HİZMET BASKIN MANTIK YAKLAŞIMININ TEMATİK GELİŞİM SÜREÇLERİ VE BİLİMSEL ÜRETİM DİNAMİKLERİ: 2004-2021 YILLARI ARASI YAYIMLANAN ARAŞTIRMALARIN BİBLİYOMETRİK ANALİZİ

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı, pazarlama literatüründe 17 yıllık bir birikime sahip olan hizmet baskın mantık araştırmalarının bibliyometrik bakış açısı ile derinlemesine incelenmesidir. İlgili amaç dahilinde 2004-2021 yılları arasında Web of Science veri tabanında hizmet baskın mantık yaklaşımı üzerine yayımlanan 912 araştırma bilimsel üretim dinamikleri ve tematik gelişim süreçleri dikkate alınarak analiz edilmiştir. Analiz sürecinde alanda etkili dergi, yazar gibi bilimsel üretim dinamiklerinin belirlenmesinde VOSviewer yazılımından faydalanılmıştır. İncelenen araştırmalarda temaların tarihsel süreçte nasıl şekillendiğinin ele alınmasında ise SciMAT yazılımından yararlanılmıştır. Bilimsel üretim dinamiklerine ilişkin analizlerde Vargo ve Lursch’un alanda en etkili yazarlar olmaya devam ettiği öne çıkarken, Journal of Marketing dergisi alanda hizmet baskın mantık konusunda en etkili dergi olarak belirlenmiştir. Hizmet baskın mantık çalışmalarının tematik gelişim süreci ise üç periyot (2004-2009; 2010-2015; 2016-2021) üzerinden incelenmiştir. İncelenen üç periyotta da tematik çeşitliliğin devamlı bir artış sergilediği ve temaların azalan etkide de olsa pazarlama ve yönetim çalışmalarını bir araya getirdiği gözlemlenmiştir. İncelenen periyotlarda alanı şekillendiren motor temaların sürdürülebilirlik sergilemediği çalışmada öne çıkan bir diğer bulgudur. Bu noktada günümüze yaklaştıkça tema çeşitliliğinin arttığı, buna karşın dönemler arası tema sürdürülebilirliğinin zayıfladığı gözlemlenmiştir. Araştırma kapsamında öne çıkan tema çeşitliliği ve sürdürülebilirlik arasındaki ters ilişkide aktörler, tüketici katılımı, iş modelleri, ağ teorisi, baskın mantıklar ve performans temaları alana katkı potansiyeli yüksek ve araştırma ihtiyacı duyulan başlıklar olarak öne çıkmıştır.

Keywords

• Hizmet Baskın Mantık
• SciMAT
• VOSviewer
• Bibliyometri
• Kurumsal Mantıklar

THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESSES AND SCIENTIFIC PRODUCTION DYNAMICS OF THE SERVICE-DOMINANT LOGIC APPROACH: BIBLIOMETRICS ANALYSIS OF RESEARCH PUBLISHED BETWEEN 2004-2021

Abstract

This study aims to examine the service dominant logic research, which have 17 years of experience in the marketing literature, with a bibliometric perspective. Within the scope of this purpose, 912 studies published in the Web of Science database between 2004-2021 were analyzed by considering scientific production dynamics and thematic development processes. In the analysis process, VOSviewer software was used to determine the dynamics of scientific production such as journals and authors that are effective in the field. In the studies examined, SciMAT software was used to deal with how the themes were shaped in the historical process. In the analysis of scientific production dynamics, Vargo and Lusch continued to be the most influential writers in the field, while the Journal of Marketing was determined as the most influential journal on service-dominated logic in the field. In the analysis of scientific production dynamics, Vargo and Lusch continued to be the most influential writers in the field, while the Journal of Marketing was determined as the most influential journal on service-dominated logic in the field. The thematic development process of service-dominated logic studies was examined over three periods (2004-2009; 2010-2015; 2016-2021). It was observed that thematic diversity exhibited a continuous increase in all three periods examined and the themes brought together marketing and management studies, albeit with a decreasing effect. Another prominent finding in the study is that the motor themes that shaped the field in the examined periods did not exhibit sustainability. At this point, it was observed that the diversity of themes increased as we approached the present day, while the sustainability of the themes between the periods weakened. Actors, consumer participation, business models, network theory, dominant logics, and performance themes in the inverse relationship between the diversity of themes and sustainability that stand out within the scope of the research have come to the fore as topics that have a high potential to contribute to the field and need research.

Keywords

• Service-Dominant Logic
• SciMAT
• VOSviewer
• Bibliometric
• Institutional Logics

References

1. Ballantyne, D., & Varey, R. J. (2006). Introducing a dialogical orientation to the service-dominant logic of marketing. In R. F. Lusch, & S. L. Vargo (Eds.), The service-dominant logic of marketing: Dialog, debate, and directions (pp. 224–235). Armonk, NY: ME Sharpe.
2. Barile, S., & Polese, F. (2010). Linking the viable system and many‐to‐many network approaches to service‐dominant logic and service science. International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences. 2(1/2), 20-39.
3. Baron, S., Warnaby, G., & Hunter‐Jones, P. (2014). Service (s) marketing research: developments and directions. International Journal of Management Reviews, 16(2), 150-171.
4. Cobo, M. J., López‐Herrera, A. G., Herrera‐Viedma, E., & Herrera, F. (2011). Science mapping software tools: Review, analysis, and cooperative study among tools. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(7), 1382-1402.
5. Cobo, M. J., López‐Herrera, A. G., Herrera‐Viedma, E., & Herrera, F. (2012). SciMAT: A new science mapping analysis software tool. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(8), 1609-1630.
6. Cowhey, P., Aronson, J., & Richards, J. (2006). The peculiar evolution of 3G wireless networks: Institutionallogic, politics, and property rights. In J. Zysman & A. Newman (Eds.),How revolutionary was the digitalrevolution? National responses, market transitions, and global technology(pp. 291–323). Stanford, CA: StanfordUniversity Press
7. Durocher, S., & Fortin, A. (2021). Financial statement users’ institutional logic. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 40(2), 106819.
8. Esser, F. (2013). Mediatization as a challenge: Media logic versus political logic. In Democracy in the Age of Globalization and Mediatization (pp. 155-176). Palgrave Macmillan, London.

9. Erdoğan, B. Z., Tiltay, M. A., & Kimzan, H. S. (2011). Pazarlama teorisi’nin felsefi temelleri: Değişim mi, ilişki mi?. Tüketici ve Tüketim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 3(1), 1-28.
10. Friedland, R. ve Alford, R. R. (1991). Bringing society back in: Symbols, practices and institutional contradictions. W. W. Powell & P. J. DiMaggio (Ed.), The new institutionalism in organizational analysis (s. 232-263). Chicago: University of Chicago
11. Press.Goodrick, E., & Reay, T. (2011). Constellations of institutional logics: Changes in the professional work of pharmacists. Work and Occupations, 38(3), 372-416.
12. Grönroos, C. (2006). Adopting a service logic for marketing. Marketing Theory, 6(3), 317-333.
13. Grönroos, C. & Gummerus, J. (2014). The service revolution and its marketing implications: service logic vs service-dominant logic. Managing Service Quality, 24(3), 2014, pp. 206-229
14. Gummesson, E. (2006). Many-to-many marketing as grand theory. In Lusch, R. F., & Vargo, S. L. (eds), The service-dominant logic of marketing: Dialog, debate, and directions (pp. 339–353), Armonk, NY: ME Sharpe.
15. Harengel, P., Clauß, T., & Laudien, S. M. (2016, June). Perspectives of service-dominant logic for innovation management: a bibliometric analysis. In ISPIM Innovation Symposium (p. 1). The International Society for Professional Innovation Management (ISPIM).
16. Jayashankar, P., Nilakanta, S., Johnston, W. J., Gill, P., & Burres, R. (2018). IoT adoption in agriculture: the role of trust, perceived value and risk. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing. 33 (6), pp. 804-821
17. Kunz, W. H., & Hogreve, J. (2011). Toward a deeper understanding of service marketing: The past, the present, and the future. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 28(3), 231-247.
18. Lusch, R. F., & Vargo, S. L. (2009). Service-dominant logic—a guiding framework for inbound marketing. Marketing Review St. Gallen, 26(6), 6-10.
19. López-Robles, J. R., Cobo, M. J., Gutiérrez-Salcedo, M., Martínez-Sánchez, M. A., Gamboa-Rosales, N. K., & Herrera-Viedma, E. (2021). 30th Anniversary of Applied Intelligence: A combination of bibliometrics and thematic analysis using SciMAT. Applied Intelligence, 51(9), 6547-6568.
20. Martinez M. A., Cobo, M. J., Herrera, M., vd., (2015). Analyzing the scientific evolution of social work using science mapping. Research on Social Work Practice, 25, 257-77.
21. Michel, S., Brown, S. W., & Gallan, A. S. (2008). An expanded and strategic view of discontinuous innovations: deploying a service-dominant logic. Journal of The Academy of Marketing Science, 36(1), 54-66.
22. Nash, K. (2019). Neo-liberalisation, universities and the values of bureaucracy. The Sociological Review, 67(1), 178-193.
23. Nguyen, P. (2022). Service-dominant logic: A model of service satisfaction and its antecedents. European Journal of Business and Management Research, 7(3), 357-363.
24. Ocasio, W., Thornton, P. H., & Lounsbury, M. (2017). Advances to the institutional logics perspective. In The Sage handbook of organizational institutionalism (pp. 509-531). SAGE Publications Ltd.
25. Ometto, M. P., & Lounsbury, M. (2020). Two popes: religion and conflicting ınstitutional logics ınfluence on social movement outcomes. In Academy of Management Proceedings (Vol. 2020, No. 1, p. 17986). Briarcliff Manor, NY 10510: Academy of Management.
26. Ordanini, A., & Parasuraman, A. (2011). Service innovation viewed through a service-dominant logic lens: a conceptual framework and empirical analysis. Journal of Service Research, 14(1), 3-23.
27. Payne, A. F., Storbacka, K., & Frow, P. (2008). Managing the co-creation of value. Journal of The Academy of Marketing Science, 36(1), 83-96.
28. Peñaloza, L., & Venkatesh, A. (2006). Further evolving the new dominant logic of marketing: from services to the social construction of markets. Marketing Theory, 6(3), 299-316.
29. Pohlmann, A., & Kaartemo, V. (2017). Research trajectories of service-dominant logic: Emergent themes of a unifying paradigm in business and management. Industrial Marketing Management, 63, 53-68.
30. Prahalad, C. K., & Ramaswamy, V. (2004). Co-creation experiences: The next practice in value creation. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 18(3), 5-14.
31. Sharifi, A., Simangan, D., & Kaneko, S. (2021). Three decades of research on climate change and peace: A bibliometrics analysis. Sustainability Science, 16(4), 1079-1095.
32. Silva, S. V. D., Antonio, N., & de Carvalho, J. C. (2017). Analysis of the service dominant logic network, authors, and articles. The Service Industries Journal, 37(2), 125-152.
33. Silva, S. V. D., António, N., & José. (2018). The first decade of service dominant logic research–a bibliometric analysis. International Journal of Business Excellence, 14(4), 523-544.
34. Silva, M. E., & Nunes, B. (2022). Institutional logic for sustainable purchasing and supply management: Concepts, illustrations, and implications for business strategy. Business Strategy and the Environment, 31(3), 1138-1151.
35. Singh, V. K., Singh, P., Karmakar, M., Leta, J., & Mayr, P. (2021). The journal coverage of Web of Science, Scopus and Dimensions: A comparative analysis. Scientometrics, 126(6), 5113-5142.
36. Small, H. (1973). Co‐citation in the scientific literature: A new measure of the relationship between two documents. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 24(4), 265-269.
37. Tan, J., & Wang, L. (2011). MNC strategic responses to ethical pressure: An institutional logic perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 98(3), 373-390.
38. Thimm, C., Anastasiadis, M. and Einspänner-Pflock, J. (Eds) (2018), Media logic(s) revisited: Modelling the interplay between media institutions, Media Technology and Societal Change, Transforming Communications - Studies in Cross-Media Research, Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.
39. Thornton, P. H., Ocasio, W., & Lounsbury, M. (2012). The institutional logics perspective: A new approach to culture, structure, and process. New York: Oxford University Press.
40. Thornton, P. H., & Ocasio, W. (2008). Institutional logics. The Sage Handbook of Organizational Institutionalism, 840(2008), 99-128.
41. Tijssen, R. J. W., & Van Leeuwen, T. N. (2003). Bibliometric analyses of world science. In Third European Report on S&T Indicators. European Communities.
42. Van Eck N, Waltman L (2020) VOSviewer Manual for VOSviewer version 1.6.14. Leiden University, Leiden. https://www.vosviewer.com/documentation/Manual_VOSviewer_1.6.16.pdf
43. Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2004). Evolving to a new dominant logic for marketing. Journal of Marketing, 68(1), 1-17.
44. Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2006). Service-Dominant Logic: What it is, what it is not, what it might be. In R. F. Lusch & S. L. Vargo (Eds.), The service-dominant logic of marketing: Dialog, debate, and directions (pp. 43–56). Armonk: ME Sharpe.
45. Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2008). Service-dominant logic: continuing the evolution. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 36(1), 1-10.
46. Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2016). Institutions and axioms: an extension and update of service-dominant logic. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 44(4), 5-23.
47. Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2017). Service-dominant logic 2025. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 34(1), 46-67.
48. Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (Eds.). (2018). The SAGE Handbook of Service-Dominant Logic. London, UK: SAGE Publications Inc.
49. Vargo, S.L., Koskela-Huotari, K., and Vink, J. (2020) Service-Dominant Logic: Foundations and Applications. In Bridges, E. and Fowler, K. (Eds.) The Routledge Handbook of Service Research Insights and Ideas, (p. 3-23). New York: Routledge.
50. Visser, M., van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2021). Large-scale comparison of bibliographic data sources: Scopus, Web of Science, Dimensions, Crossref, and Microsoft Academic. Quantitative Science Studies, 2(1), 20-41.
51. Wilden, R., Akaka, M. A., Karpen, I. O., & Hohberger, J. (2017). The evolution and prospects of service-dominant logic: An investigation of past, present, and future research. Journal of Service Research, 20(4), 345-361.
52. Williams, R., & Bornmann, L. (2016). Sampling issues in bibliometric analysis. Journal of Informetrics, 10(4), 1225-1232.