Rethinking value proposition tools for living labs
Äyväri, Anne; Jyrämä, Annukka (2015)
Naples Forum on Service
2015
All rights reserved. This publication is copyrighted. You may download, display and print it for Your own personal use. Commercial use is prohibited.
Julkaisun pysyvä osoite on
https://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi:amk-2021091017652
https://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi:amk-2021091017652
Tiivistelmä
Purpose: This paper considers how well the living lab approach and recent theoretical developments around the concept of value are incorporated into three managerial tools for creating value propositions.
Approach: Using abductive reasoning, the descriptions of the tools were analysed as cultural texts, as language-in-use in a social context.
Findings: In the context of the living labs approach, the Value Proposition Builder™ seems to conflict with the ideas and premises of user-centric innovation processes. In Value Proposition Canvas, the co-creation aspect is rather vague as the enterprise and its offerings are presented as creators of value for the customer. Thus, this tool somewhat contradicts the living lab approach. The People Value Canvas is aligned with the service-dominant logic and the premises of living labs. However, all three tools largely neglect a deeper acknowledgement of the role of the wider context, the service ecosystem, and the role of networked actors as resource integrators. Moreover, none of the tools explicitly point out the role of enterprises as intermediaries in constructing invitations for value co-creation.
Originality/value: The paper contributes to the SDL and living labs literature by analysing different value proposition tools that have not been analysed before such as the Value Proposition Builder and the People Value Canvas which are relevant for academics as well as practitioners. By identifying the absent elements of S-D logic from managerial value proposition tools the paper gives guidelines how to develop the tools especially in the context of living labs to advance enterprise competitiveness.
Approach: Using abductive reasoning, the descriptions of the tools were analysed as cultural texts, as language-in-use in a social context.
Findings: In the context of the living labs approach, the Value Proposition Builder™ seems to conflict with the ideas and premises of user-centric innovation processes. In Value Proposition Canvas, the co-creation aspect is rather vague as the enterprise and its offerings are presented as creators of value for the customer. Thus, this tool somewhat contradicts the living lab approach. The People Value Canvas is aligned with the service-dominant logic and the premises of living labs. However, all three tools largely neglect a deeper acknowledgement of the role of the wider context, the service ecosystem, and the role of networked actors as resource integrators. Moreover, none of the tools explicitly point out the role of enterprises as intermediaries in constructing invitations for value co-creation.
Originality/value: The paper contributes to the SDL and living labs literature by analysing different value proposition tools that have not been analysed before such as the Value Proposition Builder and the People Value Canvas which are relevant for academics as well as practitioners. By identifying the absent elements of S-D logic from managerial value proposition tools the paper gives guidelines how to develop the tools especially in the context of living labs to advance enterprise competitiveness.