Adopting Self-Service Technology to Do More with Less
Adopting self-service technology to do more with less
Toni Hilton
Westminster Business School, University of Westminster, London, UK, and
Tim Hughes, Ed Little and Ebi Marandi
Bristol Business School, University of the West of England, Bristol, UK
Abstract Purpose – Employees have traditionally played a major role in the customer’s service experience. Yet self-service technology (SST) replaces the customer-service employee experience with a customer-technology experience. This paper seeks to use a service-dominant logic lens to gain fresh insight into the consumer experience of SST. In particular, it aims to consider the resources that are integrated when consumers use SSTs, their coproduction role and what might constitute value. Design/methodology/approach – The paper presents findings from 24 semi-structured interviews that focus on the everyday experiences of consumers in using SST. Both genders and all socio-economic categories within all adult age groups from 18 to 65 þ were included. Findings – There is a danger that organizations embrace SST as an economic and efficient mechanism to “co-create” value with consumers when they are merely shifting responsibility for service production. The paper identifies risks when customers become partial employees and concludes that customers should perceive the value they gain from using SST to be at least commensurate with their co-production role. Research limitations/implications – The qualitative study was confined to the consumer perspective. Future research within organizations and among employees who support consumers using SST would extend understanding, as would research within the business-to-business (B2B) context. Quantitative studies could measure the frequency and extent of the phenomena the authors report and assist with market segmentation strategies. Practical implications – The application of service-dominant logic highlights potential risks and managerial challenges as self-service, and consequent
Toni Hilton
Westminster Business School, University of Westminster, London, UK, and
Tim Hughes, Ed Little and Ebi Marandi
Bristol Business School, University of the West of England, Bristol, UK
Abstract Purpose – Employees have traditionally played a major role in the customer’s service experience. Yet self-service technology (SST) replaces the customer-service employee experience with a customer-technology experience. This paper seeks to use a service-dominant logic lens to gain fresh insight into the consumer experience of SST. In particular, it aims to consider the resources that are integrated when consumers use SSTs, their coproduction role and what might constitute value. Design/methodology/approach – The paper presents findings from 24 semi-structured interviews that focus on the everyday experiences of consumers in using SST. Both genders and all socio-economic categories within all adult age groups from 18 to 65 þ were included. Findings – There is a danger that organizations embrace SST as an economic and efficient mechanism to “co-create” value with consumers when they are merely shifting responsibility for service production. The paper identifies risks when customers become partial employees and concludes that customers should perceive the value they gain from using SST to be at least commensurate with their co-production role. Research limitations/implications – The qualitative study was confined to the consumer perspective. Future research within organizations and among employees who support consumers using SST would extend understanding, as would research within the business-to-business (B2B) context. Quantitative studies could measure the frequency and extent of the phenomena the authors report and assist with market segmentation strategies. Practical implications – The application of service-dominant logic highlights potential risks and managerial challenges as self-service, and consequent
References: Further reading IfM and IBM (2007), “Succeeding through service innovation: a discussion paper”, Institute for Manufacturing, University of Cambridge, Cambridge