Alle Angebote für dieses Produkt
Meistverkauft in Sprache & Literatur
Über dieses Produkt
- Kurzbeschreibung<p>For virtually all of the 20th century, the paradigm in marketing was founded on early economic thoughts, making goods and exchanges the focal point of economic research and practice. In the 1980s and 1990s, scholars called for a paradigm shift, but did not deliver clear directives on how to move forward. It was not before 2004 when Stephen L. Vargo and Robert F. Lusch published their award-winning article Evolving to a New Dominant Logic for Marketing in the Journal of Marketing, dealing with a potentially new paradigm for marketing. The publication has caused a lot of discussions, crowned by a collection of essays from more than 50 scholars in 2006. This book aims at looking into the reactions and discussions regarding the proposed service-dominant logic in more detail. So far, no comprehensive overview of the existing literature has yet been made. This book will introduce the basic ideas of the service-dominant logic, followed by a detailed state-of-literature. The last part of the book will examine whether the concepts of a service-dominant logic display similarities with concepts of B2B marketing and whether they could successfully be adopted in B2B markets.</p>
- AutorChristina Weissenfels
- VerlagAnchor Academic Publishing
- Seiten60 Seiten
- Gewicht110 g
- LeseprobeTextprobe:<br>Chapter 2.2, How Current Research Challenges the Validity of an IHIP Paradigm:<br>While the IHIP characteristics of services have been an acknowledged belief in marketing research for a long period of time - especially at the beginning of the new emerging subdiscipline of services marketing - new thoughts and evolvements have lead to new publications which challenge the general validity of the four IHIP characteristics. While a subliminal skepticism on the part of several marketing scholars could be observed sporadically (Grönroos 2000; Gummesson 2002b; Lovelock 1983), it was not before 2004 that two publications fiercely attacked the validity of the IHIP characteristics: Lovelock and Gummesson with their article Whither Services Marketing? (2004), and also the founders of the service-dominant logic in their publication The Four Service Marketing Myths (Vargo and Lusch 2004b). <br>Lovelock and Gummesson (2004) doubt that intangibility, heterogeneity, inseparability, and perishability are able to make services uniquely different from goods. Intangibility refers mainly to the fact that services cannot be sensed or touched before their purchase, and thus a high prepurchase uncertainty for the customer is involved. This point is relativized when thinking about the lot of tangible products (e.g. foodstuffs or cosmetics) where the same holds true because of their packaging. Furthermore, many services include tangible elements as well, most of which can be evaluated before purchase, for example a hotel room, where the room s facilities are the core of the service (Lovelock and Gummesson 2004). They conclude that it may indeed be true that many services are difficult to evaluate prior to the first use, but the same is also true for many goods. Therefore, the concept of intangibility may sometimes be useful, but it is not a universally applicable characteristic of all services during all stages from prepurchase through delivery, consumption, and output (p. 27). <br>Heterogeneity, or variability, as Lovelock and Gummesson (2004) would like to name it, is primarily caused by the interaction of human beings (employees and customers) during the service delivery process. However, external factors like the surroundings or even the weather can affect the perceived service outcome as well. The authors state that it cannot be denied that variability is an inherent characteristic of services, but the trend towards automation (self-service machines, online forms, etc.) will lead to a much lower level of variability. They oppose heterogeneity as a general distinction between goods and services.<br>For service consumption being inseparably connected with production, the customer must be directly involved
Dieser Artikel gehört nicht auf diese Seite.
Vielen Dank. Wir kümmern uns darum.