Collaboration reasoning or social heuristics? Value proposition validity in omnium-gatherum business models
通过文献综述和案例研究，分析了两种判断价值主张有效性的范式：协作理性（评估互动背后的理由）和社会启发（基于群体的满意决策），并提出了一个多主体价值共创的规范性框架。
Central to the value co-creation business model is mutualistic interaction, through which business value producers propose offers and affirm the final meaning of offering values with customer experience. The model treats each upstream offering of value production merely as a part of value proposition (Grönroos, 2011; Vargo, 2008). Thus, the interaction becomes a locus, key source of value co-creation. Contemporary literature on interactive marketing and service research contain a myriad of theories clarifying the relevance and prominence of the interaction. However, there are still limited discussions regarding how business actors may propose a new potential value, and how the actors can judge the validity of the value co-creation in multi-actor business environments. This study provides a literature review on two main judgment paradigms used as a means to validate new value proposition and co-creation. The two paradigms are as follows: (1) collaborative rationality that evaluates rationales behind business actors' interactions for value co-creation; (2) social heuristics that concerns group-based satisficing decisions and judgments on a specific value proposition. Social heuristics use social information that does not necessarily stem from a formal, accurate analysis. To corroborate the theoretical implications of the two paradigms, the study analyzes a set of field case value validation processes for a novel product life cycle management information platform. The case study findings illustrate implications for collaborative business modeling and verification on new service-dominant value creation. Finally, the case study presents a prescriptive framework for smarter multi-actor value propositions and co-creation procedures.