Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Gestaltungsdimensionen der Digitalisierung – Wie Dienstleistungssysteme den Wandel antreiben und welche Faktoren eine Rolle spielen

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Dienstleistungsinnovationen durch Digitalisierung

  • 5261 Accesses

Zusammenfassung

In Zeiten der Digitalisierung nimmt Informationstechnologie eine Schlüsselrolle im Modernisierungsprozess von Unternehmen ein. Zugleich bringt die Softwareeinführung das Risiko mit sich, den intendierten Nutzen nicht zu realisieren. Durch eine Dienstleistungssystem-Perspektive erscheint die Einbindung der Nutzer in die Softwareeinführung ein vielversprechender Ansatz. Das Ziel des Projektes ExTEND – Engineering von Dienstleistungssystemen für nutzergenerierte Dienstleistungen ist es daher, Nutzer in die Softwareeinführung nach dem Leitbild „Dienstleistungen von Nutzern für Nutzer“ zu befähigen, aktiv einen Beitrag zu der Gestaltung der Arbeitsumgebung zu leisten. Hieraus resultieren IT-gestützte Servicebausteine, in denen Nutzer sich gegenseitige Hilfestellungen geben und Handlungsalternativen in der Softwareeinführung aufzeigen. Durch ein Pilotierungsvorgehen werden die Servicebausteine in drei Anwendungsfeldern entwickelt und pilotiert. Hieraus resultiert evidenzbasiertes Gestaltungswissen für die Entwicklung von nutzergenerierten Dienstleistungen. Darüber hinaus wird ein Mehrebenenmodell für die Gestaltung von Dienstleistungssystemen vorgestellt, welches die Entwicklung von Dienstleistungssystemen unterstützt und über traditionelle Ansätze des Service Engineerings hinausgeht.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 64.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Literatur

  • Agarwal, N., & Brem, A. (2012). Frugal and reverse innovation-Literature overview and case study insights from a German MNC in India and China. Paper presented at the 18th International ICE Conference on Engineering, Technology and Innovation, München.

    Google Scholar 

  • Agarwal, N., Bästlein, M., Böhmann, T., Ernst, S., Fritzsche, A., Grotherr, C., Klemm, H., Klemm, P., Leimeister, J. M., Li, M. M. Möslein, K. M., Peters, C., Sarpong, B., Saxe, S., Schmidt, T., Schymanietz, M., Wurfbaum, M. S., Semmann, M., & Ziegler, D. (2019a). Nutzergenerierte Dienstleistungssysteme zur digitalen Transformation von Organisationen. In P. D. J. H. S. Prof. Dr.-Ing. V. Stich, Prof. Dr. D. Beverungen, Dr.-Ing. G. Gudergan & Dr.-Ing. P. Jusse (Hrsg.), Digitale Dienstleistungsinnovationen. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Agarwal, N., Schymanietz M., & Fritzsche, A. (2019b). A Frugal Support Structure for New Software Implementations in SMEs. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 14. Tagung Wirtschaftsinformatik (WI), Siegen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Akaka, M. A., & Vargo, S. L. (2014). Technology as an operant resource in service (eco) systems. Information Systems and e-Business Management, 12(3), 367–384.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Albers, A., & Braun, A. (2011). A generalised framework to compass and to support complex product engineering processes. International Journal of Product Development, 15(1–3), 6–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baumöl, U. (2006). Methodenkonstruktion für das Business/IT Alignment. Wirtsch. Inform., 48(5), 314–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beaudry, A., & Pinsonneault, A. (2010). The other side of acceptance: Studying the direct and indirect effects of emotions on information technology use. MIS Quarterly, 34(4), 689–710.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beirão, G., Patrício, L., & Fisk, R. P. (2017). Value cocreation in service ecosystems: Investigating health care at the micro, meso, and macro levels. Journal of Service Management, 28(2), 227–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benbya, H., & Leidner, D. (2016). Harnessing employee innovation in internal crowdsourcing platforms: Lessons from Allianz UK. Paper presented at the International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS), Dublin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernardi, N., & Kowaltowski, D. (2010). When role playing is not enough: Improved universal design education. International Journal of Architectural Research: ArchNet-IJAR, 4(2/3), 376–390.

    Google Scholar 

  • Böhmann, T., Leimeister, J., & Möslein, K. (2014). Service systems engineering. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 6(2), 73–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Böhmann, T., Leimeister, J. M., & Möslein, K. (2018). The new frontiers of service systems engineering. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 60(5), 373–375.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Breidbach, C., Brodie, R., & Hollebeek, L. (2014). Beyond virtuality: From engagement platforms to engagement ecosystems. Managing Service Quality, 24(6), 592–611.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Breidbach, C. F., & Brodie, R. J. (2017). Engagement platforms in the sharing economy: Conceptual foundations and research directions. Journal of Service Theory and Practice, 27(4), 761.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Breidbach, C. F., & Maglio, P. P. (2016). Technology-enabled value co-creation: An empirical analysis of actors, resources, and practices. Industrial Marketing Management, 56, 73–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brynjolfsson, E., & Hitt, L. M. (1998). Beyond the productivity paradox. Communications of the ACM, 41(8), 49–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bullinger, H.-J., & Scheer, A.-W. (2006). Service engineering – Entwicklung und Gestaltung innovativer Dienstleistungen. In H. J. Bullinger & A. W. Scheer (Hrsg.), Service engineering (S. 3–18). Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Chandler, J. D., & Lusch, R. F. (2015). Service systems: A broadened framework and research agenda on value propositions, engagement, and service experience. Journal of Service Research, 18(1), 6–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chandler, J. D., & Vargo, S. L. (2011). Contextualization and value-in-context: How context frames exchange. Marketing Theory, 11(1), 35–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chang, S.-I., Yen, D. C., Huang, S.-M., & Hung, P.-Q. (2008). An ERP system life cycle-wide management and support framework for small-and medium-sized companies. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 22(1), 15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davison, R. M., Ou, C. X. J., & Martinsons, M. G. (2013). Information technology to support informal knowledge sharing. Information Systems Journal, 23(1), 89–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Echeverri, P., & Skålén, P. (2011). Co-creation and co-destruction: A practice-theory based study of interactive value formation. Marketing Theory, 11(3), 351–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edvardsson, B., & Tronvoll, B. (2011) Value co-creation and value-in-context: Understanding the influence of duality of structures. Paper presented at the International Joint Conference on Service Sciences (IJCSS), Taipei.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edvardsson, B., Tronvoll, B., & Gruber, T. (2011). Expanding understanding of service exchange and value co-creation: A social construction approach. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 39(2), 327–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edvardsson, B., Skålén, P., & Tronvoll, B. (2012). Service systems as a foundation for resource integration and value co-creation. Review of Marketing Research, 9(2), 79–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edvardsson, B., Kleinaltenkamp, M., Tronvoll, B., McHugh, P., & Windahl, C. (2014). Institutional logics matter when coordinating resource integration. Marketing Theory, 14(3), 291–309. https://doi.org/10.1177/1470593114534343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ekman, P., Raggio, R. D., & Thompson, S. M. (2016). Service network value co-creation: Defining the roles of the generic actor. Industrial Marketing Management, 56, 51–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eraut, M. (2004). Informal learning in the workplace. Studies in Continuing Education, 26, 247–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erickson, L. B., Trauth, E. M., & Petrick, I. (2012) Getting inside your employees’ heads: Navigating barriers to internal-crowdsourcing for product and service innovation. Paper presented at the International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS), Orlando.

    Google Scholar 

  • Faraj, S., von Krogh, G., Monteiro, E., & Lakhani, K. R. (2016). Online community as space for knowledge flows. Information Systems Research, 27(4), 668–684.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Felin, T., Foss, N. J., & Ployhart, R. E. (2015). The microfoundations movement in strategy and organization theory. Academy of Management Annals, 9(1), 575–632.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fritzsche, A. (2018). Spreading innovations: models, designs and research directions. In Diffusive spreading in nature, technology and society (S. 277–294). Cham: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Fritzsche, A., Jonas, J. M., & Roth, A. (2018). Entwicklung digitaler Servicesysteme – Akteure, Ressourcen und Aktivitäten. In K. Meyer, S. Klingner & C. Zinke (Hrsg.), Service Engineering (S. 51–61). Wiesbaden: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Frow, P., McColl-Kennedy, J. R., & Payne, A. (2016). Co-creation practices: Their role in shaping a health care ecosystem. Industrial Marketing Management, 56, 24–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gill, T. G., & Hevner, A. R. (2013). A fitness-utility model for design science research. ACM Transactions on Management Information Systems (TMIS), 4(2), 5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glass, R. L. (1997). Pilot studies: What, why and how. Journal of Systems and Software, 36(1), 85–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gnewuch, U., Haake, P., Mueller, B., & Maedche, A. (2016). The effect of learning on the effective use of enterprise systems. Paper presented at the Thirty-Seventh International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS), Dublin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldkuhl, G. (2013). From ensemble view to ensemble artefact – An inquiry on conceptualisations of the IT artefact. Systems, Signs & Actions, 7(1), 49–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gregor, S., & Hevner, A. R. (2013). Positioning and presenting design science research for maximum impact. MIS Quarterly, 37(2), 337–355.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gregor, S., & Jones, D. (2007). The anatomy of a design theory. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 8(5), 312–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grönroos, C. (2008). Service logic revisited: Who creates value? And who co-creates? European Business Review, 20(4), 298–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grotherr, C., Semmann, M., & Böhmann, T. (2018a). Engaging users to co-create – Implications for service systems design by evaluating an engagement platform. Paper presented at the 51th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), Hawaii.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grotherr, C., Semmann, M., & Böhmann, T. (2018b). Using microfoundations of value co-creation to guide service systems design – A multilevel design framework. Paper presented at the International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS), San Francisco.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haake, P., Mädche, A., Mueller, B., & Lauterbach, J. (2015). The effect of user adaptation on the effective use of enterprise systems. Paper presented at the Thirty Sixth International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS), Fort Worth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haines, R., Hough, J., Cao, L., & Haines, D. (2014). Anonymity in computer-mediated communication: More contrarian ideas with less influence. Group Decision and Negotiation, 23(4), 765–786.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hertzum, M., Bansler, J. P., Havn, E. C., & Simonsen, J. (2012). Pilot implementation: Learning from field tests in IS development. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 30(1), 313–328.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hevner, A. R. (2007). A three cycle view of design science research. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 19(2), 87–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hevner, A. R., March, S. T., Park, J., & Ram, S. (2004). Design science in information systems research. MIS Quarterly, 28(1), 75–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krcmar, H., & Böhmann, T. (2004). Piloting socio-technical innovations. In N. Bjørn-Andersen, K. V. Andersen, M. T. Vendelø, G. B. Davis, T. Böhmann, D. Avison & R. Vidgen (Hrsg.), The past and future of information systems (S. 13–28). Amsterdam: Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lancaster, G. A., Dodd, S., & Williamson, P. R. (2004). Design and analysis of pilot studies: Recommendations for good practice. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 10(2), 307–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leimeister, J., Zogaj, S., & Blohm, I. (2014). Crowdwork – Digitale Wertschöpfung in der Wolke: Ein Überblick über die Grundlagen, die Formen und den aktuellen Forschungsstand. In C. Benner (Hrsg.), Crowdwork – Zurück in die Zukunft? Perspektiven digitaler Arbeit (S. 9–41). Frankfurt a. M.: Bund.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leimeister, J. M. (2019). Dienstleistungsengineering und -management, Data-driven Service Innovation (2. Aufl.). Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lenney, P., & Easton, G. (2009). Actors, resources, activities and commitments. Industrial Marketing Management, 38(5), 553–561.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, M. M., & Peters, C. (2016). Mastering shakedown through the user: The need for user-generated services in techno change. Paper presented at the European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), Istanbul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Li, M. M., & Peters, C. (2018). Reconceptualizing service systems – Introducing service system graphs. International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS), San Francisco.

    Google Scholar 

  • Li, M. M., Billert, M. S., Dellermann, D., Peters, C., & Leimeister, J. M. (2018). Einführung von Crowd-Based Support Dienstleistungen zur Verbesserung der Softwareeinführung. In K. Meyer, S. Klingner & C. Zinke (Hrsg.), Service Engineering (S. 133–149). Wiesbaden: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu, G. H., Wang, E., & Chua, C. E. H. (2015). Leveraging social capital to obtain top management support in complex, cross-functional IT projects. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 16(8), 707–737.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, T.-C., Liang, J.-K., Wang, H.-Y., Chan, T.-W., & Wei, L.-H. (2003). Embedding educlick in classroom to enhance interaction. International conference on computers in education (ICCE), Hong Kong.

    Google Scholar 

  • Locke, E. A. (1968). Towards a theory of task motivation and incentives. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 3(2), 157–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lusch, R. F., & Nambisan, S. (2015). Service innovation: A service-dominant logic perspective. MIS Quarterly, 39(1), 155–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lusch, R. F., & Vargo, S. L. (2014). Service-dominant logic: Premises, perspectives, possibilities. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Maglio, P. P., Vargo, S. L., Caswell, N., & Spohrer, J. (2009). The service system is the basic abstraction of service science. Information Systems and e-Business Management, 7(4), 395–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mahmud, I., Ramayah, T., & Kurnia, S. (2017). To use or not to use: Modelling end user grumbling as user resistance in pre-implementation stage of enterprise resource planning system. Information Systems, 69, 164–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Majchrzak, A., Markus, M. L., & Wareham, J. (2016). Designing for digital transformation: Lessons for information systems research from the study of ICT and societal challenges. MIS Quarterly, 40(2), 267–277.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • March, S. T., & Smith, G. F. (1995). Design and natural science research on information technology. Decision Support Systems, 15(4), 251–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marchand, D. A., Kettinger, W. J., & Rollins, J. D. (2000). Information orientation: people, technology and the bottom line. Sloan Management Review, 41(4), 69–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Markus, M. L. (2004). Technochange management: Using IT to drive organizational change. Journal of Information Technology, 19(1), 4–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDonald, S., Edwards, H. M., & Zhao, T. (2012). Exploring think-alouds in usability testing: An international survey. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 55(1), 2–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meehan-Andrews, A. (2009). Teaching mode efficiency and learning preferences of first year nursing students. Nurse Education Today, 29, 24–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meynhardt, T., Chandler, J. D., & Strathoff, P. (2016). Systemic principles of value co-creation: Synergetics of value and service ecosystems. Journal of Business Research, 69(8), 2981–2989.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore, M. G. (1989). Editorial: Three types of interaction. American Journal of Distance Education, 3(2), 1–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nonaka, I. (1994). A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organization Science, 5(1), 14–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orlikowski, W. J. (1996). Improvising organizational transformation over time: A situated change perspective. Information Systems Research, 7(1), 63–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orlikowski, W. J., & Iacono, C. S. (2001). Research commentary: Desperately seeking „IT“ in IT research – A call to theorizing the IT artifact. Information Systems Research, 12(2), 121–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom, A. L., Parasuraman, A., Bowen, D. E., Patricio, L., Voss, C. A., & Lemon, K. (2015). Service research priorities in a rapidly changing context. Journal of Service Research, 18(2), 127–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parry, S., Jones, R., Rowley, J., & Kupiec-Teahan, B. (2012). Marketing for survival: A comparative case study of SME software firms. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 19(4), 712–728.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Payne, A. F., Storbacka, K., & Frow, P. (2008). Managing the co-creation of value. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 36(1), 83–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peffers, K., Tuunanen, T., Gengler, C. E., Rossi, M., Hui, W., Virtanen, V., & Bragge, J. (2006). The design science research process: A model for producing and presenting information systems research. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the first International Conference on Design Science Research in information Systems and Technology (DESRIST), Claremont.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peffers, K., Tuunanen, T., Rothenberger, M. A., & Chatterjee, S. (2007). A design science research methodology for information systems research. Journal of Management Information Systems, 24(3), 45–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peters, C., Blohm, I., & Leimeister, J. M. (2015). Anatomy of successful business models for complex services: Insights from the telemedicine field. Journal of Management Information Systems (JMIS), 32(3), 75–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pinho, N., Bo, E., Professor Anders, P., Beirão, G., Patrício, L. P., & Fisk, R. (2014). Understanding value co-creation in complex services with many actors. Journal of Service Management, 25(4), 470–493.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Puhakainen, P., & Siponen, M. (2010). Improving employees’ compliance through information systems security training: An action research study. MIS Quarterly, 34(4), 757–778.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ragunathan, T. S., Tarafdar, M., Ragunathan, B. S., & Tu, Q. (2008). The consequences of technostress for end users in organizations: Conceptual development and empirical validation. Information Systems Research, 19(4), 417–433.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raymond, A., Jacob, E., Jacob, D., & Lyons, J. (2016). Peer learning a pedagogical approach to enhance online learning: A qualitative exploration. Nurse Education Today, 44, 165–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, E. M. (2010). Diffusion of innovations. New York: Simon and Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ropohl, G. (2009). Allgemeine Technologie: Eine Systemtheorie der Technik. Karlsruhe: KIT Scientific Publishing.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rost, K., Stahel, L., & Frey, B. S. (2016). Digital social norm enforcement: Online firestorms in social media. PLoS one, 11(6), e0155923.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2011). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schlagwein, D., Conboy, K., Feller, J., Leimeister, J. M., & Morgan, L. (2017). „Openness“ with and without Information Technology: A framework and a brief history. Journal of Information Technology, 32(4), 297–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schöbel, S., & Janson, A. (2018). Gamifying information systems – Improving motivation and effective use through a theory-motivated method. Paper presented at the International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS), San Francisco.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwabe, G., & Krcmar, H. (2000). Piloting Socio-Technical Innovation. Paper presented at the European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), Wien.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sein, M., Henfridsson, O., Purao, S., Rossi, M., & Lindgren, R. (2011). Action design research. MIS Quarterly, 35(1), 37–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Semmann, M. (2017). Service Systems for Benefits Realization. Dissertation, University of Hamburg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Semmann, M., & Böhmann, T. (2015). Post-project benefits management in large organizations – Insights of a qualitative study. Paper presented at the International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS), Fort Worth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Semmann, M., & Grotherr, C. (2017). How to empower users for co-creation – Conceptualizing an engagement platform for benefits realization. Paper presented at the 13th International Conference on Wirtschaftsinformatik, St. Gallen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Silva, É. R., Bartholo, R., & Proença, D. (2018). Managing the state of the art of engineering: Learning from medicine. In A. Fritzsche & S. Oks (Hrsg.), The future of engineering (S. 217–227). Cham: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snehota, I., & Hakansson, H. (1995). Developing relationships in business networks. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stieger, D., Matzler, K., Chatterjee, S., & Ladstaetter-Fussenegger, F. (2012). Democratizing strategy: How crowdsourcing can be used for strategy dialogues. California Management Review, 54(4), 44–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Storbacka, K., Brodie, R. J., Böhmann, T., Maglio, P. P., & Nenonen, S. (2016). Actor engagement as a microfoundation for value co-creation. Journal of Business Research, 69(8), 3008–3017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sykes, T. A. (2015). Support structures and their impacts on employee outcomes: A longitudinal field study of an enterprise system implementation. MIS Quarterly, 39(2), 473–495.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sykes, T. A., Venkatesh, V., & Gosain, S. (2009). Model of acceptance with peer support: A social network perspective to understand employees’ system use. MIS Quarterly, 33(2), 371–393.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Syson, F., & Perks, H. (2004). New service development: A network perspective. Journal of Services Marketing, 18(4), 255–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tekic, A., & Willoughby, K. (2018). Co-creation–child, sibling or adopted cousin of open innovation? Innovation: Management, Policy & Practice, 21(2), 274–297.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tennant, V., Mills, A., & Chin, W. (2015). The effect of feedback on change in post-adoption use of information systems. Paper presented at the Thirty Sixth International Conference on Information Systems, Fort Worth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thabane, L., Ma, J., Chu, R., Cheng, J., Ismaila, A., Rios, L. P., Robson, R., Thabane, M., Giangregorio, L., & Goldsmith, C. H. (2010). A tutorial on pilot studies: The what, why and how. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 10(1), 1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Till, J. (2005). The negotiation of hope. Architecture and participation (S. 23–41). London: Spon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tronvoll, B.: The Actor (2005). The key determinator in service ecosystems. Systems, 5(2), 38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turner, J. R. (2005). The role of pilot studies in reducing risk on projects and programmes. International Journal of Project Management, 23(1), 1–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2004). Evolving to a new dominant logic for marketing. Journal of Marketing, 68(1), 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2015). Institutions and axioms: An extension and update of service-dominant logic. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 44(1), 5–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vargo, S. L., Maglio, P. P., & Akaka, M. A. (2008). On value and value co-creation: A service systems and service logic perspective. European Management Journal, 26(3), 145–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Venkatesh, V., Zhang, X., & Sykes, T. A. (2011). Doctors do too little technology: A longitudinal field study of an electronic healthcare system implementation. Information Systems Research, 22(3), 523–546.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Venkatesh, V., Bala, H., & Sambamurthy, V. (2016). Implementation of an information and communication technology in a developing country: A multimethod longitudinal study in a bank in India. Information Systems Research, 27(3), 558–579.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vogel, P., Grotherr, C., & Semmann, M. (2019). Leveraging the internal crowd for continuous requirements engineering: Lessons learned from a design science research project. Paper presented at the European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), Stockholm.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagenknecht, T., Levina, O., & Weinhardt, C. (2017). Crowdsourcing in a public organization: Transformation and culture. Paper presented at the 23th Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS), Boston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watson, R. T., Kunene, K. N., & Islam, M. S. (2013). Frugal information systems (IS). Information Technology for Development, 19(2), 176–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning as a social system. Systems Thinker, 9(5), 2–3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Witte, E. (1997). Feldexperimente als Innovationstest – die Pilotprojekte zu neuen Medien. Zeitschrift für betriebswirtschaftliche Forschung, 49(5), 419–436.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zogaj, S., Leicht, N., Blohm, I., & Bretschneider, U. (2015). Towards successful crowdsourcing projects: Evaluating the implementation of governance mechanisms. Paper presented at the Thirty Sixth International Conference of Information Systems, Fort Worth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zuchowski, O., Posegga, O., Schlagwein, D., & Fischbach, K. (2016). Internal crowdsourcing: Conceptual framework, structured review, and research agenda. Journal of Information Technology, 31(2), 166–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Universität Hamburg, Hamburg, Deutschland

    Christian Grotherr, Martin Semmann & Tilo Böhmann

  2. Universität Kassel, Kassel, Deutschland

    Mahei M. Li, Christoph Peters & Jan Marco Leimeister

  3. Friedrich-Alexander Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Nürnberg, Deutschland

    Martin Schymanietz, Albrecht Fritzsche & Kathrin M. Möslein

Authors
  1. Christian Grotherr
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mahei M. Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Martin Schymanietz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Albrecht Fritzsche
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Martin Semmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Christoph Peters
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Tilo Böhmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Jan Marco Leimeister
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Kathrin M. Möslein
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tilo Böhmann .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Universität Paderborn, Paderborn, Germany

    Daniel Beverungen

  2. Universität Passau, Passau, Germany

    Jan H. Schumann

  3. RWTH Aachen, Aachen, Germany

    Volker Stich

  4. Universität Siegen, Siegen, Germany

    Giuseppe Strina

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Der/die Herausgeber bzw. der/die Autor(en), exklusiv lizenziert durch Springer-Verlag GmbH, DE, ein Teil von Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Grotherr, C. et al. (2020). Gestaltungsdimensionen der Digitalisierung – Wie Dienstleistungssysteme den Wandel antreiben und welche Faktoren eine Rolle spielen. In: Beverungen, D., Schumann, J.H., Stich, V., Strina, G. (eds) Dienstleistungsinnovationen durch Digitalisierung. Springer Gabler, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-62144-8_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-62144-8_6

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer Gabler, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-662-62143-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-662-62144-8

  • eBook Packages: Business and Economics (German Language)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation