Xem mẫu
- International Journal of Management (IJM)
Volume 9, Issue 6, November-December 2018, pp.13–23, Article ID: IJM_09_06_002
Available online at http://www.iaeme.com/ijm/issues.asp?JType=IJM&VType=9&IType=6
Journal Impact Factor (2016): 8.1920 (Calculated by GISI) www.jifactor.com
ISSN Print: 0976-6502 and ISSN Online: 0976-6510
© IAEME Publication
CO-CREATION A NEW METHOD OF BUILDING
BRAND LOYALTY & INNOVATION
Sunita Kumar and Megha Kandoi
Christ University, India
ABSTRACT
Innovation in any form can bring overall new energy to brand loyalty. In an
organization,especially in the service industry, co-creation is a business strategy
which is an open innovation for consumers. This paper provides a conceptual
understanding of how co-creation can add value in the service industry regarding
brand loyalty as well as customer relationship management through some of its basic
features of co-creation which include co-designing, collaborating, tinkering, and
submitting. Co-creation sources are combined to generate new directional and mutual
values. The co-innovation not only includes engagement, but also gives stakeholder
co-creation, and compelling experience for value creation.
Keyword: Co-creation, Brand, Brand Loyalty, Customer Relationship Management,
Brand Awareness, Innovation, Collaboration Partnership.
Cite this Article: Sunita Kumar and Megha Kandoi, Co-Creation A New Method of
Building Brand Loyalty & Innovation, International Journal of Management, 9 (6),
2018, pp. 13–23.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/issues.asp?JType=IJM&VType=9&IType=6
1. INTRODUCTION
Innovation has always been successful when it has been a group activity and is the result of
long hours spent on developing the idea of creativity together with others. Co-creation in
marketing is a successful strategy which allows consumers of a brand to get actively involved
and develop an interacting relationship with the brand to co-construct a product or service
which gives them maximum brand satisfaction. Co-creation also helps a brand to get a
competitive advantage over the others. In the world of innovation, branding rarely gets
referred to, and this is unacceptable as a brand is the fundamental attribute of co-creation.
People are mostly misunderstanding the brand,and they consider it to be just a logo or the
advertising or the product or service. In reality, the brand is a stakeholder experience and
something which might as well influence one’s future intentions. When the consumers
actively get, themselves involved in co-creation, they put forward their perception of the
brand which influences how they create and evaluate ideas. In the case of co-creation, brand
acts as a filtering technique to ascertain which ideas to consider for co-creating products and
which ones to discard. As co-created ideas are executed, the brand develops, and the meaning
of the brand perceived by the consumer becomes strong.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.asp 13 editor@iaeme.com
- Co-Creation A New Method of Building Brand Loyalty & Innovation
Service innovation through co-creation comes to the rescue of many companies whose
service businesses are under threat and facing challenges surviving in the market. The new
wave of service innovation has brought a change in the service industry as it benefits both the
service provider and the customers by having a competitive edge over others and building a
strong customer base that are loyal to the brand. Nowadays, consumers are seen demanding
intermediate personalized services for themselves with greater involvement, co-operation and
customization.
(Nonika & Hirotima, 1995)recognized that the consumers are associated with social
communicationso that a company or an organization assumes that they control the
interpretation of the brand, it might as well be proved that the meaning of a brand is created
by the consumers and the stakeholders in the procedure of interaction. (Ind & Coates, 2013)
Found out from a managerial prospect, that the congregation for the potential of online
engagement with the brand and the escalating admiration of the significance of the consumers
as the creator of value has encouraged the development of co-creation.
“When you need to transform a brand or product, you can’t just do the same things
better,” Jeremy Brown, Sense World wide’s Chief Executive said. “You need to do something
new. You tap into the creativity of your consumers.” Director of the strategy Brian Miller and
Brown have been running co-creation in global online communities and workshops all around
the world for more than a decade, and they believe co-creation is not only an innovative
process, but it also turns market research into a more dynamic and creative process.
Co-creation helps the contact or interaction between a consumer and an organization or
brand move away from transactional and become a creative experience. Creation of new value
gives the customers an opportunity to connect with the brand and the initiatives for the same
are on the rise more and more frequently. This paper attempts to understand how co-creation
helps in building strong brands and improve consumer loyalty with innovation in the service
industry.
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
(Prahalad &Ramaswamy , 2004) Found out that consumers want to interact with firms and
“co-create” value after being dissatisfied with available choices. Competitive advantage can
be gained by a company when a consumer can co-create unique experiences due to effective
interaction. This conceptual paper focuses on exploring the various aspects of co-creation.
The organization orchestrates and focuses the overall experience of its consumer involvement
in the process of co-creation. To ease the process of co-creation, Dialogue (interaction
between both sides), Access, Risk-benefits and Transparency (DART) acts as building blocks
of consumer-organization interaction. Carrying out the process of co-creation by an
organization is a herculean task, as the concept is often misunderstood and hence it challenges
two concepts – exchange of product and service offerings and the coming together of the
consumers. Co-creation acts as both value creation and extraction, and the market is viewed
as an area of probable experience of co-creation in which an individual’s restrictions and
selections explain the will to pay for it. It is a two-way street, and the risk involved is to be
equally shared by the consumers as well and not just the organizationitself. According to
(Merz & Vargo, 2009) brand value is co-created through network relationships and social
communication among the conglomerate of all stakeholders.
(Hatch & Schultz, 2010) Demonstrated that co-creation is not just limited to the area of
innovation, but as well spreads out to marketing and more specifically to branding. It also
expands to co-create ideas with other stakeholders and not only just consumers. The paper
presents an integrative constitution of co-creation based on two factors - stakeholder/company
involvement (dialogue and access) and organizational self-disclosure (transparency and risk)
http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.asp 14 editor@iaeme.com
- Sunita Kumar and Megha Kandoi
by integrating four building blocks of (Prahalad &Ramaswamy , 2004) while co-creating
LEGO brand as an example. They found out that branding can create dialogue among
different elements such as stakeholders, consumers, customers, fans, employees and critics
related to an organization. Branding acts as means of entry to some members involved in the
organization as stakeholders’ involvement is possible through the consequences of marketing,
corporate communication and human resource. The brand LEGO used the internet as a
medium to interact with consumers and a channel for brand engagement. It changed the way
organization involved in dialogue with consumers and the enthusiasm from the customers
made organization’s efforts to build strong brand possible. The key to increasing brand
engagement and building strong brands is dialogue and access which brings in transparency in
the organization eventually leading to risk. The organization undertakes the real risk,and this
process is to determine to what extent the major part of the world understands their value.
(Skaržauskaitė, 2013) Conducted a theoretical analysis to provide a comprehensive idea of
co-creation value. The concept of co-creation has changed from what it was in the 1990s with
the sole focus on customer participation to coming together with customers at their own free
will with the help of social technologies for the betterment of both sides. The focus also
drastically shifted to maintain a customer relationship with goods and services dominant
market. Through extensive literature review analysis, it was understood that the customer is
the sole person on whom the value creation is highly dependent on and without active
involvement or the willingness to interact, an amalgamation of efficient resources and
spectrum of a prospective method of co-opetition, co-creation experience is unsustainable.
(Verleye, 2015) Provides us with an understanding of customer engagement and
experience in co-creation of products and other determinants related to it. The paper argues
that co-creation depends on the benefits expected by the customer and to the extent to which
the customer is ready to fulfil his role as a co-creator. The argument is also put forward to the
point that co-creation experience has also depended on the characteristics or the availability of
technology in a co-creation environment and connectivity of the resources to customers. From
the extensive literature review, it was concluded that the benefits expected from co-creation
are hedonic, cognitive, social, personal, pragmatic and economic and the overall experience is
dependent on these dimensions. The benefits expected from co-creation is relative as in it
varies from customer to customer. The primary source of data was collected with a sample
size of 180 students and was assigned to two (technologization: low vs high) by two
(connectivity: low vs high) mixed design. The results showed that the overall co-creation
experience gets improved by an improvement in hedonic and social experience. The findings
tell us that co-creation experience is not affected only by the process of co-creation but also is
impacted by the characteristics of its environment and the interaction among co-creators.
Overall, it is a multidimensional phenomenon.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.asp 15 editor@iaeme.com
- Co-Creation A New Method of Building Brand Loyalty & Innovation
Figure 1 Types of Co-creation
3. CHARACTERISTICS OF CO‐‐CREATION TYPES
Table: 1 Source :( customer co-creation: a typology and research agenda)
Selection Contribution
Type of Key Key Prototypical Key
Activity Activity
Co-Creation Payoffs Challenges Application Studies
Protecting Grewal et
Reduced intellectual al. (2006)
Customer‐Le development property Open source Lakhani
Collaborating Open costs Attracting a and Wolf
d software
Continuous (2005)
critical mass
product von
of
improvement Krogh et
collaborators al. (2003
Jeppesen
Enhanced Policing the and Molin
differentiatio content of Modified (2003)
n rogue co
Tinkering Firm‐Led Open computer Nieborg
Virtual test ‐creators games (2005)
markets
Creating new Prügl and
for new
competitors Schreier
products
(2006
Reduced
Attracting a Online voting
development Ogawa
critical mass on
Customer‐Le costs and Pillar
Co‐designing Fixed of designers customer‐gene
d Decreased (2006)
Defending rated content
risk of and designs Cook
against new
product (2008)
entrants
failure
Shortened Acquiring
product knowledgeabl
development e new Füller et
Company‐spo
cycles al. (2004)
Submitting Firm‐Led Fixed co‐creators nsored design
Increased competitions Sawhney
access to Retaining and et al.
novel motivating (2005)
customer existing
ideas co‐creators
http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.asp 16 editor@iaeme.com
- Sunita Kumar and Megha Kandoi
3.1. Branding
Branding is the way through which the attributes, characteristics and values are expressed of
an organization or its product or service. It is strategic unlike tactical marketing, and it stays
within the minds of a customer associated with the product, service or organization which
ultimately determines if the customer is loyal or not. Branding evolves more and more with
the behaviour of consumers and is the mental image of how an organization represents to a
consumer impacted by the elements, words and creativity that surrounds it.
Figure 2.The Dynamic Process of Building Brand
The efficacy of brand doesn't just happen before the purchase of product or service, but it's
also about the life of the brand of the experience it gives a consumer. Brand not only
creates loyal customers, but it creates loyal employees. Brand gives them something to
believe in, something to stand behind. It helps them understand the purpose of the
organization or the business.
3.2. Thread less New Era of Co-Creation and Building Loyalty
“Why wouldn’t you want to make the products that people want you to make?” (Nickell,
2008). Such are the expressions of Jake Nickell, the fellow benefactor and CEO of Thread
less, a shirt organization that print their most prevalent sections to the very individuals who
voted in favour of them and composed them. The idea of including the buyer in the
production of a shirt came to Nickell in 2000 when, with practically no aptitudes in outline or
its virtual products, he partook in a London-based plan celebration (Lakhani and Kanji, 2008).
Nickell, who won the prize, was animated by that idea and chosen to popularize it. By
November of that very year, Nickell and DeHart established an organizationgiven a
comparable thought and called it Thread less, a figure of speech between the string of fibre
used to make pieces of clothing, and the string additionally known to be a discourse on an
online group.
Toward the starting, the twosome asked their companions and previous colleagues to
present their plans and thoughts to the site. Not knowing which plans to pick when they began
streaming, they asked the recently printed group to choose. The plan has since survived, and
however it has advanced in the years since, the idea remains consistent with its root. Counting
the client in each progression of Thread less' DNA renders it an ideal case of co-creation. 95%
of Thread less' clients have purchased a thing, as well as either voted, remarked, submitted or
taken an interest in any capacity.
Thus, the organization depends vigorously on the fulfilment of its clients to look after
itself. In its 14 years and 6,359 printed plans (Thread less, 2015), Thread less has never seen a
http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.asp 17 editor@iaeme.com
- Co-Creation A New Method of Building Brand Loyalty & Innovation
solitary slump (Ogawa and Piller, 2006). The reason is very basic: the organizationutilizes
crowd funding strategies, implying that, on top of getting enough votes, fashioners must have
the capacity to accumulate enough money related venture from different buyers to achieve the
base subsidizing limit (Thread less, 2015). In that ensuring Thread less a 100% achievement
rate. The sheer energy for planning is strong to the point that buyers will do it for nothing.
Thread less not just keeps on being a co-creation model of accomplishment, additionally
demonstrates the thousands to come that enthusiasm, esteem and decency can prompt
achievement.
3.3. Radiohead (Co-Creation Through Pay What You Want Strategy)
Radiohead bewildered the music business by giving its fans a chance to pay what they
thought was reasonable for download the band's most recent collection. The rock music
industry has likewise explored different avenues regarding co-creation of significant worth.
Radiohead's "In Rainbows" collection was sold straightforwardly to more than 2 million
purchasers who paid what they felt the music was worth. The symphonic band Renaissance
likewise raised more than $92,000 from 860 faithful fans to record another CD called
"Grandineil Vento."
Everything except one achieved platinum status and they had earned three main three
collections on The Billboard 200. Radiohead had part with their record home EMI after
2003's "Hail to the Thief" but kept on ruling on a visit. Different individuals including Thom
Yorke and Jonny Greenwood had likewise discharged solo and soundtrack ventures: it was
prime time to understand their incentive as an outside the box, subsequently time for some
free considering. The British band discharged their next collection "In Rainbows" carefully
through their site using a "pay-what-you-need" plot. Fans could purchase for $0.00. Also,
Radiohead declared it just ten days early. They later sold the collection by permitting it to
different marks, after the world spilt out basic approval for the compensation show. The level
of interest and eagerness for Radiohead's compensation what-you-need model was out and out
bonkers. No band comparative in scale and reach of Radiohead had ever attempted such a
plan sometime recently, thus even with the short dispatch time frame, the madness likely
impelled computerized and physical deals and a huge number of requests for the fancy
discbox of "In Rainbows." Pre-deals for the compensation what-you-need period alone (Oct.
10–Dec. 10 in 2007) profited for the band than the greater part of the offers of "Hail to the
Thief," because of the stunning verbal. In January 2008, the band still figured out how to win
No. 1 on the Billboard 200. Radiohead's pay-what-you-want model was a reconsidering of the
estimation of a straightforward download, and putting more accentuation on the physical and
restricted version discharges. Radiohead's pay-what-you-want plan of action increased
inconceivable consideration and hadbeen connected to different divisions as eateries and
magazine memberships.
An administration rationale approach is connected which includes client interest to co-
create new customer esteem together with the brand. It is seen that consumer's co-creation
with a brand while building the association with it impacts mark understanding, and thus,
mark fulfillment and reliability. Co-creation encourages a brand to work through
advancement, and it additionally expands consumer satisfaction and loyalty.
4. LOYALTY AND ITS IMPORTANCE IN BRAND BUILDING
(Morgan, 2000) has considered loyalty in the concept of branding as one of the most
elucidated conceptualizations in marketing. “Loyalty to the firm’s brands represents a
strategic asset which has been identified as a major source of brands’ equity” as said by
(Mellens, Dekimpe, & Steenkamp, 1996). (Aaker, 1991) has defined brand loyalty as an
http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.asp 18 editor@iaeme.com
- Sunita Kumar and Megha Kandoi
instrument of measure of the attachment that a consumer has with a brand and which defines
an exhibit whether a consumer would change to another brand if the brand’s service/product
price change or few of its features change. Loyalty is as well as described as an effective
behaviour that involves repurchasing, support and offer to purchase (Chegini, 2010). (Khan,
2009) has explained how brand loyalty critical intent of a development process of a product/
service and how it efficiently and effectively contributes to the competitive advantage and
success of the organization. Organizations whose consumers have strong loyalty to its brands
can gain important competitive marketing advantages such as persistent stream of profit,
decrease in operating costs and marketing costs, trade leverage, valuable time to respond to
competitive moves at the right time and the ability to attract new customers (Aaker, 1991;
Khan, 2009).
(Connell, Edgar, & Olex, 2001) has realized the importance of innovation as a crucial
factor for the success and sustained the growth of any organization. (Brown, Kozinets, &
Sherry, 2003; Coupland, Iacobucci, & Arnould, 2005) analysed that organizations often
misinterpret that successful brands and innovation are created as a compliant effect of
marketing involvement by the brand managers, and they fail to know that the fact of co-
creation procedure involving both the brand representatives and the consumers is the sole
reason for the emergence of strong brands. Moreover, it has been studied that a marketing
strategy eventually fails and is insufficient if the organization’s product or service does not
satisfy the consumer’s wants and needs (Tu, Lin, & Hsu, 2013).
(Mascaren has et al., 2004) hasrealized the importance of engaging a company’s target
customers, regardless of industry, at any stage of value creation chain. The various stages in
product development process are product ideation, concept development, prototype
development, design development, prototype-design testing, packaging-label testing,
manufacturing, ad testing, product/service bundle testing, product/service price-bundle mix
testing, product financing bundle testing, national launch and press-release process or
customer service and feedback.
Figure 3.Relationship Building through Co-Creation
Example of a Co-creation programme creates a different context for the emergence of
meaning compared with live. In the outline world, naturally occurring groups and the
emergence of the participatoryenvironments such as Wikipedia, YouTube and Face book have
http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.asp 19 editor@iaeme.com
- Co-Creation A New Method of Building Brand Loyalty & Innovation
brought the idea of communities to the fore. Consequently, people have become used to
online discussion and creation and largely understand the protocols of engagement. From a
co-creation perspective, while some of the aspects of online and live can besimilar, there are
differences which make them appropriate to certain context and tasks, as shown in figure 3.
The attributes of each world offer certain specific benefits, once the co-creation approach is
agreed on the specific activities within an event, or a community can be determined based on
the nature of the requirement
5. CO-CREATION FOR INNOVATION
Figure 4.Conceptual Process how co-Creation work
According to Payne (2009), if we look at the literature on innovation, we will find Co-
creation especially branding rarely get a name. This looks strange, for the brand both creates a
frame for innovation and evolves because of innovations by consumers and other
stakeholders. The brand is, in this perspective, a fundamental ingredient of co-creation. The
barrier to understand brand in this way may be due to misconceptions about the terminology.
Some people think brand as a logo or advertising or the packaging of a product or service.
However, the way we see the brand as a stakeholder experience-the result of hearing about,
buying and using something that influence future intentions. We buy iPhone, eat at
McDonalds, shop with Amazon and Flip kart and donate money to CRY because these
choices create a relevant experience that aligns with who we are and how we want to be seen.
When managers, consumers and other stakeholders take part in co-creation, events and
communities bring their perceptions of the brand with them. It influences how they create and
evaluate ideas. The brand provides important filtering mechanism in determining which ideas
to progress and which to discard. Intern as ideas from co-creation are implemented, they help
to evolve the brand and its meaning for people. The idea of the brand as ever-evolving seems
to some people. Certainly, traditional description of the brands has tended to see it as static,
communication – driven and only focus on consumers. In 1998, Ries and Ries wrote that the
market might change but brand should not – odd ideas somehow suggest that brand is
separate from markets they serve. If market change then so brands. So, if consumers are
involved their experience with others implies a constant state of change. In service, the
dominant logic that argues that brand is co-created with consumers and concepts of
experience economy have shifted branding away from communications to personal
interactions. In this perspective, branding is about people. It is the individuals inside the
http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.asp 20 editor@iaeme.com
- Sunita Kumar and Megha Kandoi
organization who listen to, connect with and deliver service to stakeholders and it is
individual stakeholders,and it is individual stakeholders who use and take part in a dialogue
about the brand. So, the organization may make a promise about its corporate, service or
product brand and it may deliver on that promise, but the brand itself is negotiated and ebbing
and flowing space that is subject to a wide variety of influences moving increasingly beyond
the control of the organizations.
Figure 5.Co-creation as a design workshop
The ideology, which can be structured at the corporate and product/service level, try to
absorb influences from inside and outside organizations in defining the idea that is both
rooted in the past and stenches towards the future. The ideology of a brand creates innovation
for the framework. It set outs a certain set of ideas that provide a focuson new product and
services that make it more relevant for one company to develop something more than others.
Even though the ideology is normally structured to give guidance, we should recognize that
brands are fluid entities that are shaped by the interaction between organizational members
and external stakeholders. They evolve because of experience and resulting expectation of
people they buy, use adapt, discuss and interact with the brand and absorption those
experiences with employees who can use that knowledge to restructure and reprint the brand.
In the line of thought, co-creation is intimately connected to the brand and brand building. It
is the brand ideology that shapes co-creation process both by setting and direction for
creativity and by providing a means of evaluating ideas generated through collective effort.
On the other hand, the action of customers and other stakeholder taken together with those of
the company help to develop the meaning of the brand building.
The principals that help to ensure the effectiveness of co-creation method rooted in the
idea that co-creation often asks a lot of customers and other stakeholders. It asks them to give
themselves to contribute their intelligence and creativity to help the organizations to become
more successful. Whereas other research methods ask less of people, the significance of input
here moves the connection between the organization and the participants away from the
transactional methods. This creates a set of psychological obligations which must be met if
people are ready to give ideas. That means adoption of human-centric vies of participants, a
willingness to take time at the beginning of the process to build trust, to a commitment to
openness and transparency, the guilty to recognize that the question posed at the outset may
http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.asp 21 editor@iaeme.com
- Co-Creation A New Method of Building Brand Loyalty & Innovation
not be the right questions. The capability to learn through trial and error of experiments and
finally involvement of key decision maker of the processes.
Of course, it can be argued that not all these elements need to be in place to have
functioning co-creation method, but the likelihood of successful innovation is heightened if an
environment is created in which people can genuinely create together.
6. CONCLUSION
To conclude a company can have an exemplary process regarding discovery, ideation,
development and filtering but still fail to be an effective innovative because the outputs fail to
see the light of the day. Leaders and managers and vital gatekeepers who can help to ensure
that good ideas make their way to market, or they can be guilty of inertia, to concern with
meetings or dealing with ongoing problems to give sufficient emphasis to innovations. When
organizations insiders are supportive, then co-creation can yield strong results because it
already includes the customer perspective. This may now always be right of course and co-
creation is too young to generalize whether it has better record of innovation than more closed
models, but it should help to get things to market quicker while reducing risks. In particular,
co-creation is adapted at getting to the effective voice of communication. Co-creation can
clearly help to design and complements products and services so that the brand as experienced
by the customer is relevant and appealing. It is the potential of co-creation to address both
tangible and intangible attributes of the brand that make it so interesting.
REFERENCES
[1] Adler, P., Heckscher, C., &Prusak, L. (2011). Building a collaborative enterprise. Harvard
Business Review, 89(7/8), 94-101.
[2] Castells, M. (2000). The Rise of the Network Society. 2nd ed., Blackwell, Malden, MA.
[3] Chesbrough, H. (2003). Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting
from Technology. Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.
[4] Chesbrough, H. (2011). Open Service Innovation, Jossey-Bass. San Francisco, CA.
[5] Duncan, D.E. (2005). Masterminds: Genius, DNA, and the Quest to Rewrite Life. Harper
Perennial, New York, NY.
[6] Friedman, T.L. (2005). The World is flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-first Century.
Farrar, Straus and Giroux, New York, NY.
[7] Friedman, F. (2011). The Next Decade: Where we’ve been and Where We’re Going.
Doubleday, New York, NY.
[8] Ghemawat, P. (2007). Managing differences: the central challenge of global strategy.
Harvard Business Review, 85 (3)59-68.
[9] Gupta, A. and Govindarajan, V. (2003). Global Strategy and the Organization. Wiley,
New York, NY.
[10] Hatch, M. J., & Schultz, M. (2010). Toward a theory of brand co-creation with
implications for brand governance. Journal of brand management.
[11] Ind, N., & Coates, N. (2013). The meanings of co-creation.
[12] Johnson, S. (2001). Emergence: The Connected Lives of Ants, Brains, Cities, and
Software. Touchstone, New York, NY.
[13] Kauffman, S. (2000). Investigations, Oxford University Press, New York, NY.
[14] Kim, W.C. and Mauborgne, R. (2005), Blue Ocean Strategy. Harvard Business School
Press, Boston, MA.
[15] Kurzweil, R. (2005). The Singularity is Near: When Humans Transcend Biology. Penguin
Books, New York, NY.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.asp 22 editor@iaeme.com
- Sunita Kumar and Megha Kandoi
[16] Lee, S.M. and Olson, D.L. (2010), Convergenomics: Strategic Innovation in the
Convergence Era, Gower, Farnham.
[17] Lee, S.M., Olson, D.L. and Trimi, S. (2010). The impact of convergence on organizational
innovation. Organizational Dynamics, 39 (3), 218-25.
[18] Li, C. and Bern off, J. (2008), Groundswell: Winning in a World Transformed by Social
Technologies, Harvard Business School Press, and Boston, MA.
[19] Lichtenthaler, U., Hoegl, M. and Muethel, M. (2011).Is your company ready for open
innovation.MIT Sloan Management Review, fall, 45-8.
[20] Longman, P. (2004). The Empty Cradle. New America Books, New York, NY.
[21] Mandeles, M.D. (2005). The Future of War: Organizations as Weapons. Potomac Books,
Washington, DC.
[22] Naisbitt, J. (1988). Megatrends: Ten New Directions Transforming Our Lives. Grand
Central Publishing, New York, NY.
[23] Naisbitt, J., &Naisbitt, D. (2010). China’s Megatrends: The 8 Pillars of a New Society.
Harper Business, New York, NY.
[24] Nonaka, I. and Takeuchi, H. (1995). The Knowledge Creating Company, Oxford
University Press, New York, NY.
[25] Pringle, P. (2003). Food, Inc.: Mendel to Monsanto – The Promises and Perils of the
Biotech Harvest, Simon & Schuster, New York, NY.
[26] Prahalad, C.K., & Ramaswamy, V. (2000) Co‐opting Customer Competence. Harvard
Business Review, 78 (January‐February), 79‐87.
[27] Prahalad, C.K., Ramaswamy, V. (2004),.Co‐Creation Experiences: The Next Practice in
Value Creation. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 18 (summer), 5‐14.
[28] Ramaswamy, V., & Gouillart, F. (2010). The Power of Co-creation. The Free Press, New
York, NY.
[29] Ramo, J.C. (2009). The Age of the Unthinkable. Back Bay Books, New York, NY.
[30] Schumpeter, J.A. (1942). Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy. Harper and Row, New
York, NY.
[31] Singer, P.W. (2009). Wired for War: The Robotics Revolution and Conflict in the 21st
Century, Penguin Books, New York, NY.
[32] Skaržauskaitė, M. (2013). MEASURING AND MANAGING VALUE CO-CREATION
PROCESS: OVERVIEW OF EXISTING THEORETICAL MODELS.
[33] Tapsott, D. (2006), Wikinomics: How Mass Collaboration Changes Everything. Portfolio,
New York, NY.
[34] Teece, D.J. (2009), Dynamic Capabilities and Strategic Management: Organizing for
Innovation and Growth, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
[35] Verleye, K. (2015). The co-creation experience from the customer perspective: its
measurement and determinants.
[36] Von Hippel, E., Ozawa, S., & De Jong, J. (2011). The age of the consumer-innovator.
MIT Sloan Management Review, fall, 27-35.
[37] Walker, B., & Salt, D. (2006). Resilience Thinking: Sustaining Ecosystems and People in
a Changing World. Island Press, Washington, DC.
[38] Zhang, J., & He, Y. (2013). Key dimensions of brand value co-creation and its impacts
upon customer perception and brand performance.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.asp 23 editor@iaeme.com
nguon tai.lieu . vn
