9600 
7698Value co-destruction refers to the fact that at least one party’s welfare decreases due to resource misuse in the process of value formation, which means that not only positive output but also negative or less-than-expected output will be co-produced during the interaction between actors. Therefore, it is necessary to carry out systematic research on this phenomenon of value co-destruction, which will contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of the interaction process of the value formation, and can be regarded as an important complement to the value co-creation research; from the perspective of practice, to explore the reasons and the process of value co-destruction will contribute to the prevention, identification, analysis and save of the value co-destruction of various forms, and be conducive to achieve value co-creation by pertinently motivating participants. The study of value co-destruction originates from the study of value co-creation because some scholars have discovered the phenomenon of value co-destruction while studying the value co-creation. But they have not paid much attention to this phenomenon. It is not until 2010 that some scholars formally put forward the concept and the definition of value co-destruction, which indicates the formal birth of this research field. Subsequently, a number of related studies emerge. The topics concerned include empirically testing of value co-destruction, discussing the definition and the classification of value co-destruction, and identifying the causes and the process of value co-destruction. In general, the value co-destruction study is in its infancy and thus research is mainly conceptual in nature. There are still some disputes about the definition of value co-destruction. Some scholars believe that the co-destruction only means negative output, but some others believe that it should also mean neutral and less-than-expected output. The concepts related to value co-destruction include value destruction, value diminution, and so on. The value destruction means that the welfare reduction only occurs on the person who is informed. In other words, it means that only one party’s value creation process is negatively affected. The meaning of value diminution is more extensive than value co-destruction, and it refers to a suboptimal output below the most ideal situation. We can classify the value co-destruction from multiple perspectives, such as the structure of participants, the output level caused by co-destruction, and the time sequence in interaction process. The causes of the value co-destruction are diverse, and different kinds of literature hold different views. In general, these causes can be summarized as lack of trust, unequal status, lack of resources and inadequate communication/coordination or incongruent practice elements, misuse of resources, unequal value perception and so on. The logical relationship between these causes constitutes the flow chart of the value co-destruction. There are many research opportunities in the field of value co-destruction, and the related research in the future can be carried out from the following aspects. Firstly, strengthening the empirical study on the value co-destruction, especially in Chinese context; secondly, studying the problem of value co-destruction from a more general perspective; thirdly, carrying out the exploratory study on the value co-destruction involving three or more participants; fourthly, continuing to study the result of value co-destruction because the meaning of welfare reduction is still not clear; fifthly, studying how to overcome the main causes of value co-destruction. The contributions of this paper are to build a comprehensive theoretical framework of value co-destruction process, and to use the science revolution theory to divide the development process of this field into three stages and to predict the possible characteristics of future research.
/ Journals / Foreign Economics & Management
Foreign Economics & Management
LiZengquan, Editor-in-Chief
ZhengChunrong, Vice Executive Editor-in-Chief
YinHuifang HeXiaogang LiuJianguo, Vice Editor-in-Chief
Value Co-destruction Research: Origin, Present and Prospect
Foreign Economics & Management Vol. 40, Issue 06, pp. 44 - 58 (2018) DOI:10.16538/j.cnki.fem.2018.06.004
Summary
References
Summary
Keywords
[1] Aarikka-Stenroos L, Jaakkola E. Value co-creation in knowledge intensive business services: A dyadic perspective on the joint problem solving process[J]. Industrial Marketing Management, 2012, 41(1): 15-26.
[2] Anderson L, Ostrom A L. Transformative service research: Advancing our knowledge about service and well-being[J]. Journal of Service Research, 2015, 18(3): 243-249.
[3] Becker S V, Aromaa E, Eriksson P. Client-consultant interaction: The dynamics of and conflicts in value co-creation and co-destruction[J]. International Journal of Services Technology and Management, 2015, 21(1-3): 40-54.
[4] Bu Qingjuan, Jin Yongsheng, Li Zhaohui. Does interactive behavior certainly create value？The effect of customer value co-creation interactive behavior on customer value[J]. Foreign Economics & Management, 2016, 38(9): 21-37.
[5] Cai li, Shan Biaoan. Research on entrepreneurship in China: Review and prospect[J]. Management World, 2013, (12): 160-169.
[6] Camilleri J, Neuhofer B. Value co-creation and co-destruction in the Airbnb sharing economy[J]. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 2017, 29(9): 2322-2340.
[7] Carù A, Cova B. Co-creating the collective service experience[J]. Journal of Service Management, 2015, 26(2): 276-294.
[8] Chandler J D, Vargo S L. Contextualization and value-in-context: How context frames exchange[J]. Marketing Theory, 2011, 11(1): 35-49.
[9] Daunt K L, Harris L C. Consumer showrooming: Value co-destruction[J]. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 2017, 38: 166-176.
[10] Dougherty D, Murthy A. What service customers really want[J]. Harvard Business Review, 2009, 87(9): 22-23.
[11] Echeverri P, Skålén P. Co-creation and co-destruction: A practice-theory based study of interactive value formation[J]. Marketing Theory, 2011, 11(3): 351-373.
[12] Farquhar J D, Robson J. Selective demarketing: When customers destroy value[J]. Marketing Theory, 2017, 17(2): 165-182.
[13] Fletcher-Chen C C Y, Plé L, Zhu X. The dynamics between value co-creation and value co-destruction in business service networks[A]. Rossi P. Marketing at the confluence between entertainment and analytics[C]. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2017.
[14] Grönroos C. What can service logic offer marketing theory?[A]. Lusch R F, Vargo S L. The service-dominant logic of marketing: Dialog, debate, and directions[C]. Armonk, NY: ME Sharpe, 2006.
[15] Heinonen K, Strandvik T, Voima P. Customer dominant value formation in service[J]. European Business Review, 2013, 25(2): 104-123.
[16] Hobfoll S E. Social and psychological resources and adaptation[J]. Review of General Psychology, 2002, 6(4): 307-324.
[17] Inman J J. Regret regulation: Disentangling self-reproach from learning[J]. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 2007, 17(1): 19-24.
[18] Jaakkola E, Helkkula A, Aarikka-Stenroos L. Service experience co-creation: Conceptualization, implications, and future research directions[J]. Journal of Service Management, 2015, 26(2): 182-205.
[19] Jaworski B, Kohli A. Co-creating the voice of the customer[A]. Lusch R F, Vargo S L. The service-dominant logic of marketing: Dialog, debate, and directions[C]. Armonk, NY: ME Sharpe, 2006.
[20] Jian Zhaoquan, Linghu Kerui, Li Lei. The evolution and prospects of value co-creation research: A perspective from customer experience to service ecosystems[J]. Foreign Economics & Management, 2016, 38(9): 3-20.
[21] Kashif M, Zarkada A. Value co-destruction between customers and frontline employees: A social system perspective[J]. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 2015, 33(6): 672-691.
[22] Leclercq T, Hammedi W, Poncin I. Ten years of value cocreation: An integrative review[J]. Recherche et Applications En Marketing (English Edition), 2016, 31(3): 26-60.
[23] Lusch R F, Vargo S L. The service-dominant logic of marketing: Dialog, debate and directions[M]. Armonk, NY: ME Sharpe, 2006.
[24] Lusch R F, Vargo S L, O’Brien M. Competing through service: Insights from service-dominant logic[J]. Journal of Retailing, 2007, 83(1): 5-18.
[25] Lusch R F, Vargo S L. Service-dominant logic: Premises, perspectives, possibilities[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014.
[26] Maglio P P, Spohrer J. Fundamentals of service science[J]. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 2008, 36(1): 18-20.
[27] Malone S, McKechnie S, Tynan C. Tourists’ emotions as a resource for customer value creation, cocreation, and destruction: A customer-grounded understanding[J]. Journal of Travel Research, 2017, doi: 10.1177/0047287517720118.
[28] Ostrom A L, Bitner M J, Brown S W, et al. Moving forward and making a difference: Research priorities for the science of service[J]. Journal of Service Research, 2010, 13(1): 4-36.
[29] Ostrom A L, Parasuraman A, Bowen D E, et al. Service research priorities in a rapidly changing context[J]. Journal of Service Research, 2015, 18(2): 127-159.
[30] Pinnington B D, Scanlon T J. Antecedents of collective-value within business-to-business relationships[J]. European Journal of Marketing, 2009, 43(1-2): 31-45.
[31] Plé L, Cáceres R C. Not always co-creation: Introducing interactional co-destruction of value in service-dominant logic[J]. Journal of Services Marketing, 2010, 24(6): 430-437.
[32] Plé L. Studying customers’ resource integration by service employees in interactional value co-creation[J]. Journal of Services Marketing, 2016, 30(2): 152-164.
[33] Prahalad C K, Ramaswamy V. The co-creation connection[J]. Strategy and Business, 2002, 27(2): 51-60.
[34] Prahalad C K, Ramaswamy V. The future of competition: Co-creating unique value with customers[M]. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press, 2004.
[35] Prior D D, Marcos-Cuevas J. Value co-destruction in interfirm relationships: The impact of actor engagement styles[J]. Marketing Theory, 2016, 16(4): 533-552.
[36] Quach S, Thaichon P. From connoisseur luxury to mass luxury: Value co-creation and co-destruction in the online environment[J]. Journal of Business Research, 2017, 81: 163-172.
[37] Ramírez R. Value co-production: Intellectual origins and implications for practice and research[J]. Strategic Management Journal, 1999, 20(1): 49-65.
[38] Robertson N, Polonsky M, McQuilken L. Are my symptoms serious Dr Google? A resource-based typology of value co-destruction in online self-diagnosis[J]. Australasian Marketing Journal, 2014, 22(3): 246-256.
[39] Samaha S A, Palmatier R W, Dant R P. Poisoning relationships: Perceived unfairness in channels of distribution[J]. Journal of Marketing, 2011, 75(3): 99-117.
[40] Shaver P, Schwartz J, Kirson D, et al Emotion knowledge: Further exploration of a prototype approach[J]. Journal of personality and social psychology, 1987, 52(6): 1061-1086.
[41] Shneider A M. Four stages of a scientific discipline; four types of scientist[J]. Trends in Biochemical Sciences, 2009, 34(5): 217-223.
[42] Smith A M. The value co-destruction process: A customer resource perspective[J]. European Journal of Marketing, 2013, 47(11-12): 1889-1909.
[43] Solomon M R, Surprenant C, Czepiel J A, et al. A role theory perspective on dyadic interactions: The service encounter[J]. Journal of Marketing, 1985, 49(1): 99-111.
[44] Spohrer J, Maglio P P, Bailey J, et al. Steps toward a science of service systems[J]. Computer, 2007, 40(1): 71-77.
[45] Stieler M, Weismann F, Germelmann C C. Co-destruction of value by spectators: The case of silent protests[J]. European Sport Management Quarterly, 2014, 14(1): 72-86.
[46] Uppström E, Lönn C M. Explaining value co-creation and co-destruction in e-government using boundary object theory[J]. Government Information Quarterly, 2017, 34(3): 406-420.
[47] Vafeas M, Hughes T, Hilton T. Antecedents to value diminution: A dyadic perspective[J]. Marketing Theory, 2016, 16(4): 469-491.
[48] Vargo S L, Lusch R F. Evolving to a new dominant logic for marketing[J]. Journal of Marketing, 2004, 68(1): 1-17.
[49] Vargo S L, Lusch R F. From goods to service(s): Divergences and convergences of logics[J]. Industrial Marketing Management, 2008a, 37(3): 254-259.
[50] Vargo S L, Lusch R F. Service-dominant logic: Continuing the evolution[J]. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 2008b, 36(1): 1-10.
[51] Vargo S L, Lusch R F. Why “service”?[J]. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 2008c, 36(1): 25-38.
[52] Vargo S L, Maglio P P, Akaka M A. On value and value co-creation: A service systems and service logic perspective[J]. European Management Journal, 2008, 26(3): 145-152.
[53] Vargo S L, Lusch R F. It’s all B2B…and beyond: Toward a systems perspective of the market[J]. Industrial Marketing Management, 2011, 40(2): 181-187.
[54] Vargo S L, Lusch R F. Institutions and axioms: An extension and update of service-dominant logic[J]. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 2016, 44(1): 5-23.
[55] Williams B N, Kang S C, Johnson J. (Co)-Contamination as the dark side of co-production: Public value failures in co-production processes[J]. Public Management Review, 2016, 18(5): 692-717.
[56] Wofford J C, Goodwin V L, Premack S. Meta-analysis of the antecedents of personal goal level and of the antecedents and consequences of goal commitment[J]. Journal of Management, 1992, 18(3): 595-615.
[57] Woodruff R B, Flint D J. Marketing’s service-dominant logic and customer value[A]. Lusch R F, Vargo S L. The service-dominant logic of marketing: Dialog, debate, and directions[C]. Armonk, NY: ME Sharpe, 2006.
[58] Yi S W, Baumgartner H. Coping with negative emotions in purchase-related situations[J]. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 2004, 14(3): 303-317.
[59] Zhu X, Zolkiewski J. Exploring service failure in a business-to-business context[J]. Journal of Services Marketing, 2015, 29(5): 367-379.
Cite this article
Chen Wei, Wu Zongfa, Xu Ju. Value Co-destruction Research: Origin, Present and Prospect[J]. Foreign Economics & Management, 2018, 40(6): 44-58.
Export Citations as:
For
ISSUE COVER
RELATED ARTICLES
