Ten lessons for qualitative transformative service researchers

Purpose: This paper offers key methodological insights for scholars new to qualitative transformative service research (TSR). Design/methodology/approach: The paper offers ten lessons on conducting qualitative TSR that the authors have gleaned, across more than 30 years (combined) of qualitative inquiries and engagement with other scholars conducting and publishing what may be now termed TSR. Findings: The key lessons of conducting qualitative TSR work include: displaying ethics in conducting and presenting qualitative TSR; preparing for and understanding the research context; considering design, mechanics and technical elements; being participant-centric; co-creating meaning with participants; seeking/using diverse types of data; analyzing data in an iterative fashion, including/respecting multiple perspectives; presenting evidence in innovative ways; and looking inward at every stage of the research process. Social implications: The paper provides implications for addressing the vulnerability of both research participants and researchers with the aim of improving research methods that lead to improved service research and well-being outcomes. Originality/value: Clearly, the complexity and importance of the social problems TSR scholars investigate – poverty, war, disaster recovery, inadequate healthcare – requires preparation for how to engage in transformative service research. Importantly, the paper fits with recent persistent calls within the broader literature of services marketing to: use service research and design to create “uplifting changes” within society and broaden the paradigmatic underpinnings of service research to include dynamic, process-oriented approaches, which capture the dynamic and relational aspects of service ecosystems

Harmonious homegoings: alleviating consumer vulnerability through service fluidity and compassion

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to explore the role of service flexibility in addressing consumer vulnerability for chronically-traumatized consumers within the funerary context. Design/methodology/approach: Using phenomenological philosophy and a grounded approach, data was collected and analyzed through 12 depth interviews with funeral service providers, coupled with observations and photographs of three second-line funeral processionals. Findings: Study results include the following three primary roles of service providers in supporting chronically-traumatized consumers: the role of service fluidity in addressing trauma, mitigating vulnerability via service providers as community members and alleviating suffering through compassionate service. Service flexibility and value co-creation efforts were executed through an expansive service ecosystem of vendors. Practical implications: When consumers experience vulnerability that demands reliance upon service industries, service providers can intentionally implement fluidity and agility in service design, adopt understanding and altruistic practices, and operate with empathy and compassion to orchestrate mutually-beneficial service outcomes. Social implications: Rooted in transformative service research, providers are advised to consider modifying services to improve well-being and mitigate vulnerability for chronically-traumatized consumers via fluidity, community and compassion. Originality/value: This study contributes originality to the body of service marketing literature by illustrating how service providers alleviate vulnerability for chronically-traumatized consumers through three adaptive service strategies

When Does the Social Service Ecosystem Meet Consumption Needs? A Power–Justice–Access Model of Holistic Well-Being from Recipients’ Perspectives

Many Americans living in poverty rely on a constellation of social services to meet their consumption needs. This article explores the conditions under which social service programs enhance or detract from holistic well-being, from recipients’ perspectives. Depth interviews with 45 rural and urban recipients reveal, through a power–justice–access model, that holistic well-being extends beyond access to social service programs to include power to choose and control resource outcomes and justice (respect) in recipients’ experiences with elements of the social service ecosystem (design, practices, actors, resources). Theoretically, focusing on the social service ecosystem allows a broader understanding of holistic well-being than is possible through a resource-based or dyadic perspective. In terms of policy, the findings suggest the need to include subjective, versus solely objective, approaches in assessing the performance of the social service ecosystem in meeting consumption needs. Finally, the authors offer a practical principle termed “sensitized standardization,” whereby, at the local level, needs are addressed in relation to the context of recipients’ daily lives and the macro structure of the social service ecosystem

Consumers on the Job: Contextualization Crafting in Expert Services

Tasked with a greater role in the coproduction of expert services, consumers often face an immense burden in coproducing service and well-being outcomes. While some prior research has explored customer work, we delineate unique aspects of expert services and articulate consumer efforts that transpire outside the dyadic service interaction. Through netnographic inquiry in a health care context, we find that coproduction efforts are job-like and require job crafting efforts. Upon this foundation, three major themes emerged: (1) consumers leverage their context expertise by adapting content expertise to their unique circumstances, (2) consumers develop and deploy strategies (hacks) through affordances in order to manage their coproduction jobs, and (3) consumers move through the expert service journey in a variety of ways that shift them toward or away from well-being outcomes. After assessing the transferability of our results by analyzing a second expert service context (financial services/debt management), we suggest implications for theory, practice, and future research

Digital exchange compromises

Publisher Copyright: © 2022 The Authors. Journal of Consumer Affairs published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Council on Consumer Interests.Societal well-being is challenged by the complexity and intangibility of the compromises inherent in digital exchanges. Increasingly these exchanges rely on technology, with competing priorities that challenge cooperation and communication among key parties involved. The authors examine the factors that drive tensions between consumers and organizations in digital exchanges, as well as how and why interest groups, lawmakers, and bureaucrats (also known as the “iron triangle”) try to mediate these exchanges through policy and regulation. By explicating the nature of these relationships, the authors illustrate various trade-offs faced by all parties and depict a novel, comprehensive framework to facilitate holistic assessment of the factors underlying these ubiquitous but complex digital relationships with vague ethical stewardship. This framework serves as a lens to help guide business and regulatory policymaking and as a platform for identifying future research opportunities.Peer reviewe