Refining shippers’ dyadic cost, risk, and delivery responsibilities: The principal changes to INCOTERMS and a transaction cost focus for the future

We first explore the changes in the latest version of Incoterms and explain why and how they have been refined to better capture contemporary global and domestic shipping practices and policies. Next we graphically explain each of the eleven INCOTERMS 2010 and specify exact delivery points, those critical points at which cost and risk responsibilities shift from the Seller to the Buyer. We then provide a discussion to better explain the application of the terms from a practitioner’s view and note that many shippers and freight forwarders still revert to long practiced shipping policies, leaving themselves vulnerable. We close by proposing future researchers build an expert system grounded primarily in Transaction Cost Economics with mechanisms from Game Theory in an attempt to better guide trading partners in using appropriate Incoterms

ESSAYS ON CUSTOMER TRAINING AND EDUCATION IN SERVICE DESIGN

Customers who can effectively perform the tasks necessary in their service participation, and who are motivated to perform these tasks, experience improved satisfaction and service quality. In order to ensure customers have adequate skills and motivation, service designs incorporate practices which train and educate them. The goal of this research was to investigate how customers can effectively be trained and educated so that they can perform their service tasks. Based on various theories used in the field of management, we developed several research models to investigate this issue. These models were tested through survey data collected from adult patients with type-2 diabetes who attended outpatient diabetes education programs provided by seven hospitals in South Carolina during 2009 and 2010. These seven educational programs served approximately 6,560 patients during these two years, and we sent the survey to a representative sample of 3,198 patients in the spring of 2011. A total of 518 surveys (a 16 percent response rate) were returned. The sample characteristics are a good match with the characteristics of the population; 67 percent are female, 83 percent white, and 79 percent older than 45 years. Our analysis involved bivariate correlations and structural equation modeling factors including the difficulty of the health-related tasks (e.g., measuring blood glucose level and meal planning) that patients have to learn, the educational methods used for teaching these tasks (e.g., attendance at group classes and extent of hands-on experience etc.), the outcomes of the educational methods (e.g., patient knowledge and motivation etc.) and demographics (e.g., gender, race and education etc.). It was found that training and education have value for both customers and service providers; however, these programs can be more effective if they are tailored based on the characteristics of the tasks that customers need to perform. We also provide suggestion on how managers can improve customer training and education in their services

Customer participation risk management: conceptual model and managerial assessment tool

Purpose: Customer Participation (CP) has received considerable interest in the service literature as a way to improve the customer experience and reduce service providers’ costs. While its benefits are not in question, there is a paucity of research on potential pitfalls. This paper provides a conceptual foundation to address this gap and develops a comprehensive model of the risks of customer participation in service delivery, integrating research from the marketing, operations and supply chain management, strategy, and information technology fields. Design/methodology/approach: The model is derived deductively by integrating insights from research in marketing, operations and supply chain management, strategy, and information technology. Findings: This paper identifies three categories of potential risks of CP (i.e., market, operational, and service network) and discusses ways that firms can mitigate these risks. Building on the model, it develops a CP risk assessment tool that managers can use when evaluating increases in CP. Research limitations/implications: The conceptual model proposed in this paper can serve as a robust basis for future research in customer participation, particularly in such areas as sharing economy services, service delivery networks, and experiential services. The risk assessment tool offers clear guidelines for managers who are considering an increase in customer participation in their service. Originality/value: This is the first attempt to conceptually define customer participation risk and develop a comprehensive model of its drivers and strategies to mitigate it. This paper develops a straightforward method for managers to evaluate CP risk

More is not always better: The impact of value co‐creation fit on B2B and B2C customer satisfaction

Organizations increasingly rely on customer involvement in the value creation process (i.e., co-creation) to enhance customer satisfaction and differentiate themselves from competitors. While past research has largely indicated that more co-creation is beneficial, some have suggested yet not empirically validated that excess co-creation may negatively impact customers. Applying the service-dominant logic, two studies (B2B and B2C customers) offer insight into the appropriate levels of the co-production and value-in-use dimensions of co-creation. For both B2B and B2C customers, polynomial regression and surface plot analyses indicate an inverted U-shaped relationship between value co-creation and satisfaction, establishing that more co-creation is beneficial only up to a point. As such, we inform managers of factors that can cause the relationship between co-creation and satisfaction to peak and then turn negative. Further, customer expertise and process enjoyment moderate this relationship for B2C (but not B2B) customers, thereby offering ways to mitigate the negative effects of excess co-creation for end-customers. The studies also highlight the importance of value co-creation “fit” between the customer\u27s expected and experienced levels of co-creation. Interestingly, positive misfit (i.e., excess co-creation) retains a stronger negative influence on customer satisfaction than negative misfit (i.e., insufficient co-creation) for both B2B and B2C customers