Improving Industry 4.0 | A Service Science Perspective

  • Agostinho da Silva Universidade de Évora, CEFAGE, 7000 Évora, Portugal; Polytechnic of Leiria, MARE, 2400 Leiria, Portugal; Instituto Superior de Gestão, ISG, 1000 Lisboa, Portugal; Polytechnic of Leiria, CIIC, Leiria, Portugal
  • Andreia Dionísio Universidade de Évora, CEFAGE, 7000 Évora, Portugal
  • Luís Coelho Universidade de Évora, CEFAGE, 7000 Évora, Portugal
Keywords: Service Science, Service Systems, Industry 4.0, Service-Dominant Logic, Cyber-Physical Systems

Abstract

Traditionally, customers were considered to be destructive value stakeholders, independent of products, and distant from production sites. Industry 4.0 is a hot and relevant topic, driven by digital technologies, which has made it possible to incorporate a new economic dimension: the consumer collaborates with the producer in the co-creation of products. Service Science is a multidisciplinary scientific discipline, which studies the interactions between abstract entities called service systems. Considering that value is the result of collaborative interactions between service systems, Service Science appears to be one of the most important emerging scientific fields suitable in the approach and development of Industry 4.0. Given this apparent alignment between the mindset of Industry 4.0 and the philosophical base of the Service Science, the following question arises: How to address Industry 4.0 through the Service Science? As a methodology to find a possible answer to this question, we started from a literature review, in which divergences and gaps between the Service Science Body of Knowledge and its philosophical basis Service-Dominant Logic were explored and identified. The main goal is to understand the potential tension of these two approaches in the context of Industry 4.0. Once the divergences gaps identified, a conceptual framework is conceptualized, through which, the creative interactions of Industry 4.0 can be enhanced and scaled use of Service Science’s Theory.

References

. S. Vargo and R. Lusch, “Institutions and Axioms: An Extension and Update of Service-Dominant Logic,” J. Acad. Mark. Sci., vol. 44, no. 1, pp. 5–23, 2016.

. A. Silva, A. Dionísio, and L. Coelho, “Improving Industry4 . 0 Through the Service Science,” Int. J. Serv. Sci., pp. 1–27, 2020.

. C. Breidbach and P. Maglio, “Technology-enabled value co-creation: An empirical analysis of actors, resources, and practices,” Ind. Mark. Manag., vol. 56, pp. 73–85, 2016.

. J. Spohrer and S. K. Kwan, “Service science,management, engineering, and design (SSMED): an emerging discipline -- outline and references,” San Jose State Univ. - Manag. Inf. Syst. Dep., vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 1–31, 2009.

. J. Spohrer, L. Anderson, N. Pass, and T. Ager, “Service science and service-dominant logic: Paper 2,” Otago Forum 2, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 1–18, 2008.

. M. Stoshikj, N. Kryvinska, and C. Strauss, “Service Systems and Service Innovation: Two Pillars of Service Science,” Procedia Comput. Sci., vol. 83, no. Ant, pp. 212–220, 2016.

. S. Vargo and R. Lusch, “It’s all B2B...and beyond: Toward a systems perspective of the market,” Ind. Mark. Manag., vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 181–187, 2010.

. B. Matthies and D’Amato, “An ecosystem service-dominant logic? - Integrating the ecosystem service approach and the service-dominant logic,” J. Clean. Prod., vol. 124, pp. 51–64, 2016.

. S. L. Vargo and R. F. Lusch, “The Four Service Marketing Myths: Remnants of a Goods-Based, Manufacturing Model,” J. Serv. Res., vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 324–335, 2004.

. S. L. Vargo and R. F. Lusch, “Evolving to a New Dominant Logic for Marketing,” J. Mark., vol. 68, no. 1, pp. 1–17, 2004.

. R. Lusch and S. Vargo, “Service-dominant logic: reactions, reflections and refinements,” Mark. Theory Vol., vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 281–288, 2006.

. R. Lusch and S. Vargo, “Service-dominant logic: Continuing the evolution,” J. Acad. Mark. Sci., vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 1–10, 2007.

. R. Lusch, S. Vargo, and A. Gustafsson, “Fostering a trans-disciplinary perspectives of service ecosystems,” J. Bus. Res., vol. 69, no. 8, pp. 2957–2963, 2016.

. S. L. Vargo and R. F. Lusch, “From goods to service(s): Divergences and convergences of logics,” Ind. Mark. Manag., vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 254–259, 2008.

. J. Spohrer and P. Maglio, “The Emergence of Service Science: Toward Systematic Service Innovations to Accelerate Co-Creation of Value,” Prod. Oper. Manag., vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 238–246, 2008.

. D. Kindström, C. Kowalkowski, and S. Erik, “Enabling service innovation – A dynamic capabilities approach,” J. Bus. Res., vol. 66, no. 8, pp. 1063–1073, 2013.

. N. Bicocchi, G. Cabri, F. Mandreoli, and M. Mecella, “Dynamic digital factories for agile supply chains: An architectural approach,” J. Ind. Inf. Integr., vol. 15, no. December 2018, pp. 111–121, 2019.

. M. Peruzzini and J. Stjepandić, “Editorial to the special issue ‘Transdisciplinary approaches for industrial information integration engineering I,’” J. Ind. Inf. Integr., vol. 12, pp. 1–2, 2018.

. H. F. Binner, “Industrie 4.0 bestimmt die Arbeitswelt der Zukunft,” Elektrotechnik & Informationstechnik, vol. 131, no. 7, pp. 230–236, 2014.

. T. Stock and G. Seliger, “Opportunities of Sustainable Manufacturing in Industry 4.0,” Procedia CIRP, vol. 40, no. Icc, pp. 536–541, 2016.

. A. Silva, A. Dionísio, and L. Coelho, “Flexible-lean processes optimization : A case study in stone sector,” Results Eng., vol. 6, no. March, p. 100129, 2020.

. S. Wang, J. Wan, D. Zhang, D. Li, and C. Zhang, “Towards smart factory for Industry 4.0: A self-organized multi-agent system with big data based feedback and coordination,” Comput. Networks 101, vol. 101, pp. 158–168, 2015.

. M. Akaka, D. Corsaro, C. Kelleher, P. Maglio, Y. Seo, R. Lusch, and S. Vargo, “The role of symbols in value cocreation,” Mark. Theory, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 311–326, 2014.

. J. Spohrer, P. Maglio, J. Bailey, and D. Grughl, “Steps toward a science of service systems,” IBM Res. Almaden Res. Cent., vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 71–77, 2007.

. C. Merschbrock and B. E. Munkvold, “Effective digital collaboration in the construction industry - A case study of BIM deployment in a hospital construction project,” Comput. Ind., vol. 73, pp. 1–7, 2015.

. R. Lusch, S. Vargo, and M. Tanniru, “Service, value networks and learning,” J. Acad. Mark. Sci., vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 19–31, 2010.

. P. Maglio and J. Spohrer, “Fundamentals of service science,” J. Acad. Mark. Sci., vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 18–20Maglio, P. P., & Spohrer, J. (2008). Fundamen, 2007.

. H. Demirkan and J. C. Spohrer, “Emerging service orientations and transformations (SOT),” Inf. Syst. Front., vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 407–411, 2016.

. E. Hofmann and M. Rüsch, “Industry 4.0 and the current status as well as future prospects on logistics,” Comput. Ind., vol. 89, pp. 23–34, 2017.

. A. Cox and D. Chicksand, “The limits of lean management thinking: Multiple retailers and food and farming supply chains,” Eur. Manag. J., vol. 23, no. 6, pp. 648–662, 2005.

. R. N. Bolton, D. Grewal, and M. Levy, “Six strategies for competing through service: An agenda for future research,” J. Retail., vol. 83, no. 1, pp. 1–4, 2007.

. P. Maglio and J. Spohrer, “A service science perspective on business model innovation,” Ind. Mark. Manag., vol. 42, no. 5, pp. 665–670, 2013.

. R. Lusch and S. Nambisan, “Service Innovation: A Service-Dominant-Logic perspective,” MIS Q., vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 155–175, 2015.

. H. Chesbrough and J. Spohrer, “A research manifesto for services science,” Commun. ACM, vol. 49, no. 7, p. 35, 2006.

. P. Maglio, “Service Science, Management, Engineering & Design,” in UC Merced and IBM Research, 2016, pp. 1–83.

. S. Vargo and R. Lusch, “Service-dominant logic 2025,” Int. J. Res. Mark., vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 46–67, 2017.

Published
2020-06-23
Section
Articles