Analysis of service quality from the perspective of the customer has generated much attention. The scale most used to develop such studies is the SERVQUAL. This tool has undergone much criticism, mainly focusing on the situational instability shown by the dimensions in certain cases. This work does not reject the proposals of that instrument, but attempts to improve its internal consistency and assess its dimensional structure. To do this, the Enlarged Service Quality Scale (ESQS) has been designed and applied to the university context. The ESQS is mainly characterized by compensating the number of items in all the dimensions, seeking better intra-dimensional consistency. The results confirm the applicability of this scale in non-educational university services, show considerable improvement in its consistency and, further, indicate that the traditional dimensions of SERVQUAL can be reduced and clustered in the macro categories, interactive quality and physical quality. The data also demonstrate the importance of the dimensions related to personalized treatment and interaction in user satisfaction.

We seek means of further improving the process of service innovation by providing conceptual framework that would uniformly model information about a service system. Since value co-creation is achieved through knowledge-based interactions, such a framework should be a connection-oriented one. We propose uniform approach to context-sensitive relationships modeling and representation, based on semantic conceptual modeling, suitable for modeling both service system interactions and information about a service system itself. Its application is illustrated on digital libraries domain. The proposed representation may be combined with goal-driven development methods to allow closer interconnection of goals and value proposition. The paper presents application of an original conceptual reference model of service system, which may provide more elaborated background for service innovation process.

Since Aristotle’s claim that knowledge is derived from the understanding of the whole and not that of the single parts (Aristotle’s Holism), researchers have been struggling with systems and parts in terms of their contents and their relative dynamics. This historic effort evolved during the last century into so-called “systems theory” (Bogdanov, 1922, 1980; von Bertalanffy, 1968, Lazlo 1996; Meadows, 2008). Systems theory is an interdisciplinary theory about every system in nature, in society and in many scientific domains as well as a framework with which we can investigate phenomena from a holistic approach (Capra, 1997). Systems thinking comes from the shift in attention from the part to the whole (Checkland, 1997; Weinberg, 2001; Jackson, 2003), considering the observed reality as an integrated and interacting unicuum of phenomena where the individual properties of the single parts become indistinct. In contrast, the relationships between the parts themselves and the events they produce through their interaction become much more important, with the result that “system elements are rationally connected” (Luhmann, 1990), towards a shared purpose (Golinelli, 2009). The systemic perspective argues that we are not able to fully comprehend a phenomenon simply by breaking it up into elementary parts and then reforming it; we instead need to apply a global vision to underline its functioning. Altough we can start from the analysis of the elementary components of a phenomenon, in order to fully comprehend the phenomenon in its entirety we have to observe it also from a higher level: a holistic perspective (von Bertalanffy, 1968). Systems theory encompasses a wide field of research with different conceptualizations and areas of focus (e.g. Boulding 1956, Maturana and Varela 1975, Senge 1990). Specifically, within management and marketing, a number of authors and scholars have adopted – implicitly or explicitly – a vision of organizations as systems with the aim of analyzing the relationship between organizations and their environment (e.g. Burns and Stalker 1961, Lawrence and Lorsch 1967, Aldrich 1979). The aim of this paper is to provide an overview of systems theories. In particular, focus is given to those that make a specific reference to management. We shall focus on: a) A brief review on multidisciplinary systems theories b) The introduction of basic systems concepts c) The managerial applications of systems thinking This commentary closes the special issue of the Journal of Service Science. It hopes to raise questions, observations and dilemmas in order to foster dialogue about the opportunities and limitations of applying systems theory in management studies and practices.

Service-based industries now dominate the most advanced economies of the world. There is, however, no fully interdisciplinary foundation for research into the development of service, per se. The creation of a service science has been proposed, which would bring into question many traditional assumptions about economics. This paper explores service as a science, and proposes that the biological concept of mutualism be used as one aspect for developing a foundation of service science. It then considers the implications for individual organizations, in terms of viable systems.

Purpose: This conceptual paper will explore the application of an aspect of systems theory, the Law of Requisite Variety (LRV) to service organisations. Design / methodology / approach: The notion of a system has a strong history in management; in searching for theory to provide substance to service systems research the concept can provide valuable insights. Systems theory and thinking is the study of complex adaptive wholes; the focus is on the whole rather than the parts. The LRV, introduced by Ashby, concerns the behaviour of systems. The LRV states that the organisation must be able to deal with the variety introduced by the external environment, in order to remain viable. Understanding the nature of customer variety and how to deal with it is important for service organisations since variety provides both a challenge and an opportunity. This paper seeks to explore and operationalise variety in a service context. Findings: A new service systems model is proposed building on the LRV, systems concepts and on current developments in service classification. Originality / value: To further the use of systems thinking in service science and to explore how the LRV could be applied in this context.

Purpose: In this paper we develop a resource allocation model for a service system. The uncertainty of the relationship between inputs and outputs of a process of co-creation of value by a service provider and a service recipient is modeled with a stochastic form of the technology function of each service process of the system. The model development is directed at providing useful policy prescription for service providers and a foundation for research into the nature of resource allocation policies in service industries. Design/methodology/approach: The model development makes use of concepts of probability theory, optimization theory and extant DEA models. Findings: A practical optimization for allocating resources to service processes as well as insights into the complexity of service resource management are obtained. Research limitations/implications: The model presented in this paper is based on constant returns to scale of the service process. Nonlinear technology functions will be the subject of future research. Originality/value: To date, service science lacks models for resource management that approach the usefulness of resource-management models for manufacturing enterprises even though the service economy in the industrialized world is larger than the manufacturing economy. This paper initiates a stream of model-building research.

This paper proposes a system science restructuring of today’s management practices. The paper discusses what we have learned from system science that gives us a new and different understanding of what the company is, and how it works; and a new way of understanding the world outside the company where company success is created. System science restructures management practices at a new level of understanding; structuring the company to achieve its purpose, and changing and very much improving the way the company is managed. Stafford Beer’s viable system model is a useful model for this restructuring.

The main purpose of this paper is to highlight the new opportunities that the Viable Systems Approach (VSA) can provide for observing complex service systems and explaining social phenomena through general schemes of interpretation. At the same time, it explores methodological links with the Service Science (SS) approach in order to propose (VSA)’s contribution to moulding a unified vision of complex objects of analysis, and to evidence the many converging elements that emerge from the two perspectives as well as the benefits that derive from different interpretation schemes. In particular, in our paper we analyze healthcare service complexity in a relational perspective, using a VSA-SS conceptual framework to interpret the emergent systems instability in the Italian Health Service. The application of principles and concepts proper to the (VSA) and the SS approaches to articulated service structures, such as healthcare, identifies critical features and interesting new “therapeutic” prospects for healthcare service systems in order to guarantee their viability. The paper proposes an innovative methodological basis for evaluating the level of appropriateness of the healthcare service and, at the same time, evidences the need for achieving a balanced triple target of efficiency, effectiveness and sustainability (EES) in healthcare service systems governance. As a result, a new area of cross fertilization for collaborative research emerges.

The objective of this paper is to review recent developments in service theory and systems theory with a view to identifying common features between the two. In particular, the study explores the issue of whether so-called ‘smart service systems’ can be understood in terms of the ‘viable systems approach’ of systems theory. The paper begins with a review of recent developments in service theory by examining the fundamental principles of service-dominant logic (S-D logic) and service science (SS). The similarities and differences of the two are explored, with particular emphasis on the common feature of the service system. The study then moves to the realm of systems theory by exploring the main proposals of the viable systems approach (VSA), which is an interdisciplinary systems theory that includes elements derived from resource-based theory, biology, sociology, and mechanics. The paper then draws together service theory and systems theory by examining whether ‘smart service systems’ can be best understood in terms of ‘viable service systems’. The most important finding of the study is that the VSA provides valuable insights into the design and management of smart service systems, especially with regard to harmonisation, systems governance, and successful value co-creation processes.

This paper presents a first attempt at an integrated Service Science (SS) and Viable Systems Approach (VSA) analysis of the real-world phenomenon of changing jobs roles. Changing job roles is important to quality of life and yet understudied by systems scientists. Today, individuals changing jobs multiple times during their working life is the norm. The average person born in the later years of the US baby boom held 10.8 jobs from age 18 to age 42 (BLS 2008). The viability of societal systems depends on both entities changing job roles offered and individuals changing job roles filled (Spohrer and Maglio 2010b). Societal systems interact with their environment via individuals in job roles, and the behaviors and dynamics of these diverse types of viable systems are not easy to explain and predict (Beer 1972). Both Service Science (SS) and Viable Systems Approach (VSA) can be seen as less well known specializations of General Systems Theory (von Bertalanffy 1968, Spohrer and Kwan 2009, Barile 2009, Golinelli 2010). Like General Systems Theory, these emerging analytic frameworks advocate a worldview and specialized vocabulary that provide a framework for analysis and decision making. Also, these nascent analytic frameworks aim to improve our understanding of complex systems and improve their design. By refining the concept of the identity of a system from SS and VSA perspectives, the contributions of this paper include providing an abstract framework for enumerating all job roles and transitions between job roles as well as a practical recommendation to prepare a next-generation of individuals to compete better in a world of accelerating job role change. Specifically, our analysis of changing job roles will result in a recommendation for increasing the ratio of T-Shaped Professionals (T-SP possess both broad communication skills and deep problem solving skills) to I-Shaped Professional (I-SP possess only deep problem solving skills) in the labor force of nations and businesses to improve their viability in a complex environment of accelerating change (Donofrio et al. 2010).