Abstract
In today’s dynamic market environment, no single actor has enough knowledge and sufficient human resources to innovate on a globally competitive level. This trend has accelerated the need for a deeper understanding of relationship management in alliances, virtual corporations, and networks to maximize capacity for innovation. We refer to these structures as service ecosystems and propose a framework for investigating how innovation occurs in service ecosystems. Specifically, we review the conceptualization of relationship as it has evolved from the relationship marketing, service and business-to-business marketing, and service-dominant logic literature. Then, we draw on centrality and embeddedness to explicate how actors in these service ecosystems draw on resources from their extended networks for innovation. We propose an embedded relationships framework for investigating innovation as a dynamic and continuous ecosystem of information seeking and information processing. Future research directions are discussed.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Arndt, J. (1979). Toward a concept of domesticated markets. Journal of Marketing, 43, 69–75.
Bavelas, A. (1948). A mathematical model for group structure. Human Organizations, 7, 16–30.
Berry, L. (1983). Relationship Marketing. Chicago: American Marketing Association.
Bickert, J. (1992). The database revolution. Target Marketing, 15, 14–18.
Bonacich, P. (1972). Factoring and weighting approaches to status scores and clique identification. Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 2, 113–120.
Borgatti, S. (2005). Centrality and network flow. Social Network, 27, 55–71.
Borgatti, S., & Cross, R. (2003). A relational view of information seeking and learning in social networks. Management Science, 49(4), 432–445.
Bristor, J., & Ryan, M. (1987). The buying center is dead, long live the buying center. Advances in Consumer Research, 14, 255–258.
Chandler, J., & Vargo, S. (2010). Contextualization: Network intersections, value-in-context, and the co-creation of markets. Marketing Theory.
Chesbrough, H. (2003). Open innovation: The new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Doz, Y., & Hamel, G. (1998). Alliance Advantage. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Dwyer, R., Schurr, P., & Oh, S. (1987). Developing buyer-seller relationships. Journal of Marketing, 51(2), 11–27.
Freeman, L. (1978). Centrality in Social Networks Conceptual Clarification. Social Networks, 1, 215–239.
Granovetter, M. (1985). Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddedness. The American Journal of Sociology, 91, 481–510.
Granovetter, M. (1973). The Strength of Weak Ties. The American Journal of Sociology, 6, 1360–1380.
Grönroos, C. (2000). Relationship marketing: The Nordic School perspective. In J. Sheth & A. Parvatiyar (Eds.), Handbook of Relationship Marketing (pp. 95–117). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Grönroos, C. (1997). Value-driven Relational Marketing: from Products to Resources and Competencies. Journal of Marketing Management, 13, 407–420.
Gulati, R., & Sytch, M. (2008). Does familiarity breed trust? Managerial and Decision Economics, 29, 165–190.
Gummesson, E. (1995). Relationship marketing: From 4Ps to 30Rs. Malmo, Sweden: Liber-Hermods.
Hakansson, H., & Snehota, I. (2000). The IMP persective. In J. Sheth, & A. Parvatiyar (Eds.), Handbook of Relationship Marketing (pp. 69–93). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Hanneman, R. A., & Riddle, M. (2005). Introduction to social network methods. Riverside, CA: University of California, Riverside (published in digital form).
Hansen, M. (1999). The search-transfer problem: The role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organization subunits. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(1), 82–111.
Hauser, J., Tellis, G., & Griffin, A. (2006). Research on innovation: A review and agenda for marketing science. Marketing Science, 26(6), 687–717.
Hippel, E. v. (2005). Democratizing innovation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Johnoston, W., & Bonoma, T. (1981). The buying center: Strucuture and interaction patterns. Journal of Marketing, 45, 143–156.
Knoke, D., & Burt, R. (1983). Prominence. In e. b. Minor, Applied Network Analysis (pp. 195–222). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Lusch, R. F., & Vargo, S. (2006). Service-dominant logic: Reactions, reflections and refinements. Marketing Theory, 6(3), 281–288.
Lusch, R., Vargo, S., & Tanniru, M. (2010). Service, value networks and learning. Journal of the Acadamy of Marketing Science, 38(1).
Money, R. B., Gilly, M. C., & Graham, J. L. (1998). Explorations of national culture and word-of-mouth referral behavior in the purchase of industrial services in the United States and Japan. Journal of Marketing, 62(4), 76–87.
Morgan, R., & Hunt, S. (1994). The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing. Journal of Marketing, 3, 20–38.
Powell, W. (1990). Neither market nor hierarchy: Network forms of organizations. In e. b. Cummings, Research in Organizational Behavior (pp. 295–336). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Rindfleisch, A., & Moorman, C. (2001). The acquistion and utilization of information in new product alliances: A strength-of-ties perspective. Journal of Marketing, 65, 1–18.
Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovation. New York: Free Press.
Rust, R., Zeithaml, V., & Lemon, K. (2000). Driving customer equity: How customer lifetime value is reshaping corporate strategy. New York: The Free Press.
Rust, R., Zeithaml, V., & Lemon, K. (2004). Return on marketing: Using customer equity to focus marketing strategy. Journal of Marketing, 68, 109–127.
Sabidussi, G. (1966). The centrality index of a graph. Pychometrika, 31, 581–603.
Schumpeter, J. (1934). The theory of economic development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Scott, J. (2000). Social network analysis. London: Sage Publications.
Sheth, J., & Parvatiyar, A. (2000). Handbook of relationship marketing. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc.
Uzzi, B. (1996). The sources and consequences of embeddedness for the economic performance of organizations: The network effect. American Sociological Review, 61, 674–698.
Vargo, S., & Lusch, R. (2004). Evolving to a new dominat logic for marketing. Journal of Marketing, 68, 1–17 (January).
Vargo, S., & Lusch, R. (2008). Service-dominant logic; further evolution. Journal of the Academy of Marketing, 36(1), 1–10.
Vargo, S. L. (2009). Toward a transcending conceptualization of relationship: a service-dominant logic perspective. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketin, 24(5/6), 373–379.
Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2008). From goods to service(s): Divergences and convergences of logics. Industrial Marketing Management, 37(3), 254–259 (The transition from product to service in business markets).
Vargo, S., Lusch, R., Horbel, C., & Wieland, H. (2010). Alternative logics for service(s): From hybrid systems to service ecosystems. In W. Ganz. Fraunhofer-Institut für Arbeitswirtschaft und Organisation IAO.
Volberda, H. W. (1996). Toward the flexible form: How to remain vital in hypercompetitive environments. Organization Science, 7(4), 359–374.
Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis. Cambridge: Cambrigde University Press.
Williamson, O. (1981). The economics of organization: The transaction cost approach. American Journal of Sociology, 87(3), 548–577.
Wuyts, S., Stremersch, S., Van Den Bulte, C., & Franses, P. H. (2004). Vertical marketing systems for complex products: A triadic perspective. Journal of Marketing Research, 41(4), 479–487.
Zander, U., & Kogut, B. (1995). Knowledge and the speed of transfer and Imitation of organizational capabilities: An empirical test. Organization Science, 6(1), 76–92.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Chandler, J.D., Wieland, H. Embedded Relationships: Implications for Networks, Innovation, and Ecosystems. J Bus Mark Manag 4, 199–215 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12087-010-0041-5
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12087-010-0041-5