THEORY LOGIC OF SERVICE DOMINAT FROM TIME TO TIME WELDING THE MARKETING STUDIES

This study aims to examine the contribution of Vargo and Lusch's (V&L) thinking to the Service-Dominant Logic (SD logic) from its first appearance until the present. Previous research has not specifically analysed all of V&L's contributions since their seminal article on this perspective in 2004. A total of 146 scientific publications by V&L with other authors on the SD logic perspective over a 17-year period (2004–2020) were identified. Each publication is subjected to content analysis using various keyword aspects. The findings show that the types of publications were predominantly journal articles and book chapters. V&L collaborated with 95 authors, primarily from America and Europe. Regarding the origin of the research organizations, 64 institutions collaborated with V&L. All V&L publications are distributed across 44 scientific journals, including marketing and non-marketing journals or those from other social sciences. As a novelty, this research successfully explains the evolution of SD logic research over time-based on V&L's work through a systematic investigation. Furthermore, this study traces V&L's efforts to institutionalize SD logic.


INTRODUCTION
Since its introduction in the article "Evolving to a new dominant logic for marketing" by Vargo and Lusch (2004), service-dominant logic (SDL) has become one of the most significant developments in modern marketing thinking.Over time, SDL has evolved to view markets as complex ecosystems of interconnected services, governed by institutions (Vargo, 2011), drawing on systems theory (e.g., Barile and Polese, 2010) and the sociological work of Giddens (e.g., Edvardsson et al., 2011).It incorporates these perspectives into market and marketing concepts while continuing to grow (Brodie et al., 2019).
Several citation analyses within the SDL discourse have emerged, aiming to systematize current knowledge, analyze existing contributions, identify central issues, and suggest future research directions, all of which reinforce advanced theory (as suggested by Light andPillemer, 1984, andDresch et al., 2015).For example, Pohlmann and Kaartemo (2017) and da Silva et al. (2018) utilized bibliometric co-citation analysis to organize research in SDL.Additionally, Wilden et al. (2017) applied co-citation to reveal SDL's interdisciplinary theoretical heritage and significant changes in the concept's focus over time.This co-citation and bibliometric approaches offer advantages in handling vast datasets, especially for assessing output at the macro level (Haustein and Lariviere, 2015).Moreover, such an approach has proven suitable for assessing the impact of research within a specific scientific community, with an emphasis on journals and countries (Haustein and Lariviere, 2015), as exemplified by da Silva et al. (2018).However, it is important to note that these approaches also have certain limitations, as emphasized by these authors.
A common limitation of co-citation and bibliographic analysis, as practiced by the colleagues mentioned above, is their limited ability to offer a broader picture beyond a particular field (Haustein and Lariviere, 2015).This is because such analyses, from a research point of view on citation practice, tend to ignore the position of the citation in the text, as well as the main reasons for citing a particular work (Ding et al., 2014;Zhao and Strotmann, 2014).These aspects are very relevant to study, especially concerning the frequency and context of citations in a text, in order to improve analytical results (Narin, 1976;Herlach, 1978).Indeed, joint-citation analysis tends to treat all citations as equals, which has been criticized because not all citations carry the same weight (Voos and Dagaev, 1976;Zhao and Strotmann, 2014).For instance, using a citation for methodological purposes or to justify research holds more significance than listing a citation as one of many in a literature review.When all citations are treated equally, the analysis may yield results that are slightly off-topic (Khadka and Knoth, 2018).
Against this background, research on citation practice recommends analyzing the citation context of references to provide more detailed and direct information about the nature of citations (Ding et al., 2014;Liu et al., 2014;Zhao and Strotmann, 2014).Both Pohlmann and Kaartemo (2017) and Wilden et al. (2017) have acknowledged doubts about the nature of quotations, including the positive and negative sentiments associated with identified themes, although the former authors attempted to mitigate this shortcoming somewhat.Additionally, citation frequency can be an important indicator for measuring the influence of papers; for example, Vargo and Lusch (2004) have been cited around 14,000 times.However, this figure alone does not explain why certain papers are consistently cited and what influence they hold (Liu et al., 2015).Citation context analysis provides a more thorough understanding of the citing motivation by analyzing the various purposes for using a particular quote (Liu et al., 2015).The authors argue that this approach leads to a more nuanced understanding of the impact of the cited work.
To mitigate the above limitations, this study focuses on analyzing the impact of the original SDL article (Vargo and Lusch, 2004) in its first 15 years.This article is recognized for "driving paradigmatic change" (Brodie et al., 2019, p. 3) in marketing research and has led to further refinements, advances, and reconfigurations (Vargo and Lusch, 2006, 2008a, b, 2011a, b, 2016, 2017), as well as expansions proposed by other scholars (e.g., Edvardsson et al., 2011;Wilden et al., 2017).
The primary research question addresses how and why authors of approximately 14,000 contributions published up to 2018 have used Vargo and Lusch's (2004) work.While focusing the analysis on a single widely-cited work may seem limiting, it is not uncommon in research practice.For instance, other studies have analyzed Nobel Prize-winning papers (Liu et al., 2015) and Bourdieu's contributions to management and organization research (Sieweke, 2014) in a similar manner.The advantage of such a singlepaper approach lies in pinpointing the specific contribution of a single work, both within its main field and in related and unrelated fields.It also enables an assessment of the comprehensiveness of this contribution and provides a richer understanding of the knowledge claims in that paper with the greatest impact on subsequent works.
In addition to these advantages, we acknowledge four contributions by Vargo and Lusch (2004) that have remained important throughout the evolution of SDL (Brodie et al., 2019).Firstly, the concept of "Value" continues to hold significance, even with the emergence of new conceptualizations like "value-in-context" and "value-in-experience," as evidenced in recent articles (e.g., Jayashankar et al., 2018;Jang et al., 2020).Secondly, the notion of the "value proposition" remains central in expressing how companies and customers interact (Payne et al., 2020).Thirdly, the distinction between "operant" and "operand" resources and how their integration impacts the co-creation of value remains highly relevant (Ghatak, 2020).Lastly, Vargo and Lusch's (2004) contribution to developing alternative perspectives on marketing and markets that adopt a socioeconomic view continues to be emphasized (Brodie et al., 2019;Liu et al., 2020).
Unlike previous citation analysis research on SDL, our study adds more nuance by providing Vargo and Lusch's (2004) pattern of citation practice and mapping its impressive dissemination in marketing and other literature.We extend the analysis by distinguishing among several reasons for the citation (as emphasized by Aya et al., 2005) and by focusing on the context of the citation, as defined by Bornmann and Daniel (2008).Moreover, we highlight research topics of interest based on citation practice patterns grouped into categories and suggest future research directions for each category and topic.These tangible research topics represent different contexts where general theory meets practice and influences each other; thus, they can be considered as midrange theories (Vargo and Lusch, 2017;Brodie and Peters, 2020) that have the potential to further drive the development of SDL and contribute to their respective fields.The objective is to outline the citation practice of "Evolving to a new dominant logic for marketing" by Vargo and Lusch (2004) (hereinafter referred to as V&L04), identify and discuss the most prominent studies where citations are used, and propose future research directions based on the results of the analysis.
We achieved this goal by developing a comprehensive citation practice framework based on our previous literature iterations on citation practices.We also established a set of criteria for selecting relevant contributions from the approximately 14,000 contributions available on Google Scholar.We focused on contributions written in English and published as academic journal articles, book chapters, and books.For each selected contribution, we identified meta-data, V&L04 citations, and areas of research.Additionally, we assessed the context of each quote and determined the main reason for the citation.This process was repeated for the 4,612 contributions published between 2004 and 2018.We systematized and presented our findings in terms of citation practice and research agenda, concluding the article with theoretical implications and future research directions.
SDL continues to evolve towards a more cohesive and specific general theory that can be empirically tested and practically applied, exerting an expanded influence on DIE: Jurnal Ilmu Ekonomi dan Manajemen ISSN. 0216-6488 (Print), 2775-7935 (Online) various disciplines and research (Vargo & Lusch, 2017;Hastari et al., 2020).Described as a "work in progress" (Vargo & Lusch, 2006), SDL provides an alternative perspective on exchange (Vargo & Lusch, 2004a).It acknowledges the point of service as the foundation for all transactions (Vargo & Lusch, 2004a, 2008a), offering a different mindset compared to traditional logic or GD, which centers on the physical product as the basis for exchanges (Koskela-Huotari & Vargo, 2018).While SDL originated in marketing, it is increasingly becoming an interdisciplinary endeavor (Vargo et al., 2017a;Lusch et al., 2016).However, there is still much work to be done in reconciling SDL with institutional frameworks (Vargo & Lusch, 2016).
The existence of this new logic provides hope for the future of marketing theory and practice.However, SDL is still a relatively young theoretical framework (Vargo, 2018).Although not in its infancy, it has evolved from a structure over status to an approaching theory (Vargo et al., 2017c), with a research agenda that is sometimes relatively abstract (Vargo et al., 2017c).Additionally, the relationship of this perspective with conventional service frameworks has not been thoroughly investigated through empirical observations (Wilden et al., 2017).The challenge for future SDL research is to bridge the gap between academic language and everyday language, as well as to apply SDL concepts at an analytical level in both systemic and empirical phenomena (Vargo et al., 2017c).
The aim of this study is to conduct a systematic examination of research on the dominant logic of services by V&L from 2004 to the present, covering a span of 17 years.The inquiry was driven by the need to understand how V&L's SDL inquiry has developed and grown over time.This analysis reveals changes in various aspects, such as the number and type of publications, names of collaborating authors, research organizations, journal names and rankings, publication types, number of citations per article, number of authors per publication, country of origin of the authors, types of journal articles, and the number of pages per article in the underlying SDL research.Similar research was conducted by Wilden et al. (2017), who analyzed scientific writing data to examine the evolution of research related to SDL.However, Wilden et al.'s research (2017) did not cover all articles on co-creation.

RESEARCH METHODS
This research employs content analysis to present a comprehensive and systematic review of V&L's SD logic research.Specifically, we conducted a search on Google Scholar to identify the titles of all V&L publications discussing SDL.The publications include journal articles, book chapters, proceedings, books, working papers, and popular articles published from 2004 (when the article entitled "Development" was released) to 2021.Some articles by V&L that do not pertain to service-dominant logic, such as Vargo and Lusch (2005) and Lusch (2017), are excluded from the analysis.In total, 146 publication titles were identified.
Each subsequent paper is subjected to verification through content analysis, following the approach by Krippendorff (1980).This technique has been widely used by other scholars and has yielded significant results (Li & Cavusgil, 1995;Leonidou, 1995;Leonidou et al., 1998).The content of each paper is managed by a research assistant, and 241 Fakultas Ekonomi dan Bisnis Universitas 17 Agustus 1945 Surabaya to ensure consistency in data analysis, the assistants are provided with technical instructions.
Based on Leonidou et al. (2010), the compilation of publication data involves a specially prepared coding sheet consisting of several sections: number and type of publication, authors who collaborated with V&L, research organizations, name and ranking of the journal based on Schimago, type of publication, number of citations per article, number of authors per publication, country of origin of the authors, type of journal article, and number of pages per article.Each coder worked individually to assign the relevant information from the 146 publications to their respective code sheets.
After completing the coding process, the assigned elements on the code sheet by each coder are cross-checked to track reasonable variations in evaluations.Following Holsti's (1969) strategy, any coding differences, errors, or issues that arise during the coding process are discussed and resolved with the assistance of the administrator.Subsequently, the information on the amended code sheet is used for further analysis.

RESULT AND DISCUSSION
This section presents the substantive examination result from the publications of V&L and their colleagues, specifically related to the service-dominant logic.It is important to note that these discoveries are limited to a bibliographical examination of only a selection of the aforementioned publications.The section is divided into several subsections, covering aspects such as the number and type of publication, authors who have collaborated with V&L, research organizations, name and ranking of journals according to Schimago, type of publication, number of citations per article, number of authors per publication, authors' countries of origin, type of journal article, and number of pages per article.
This research found that over the course of V&L's 17 years of existence, either individually, jointly, or in collaboration with other authors, they have produced a total of 146 publications related to SDL.On average, they publish about nine publications per year.The highest number of publications in a single year was in 2011, with 15 titles.The overall trend of publication types from year to year can be observed in Figure 2. The majority of V&L publications are in the form of journal articles (62 percent) and book chapters (25 percent).The number of journal articles tended to increase from 2004 to 2008, then showed a fluctuating trend in the subsequent years (see Figure 1).Additionally, V&L published many articles in book chapter form between 2010 and 2014.
Most of the articles authored by V&L have received an overwhelming response from research enthusiasts worldwide, including scholars in marketing, non-marketing disciplines, and even social sciences.This is evident from the high number of citations per article.Notably, their groundbreaking article on SDL, titled "Developing....," published in 2004 in the Journal of Marketing (JM), has garnered significant recognition.The traditional view of goods, where tangible products are the primary forms of transactions, has been challenged by SDL (Vargo & Lusch, 2004a, 2004b).Additionally, SDL questions the practice of placing companies at the center and making them the sole actors responsible for value creation (Vargo & Lusch, 2004a, 2011).Moreover, the Goods-Dominant Logic has been criticized for its linear view, which overly emphasizes monetary value when discussing the concept of value (Vargo et al., 2008b).In contrast, the SDL framework emphasizes the importance of intangible resources in value creation, promotes collaboration over competition, and focuses on relationships rather than mere transactions.As demonstrated through the SDL lens, the most ideal economic transaction is understood as the reciprocal exchange of services.In other words, the purpose of the exchange is a service, an activity derived from the application of specific resources that individuals engage in for themselves and others, rather than merely trading tangible products (Koskela-Huotari & Vargo, 2018).As previously described, the evolution of these logic frameworks continues with the integration of various premises and axioms since the SDL perspective was first introduced.Currently, the SDL perspective comprises five axioms (out of a total of 11 foundational premises).Together, these premises and axioms form a comprehensive basis for systematically understanding the SDL viewpoint.In total, Vargo has authored 120 titles, both individually, with Lusch, and in collaboration with other authors.On the other hand, Lusch has authored as many as 79 titles, either alone, with Vargo, or with other co-authors.The majority of V&L publications were co-authored by ten (56) and three authors (50).Titles with two authors could be written by Vargo with someone other than Lusch, by Lusch with another co-author aside from Vargo, or jointly by both Vargo and Lusch with another author.However, it is worth noting that the collaborative work between Vargo and Lusch has resulted in publications that are the most widely cited by other researchers.In some of his articles, Vargo has also collaborated with three of his students, namely Akaka (University of Denver), Wieland (California State University), and Koskela-Huotari (Karlstad University).Interestingly, Vargo and Lusch have collaborated with 95 independent authors in total.Among the co-authors, the three with whom they have collaborated the most are Akaka (24 publications), Wieland (11 publications), and Koskela-Huotari (8 publications).Additionally, they have collaborated with Spohrer (IBM) and Maglio (University of California), each with five publications.Notably, Maglio and Spohrer (2008) have been pioneers in advancing a new scientific field known as service science, which focuses on the study of applied resources from at least one network to serve different networks in a transaction (Maglio et al., 2009).Other co-authors involved in collaboration with V&L include Siltaloppi (4 publications), Vaughan (3 publications), Corsaro (3 publications), Chen (3 publications), and Ng (3 publications).The complete list of authors who have collaborated with V&L can be found in Appendix A.
Regarding the organizations where the researchers are affiliated, we found 64 organizations involved in collaboration with V&L.Naturally, the University of Hawaii (129 publications) and the University of Arizona (90 publications), where V&L work, contributed the most to the publications.Other organizations involved in collaboration include the University of Denver (23 publications), California State University (13 publications), Karlstad University (12 publications), IBM Almaden Research Center (9 publications), Texas Christian University (7 publications), University of North Texas (5 publications), Aalto University (4 publications), and the University of Queensland (4 publications).For detailed information, the organizations where the researchers are located can be seen in Appendix B.
Most of the articles were written by authors from the Americas (84 percent), followed by Europe (12 percent), Australia, New Zealand (3 percent), and lastly Asia (1 percent).Authors from Europe include researchers from Sweden, England, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, and Norway.On the other hand, writers from Asia include researchers from Japan and China.These findings suggest that collaboration between V&L and researchers, research centers, and universities from Asia, Australia, and New Zealand needs to thrive in the future.The findings above show a gap in the number of articles written by authors in various regions, such as between American and European authors.However, many papers by these American authors have been produced by a handful of prominent scholars, including Vargo, Lusch, and a number of their colleagues and Ph.D. students, most notably Akaka, Wieland, Spohrer, Maglio, Vaughan, and Chen.SDL is a new perspective in marketing theory, shifting the dominant logic of goods as the basis of the former change.This new mindset has made significant contributions to marketing theory and even the social sciences, particularly in providing meaningful improvements to the strong institutionalized mainstream marketing theory.That is the reason why SDL has been challenging for mainstream marketing scholars, most of whom are Americans, to accept.Therefore, in the early years of SDL's existence, Vargo and Lusch began to build collaborations with scholars, universities, and service centers outside America, especially in Europe, to further develop SDL.
Additionally, all V&L publications are spread across 44 scientific journals, which include journals for marketing and non-marketing disciplines and other social sciences.This dissemination supports the diffusion of SD logic perspectives among various scholars DIE: Jurnal Ilmu Ekonomi dan Manajemen ISSN. 0216-6488 (Print), 2775-7935 (Online) worldwide.The Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science (JAMS) contains the most articles ( 9), followed by Marketing Theory (MT) (8), Service Science (SS) (6), Industrial Marketing Management (IMM) (4), Journal of Marketing Management (JMM) (4), and Journal of Service Research (JSR) (4).The full names of the journals and the number of publications in these journals can be seen in Table 2. Apart from publications in journals, Vargo and Lusch have published three books, written in 2006, 2014, and 2018.Based on the "business, management, and accounting (BMA)" field in Scimago's ranking, the majority of V&L articles fall into the Q1 category (69 percent).Similarly, according to the "marketing" category in Scimago's ranking of journals, the majority of V&L articles are also in the Q1 category (42 percent).Although some articles do not fall into Q1 to Q4 in the BMA and "marketing" categories, most of these articles occupy Q1 in other categories, such as manufacturing engineering, management information systems, sociology, political science, tourism, leisure management, and hospitality, transportation, information systems, and organizational behavior.These findings indicate that SDL is accepted by other non-marketing or social science disciplines.Although SDL was born out of the marketing discipline, this logic can also contribute to other non-marketing or social science disciplines.For complete information, Schimago-based article rankings can be seen in Table 3. Source: *business, management, and accounting Most of the V&L publications were conceptual papers (96 percent), with only a small portion being empirical papers (4 percent, four articles).Conceptual papers focus on theoretical studies from the perspective of elementary logic.As a relatively new theory, theoretical and conceptual development from this perspective is essential to support the creation of a solid new theory, especially through various empirical studies, both qualitative and quantitative.Generally, articles ranged from six to twenty pages (64 percent) and were indexed by Scopus (73 percent).Articles that were not indexed by Scopus were indexed by other agencies, such as Ebsco, Springer, and ProQuest.
The dominant logic of service as a modern approach within the marketing discipline is highlighted in each V&L article.Therefore, it is understandable that the concept of service-dominant logic is the keyword in most of the V&L articles.It becomes part of the process of institutionalization or institutional work, which corrects the traditional perspective in the marketing discipline.The dominant logic of service is another perspective that views service as a process or activity of implementing operant resources that are owned to provide benefits to other actors (Vargo & Lusch, 2004a).Within this framework, services are reciprocal or referred to as service-to-service exchanges.On the other hand, the dominant logic of goods believes that the basis of exchange is units of output or products, both tangible (goods) and intangible (services).As stated by Vargo and Lusch (2004b), the dominant logic of services does not recognize intangible products.
Another concept that is often used as a keyword for every V&L article is value.Value is more often associated with real value, use value, or contextual value.Value is characterized as phenomenological, co-created, multidimensional, and emergent (Vargo et al., 2017a).Following premise six or axiom five in a service-dominant logic perspective, value is created jointly by many actors and consistently includes beneficiaries (Vargo & Lusch, 2016).However, SD logic also addresses value-in-exchange, that is, the value attached to a physical product.The exchange rate is measured by nominal value, namely price (Vargo et al., 2008b).Actors cannot convey use or real value, but they can be involved in forming exchange rates or value propositions (Vargo and Lusch, 2016).SE as a concept has been explored since the articles by Vargo (2009) and Lusch et al. (2010).In SE's view, producers, consumers, suppliers, and other actors are all considered service providers and recipients, making them generic actors (Vargo, 2009).Initially, the value network concept was presented as a dynamic and complex SE.However, SE is considered to be better at capturing the adaptive and evolutionary nature of value networks.SE can encompass supply chains with a wider network (Lusch et al., 2010).In its development, SE is characterized as an actor-adaptive system that integrates public, private, and market-facing resources linked by institutions and creates real value through mutual service (Vargo & Lusch, 2016).
In institutional theory, North (1990) describes institutions as human-created structures that shape human relationships.These institutions can be formal (such as rules or laws) or informal (such as norms and conventions).Institutions consist of regulative, normative, and cognitive components, which provide stability and significance to public activities (Scott, 2013).Williamson (1999) has described the rules of the game as part of environmental institutions.Actors rely on language, institutions, and technology to organize interactions and exchanges (Vargo & Lusch, 2010).On the other hand, institutional arrangements are sets of interdependent institutions that function as a set of values, cognitive models, and rules of the game that guide actors in exchanging services with other actors (Vargo & Lusch, 2016).For details on each keyword category, please refer to Table 4 and Table 5 Since its first introduction in 2004, the concept of "Service-Dominant (SD) logic" has become the most frequently mentioned keyword in every V&L (Value and Lifestyles) article.In particular, this concept was consistently emphasized in V&L articles from 2004 to 2008.However, in the following years, the number of SD logic keywords tended to fluctuate and decrease.On the other hand, the keyword "value" showed significant fluctuations from year to year and was present in articles from 2008, 2011, and 2015.The term "service ecosystem (SE)" rarely appeared annually, but its frequency increased, with more regular appearances in articles from 2016 and 2017.The term "institutional" was widely discussed only in 2011, 2015, and 2016.Similarly, the keyword "resources" was initially used in 2006 and continued to fluctuate until 2016.In contrast, the term "markets" had not been widely mentioned but experienced a surge in 2018.
Furthermore, the keyword "innovation" gained significant traction, especially since 2012 and even more so in 2020.
The complete trend of the keyword categories from year to year can be seen in  Several journal articles in collaboration with researchers such as Vargo, Lusch, and others have received prestigious awards.To date, a minimum of 14 articles have been recognized and honored by associations and journal publishers.One notable article, "Browning into....," published in the Journal of Marketing (JM), was not only highly cited but also received the prestigious Hunt/Maynard Award.Following that success, another significant article titled "Service-dominant logic: continuing....," published in the Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science (JAMS), also received recognition as the most cited article in its respective field.Additionally, the article "Elevating marketing," also published in JAMS, earned the prestigious title of "Recipient of Sheath Foundation 2014 / JAMS Best Article Award 2013."Morerecently, the paper "Con-verging on a new" published in JM, has achieved the distinguished honor of winning a Hunt/Maynard Award.These awards highlight the outstanding contributions these articles have made to their respective fields of research and scholarship.

CONCLUSION
This research offers a systematic and comprehensive assessment of V&L's work and that of their colleagues in the field of elementary logic up to the present time.The primary objective of this research is to uncover the shifts in thoughts, positions, and efforts of V&L in their journey of institutionalizing the logic of Service-Dominant (SD) over the course of 17 years.These findings provide valuable insights for contemporary SD logicians and scholars seeking to understand the evolution of SD logical thinking based on V&L's work.Notably, this study traces V&L's efforts in institutionalizing SD logic.Furthermore, the research identifies emerging trends and conceptual challenges, offering new knowledge as a reference for future investigations.Employing content analysis, the research thoroughly examines V&L's contributions to elementary logical thinking from its inception to the present day.The main conclusion drawn from the analysis of V&L's work is that the number of publications co-authored by V&L has shown a decreasing trend over the past 17 years, following a peak phase around 2011.The dominant types of publications are journal articles and book chapters.V&L has collaborated with nearly 100 authors, primarily concentrated in the Americas and Europe.The research has engaged with around 60 organizations in its collaborative efforts.V&L's publications span more than 40 scientific journals, encompassing both marketing and non-marketing disciplines, as well as other social sciences.Notably, the Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science (JAMS) contains the most articles by V&L, followed by MT, SS, and IMM.Generally, V&L's journal articles and those of their colleagues are conceptual and indexed in Scopus.
Beyond its theoretical contributions, the research findings also have practical implications for managers, offering new perspectives on understanding shared value creation.Managers gain insights into the crucial role of technologies, resource integration, value proposition, markets, and strategic benefits in value co-creation activities.The research emphasizes that actors are not merely producers and consumers in a dyadic relationship but encompass multiple actors who serve one another by engaging in complex and systemic institutions and institutional arrangements.Consequently, each generic actor needs to prioritize the process (activity) of service, which involves applying resources, especially operant resources, to deliver benefits to other actors.

Figure
Figure 1.Number of articles published per year

Figure
Figure 4. Trend of keywords usage in the journal article