There is a consensus among these differing conceptions that traditional servitization aims to develop hybrid product-service offerings, shifting from pure product-based manufacturing (Pinillos et al , 2021). Over 30 years of development, it has been the mainstream lens and provided the origin and foundation for the other two lenses.…”

The moderating effect of supply chain collaboration on servitization

“…Servitization has been defined over the years differently depending on the discipline (strategic management, marketing, operations, service management, information technology IT, etc.) and the time period (Pinillos et al , 2022). The most commonly agreed definition sees servitization as a means to create added value to traditional offerings by developing new capabilities (Baines et al , 2009; Baines and Lightfoot, 2013; Sousa and Silveira, 2017).…”

“…Referring to the introduction of services in manufacturing, servitization is not a new field of research but it still lacks consensus over its definitions, theoretical backgrounds and impact (Pinillos et al , 2022). An examination of the servitization literature shows a limited understanding of the role of inter-firm relationships and supply chain collaboration (SCC) (Bikfalvi et al , 2013; Finne and Holmström, 2013; Galvani and Bocconcelli, 2022).…”

When in Rome, do as the Romans do: can international marketing adaptation improve the association between servitization and profitability?

“…We aim to contribute to the literature in two ways. First, in line with the studies that highlight the relevance of contingency theory that supports the servitization concept (Miller, 1981; Pinillos et al , 2021; Ruiz-Martín and Díaz-Garrido, 2021), we include the international 4Ps’ marketing mix strategies as firm-related contingency factors that influence the servitization–profitability relationship. By doing this, we were able to distinguish between individual influences in each one of these strategies.…”