Product–Service Portfolio Configuration vs. Economic and Financial Results: An Empirical Analysis in the Italian Truck Industry

  • Paolo Gaiardelli
  • Giuditta Pezzotta
  • Barbara Resta
  • Lucrezia Songini
Chapter

Abstract

Based on an extensive survey involving Italian heavy truck workshops, this chapter introduces an empirically based typology. The research aims at identifying the main features that characterise heavy truck assistance workshops offering similar product–service portfolios and having a comparable service attitude. The developed typology allows a better understanding of the relationship between workshop types and their economic and financial results. The analysis shows that the attitude towards the proposal of comprehensive product–service portfolios supports workshops to prosper in this market that is affected by weak demand, hard competition and decreasing margins.

Keywords

Cluster analysis Service portfolio configuration Servitisation Survey Typology 

References

  1. 1.
    Wise R, Baumgartner P (1999) Go downstream. Harv Bus Rev 77(5):133–141Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gebauer H, Fleisch E, Friedli T (2005) Overcoming the service paradox in manufacturing companies. Eur Manag J 23(1):14–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cohen MA, Agrawal N, Agrawal V (2006) Winning in the aftermarket. Harv Bus Rev 84(5):129–138Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Schweitzer E, Mannweiler C, Aurich JC (2009) Continuous improvement of industrial product-service systems. In: Proceedings of the 1st CIRP April 1-2, Cranfield University, Cranfield (UK)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Oliva R, Kallenberg R (2003) Managing the transition from products to services. Int J Serv Ind Manag 14(2):160–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Davies A (2004) Moving base into high-value integrated solutions: a value stream approach. Ind Corp Chang 13(5):727–756CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Davies A, Brady T, Hobday M (2006) Charting a path towards integrated solutions. MIT Sloan Manag Rev 47(3):39–48Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mathieu V (2001) Product services: from a service supporting the product to a service supporting the client. J Bus Ind Mark 16(1):39–58CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gaiardelli P, Resta B, Martinez V, Pinto R, Albores P (2014) A classification model for product-service offerings. J Cleaner Prod 66:507–519Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Tukker A (2004) Eight types of product–service system: eight ways to sustainability? Experiences from SusProNet. Bus Strat Environ 13(4):246–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kapletia D, Probert D (2010) Migrating from products to solutions: an exploration of system support in the UK defense industry. Ind Mark Manag 39(4):582–592CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mathieu V (2001) Service strategies within the manufacturing sector: benefits, costs and partnership. Int J Serv Ind Manag 12(5):451–475CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Windahl C, Lakemond N (2010) Integrated solutions from a service-centered perspective: applicability and limitations in the capital goods industry. Ind Mark Manag 39(8):1278–1290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Frambach RT, Wels-Lips I, Gündlach A (1997) Proactive product service strategies: an application in the European health market. Ind Mark Manag 26(4):341–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Penttinen E, Palmer J (2007) Improving firm positioning through enhanced offerings and buyer-seller relationships. Ind Mark Manag 36(5):552–564CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Neely A (2009) Exploring the financial consequences of the servitization of manufacturing. Oper Manag Res 1(2):103–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Martinez V, Bastl M, Kingston J, Evans S (2010) Challenges in transforming manufacturing organisations into product-service providers. J Manuf Technol Manag 21(4):449–469CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bundschuh RG, Dezvane TM (2003) How to make after-sales services pay off. McKinsey Q 1:116–127Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Porter ME (2008) The five competitive forces that shape strategy. Harv Bus Rev 86(1):78–93Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Rishi S, Gyimesi K, Burek C, Monday M (2009) Truck 2020. Transcending turbulence. Research report, IBM Institute for Business Value, Oct 2009Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Forza C (2002) Survey research in operations management: a process-based perspective. Int J Oper Prod Manag 22(2):152–194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Churchill GA (1979) A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs. J Mark Res 16:64–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Donicar S (2003) Using cluster analysis for market segmentation-typical misconceptions, established methodological weaknesses and some recommendations for improvement. Australas J Mark Res 11(2):5–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Jr Ward JH (1963) Hierarchical grouping to optimize an objective function. J Am Stat Assoc 58(301):236–244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Keppel G (1973) Design and analysis: a researcher's handbook. Prentice-Hall, Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Japan 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Paolo Gaiardelli
    • 1
  • Giuditta Pezzotta
    • 1
  • Barbara Resta
    • 1
  • Lucrezia Songini
    • 2
  1. 1.CELS-Research Group on Industrial Engineering, Logistics and Service OperationsUniversity of BergamoBergamoItaly
  2. 2.Department of Economics and BusinessEastern Piedmont UniversityNovaraItaly

Personalised recommendations