Using data platforms for smart services over the lifecycle of a complex system

• • • • • BOOK OF ABSTRACTS The Spring Servitization Conference May 2025. Liverpool, UK. Evidencing Productivity & Sustainability through Servitization: The Role of Suppliers, Intermediaries, Customers and Competitors Edited By Prof Ali Z. Bigdeli, Aston University, UK. Prof Tim Baines, Aston University, UK. Dr Chris Raddats, University of Liverpool, UK. Dr Raveen Ramachandran Menon, Aston University, UK. Dr Dipti Rathi, Aston University, UK. DISCLAIMER Responsibility for the content rests with the respective authors. Aston Business School Aston University Aston Triangle Birmingham B4 7ET The Book of Abstracts - Spring Servitization Conference 2025 Copyright © 2025 The Advanced Services Group. This is an Open Access Publication developed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. CONFERENCE PARTNERS The Advanced Services Group, Aston University The Advanced Services Group (ASG) is a centre of excellence within Aston Business School specialising in servitization and advanced services. It delivers education, training, and research to help global manufacturers and technology innovators to develop services-led strategies. The Advanced Services Partnership is an international research network, which was formed in 2015, and comprises larger manufacturing organisations that are traditionally production-focused and are now in the earlier stages of exploring, developing, and deploying advanced services. It sustains a nurturing environment comprised of one-to-one support and roundtables that are structured so that experiences can be shared openly and constructively. Partners are drawn from across Europe and the USA. University of Liverpool Management School The University of Liverpool Management School is a globally connected institution, driving influential knowledge leadership through its transformative research and teaching. With a strong commitment to improving both business and society, the school equips graduates and partners with the insight and skills needed to tackle today’s most pressing challenges. Its work continually shapes practice and policy on an international scale. CURRENT RESEARCH PROJECTS Servitization Impact Programme: Economic Productivity & Environmental Performance This ground-breaking research programme is set to shape industrial best practices and influence decisions around industrial policy associated with productivity and de-carbonisation. It will establish evidence to illustrate how servitization impacts both economic productivity and environmental performance (i.e., netzero and the green economy) and use these insights to influence industrial policy and practice in the UK. This will clarify and explain whether, when, and how the adoption of servitization should be encouraged to maximise the economic and societal impact. Researchers, from The Advanced Services Group in collaboration with The Energy and Bioproducts Research Institute and The College of Engineering and Physical Sciences at Aston University together with researchers at Warwick Business School; will develop a strong theoretical foundation based on prior research on business model innovation and value networks. Committees Co-chairs Prof Ali Z. Bigdeli, Aston University, UK Prof Tim Baines, Aston University, UK Dr Chris Raddats, University of Liverpool, UK Local Scientific Committee Prof Andreas Schroeder, Lancaster University, UK Dr Raveen Ramachandran Menon, Aston University, UK Dr Dipti Rathi, Aston University, UK Dr Daniel Andrews, Aston University, UK Dr Ahmad Beltagui, Aston University, UK Dr Yang Zhao, Aston University, UK Conference Strategic Management Group Prof Christian Kowalkowski, Linköping University, Sweden Prof Jamie Burton, Alliance Manchester Business School, UK Prof Judy Zolkiewski, Alliance Manchester Business School, UK Prof Mario Rapaccini, University of Florence, Italy Prof Paolo Gaiardelli, University of Bergamo, Italy Prof Rogelio Oliva, Mays Business School, Texas A&M University Prof Rui De Sousa, Catolica Porto Business School, Portugal Prof Shaun West, Lucerne University of Applied Sciences, Switzerland Prof Vicky Story, Loughborough University, UK Prof Vinit Parida, Luleå University of Technology, Sweden Introduction The Spring Servitization Conference (SSC2025) is dedicated to understanding how organisations develop and adapt their business models through servitization and advanced services. The 2025 conference will be held in Liverpool, UK, with the overall theme of ‘Evidencing Productivity and Sustainability through Servitization: The Role of Suppliers, Intermediaries, Customers and Competitors. The conference will bring together the world’s leading researchers, practitioners and doctoral students to debate and engage with the theory and practice of servitization. SSC2025 will comprise the Servitization Doctoral Symposium (Monday 12th May) and the main Spring Servitization Conference (Tues 13th and Weds 14th May 2025). On Monday 12th May, we will host our doctoral symposium for PhD students whose research focuses on topics related to servitization (including Product Service Systems, service-centric business models, and service-dominant logic, etc.). On Tuesday 13th and Wednesday 14th May, we will follow the established format of a single stream where contributors have an opportunity to present to the whole conference audience and engage in both structured and semi panel sessions to discuss their work. The programme is designed to encourage extensive debate and bridge research theory and industrial practice. The conference will also feature keynotes from senior executives from leading manufacturing businesses. We will also dedicate some sessions to the early stage research which comprise interactive keynotes by leading academics in the field, debates around emergent research themes, and poster reviews of proposed projects and doctoral research. Co-Chairs of the 2025 Spring Servitization Conference Advanced Research Theme CASE STUDIES AND EMPIRICAL RESEARCH / THEORY AND FRAMEWORKS LOOKING BEHIND THE CURTAINS: FUNCTIONAL ROLES AND THEIR TRANSITIONS WITHIN SERVITIZING ORGANIZATIONS Timon Urs Knapp, Jens Poeppelbuss 1 THE ROLE OF XAAS IN MANUFACTURING: A BUSINESS MODEL-BASED ANALYSIS Laura Scalvini, Marco Ardolino, Nicola Saccani, Federico Adrodegari, Luca Lussignoli 4 DO WHAT YOU WANT TO DO, OR DO WHAT YOU HAVE TO: EXPANSION INTO SERVICE OFFERING AND PERFORMANCE Anwar Adem, Giuliana Battisti, Nigel Driffield, Andreas Schroeder 6 TRANSFORMING A MACHINE TOOL MANUFACTURER INTO AN ADVANCED SERVICE PROVIDER Shaun West, Philipp Humbeck, Maximilian Rolle 8 RETHINKING COLLABORATION IN SERVITIZATION: A META-SYNTHESIS FRAMEWORK Beheshte Momeni, Rodrigo Rabetino, Marko Kohtamäki 10 EXPLORING CONSUMER ACCEPTANCE OF ADVANCED SERVICES FOR DOMESTIC APPLIANCES Ahmad Beltagui, Ana Isabel Canhoto, Daniela Castillo, Ramin Behbehani, Maren Schnieder, Niraj Kumar 12 USING PRODUCT INNOVATION AS A ROUTE TO SERVITIZATION Judy Zolkiewski, Jamie Burton, Ella Nuttall 14 ECOSYSTEMS, VALUE NETWORKS AND DIGITALISATION MOVING FROM PRODUCTS TO PLATFORMS: HOW AUTOMAKERS BECOME PLATFORM PROVIDERS THROUGH CONNECTED CARS Guilherme Sales Smania, Glauco Henrique de Sousa Mendes 16 USING DATA PLATFORMS FOR SMART SERVICES OVER THE LIFECYCLE OF A COMPLEX SYSTEM Junsong He, Miia Martinsuo 18 SERVICE ECOSYSTEMS – CURRENT RESEARCH LANDSCAPE AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS Lisa Drees, Jens Poeppelbuss 20 CAN DATA SUPPORT OUTCOME-BASED SERVICES FOR HUMAN HEALTH? Marina Vicini, Ahmad Beltagui, Maria Pardo Garcia, Martin Rudorfer, Zhuangzhuang Dai, Luis J. Manso 22 GRAND CHALLENGES, THE CIRCULAR ECONOMY AND NET-ZERO DOES STRATEGIC FOCUS ON ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY FAVOR SERVITIZATION? Rui Sousa, Danilo Soares-Silva, Jorge Julião 24 ENHANCING SOCIAL AND EMOTIONAL VALUE THROUGH SMART SERVICES Carolina Beppi, Jürg Meierhofer, Jochen Wulf 26 SUSTAINABLE SERVITIZATION & VALUE NETWORKS: A PROXIMITY PERSPECTIVE Mariana Kovacic-Lukic, Antonio Masi, Emel Arikan Fichtinger, Ali Bigdeli 28 EVALUATING THE SOCIAL VALUE OF SERVITIZATION Maria Spadafora, Mario Rapaccini, Ahmad Beltagui 30 REBOUND EFFECTS OF SUSTAINABLE SERVITIZATION IN B2B MARKETS Martin Ebel 32 KEY ADJUSTMENTS TO SERVICE OFFERINGS TO ACCOMMODATE PRODUCT INNOVATIONS: THE CASE OF COMMERCIAL VEHICLES Heiko Gebauer, Besma Glaa, Lars Witell 34 CONVENIENT SUSTAINABILITY IN SERVITIZATION: THE AIM TO MAINTAIN BUSINESS AS USUAL Zsofia Toth, Carlos Diaz Ruiz, Oliver Wirths 36 CAPABILITIES, ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE & LEADERSHIP ADVANCING SERVITIZATION THROUGH A DATAAND KNOWLEDGE DRIVEN TOOL FOR WORKPLACE EXOSKELETON ADOPTION Tobias Drees, Benjamin Reimeir, Robert Weidner, Bernd Kuhlenkötter 37 DUAL-SIDED DIGITAL CAPABILITIES: CULTIVATING DIGITAL SOLUTIONS IN SERVITIZATION Leon Adler, Heiko Gebauer, Yang Zhao 39 RE-INVENTING THE MANUFACTURER'S BUSINESS MODEL: THE ROLE OF DYNAMIC CAPABILITIES IN RADICAL RE-DESIGN OF THE MANUFACTURER'S ACTIVITY SYSTEM Tayyab Warraich, Marko Kohtamäki, Tuomas Huikkola 41 CULTURE AND MINDSET TRANSFORMATION IN SERVITIZATION: A SYSTEMATIC LITERATURE REVIEW Daniel Andrews, Mohammed Khan, Asif Majid, Matthew Anderson 43 SUCCESSFULLY SELLING SERVITIZED SOLUTIONS Judy Zolkiewski, Vicky Story, Jamie Burton 45 Evolving Research Theme SERVITIZING IN A GLOBAL NETWORK: CONTINGENCIES AND CONFIGURATIONS OF INDUSTRIAL SERVICE ECOSYSTEMS Timon Urs Knapp, Kathrin Nauth 47 TOWARDS BUSINESS MODEL INNOVATION: THE INTERPLAY BETWEEN DIGITALIZATION AND SUSTAINABILITY IN DIGITAL SERVITIZATION Odara Abeysinghe, Khaled Abed Alghani, Marko Kohtamäki 50 ALIGNING HUMAN AND MACHINE: EXPLORING AI’S ROLE IN SERVITIZED BUSINESS NETWORKS Antonio Masi 52 DIGITAL SERVITIZATION: AN INTEGRATED VIEW OF DYNAMIC CAPABILITIES AND TRANSACTION COST ECONOMICS Saeed Akkas, Amna 54 Executive Paper Looking Behind the Curtains: Functional Roles and their Transitions within Servitizing Organizations Timon Urs Knapp, Jens Poeppelbuss RESEARCH MOTIVATION Servitization represents a profound transformation affecting nearly all organizational dimensions (Peillon 2021; Oliva & Kallenberg 2003). While research has extensively examined this shift, it often does so from two perspectives: at the ecosystem level, analyzing interfirm dynamics (e.g., Sklyar et al. 2019), or at the firm level, treating companies as monolithic entities. However, the intra-organizational dynamics of servitization, particularly the interplay of functions within traditionally product-oriented firms, remain underexplored. Previous studies have addressed the organizational capabilities required for servitization (Tronvoll et al. 2020) and recently even proposed different pathways to servitization success (Heirati et al. 2024). Yet, they often overlook the structural inertia inherent in large manufacturing firms with long-established operational models. Tushman and O’Reilly (1996) describe how organizations develop structures in response to external complexities, which become interlinked over time. This structural entrenchment makes significant changes – such as those required for servitization – costly, time-intensive, and difficult to implement. Among various types of inertia (Haskamp et al. 2021), structural inertia creates strong managerial resistance to altering established functions, particularly in the early stages of servitization when the commercial viability of advanced services remains uncertain. As a result, managers are hesitant to dissolve or create functions as prescribed by literature. This study explores how companies manage structural inertia in servitization by examining the responsibilities retained or adapted by existing functions from a product-centric past. A single case study was conducted at a German pump manufacturer with €1 billion in revenue and over 5,000 employees. The company has committed to becoming a solution provider and recently centralized its global aftermarket activities within a dedicated service function, which now collaborates with other departments. Data were collected through 17 interviews across various functions. Using role theory (Allen & van de Vliert 1984; Biddle 1986), we conceptualize functions as roles to analyze their responsibilities, transitions, and conflicts during servitization. Additionally, we employ Baines et al.'s (2020) servitization process model as a sensitizing framework (Blumer 1954; Dubois & Gadde 2002) to contextualize our findings. This leads us to our central research question: Which responsibilities do different functions assume in servitization, and how do these evolve throughout the transformation? CONTRIBUTION TO THEORY AND PRACTICE Our analysis reveals that responsibilities within a servitizing organization are dynamically allocated across functions throughout the transformation. Summarized in a matrix (s. Appendix A) mapping responsibilities to functions and transformation phases, this evolution shows that while some functions remain passive due to operational constraints, most responsibilities are interdependent, requiring structured communication to overcome silo fragmentation. Building on the iterative nature of servitization (Kowalkowski et al. 2017), our findings demonstrate that functional roles are not fixed but continuously recalibrated through feedback loops. This adaptability enables firms to refine their strategies in response to internal challenges and market dynamics, reinforcing the view of organizational change as an Proceedings of the Spring Servitization Conference SSC2025 1 Executive Paper Transforming a Machine Tool Manufacturer into an Advanced Service Provider Shaun West, Philipp Humbeck and Maximilian Rolle RESEARCH MOTIVATION The manufacturing industry is shifting from capital-intensive, ownership-based models to alternative service-oriented frameworks. This transition is driven by increasing customer demand for flexibility, cost efficiency, and performance-based outcomes. Consequently, manufacturers are not just exploring but are increasingly adopting servitization strategies like Equipment as a Service (EaaS) to sustain their competitive advantage. EaaS redefines traditional business models by aligning operational costs with actual usage, offering customers predictable financial commitments while enabling manufacturers to generate recurring revenue streams. However, shifting from product sales to service-based models poses significant challenges, particularly in financial structuring, lifecycle cost management, and customer adoption. These challenges necessitate re-evaluating value propositions, revenue models, and operational frameworks. This study uses a manufacturer's strategic shift to EaaS as a lens to understand the broader complexities of servitization. It explores the implications of the business model, customer engagement strategies, and the operational adjustments required for the successful implementation of EaaS. A key focus is the role of financial partnerships in supporting asset-heavy business models and addressing critical concerns regarding capital investment, risk-sharing, and revenue predictability. By analysing the manufacturer's experience, this study contributes to the literature on servitization and offers actionable insights for manufacturers navigating similar transitions across various industrial sectors. CONTRIBUTION TO THEORY AND PRACTICE This study advances the theoretical understanding of Equipment as a Service (EaaS) by anchoring it within Product-Service Systems (PSS) and servitisation. PSS integrates products and services throughout their lifecycle, creating value through sustainability, customer-centric innovation, and operational efficiency. By employing lifecycle analysis (LCA) and total cost of ownership (TCO) methodologies, this study provides a structured approach to evaluating the financial and operational dimensions of EaaS. These approaches enable manufacturers to make data-driven decisions about resource allocation, service pricing, risk management and long-term profitability, strengthening the theoretical foundation of servitisation in the machine tool industries. This research examines the transformation of revenue models, particularly the shift from capital expenditure (CapEx) to operational expenditure (OpEx). This transition requires new financial structures, including leasing arrangements, risk-sharing mechanisms, and alternative funding strategies. By analysing how manufacturers collaborate with investors, banks, and leasing firms to manage financial risks while maintaining profitability, this study highlights the role of financial partnerships in EaaS adoption. However, financial partnerships should be applied selectively. While they may be necessary for scaling large installations and managing balance sheet exposure, small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) require direct engagement with the original equipment manufacturer (OEM) rather than third-party financiers. Their clients prioritise the supplier firm’s ability to rectify machine failures rather than provide financial remedies. Third-party financiers supporting buy/lease agreements assist with cash flow management but remain separate from the industrial firm’s core value proposition. Proceedings of the Spring Servitization Conference SSC2025 8 Executive Paper With this in mind, the supplier’s experience highlights an important consideration: while financial partnerships may be needed when managing large fleets and optimising balance sheets, smaller customers prefer direct interaction with their supplier. They rely on the OEM’s expertise, trust, and quality assurance, rather than engaging with external financiers. An internal flexible payment model may suit these customers better, with financial partnerships playing a supplementary role. From a practical perspective, this research provides actionable insights for manufacturers transitioning to EaaS. It highlights the importance of cost modelling, risk-sharing agreements, and strategic customer engagement to mitigate financial and operational barriers. The case study illustrates how companies can pilot and scale EaaS through controlled rollouts, iterative refinements, and tailored pricing models. Furthermore, this study sheds light on internal organisational changes needed for successful implementation, including workforce retraining, redefining key performance indicators, and fostering service-oriented mindsets in traditionally product-focused firms. Additionally, the findings emphasise how manufacturers can leverage digital technologies to enhance service efficiency and customer value. As digitalisation enables servitisation, this research provides a roadmap for integrating data analytics and IoT-driven insights into EaaS models to optimise service delivery. This study offers a framework for understanding and implementing EaaS in manufacturing by integrating theoretical perspectives with practical applications. It serves as a reference for future academic research on servitisation and as a guide for practitioners navigating service-oriented business transformations. The insights from this study will assist manufacturers in developing resilient business models, improving financial strategies, and fostering long-term customer relationships in an increasingly service-driven industrial landscape. KEY DISCUSSION POINTS • Financial Structuring and the Role of Financial Partnerships Transitioning to EaaS shifts manufacturers from CapEx to OpEx, requiring financial partnerships to manage asset ownership and mitigate risks. Sustainable adoption depends on lease-based financing, outcome-based pricing, and risk-sharing contracts while addressing customer concerns about financial predictability and operations. • Operational and Organisational Transformation EaaS adoption necessitates workforce retraining, revised performance metrics, and improved digital capabilities. Predictive maintenance, remote diagnostics, and data-driven utilisation tracking enhance service delivery. To ensure profitability, lifecycle cost management must be well understood, along with cost drivers. • Business Model Innovation and Revenue Streams EaaS models must balance profitability and customer value. Subscription-based, usage-based, and hybrid models each present pricing and risk challenges. Revenue stream changes demand proactive financial planning on the part of the supplier. • Strategic Implications for Manufacturing Industry EaaS adoption reflects a broader shift toward service-oriented manufacturing. Success requires ecosystem collaboration, technological innovation, and regulatory alignment to enable scalable, sustainable adoption. Future research should explore how evolving financial instruments and digital ecosystems will shape the next phase of servitization. AUTHOR CONTACT DETAILS Shaun West, Institute of Innovation And Technology Management, Lucerne University of Applied Sciences and Arts, Horw, Switzerland, [email protected] Philipp Humbeck, TRUMPF Werkzeugmaschinen SE + Co. KG, Ditzingen, Germany [email protected] Maximilian Rolle, TRUMPF Werkzeugmaschinen SE + Co. KG, Ditzingen, Germany, [email protected] Proceedings of the Spring Servitization Conference SSC2025 9 RETHINKING COLLABORATION IN SERVITIZATION: A META-SYNTHESIS FRAMEWORK Beheshte Momeni, Rodrigo Rabetino, Marko Kohtamäki RESEARCH MOTIVATION While servitization has recently witnessed rapid growth in emphasising the role of external actors, collaboration strategies among actors have thus far not been systematically recognised. This gap is critical, as effective collaboration is essential to leverage diverse expertise, integrate resources, and co-develop innovative services. In particular, digital technologies such as the Internet of Things, cloud computing, and predictive analytics have emerged as key enablers of servitization, driving significant changes in manufacturers' strategies, operations, value chains, and business models. As a result, servitization increasingly relies on the capabilities of other companies within a network. This shift often requires reconfiguring collaborations with traditional value chain actors, such as customers and downstream service providers, as well as engaging with new actors, including digital suppliers, that provide access to cutting-edge technological innovations. Collaboration can be categorised into three primary types: •Vertical collaboration occurs between actors at different levels of the value chain, such as manufacturers and suppliers or customers, focusing on resource integration and value creation across the chain. •Horizontal collaboration involves partnerships between firms at the same level, such as manufacturers working with other manufacturers, often to co-develop solutions or share resources. •Lateral collaboration refers to partnerships between firms from different value chains or industries to create new value propositions, such as a manufacturer collaborating with a technology provider to develop digital services. Structural and relational embeddedness provide two critical dimensions for understanding the nature of collaboration. •Structural embeddedness refers to the formal relationships and network positioning of actors, emphasising the governance and resource configurations that enable collaboration. •Relational embeddedness, on the other hand, focuses on the depth of trust, mutual understanding, and interpersonal ties between collaborators, which influence the quality of interactions. Against this backdrop, this paper examines how structural and relational embeddedness shapes vertical, horizontal, and parallel collaborations in servitization and how firms develop and manage collaboration in different servitization contexts. This study employs a meta-synthesis approach to integrate insights from 42 qualitative case study articles. CONTRIBUTION TO THEORY AND PRACTICE This study contributes to the servitization literature by employing a meta-synthesis approach to integrate collaboration types (vertical, horizontal, and parallel) with structural and relational embeddedness into a comprehensive framework, including antecedents, processes and outcomes. The meta-synthesis enables a systematic analysis of existing qualitative studies, identifying patterns, relationships, and gaps in collaboration strategies across diverse contexts of servitization. By doing so, the study advances the theoretical understanding of inter-organisational collaboration. Practically, the findings provide actionable insights for managers to design and manage collaboration strategies, aligning structural and relational elements effectively. 10 Execu&ve Paper Proceedings of the Spring Servitization Conference SSC2025 Additionally, the study identifies several research gaps and proposes research directions: a) Contingency factors affecting collaboration in servitization, including organisational, industry and market context. b) Micro-level study on cognitive distance, cognitive flexibility, learning orientation, and social ties affecting collaboration in servitization. c) Expanding beyond the manufacturing sector to explore collaboration in heavily regulated industries, as well as public-private partnerships. d) Contribution to supply chain management literature by further exploring lateral collaboration involving cross-industry interactions. e) Strengthening empirical evidence on collaboration outcomes, including investigating failed collaborations. KEY DISCUSSION POINTS •Shift towards service-centric business models: oVertical collaboration is highly evident, driven by governance structures and power asymmetry, as well as factors such as trust, commitment, and reciprocity. oCollaboration outcome: increases efficiency, creates power struggles across the supply chain •Shift towards digitalisation: oVertical collaboration is prevalent, and data-sharing agreements and governance structures are necessary to integrate digital services effectively. Trust and reciprocity play a crucial role in supplier-customer relationships, enabling them to overcome data governance challenges. oLateral collaboration is evident, with data governance that facilitates knowledge sharing across digital ecosystems, placing less emphasis on relational ties between actors from different supply chains or industries. oCollaboration outcome: increases efficiency, supports business transformation, creates over-reliance and vendor lock-in •Shift towards digital platform: oVertical collaboration is prevalent, with governance structure and data governance regulating interactions. Still, relational embeddedness is nearly absent, suggesting that platform-based servitization relies more on formal governance structures than on trust-based relationships. oHorizontal collaboration is visible, with platform-based ecosystems relying on structured collaboration among multiple firms to enable service scalability and interoperability. oLateral collaboration is prominent, with an emphasis on structural embeddedness, as it is necessary for platform development and the seamless integration of digital services. oCollaboration outcome: enhances inter-firm learning and ecosystem evolution, creates over-reliance and operational contradictions AUTHOR CONTACT DETAILS Beheshte Momeni, University of Vaasa, Khadijeh.[email protected] Rodrigo Rabetino, University of Vaasa, Rodrigo.rabe[email protected] Marko Kohtamäki, University of Vaasa, marko.kohta[email protected] 11 Execu&ve Paper Proceedings of the Spring Servitization Conference SSC2025 Executive Paper Exploring consumer acceptance of Advanced Services for domestic appliances Ahmad Beltagui, Ana Isabel Canhoto, Daniela Castillo, Ramin Behbehani, Maren Schnieder, Niraj Kumar RESEARCH MOTIVATION In search of productivity and sustainability, UK policy and industrial strategy have sought to increase manufacturers’ adoption of digital technologies such as Internet of Things, big data and Artificial Intelligence. These technologies can improve energy and resource efficiency as well as competitiveness but adoption among UK manufacturers is not as high as it could be. One possible explanation is a lack of demand from consumers, which in turn can be due to the high cost of smart products that apply digital technology. Meanwhile servitization is considered a route to sustainability through dematerialisation and product life extension as well as profitability by creating more value for customers. Yet uptake of Advanced Services (AS) by manufacturers is low, which may also be partly explained by lack of consumer awareness and acceptance. This research therefore set out to understand consumers’ attitudes towards digital technology and AS business models. It has become clear that that the prevailing linear model (make-use-dispose) of production and consumption is unsustainable. Yet change is challenging when business models and operating models incentivise overproduction and overconsumption. A possible alternative lies in outcome-based services that can give access to the benefits of manufactured assets without requiring ownership. In this context, domestic appliances may be leased rather than purchased, they may be paid for in a monthly subscription rather than up-front investment and they may be recovered and remanufactured rather than newly produced. A number of washing machine manufacturers, for example Miele and Haier have begun offering monthly subscription services that provide access to refurbished washing machines. In some cases these include smart appliances that adjust detergent mixes and optimise water usage, as well as providing all of the consumables in a complete service package. Delivering such services enables manufacturers to reduce resource and energy consumption while requiring introduction of digital technology in products. The research explores whether consumers can be a catalyst for servitization and digital transformation in manufacturing by investigating the factors that might lead to adoption of smart washing machines and AS business models. CONTRIBUTION TO THEORY AND PRACTICE Although servitization is extensively studied in industrial contexts, there is comparatively little research on AS in consumer contexts. A small number of studies investigate AS business models for domestic appliances such as refrigerators and heat pumps, yet these are typically from the manufacturers’ perspectives. Instead, this research focused on consumer attitudes to AS business models and digital technology applied to washing machines. Firstly, expert interviews mapped the current landscape of domestic appliance manufacturing, usage and end of life recovery, as well as identifying technology adoption challenges. It identified inertia in the prevailing business model, for example incentives to replace appliances caused by high repair costs and a lack of awareness of running costs in comparison to purchase price. Secondly, focus groups helped to understand attitudes towards technology and sustainability as well as define a series of proposed business models to compare a traditional ownership model to access based services. Proposed business models included subscriptions for new or refurbished appliances or even Washing as a Service. Focus groups highlighted the lack of awareness Proceedings of the Spring Servitization Conference SSC2025 12 among consumers of outcome-based options on the market as well as suspicion over such innovations. Research also highlighted variation between consumers willing to “pay for non-ownership” and those who “see dignity in ownership” depending on their circumstances. Finally, behavioural experiments tested attitudes and preferences. These showed little enthusiasm for technological features but some evidence that guaranteeing outcomes using technology can appeal to consumers. A number of pertinent findings emerge from this research, which is one of the few to take a consumer perspective in understanding awareness and acceptance of AS business models. Firstly, sustainability was not found to be a priority for consumers when selecting a washing machine. Whereas servitization can enable circularity and resource efficiency, these do not appear to be high on consumers’ priorities. In this sector, changing opinions towards refurbished appliances appears to be a challenge. There appears to be greater acceptance among younger consumers of business models that do not involve ownership. On the other hand, there appears to be scepticism over subscription models, which some research participants suggested are exploitative and simply used to profit at the expense of customers. Recommendations for manufacturers relate to products, technology and communication with potential customers. While manufacturers see the appeal of technological features but identify a need to ‘educate’ consumers on how to use them, consumers are concerned with outcomes and experience rather than features. An emphasis on the experience might mean communicating the peace of mind that can be offered through condition monitoring and assured maintenance. Outcomes such as clean clothes or minimising energy bills are of more concern to consumers than the technology that can be used to achieve them. AS business models may be the answer to delivering the value of technology and supporting sustainability but manufacturers need to build trust with consumers and focus on delivering positive experiences. KEY DISCUSSION POINTS •Have we reached peak subscription? Do consumers value service models or are they right to be suspicious? •Could wider adoption of smart appliances impact positively on energy, emissions and sustainability targets? •Is servitization likely to enable consumer adoption of smart and sustainable technology? •To what extent do generational differences affect acceptance of outcome-based business models? What explains differences among age groups? AUTHOR CONTACT DETAILS Ahmad Beltagui, Aston Business School and Advanced Services Group, [email protected] Ana Isabel Canhoto, University of Sussex Business School, [email protected] Daniela Castillo, University of Malta, [email protected] Ramin Behbehani, Brunel Business School, [email protected] Maren Schnieder, Bochum University of Applied Sciences, [email protected] Niraj Kumar, University of Essex, [email protected] 13 Proceedings of the Spring Servitization Conference SSC2025 Execu&ve Paper Executive Paper USING PRODUCT INNOVATION AS A ROUTE TO SERVITIZATION Judy Zolkiewski, Jamie Burton, Ella Nuttall RESEARCH MOTIVATION Four factors have motivated this research. Firstly, it is widely recognized that in order for manufacturing firms to move along their servitization journey they need to become more service oriented and develop capabilities that support service delivery. These often can differ from those needed for manufacturing and necessitate the development of new skills and a change in mindset for both senior managers and the rest of the workforce. This has been challenging for some organizations and for some has resulted in a failure to fully capitalize on the opportunities that services can offer. In addition, the majority of servtization research has taken place in what we would argue to be manufacturing contexts. However, as servitization is a process which entails the delivery of more advanced services, it can also be contended that providers of basic services have potential to servitize, thus providing an interesting research avenue. Secondly, it can be contented that as the focus on servitization grows, the role of the product can be neglected, with primary focus switching to the development of services to support servitization and product development receiving less attention and/or even being outsourced. This can also pose challenges for companies who lose the ability to develop products that meet their customers’ needs and/or companies becoming more dependent on suppliers and thus at risk when supply-chain shocks disrupt the normal product flows (as we have recently seen with respect to the CoVid-19 pandemic and geopolitical tensions). This requires further attention from researchers. Thirdly, servitization research often focuses on larger organizations rather than SMEs. This means there is a danger of simply transferring understanding of how larger organizations navigate the servitization journey into the SME context without considering if the different operational context of SMEs may result in a different type of journey and/or the need for different dynamic and operational capabilities. Again, this needs further exploration. Finally, we argue that the majority (if not all) of research is carried out retrospectively. We send out surveys and conduct interviews that ask about what has happened during the servitization process and look up historical data to try to support our observations (without fully knowing what has driven that data). We have an opportunity to work with a SME that is a base service provider as they begin a journey that involves adding a newly developed product to further support their service delivery. We also see the potential for this new product development to provide an avenue for the addition of advanced services to their portfolio. We are conducting an action research project that provides an avenue for understanding how SMEs acquire the skills to develop new product and service offerings and also how they overcome challenges they encounter long the way. CONTRIBUTION TO THEORY AND PRACTICE Our aim is to illustrate that the theoretical separation of (new) product and service development limits our understanding of business practices and what is needed for businesses to successfully deliver Proceedings of the Spring Servitization Conference SSC2025 14 Executive Paper Proceedings of the Spring Servitization Conference SSC2025 product service systems. We would argue for, and potentially demonstrate that, by conceptualizing servitization and productization as complementary, intertwined processes which underpin the delivery of product service systems, we are offering a unification of what can be seen as divergent theoretical fields. With respect to practice, we will provide guidelines for SMEs (in particular) as to how to maximize their performance by viewing new service and product development as integrated and necessary processes for future success in product service system delivery. KEY DISCUSSION POINTS The need to integrate discussions relating to new service and product development New understanding of the processes that underpin servitization and productization are interrelated How unifying servitization and product service systems provides a more managerially-oriented framework in practice How action research can be an effective research methodology that allows us to advance management theory If SMEs servitization processes differ from those of larger organizations If challenges SMEs face during servitization/productization differ from those of larger companies AUTHOR CONTACT DETAILS Judy Zolkiewski, Alliance Manchester Business School, The University of Manchester, UK, [email protected] Jamie Burton, Alliance Manchester Business School, The University of Manchester, UK, [email protected] Ella Nuttall, Alliance Manchester Business School, The University of Manchester, UK, [email protected] 15 Executive Paper Moving from products to platforms: How automakers become platform providers through connected cars Guilherme Sales Smania, Glauco Henrique de Sousa Mendes RESEARCH MOTIVATION Supported by recent advances in Industry 4.0, manufacturers have begun embedding digital technologies, such as IoT sensors, big data analytics tools, and cloud computing, into physical products, enabling them to evolve into digital platform providers. By embracing a platform approach, manufacturers can collect extensive data from connected products, gaining rich insights into product usage conditions and customer operations. These data are critical for delivering advanced digital services to customers. Consequently, digital platforms play a crucial role in facilitating manufacturers’ transformation toward digital servitization. In the automotive industry, leading automakers have been advancing digital servitization to offer new mobility services to customers. More recently, a new drive of digital servitization in this sector has been the implementation of connected cars. Through vehicle connectivity, automakers can leverage vast amounts of data collected from cars to expand their portfolio of digital services. For instance, General Motors, through OnStar, offers a digital platform with several features, including vehicle diagnostics (e.g., fuel efficiency, odometer readings, and tire pressure), geolocation, infotainment systems, and remote commands (e.g., engine start). Connectivity, therefore, transforms the car into a mobile services platform, generating new opportunities for automakers and other ecosystem actors to create and capture value. However, many industrial manufacturers struggle to successfully implement digital platforms, often failing to enact the organizational changes required to transition from product-based to platformbased models. In the automotive industry, particularly, many automakers face significant challenges in incorporating mechanisms for value creation and capture within platform-based models following the introduction of connected cars. Current literature offers little empirical evidence to support this organizational transformation, primarily focusing on companies that have grown under a platform logic. Conversely, there is limited research on product companies that have successfully undergone this transformation. This paper seeks to bridge this research gap by developing a model that explains automakers’ organizational transformation toward connected car business models. Specifically, it aims to investigate the motivations driving automakers to adopt connected car business models and the organizational changes necessary to support this transformation. CONTRIBUTION TO THEORY AND PRACTICE The study advances the literature on platforms and servitization by examining how traditional product companies have transformed into platform providers. Specifically, it demonstrates how traditional automakers have evolved toward platform-oriented business models through the implementation of connected cars. As the automotive industry evolves, automakers have begun offering innovative mobility solutions to attract a new wave of customers who no longer perceive cars as assets of the same value as before. A prominent trend in this industry is the rise of connected cars, through which automakers and other service providers now offer digital solutions and features designed to enhance the driving experience, thus reigniting customers’ motivation to purchase cars. Our findings shed light on this evolution within the automotive sector, illustrating how automakers are shifting toward platform-oriented business models. Proceedings of the Spring Servitization Conference SSC2025 16 Executive Paper Furthermore, many industrial manufacturers have struggle to fully capitalize on the benefits of platformization. A key challenge is their inability to implement the organizational changes necessary to support this transformation. Our study contributes to this discussion by underscoring that the transition to platform-oriented business models requires a comprehensive organizational transformation rather than a simple adaptation of the existing business model. In particular, this transformation demands major changes in strategy, organizational structure, culture, processes, capabilities, and ecosystem. In addition, the study identifies the primary motivations driving automakers to shift from product-based to platform-based models, thus adopting new business models centered on connected cars. For practitioners, our findings can help identify the potential benefits of shifting from products to platforms. In particular, managers can explore the implementation of connected cars to leverage data for product innovation, enhance customer experience through value-added services, and improve financial performance by creating additional revenue streams. Moreover, we highlight the organizational changes required to support the transformation toward platformoriented business models. Practitioners within automakers can apply these insights to design their business models and navigate an increasingly data-driven environment. KEY DISCUSSION POINTS As automakers advance the implementation of connected cars, they can leverage operational and market outcomes, including product innovation, enhanced customer experience, and new revenue streams. Automakers have increasingly emphasized connectivity and digital services in their discourses and intentional narratives, underscoring the central role of connected cars and data-driven business models in their strategic focus. However, many still struggle to monetize data and effectively capture value from platform-oriented business models. Successfully implementing new platform-oriented business models requires a reconfiguration of automakers’ organizational structure, including the integration of new departments (e.g., software development and data analysis) with traditional teams (e.g., product development and industrial engineering), as well as the recruitment of employees with expertise in software, data science, and digital technologies. Automakers must foster a data-driven culture and embrace an open, experimental mindset similar to that of startups to successfully implement connected car business models. This transition requires an organizational culture centered on data, software, and digital services. Implementing connected car business models requires changes in automakers’ existing product development, manufacturing, sales, and service processes. Existing work practices and organizational processes must be adapted to leverage digitalization, support digital solutions, and align with the evolving digital landscape. Connected car business models require new capabilities and competencies better suited to a digital, data-driven environment. These include data collection capabilities to gather vehicle data, data analysis and storage capabilities to efficiently process large volumes of data, and relational capabilities to foster ecosystem relationships. Automakers must reconfigure their ecosystems to integrate new actors (e.g., technology giants, telecommunications companies, autotechs, and app developers) that expand the service portfolio and enhance the platform’s focal value proposition. AUTHOR CONTACT DETAILS Guilherme Sales Smania, Federal University of São Carlos, [email protected] Glauco Henrique de Sousa Mendes, Federal University of São Carlos, [email protected] Proceedings of the Spring Servitization Conference SSC2025 17 Does strategic focus on environmental sustainability favor servitization? Rui Sousa, Danilo Soares-Silva, Jorge Julião RESEARCH MOTIVATION Increasingly, investors, consumers, employees, and policymakers are demanding sustainable practices from manufacturers. As a result, the focus on sustainability has become a crucial aspect of companies' strategic agendas. In recent years, environmental sustainability (ES) has emerged as a significant driver of servitization for two primary reasons. First, the recognition of the potential of servitization to reduce the negative environmental impact of products throughout their lifecycle. For instance, servitized business models that focus on delivering product functionality rather than ownership (through sharing, renting, and leasing arrangements with customers) are expected to reduce resource consumption, enhance efficiency in use, improve product longevity and durability, and facilitate the reuse of materials. Additionally, manufacturers can offer high-value advanced services aimed directly at improving energy efficiency and reducing product emissions, leveraging the wealth of data and knowledge from their installed product base. Second, the proliferation of new and increasingly demanding ES disclosure standards (such as the Scope 3 emissions disclosure and the Global Reporting Initiative) has intensified the pressure on manufacturing companies to report their negative or positive contributions to sustainable environmental development, not only from their own operations but also from activities across the broader supply chain (i.e., from the goods they purchase to the disposal of the products they sell). Thus, firms look at servitization as an important strategy to meet mounting environmental requirements. Despite the important role of ES in driving servitization, there remains a dearth of both theoretical insights and empirical evidence linking a firm’s focus on ES to the implementation of servitization strategies. This study theoretically articulates and empirically tests the relationship between a manufacturing firm’s focus on ES and servitization. CONTRIBUTION TO THEORY AND PRACTICE Our study investigates how manufacturers’ focus on ES influences the adoption of servitization strategies. We define ES strategic focus as the degree to which firms adopt formal policies and practices to improve ES outcomes. We examine four main areas of ES focus: i) the adoption of formal policies towards the reduction of emissions, waste and resource use; ii) the implementation of internal practices for environmental management; iii) the adoption of downstream (product-related) ES practices, such as development of green products and product recycling; and iv) adoption of upstream ES practices, namely, supplier environmental management practices. We draw on Refinitiv’s Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) dataset to extract qualitative data on the extent to which firms have a strategic focus on the different ES areas and whether they are engaged in servitization (0-1 variable). Using a logistics regression model with data from 2022 and 2023, we find evidence that it is only the adoption of formal emissions reduction policies which is positively associated with the servitization adopted by manufacturing firms. 24 Proceedings of the Spring Servitization Conference SSC2025 Executive Paper In terms of theory, the study identifies a strategic focus on emissions reduction as a key driver of servitization. Consequently, manufacturing firms appear to view servitization as beneficial to their emissions reduction policies and commitments. There is no evidence to suggest that environmental practices—whether internal, downstream, or upstream—are connected to servitization. For policy making, this may indicate the desirability of promoting servitization initiatives (e.g., via communication, incentives, etc.) alongside emissions reduction initiatives. KEY DISCUSSION POINTS •Why is the focus on emissions reductions, rather than on resource use and waste reduction, positively related to a firm's propensity to servitize? •What might be the synergies between emissions reduction policies and servitization? AUTHOR CONTACT DETAILS Rui Sousa (*), [email protected] Danilo Soares-Silva (*), das[email protected] Jorge Julião (*), jjuli[email protected]t (*) Universidade Católica Portuguesa, Católica Porto Business School, Research Centre in Management and Economics (CEGE) ACKNOWLEDGEMENT This work is supported by FCT - Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia, I.P., by project reference UIDB/00731/2020 and DOI identifier 10.54499/UIDB/00731/2020 (https://doi.org/10.54499/UIDB/00731/2020). 25 Proceedings of the Spring Servitization Conference SSC2025 Executive Paper Executive Paper Proceedings of the Spring Servitization Conference SSC2025 Enhancing Social and Emotional Value through Smart Services Carolina Beppi, Jürg Meierhofer, Jochen Wulf RESEARCH MOTIVATION This paper explores how smart services can create not only functional and economic value but also emotional and social value for individuals such as customers or employees. By their initial concept, smart services are designed to create functional or economic value for the actors of a service ecosystem (Tukker, 2004, 2015). However, emotional and social value creation for the individuals in these ecosystems play a relevant role (Sweeney & Soutar, 2001). In this context, emotional value is represented by positive emotions such as joy, while social value refers to enhancing the social self-concept, which can be expressed by peer acceptance and recognition. The purpose of this conceptual study is to investigate the multifaceted benefits of smart services and how they contribute to the overall well-being and satisfaction of users. CONTRIBUTION TO THEORY AND PRACTICE Theoretically, this paper contributes to the literature on value creation by expanding the understanding of emotional and social value in the context of smart services. Practically, the findings provide valuable insights for service providers and designers to enhance their offerings. This holistic approach to value creation can lead to higher user satisfaction and loyalty. KEY DISCUSSION POINTS •Background: The theoretical foundation of this study is based on the value dimensions proposed by (Sweeney & Soutar, 2001), which include functional, economic, social, and emotional values. While previous research has extensively covered the functional and economic aspects of smart services, there is a gap in understanding how these services contribute to emotional and social value co-creation for the individuals. Some works provide insights as to the importance of accounting for social and emotional value dimensions, although their application remains largely limited to selective contexts such as third-sector organisations or services for disadvantaged groups (Gibbon & Dey, 2011; Grieco et al., 2015; Owen et al., 2015; Tirado-Valencia et al., 2021). This paper aims to fill this gap in the current knowledge by examining and quantifying the impact of smart services on the users' emotional and social values. In particular, this paper aims at developing a model for the quantitative assessment of emotional and social value creation by smart services that enables a trade-off against economic and functional values. •Methodology: The study builds on previous research on assessing and quantifying how smart services can create functional and economic value for the different actors of a manufacturing service ecosystem (Meierhofer & Heitz, 2023, Meierhofer et al., 2024). It involves conceptual modelling of service scenarios in the manufacturing industry and applies the model to concrete company cases with selected service combinations. In this study, the existing quantitative model is extended by adding modelling components that functionally reflect the impact of smart services on emotional and social values. This functional interdependence is represented mathematically and parametrized for general applications. To operationalize the generic parametrization in a specific context, we will consider a B2B biotech company case providing innovative solutions in the fields of AI-powered diagnostic imaging, laboratory diagnostics, and advanced therapies destined to healthcare providers including hospitals, clinics, diagnostic laboratories, and other medical institutions. The modelling parameters for this specific case are determined by expert judgements. If access to further data is available, a mixed-method 26 Executive Paper Proceedings of the Spring Servitization Conference SSC2025 approach can additionally be applied for refining the modelling parameters, combining quantitative surveys and qualitative interviews. These methods will measure users' perceptions of the social and emotional values created by smart services. Data can be collected from a diverse sample of users in a manufacturing context. Given the modelling equations and the determined parameter values, the analytical model is implemented in a numerical computation environment and different service combinations are assessed with respect to their economic and functional, as well as emotional and social, value contributions. •The expected findings suggest that smart services can significantly impact an individual’s emotional and social values, which depend on the specific service context. Additionally, the study will reveal the interplay between economic and functional values as well as emotional and social values, demonstrating that users derive holistic benefits from smart services. The multidimensional quantitative model introduced enables to quantify these different dimensions and weigh them against each other to understand their relative contribution to value creation and value capture. Multi-criteria optimization can be applied to identify service combinations that optimize the various value dimensions on a combined basis. The model shows potential effects of overperforming. Higher service intensity does not necessarily lead to higher value creation. As a result of this, finding optimal value constellations is not trivial and can be better understood and managed by quantitative models as the one developed and discussed in this study. These findings highlight the importance of considering multiple value dimensions when designing and implementing smart services. AUTHOR CONTACT DETAILS Carolina Beppi, Zurich University of Applied Sciences, [email protected] Jürg Meierhofer, Zurich University of Applied Sciences, [email protected] Jochen Wulf, Zurich University of Applied Sciences, [email protected] 27 SUSTAINABLE SERVITIZATION & VALUE NETWORKS: A PROXIMITY PERSPECTIVE Mariana Kovacic-Lukic, Antonio Masi, Emel Arikan, Ali Z. Bigdeli RESEARCH MOTIVATION Societal challenges, like climate change and social injustice, highlight the importance of sustainable development. Businesses are increasingly urged to adopt innovative models, like product-service systems, to reduce environmental impacts while delivering economic and social benefits. However, sustainable development in servitized networks proves to be complicated. Two critical issues include defining relevant actors and addressing potential misalignment. These challenges manifest in problems such as rebound effects, the service paradox, and, ultimately, failed servitization. Often, these can be traced back to poor collaboration, misalignment between actors and coordination issues. Most research focuses on bilateral relationships to mitigate these challenges. However, in servitized networks, coordination efforts necessitate multiple actors to approach each other and align their goals and strategies. This necessitates a network perspective to uncover underlying mechanisms of partnership creation and management. Viewing these interactions through proximity theory provides a valuable lens for addressing this gap and uncovering network coordination mechanisms. Previously applied in product-oriented business models, innovation, and sustainable business model research, the proximity perspective offers a novel lens for examining networks in sustainable servitization. In most literature, five types of proximity are utilised: Geographical (spatial distance), institutional (shared understandings, norms and values), cognitive (shared knowledge, information and data), social (shared experiences, relationship intensity and trust), and organisational (exercised control within or across organisations). These five dimensions and the way companies apply them distinctly influence each other. The interdependencies can be categorised as either reinforcement or overlap and substitution. Where reinforcement is defined as one dimension having a positive effect on other dimensions, overlap and substitution are described as one dimension potentially replacing another one or effects of one highly correlating with the effects of another dimension. As servitization requires reconfiguring the value network, roles and actors must be redefined. In contrast to product-oriented networks, a value network of advanced services can be characterised by four stages: service design, installation, delivery, and decommissioning. Each of these stages entails collaboration with different actors and stakeholders. As the service design stage sets the base for the following three stages, partnerships and roles must be set carefully and intentionally here. In this study, we thus apply a proximity lens to sustainable servitization, investigating partnerships in servitized value networks in the service design stage. We propose that: 1. Competitive advantage in sustainable servitization depends on effective partnership management. 2. An optimal proximity configuration between partners enables efficient value co-design and - creation. 3. Different proximity configurations distinctly influence sustainable value networks. Through this exploration, we aim to advance the understanding of sustainable servitization and contribute to the discourse on sustainable business models by answering the following research question: How do different proximity dimensions influence the sustainability of advanced services value networks? We will analyse polar cases using a multiple-case study approach to develop a conceptual framework. In detail, we will seek theoretical replication by studying companies with different levels of maturity in advanced services, leading to varying configurations of relevant proximity dimensions. While it can be 28 Executive Paper Proceedings of the Spring Servitization Conference SSC2025 expected that more mature companies show an optimal level of proximity and a working configuration of dimensions in their networks, less mature companies still establish their network partnerships and thus show lower levels of proximity. This additionally addresses the proximity paradox, which elaborates on the existence of an optimal level of proximity between partners. Where too little proximity leads to failed collaboration due to the lack of common ground, too much proximity can lead to lock-in and the loss of competitive advantage and, thus, ultimately, also to failed collaboration. Conversely, we will seek literal replication by targeting UK-based servitized manufacturers similar in size and interested in adopting servitization to improve their sustainability. By keeping these factors constant, we will focus on uncovering the differences between the cases, their transformation, and the configuration of their respective networks. We will collect data through semi-structured interviews and publicly available company data. Each case will involve four interviews per network, totalling twelve. Participants will include focal company representatives and network partners to capture diverse perspectives. CONTRIBUTION TO THEORY AND PRACTICE With this paper, we aim to uncover proximity configurations in servitized networks by analysing polar cases. Expected contributions include cases where too little or too much proximity affected collaboration in value networks, thus contributing to the literature on the proximity paradox. Comparing the cases will reveal different proximity configurations for efficient sustainable servitization, meaning the configuration of servitized value networks that support sustainable development. We will apply these findings to inform a proximity framework for sustainable servitization, which can be quantified and tested in further studies. The research additionally contributes to theory through the application of the proximity lens to sustainable servitization, enriching and advancing this emerging research stream by utilising a novel approach. This adds a new perspective and way of conceptualising partnerships in service design phases. Partnership management in servitized networks is a crucial aspect to ensure efficient and, consequently, successful servitization. Aligning the goals and interests of various stakeholders frequently poses challenges in this context. We contribute to practice by creating a framework to support managers in engaging with current and potential network partners. Applying the framework will facilitate the creation and implementation of efficient and sustainable servitization strategies during the design phase. Creating a strong base at this stage impacts further network considerations in later stages, such as installation and delivery. KEY DISCUSSION POINTS •A framework of proximity dimensions facilitates network management in servitized business models. •The proximity framework can be quantified and tested in further research. •Expected findings include cases where insufficient or too much proximity hindered partnership management. •Comparing the cases will reveal different proximity configurations for advancing sustainable servitization. •Future research can look at other stages of the value network, such as service installation, service delivery, and service decommission. AUTHOR CONTACT DETAILS Mariana Kovacic-Lukic, Vienna University of Economics and Business, mariana.kovacic- [email protected] Antonio Masi, Aston Business School, [email protected]k Emel Arikan, Vienna University of Economics and Business, [email protected]c.at Ali Z. Bigdeli, Aston Business School, a.big[email protected]c.uk 29 Executive Paper Proceedings of the Spring Servitization Conference SSC2025 Evaluating the social value of servitization Maria Spadafora, Mario Rapaccini, Ahmad Beltagui RESEARCH MOTIVATION Servitization has emerged as a transformative business model that shifts firms from selling products to offering integrated solutions and services. While previous research has extensively explored its economic and environmental benefits, the social dimension remains underdeveloped. This study aims to address this gap by evaluating how servitization creates social value, particularly in alignment with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Social value in servitization encompasses multiple dimensions, including access democratization, job creation, workforce upskilling, and inclusive economic growth. By transitioning from traditional product-based transactions to service-based engagements, firms can promote more equitable access to goods and services, particularly for lower-income consumers who benefit from pay-per-use or outcome-based models. Moreover, the shift towards servitization fosters new employment opportunities, requiring specialized skills for product maintenance, digital service management, and remanufacturing. This research seeks to conceptualize and measure the social value of servitization by comparing traditional (linear, ownership-based) and innovative (circular, usership-based) business models. Through a review of case studies from consumer goods manufacturing, we examine how servitization contributes to social value such as in work and economic growth (SDG9), reducing inequality (SDG10) and encouraging remanufacturing (SDG12). The findings contribute to an evolving understanding of how manufacturers can integrate social impact considerations into their servitization strategies, thereby aligning business objectives with broader societal progress. CONTRIBUTION TO THEORY AND PRACTICE This study makes a significant contribution to both the theoretical and practical discourse on servitization by providing a structured framework to assess its social impact. Theoretically, it expands the existing servitization literature by integrating it with concepts from social innovation, demonstrating how service-oriented business models can contribute to societal well-being. While previous research has extensively addressed the economic and environmental implications of servitization, this study highlights its potential to generate social benefits such as equitable access to essential products, employment opportunities, and workforce upskills. A key theoretical contribution is the development of a conceptual model that links servitization strategies to social value creation. This model helps identify the mechanisms through which firms can enhance their social footprint while maintaining competitive advantage. Unlike traditional business models focused on ownership and linear value chains, servitization fosters long-term relationships between manufacturers and customers, promoting continuous engagement and mutual value co-creation. From a practical standpoint, this study provides actionable insights for businesses seeking to implement servitization strategies that align with broader societal goals. By shifting to pay-per-use and performance-based models, companies can enhance customer accessibility while promoting sustainable consumption patterns. Moreover, firms adopting servitization must invest in skill development and training programs to ensure that their workforce is equipped to manage servicebased operations effectively. This research also offers guidelines for Proceedings of the Spring Servitization Conference SSC2025 30 Executive Paper Executive Paper policymakers to design regulatory frameworks that encourage businesses to incorporate social impact metrics into their performance assessments. Ultimately, this study underscores the importance of integrating social sustainability into servitization practices, positioning it as a crucial component of business strategy. By recognizing servitization as not only an economic and environmental opportunity but also a driver of social progress, firms can leverage this model to create long-term value for both their stakeholders and society at large. KEY DISCUSSION POINTS •Democratization of access: servitization democratizes access to value through new technologies such as smart and sustainable washing and heating appliances, which are otherwise not affordable for consumers; furthermore this business model enables broader access to high-value technologies and services, particularly for lower-income consumers, through models such as pay-per-use and outcome-based service agreements. •Job creation and workforce development: the shift towards service-based models generates new employment opportunities in areas such as predictive maintenance, digital service management, and remanufacturing; this transformation requires investment in workforce training and skill development. •Social and economic resilience: by integrating service-based business models, firms can build more resilient economic structures that are less susceptible to supply chain disruptions, fostering local employment and sustainable economic growth. •Circular economy integration: servitization promotes sustainable consumption by extending product lifecycles through remanufacturing, repair, and maintenance services, reducing waste and environmental impact while contributing to local employment. •Measurement of social impact: current servitization frameworks lack comprehensive tools for assessing social value creation. This research introduces methodologies for evaluating social benefits using Social Impact Assessment (SIA) approaches. The development of frameworks for social impact assessment becomes even more relevant in light of the evolving regulatory landscape, such as the European Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD). This directive imposes new transparency requirements on companies, calling for structured metrics to assess the social impact of servitization. AUTHOR CONTACT DETAILS Maria Spadafora, University of Brescia, [email protected] Mario Rapaccini, University of Florence, [email protected] Ahmad Beltagui, Aston Business School, [email protected] 31 Proceedings of the Spring Servitization Conference SSC2025 Rebound Effects of Sustainable Servitization in B2B Markets Dr.-Ing. Martin Ebel RESEARCH MOTIVATION Servitization, as the transformation of traditional manufacturing towards integrated product-service systems (PSS), is widely regarded as a pathway to greater sustainability. By shifting the focus from ownership to usage, servitization aims to reduce resource consumption and environmental impact. Recent studies highlight the potential for energy conservation and emissions reduction through servitization. EU initiatives such as the Circular Economy Action Plan, the Right to Repair Directive, and the recently unveiled Clean Industrial Deal emphasize servitization by promoting business models like Product-as-a-Service (PaaS), outcome-based contracts, and circular economy practices, which prioritize access over ownership, extend product lifecycles, and encourage repairability to support the transition to a more sustainable and competitive industrial sector. However, this transformation is not without challenges. Emerging evidence suggests that servitization might not always achieve its intended sustainability outcomes due to rebound effects and implementation complexities. While most of the literature assumes a positive link between servitization and sustainability, critical studies indicate potential pitfalls. While research in B2C contexts has shown that careless use in accessbased services can undermine environmental benefits, similar challenges in B2B contexts, such as higher utilization rates, have emerged. In B2B-Contexts studies counterintuitively challenges the prevailing assumptions of reduced resource usage and consumption due to pay-per-use pricing or pooling. Also, strategic decisions for sustainabilty might have direct negative impact on company profitability. These contradictions highlight the need for deeper investigation into the complex relationship between servitization and sustainability. This research is part of an ongoing investigation into the rebound effects of sustainable servitization in B2B markets. CONTRIBUTION TO THEORY AND PRACTICE To better understand the complex relationship between servitization and sustainability, a systematic literature review was conducted using the Web of Science database. The search utilized a comprehensive string of terms: "servitization OR service infusion OR PSS OR Product Service System" AND "green OR sustainable" AND "failure OR rebound OR backfire OR Jevons paradox OR negative" AND "industry OR manufacturing OR business to business OR B2B". This resulted in 230 articles, narrowed down to six relevant studies based on title, abstract and full text review. The selection of papers was based on focusing exclusively on those that dealt with servitization and sustainability as core themes, while excluding B2C contexts. Papers that did not directly address these topics or lacked a clear connection to negative outcomes, such as rebound effects, were discarded, leaving only studies that described specific adverse impacts of servitization on sustainability. The findings of this study reveal that the effects of servitization on sustainability in B2B markets are more complex than commonly assumed. On one hand, the efficiency gains from servitization can lead to increased demand, resulting in higher resource consumption and emissions, which constitutes a 32 Proceedings of the Spring Servitization Conference SSC2025 Executive Paper rebound effect. On the other hand, internal organizational resistance emerges as a key challenge, with employees potentially opposing servitization due to fears of job displacement or retraining needs. Additionally, regulatory frameworks that are intended to promote sustainability, such as Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) policies, can inadvertently disadvantage service-based models by increasing operational costs and logistical complexities (see Table 1). Rebound Effect Implications for Servitization Future Research Directions Increased Usage and Resource Consumption Greater service efficiency can lead to increased consumer demand, resulting in higher emissions and resource use. Investigate how to manage consumer behavior and demand to mitigate the Jevons Paradox in servitization models. Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) High operational costs and recycling requirements can discourage servitization adoption, favoring product sales. Explore how EPR policies can be adapted to support service-based models while minimizing logistical challenges. Sustainable Servitization Paradox Balancing sustainability goals with profitability can create conflicts that hinder successful servitization. Investigate strategies to overcome the paradox, including capability development for sustainable servitization. Internal Organizational Resistance Employees may resist servitization due to fears of job displacement or retraining requirements. Examine how leadership and organizational culture can facilitate the transition to servitization. Environmental Impact of Digital Infrastructure The environmental footprint of digital technologies (e.g., data centers, IoT) may offset the benefits of servitization. Assess the environmental costs of digital infrastructure and develop strategies to reduce their footprint. Sustainability Assessment Challenges Lack of accurate lifecycle tracking makes it difficult to assess the true sustainability impact of servitization. Develop robust metrics and data governance frameworks for tracking the environmental impact of servitization. KEY DISCUSSION POINTS •This study contributes to the ongoing discourse on sustainable servitization by identifying and categorizing rebound effects in B2B contexts. •It challenges the assumption of servitization as inherently sustainable. •This study open avenues for future research. •By addressing these rebound effects through focused research, scholars can provide valuable insights into how servitization can help to achieve (environmental) sustainability •Results can guide policy makers and practitioners toward more nuanced sustainable (servitization) strategies AUTHOR CONTACT DETAILS Dr.-Ing. Martin Ebel, Ruhr-University Bochum, [email protected] 33 Proceedings of the Spring Servitization Conference SSC2025 Executive Paper feedback to refine their offerings, while customers achieve improved outcomes from digital solutions. Second, we identified five secondary dual-sided capability cycles that occur concurrently with digital solution development. While previous literature often views digital capabilities as cocreated between providers and customers, our research highlights these five cycles as essential for advancing digital healthcare solutions. Third, we propose four principles to enhance the effectiveness of these dual-sided capability cycles. The dual-sided capability cycles and the associated four principles describe behaviours and practices to support digital solution development, which inform practices for advancing digital healthcare solutions. KEY DISCUSSION POINTS 1. Our study aims to contribution to the servitization literature and the broader research on digital capabilities. 2. Our research identifies five cycles as essential for advancing digital healthcare solutions: Embracing design thinking, elaborating together with operational managers, encouraging opinion leaders, empowering hospital owners, and engaging with technical partners. 3. Our study proposes four principles to enhance the effectiveness of the dual-sided capability cycles. 4. A framework is developed to capture and theorise the dual-sided cycles and principles. AUTHOR CONTACT DETAILS Leon Adler Fraunhofer IMW University of Leipzig Carl Zeiss Meditec AG Email: [email protected] Heiko Gebauer Fraunhofer IMW University of St. Gallen Linköping University e-mail: [email protected] Yang Zhao Advanced Services Group Aston Business School Aston University Email: [email protected] Proceedings of the Spring Servitization Conference SSC2025 40 Executive Paper Executive Paper Re-inventing the Manufacturer’s Business Model: The Role of Dynamic Capabilities in Radical re-design of the Manufacturer’s Activity System Tayyab Warraich, Tuomas Huikkola, Marko Kohtamäki RESEARCH MOTIVATION The motivation for this study stems from the growing importance of understanding how manufacturing firms transition into smart solution providers, primarily through the development and application of dynamic capabilities that facilitate business model innovation. Existing literature on product-service systems and servitization highlights a shift among manufacturing firms from delivering standard products and add-on services to offering smart solutions that integrate advanced services. This shift, often framed within the context of digital servitization, refers to the transition from traditional product manufacturing toward smart product-service systems, or smart solutions, which leverage connectivity, data, and artificial intelligence for value creation, delivery, and capture. However, this transformation is not incremental; rather, it requires a fundamental reconfiguration of the firm’s activity system—from a focus on hardware manufacturing to the incorporation of robust service and software development capabilities. The transition to smart solutions is, therefore, complex and demands rapid changes at the level of activity systems, supported by dynamic capabilities that enable innovation in both business models and technological competencies. Despite the growing interest in this area, the existing body of literature provides limited insights into the role of dynamic capabilities in this transformation process. Specifically, prior studies have not adequately addressed how changes in value creation, delivery, and capture activities are connected to the organizational routines required to enact those changes. Furthermore, there is a notable lack of in-depth empirical case studies exploring the microlevel routines that enable the shift from traditional product manufacturing to smart solutions. This study aims to address these gaps by investigating how manufacturing firms can develop and utilize dynamic capabilities to enable the transformation into smart solution providers, thereby contributing to both theoretical understanding and practical application in the field of digital servitization. CONTRIBUTION TO THEORY AND PRACTICE This study contributes to the literature on dynamic capabilities in servitization, specifically digital servitization, by providing empirical insights into the transformation of manufacturing firms into smart solution providers. The first contribution lies in unfolding the activity systems of a product manufacturer and an intelligent solution provider, offering a comparative perspective that highlights the challenges firms face in transitioning their business models from hardware and products, referred to as product logic, toward services and software, referred to as service logic. This transition is argued to be far beyond incremental innovation in the business model, as incremental change is not sufficient. Rather, manufacturers must engage in radical innovation, requiring dynamic capabilities that enable both radical and incremental innovation, although the latter alone is inadequate to complete the transformation. The second and primary theoretical contribution is the unpacking of the routines essential for a successful transition, emphasizing the capacity to visualize future capabilities, the capacity to understand the changes required within the value creation, delivery, and capture model, and the capacity to reconfigure the business model and culture for the adoption of smart solutions. In doing so, the study extends existing discussions about the role of dynamic capabilities in digital servitization, which traditionally emphasize the incremental development of business models, by focusing on the radical change required to shift toward smart solution business models. Proceedings of the Spring Servitization Conference SSC2025 41 Executive Paper From a practical perspective, the study offers valuable insights for managers by highlighting two primary considerations: the distinction between current and future activity systems and the dynamic capabilities necessary for transforming the activity system. The empirical case and conclusions suggest that a firm’s future activity system often diverges significantly from its current or past activity system, and due to strong dependence on the latter, the transformation process is often hindered by organizational inertia. This is reflected in concepts such as path dependency, rigidity, and learning traps. Accordingly, firms must invest heavily in changing their value systems and developing the necessary dynamic capabilities and routines to overcome these challenges. The study reveals that specific practices and resources must be in place to develop these dynamic capabilities, which are ultimately essential for enabling radical innovation and transitioning from product manufacturing to smart solutions. KEY DISCUSSION POINTS •This study explores the evolution of manufacturers into smart solution providers, emphasizing the role of dynamic capabilities in anticipating and capitalizing on business model innovation. •Smart solution business model transformation represents a complex and longitudinal process. For this reason, we employed a longitudinal, in-depth single-case study method to dynamic capabilities that help a manufacturer to convert their product-focused capabilities and activities into capabilities and activities possessed by a smart solution provider •Results highlight that the transition from product manufacturing to smart solutions requires radical, not incremental, business model innovation. •The study identifies three critical capabilities for transition: The capacity to visualize the future capability, 2) the capacity to understand what types of changes are needed within the value creation, delivery, and capture model, and 3) the Capacity to reconfigure the business model and culture for smart solutions. •The findings highlight the role of visualization, sensemaking, and transforming in radical product manufacturer’s transition. •For managers, our study provides a framework that helps identify, manage, and adjust a firm’s capabilities and activities to steer the firm toward smart solutions. AUTHOR CONTACT DETAILS Tayyab Ahmad Warraich, University of Vaasa, Finland, [email protected]. Tuomas Huikkola, University of Vaasa, Finland. [email protected]. Marko Kohtamäki, University of Vaasa, Finland & Luleå University of Technology, Sweden, [email protected]. 42 Proceedings of the Spring Servitization Conference SSC2025 Executive Paper Culture and Mindset Transformation in Servitization: A Systematic Literature Review Dan Andrews, Mohammed Khan, Asif Majid, Matt Anderson RESEARCH MOTIVATION When transitioning from supplying outputs to offering outcomes, the firm undergoes substantial changes in its operations (Baines et al., 2024). While such changes have been covered extensively, and continue to be of interest to researchers, the organisational mindset (e.g. opinions, decisions, justifications) and culture (e.g. structures, rituals, norms) of the firm are also recognised as being key aspects of the change (Huikkola et al., 2022). Yet, despite this recognition of their fundamental importance, the terms culture and mindset are seldom defined, oftentimes used interchangeably, and rarely the focus of work on servitization. Recent research has begun to address the concepts of culture and mindset in the context of servitization specifically (Biesinger et al., 2024; Nuutinen and Lappalainen, 2012). However, a general assumption about the nature of productand service-oriented cultures and mindsets lingers. On the one hand, it is regularly stated that there are fundamental differences between the cultures and mindsets of organisations that deliver outputs (products) versus those that deliver outcomes (services). On the other hand, at the level of abstraction discussed, many of the criteria associated with output-oriented cultures can also be said to apply to high-performing outcome-oriented cultures as well, and vice-versa, such as their relationships with customers and strategic partners. The aim of this research is to resolve the resultant confusion amongst both academics and practitioners about the nature of culture and mindset in servitization and outcome-based business models. To achieve this, an agenda for future research is propsoed that helps identify 1) the differences between the culture and mindset of effective output-oriented firms and outcomeoriented firms, and 2) the transformation mechanisms between one and the other. This agenda is formed by means of a systematic literature review to uncover and analyse the current research trends and discussions around mindset and culture in the context of servitization. CONTRIBUTION TO THEORY AND PRACTICE The paper proposes a novel framework based on a synthesis of competing values, mindset and capabilities frameworks, previously applied in traditional manufacturing contexts (Prajogo and McDermott, 2011) and in the context of the manufacturing firm adopting smart services (Töytäri et al., 2018). This synthesis is created to address the paradox discussed above: though the servitization literature stresses that a service-oriented culture and mindset is distinct from that of product-oriented manufacturing firms, the characteristics discussed can often be applied to both productand service-oriented firms. Examples of such characteristics include multidisciplinary collaboration internally and externally, closeness with the customer, and the design of solutions based on relationships with the customer. On the other hand, traditional characteristics associated with product-oriented firms, such as a silo mentality and distinction between roles, responsibilities and skillsets of units and individuals, are also recognised as being important for the efficiency and effectiveness of the manufacturing firm in either productor service-oriented contexts (Vargo and Lusch, 2008). The competing values framework (CVF) can be applied to this apparent contradiction, as it accommodates the contrasting cultural dynamics within individual organisations. CVF has already been used to understand the balances between different cultural dimensions in various applications of traditional manufacturers (Prajogo and McDermott, 2011). In the context of the Proceedings of the Spring Servitization Conference SSC2025 43 Executive Paper servitizing manufacturer, however, it has yet to be used in a way that helps identify the similarities and distinctions between the old and the new culture and mindset. Recent research into the balancing of mindset and capabilities begins to address this gap, as it acknowledges the added complexity of changes required in the customer’s mindset for servitization to be successful (Töytäri et al., 2018). For instance, although a manufacturer can be considered customer-oriented if it has a close and ongoing relationship with the customer, it remains product-oriented if the focal point of discussions, requirements and specifications is the product. For servitization to be successful, the customer would need to accommodate a shift in such discussions, as well as the manufacturer. Again, this requires a mindset and culture change that balances the old (relationships) with the new (outcomes). When discussing the distinctions and transformation mechanisms between different organisational cultures and mindsets, the literature neglects to address this balance between the old and the new, and thus does not articulate the specific similarities and differences. This understanding is essential to help practitioners identify the requirements of successful culture and mindset transformation in servitization and currently eludes the research community. Our approach to understand these similarities and differences is to 1) conduct a systematic literature review of the extant research that discusses organisational culture and mindset in the context of servitization, 2) identify existing examples of product/outputand service/outcomeoriented cultures and mindsets, and the transformation mechanisms to shift from one culture and/or mindset to another, and 3) to map the criteria against the synthesis of the frameworks described above. Our findings show that there are a range of distinctions and criteria for transformation between the culture and mindset of outputand outcome-oriented firms that have been identified. However, there is much literature that fails to adequately express the distinctions, as the discussions are too abstract. From this it is argued that, while there are promising avenues of enquiry, there are problems in existing approaches which stem from the assumed, broad distinctions between productand service-oriented cultures and mindsets. Our concluding agenda proposes that future work should 1) validate identified distinctions and transformation mechanisms through empirical research, and 2) identify more specific distinctions and transformation mechanisms through more rigorous research into phenomena that are currently expressed at an abstract level. KEY DISCUSSION POINTS •The servitization literature frequently cites organisational culture and mindset as being important factors in transformation, without fully articulating how they differ or what this means •The literature often articulates the differences between productand service-oriented cultures and mindsets at a level of abstraction that does not fully explain the distinctions •In analysing the literature, emergent themes are identified, and some are better explored than others •A future research agenda is proposed based on identified distinctions and transformation mechanisms and more specific distinctions and transformation mechanisms AUTHOR CONTACT DETAILS Dan Andrews, Advanced Services Group, Aston Business School, [email protected] Mohammed Khan, Cranfield School of Management, [email protected] Asif Majid, Sheffield Business School, [email protected] Matthew Anderson, Independent Researcher, [email protected] 44 Proceedings of the Spring Servitization Conference SSC2025 Executive Paper Proceedings of the Spring Servitization Conference SSC2025 SUCCESSFULLY SELLING SERVITIZED SOLUTIONS: Judy Zolkiewski, Vicky Story, Jamie Burton RESEARCH MOTIVATION The majority of servitization research has been at a strategic or organizational level, focussing, for example, on investigating the capabilities and changes in processes and mindsets needed for success. There is also extensive discussion about how to develop advanced services, digital servitization and solutions, along with growing recognition that servitization often cannot be achieved by a single organization, rather, an ecosystem is necessary. Much less attention is given to how such a manufacturer sells solutions and smart services and what new sales processes, capabilities, skills and mindsets are needed to facilitate this, including how solutions are sold in service ecosystems. However, successfully selling services to meet sales targets and build long-term, profitable business relationships is a fundamental challenge for most servitizing firms. This is because not enough is known about the behaviours, actions and attributes that are associated with the goal of securing advanced service sales that build long-term relationships with profitable customers. In particular, salespeople play an important role, as boundary spanners managing the supplier-customer interface, and making solutions happen. Thus, we argue that understanding the challenges of selling servitized solutions and smart services warrants greater attention. In industrial markets, personal selling is important, and relational selling is considered the norm, especially for services. Value, and outcome/solution focused value-based selling is at the heart of this selling process. Sales in servitized ecosystems, with their multi-actor setup, makes this process even more complex. Additionally, integration of innovative digital technologies and development of new digital platforms within ecosystems, sometimes by emergent intermediaries is also impacting sales processes. However, currently there is limited understanding of how to sell advanced services and managers need a more integrated set of guidance to ensure that they can maximise the illustration and communication of a credible set of value benefits that can be accrued from the introduction of advanced service solutions. Thus, our research question is: What is the current state of knowledge relating to selling servitized solutions? We conducted a systematic literature review to examine extant knowledge by searching for all articles that including sell*, or sale*, or account management or business development, and servitiz*, or servitis*, solution* or service infusion or services, with a timeframe of 1988-February 2025, as the term servitization was defined by Vandemerwe and Rada in 1988. These were manually reviewed to ensure relevance to selling servitized solutions as well as only being included if the article was written in English and published in a peer-reviewed journal where the fully published version was retrievable. Findings were synthesized through thematic analysis. CONTRIBUTION TO THEORY AND PRACTICE A SLR allows us to build a more comprehensive understanding of extant knowledge in this area of study, helping us to identify, select, and synthesise domain literature in a rigorous, transparent, and unbiased way. In answering our research question, we aim to add value to current understanding of selling servitized solutions and smart services by synthesizing and surfacing the most important selling competences, processes and activities that support successful selling of advanced service solutions and offer recommendations for future research. Managerially, we aim to offer real-world implications, particularly in terms of identifying and understanding the key challenges to and consequences of, different selling approaches and activities. 45 Executive Paper Proceedings of the Spring Servitization Conference SSC2025 KEY DISCUSSION POINTS Our results provide a more structured understanding of how servitized solutions and smart services can be sold. Barriers/Challenges include both organizational resource and capability deficiencies, such as a lack of salespeople capable of selling services, and technology-related barriers, such as issues around the digital interface, automation processes, and the use of AI. Competences, processes and activities include: oThe capacity to effectively communicate the value of a servitized offering – particularly when the service might be abstract or vague, where customer specifications are illdefined, or where benefits are harder to evidence in advance. oThe ability to identify the right customers to sell to– being able to identify and respond to a customer’s readiness for service solutions. oThe importance of salespeople’s qualities and attributes, such as motivation, empathy, ambidexterity, responsiveness, trustworthiness, and proactivity, are relatively well understood, but for servitizing firms, where the opportunity is often vague, a salesperson’s ability to be able to identify and recognise customers’ value opportunities, is a key competence. oWork also explores how firms might best motivate their sales force and effectively engage sales staff in the transformation process from product selling to solution selling, especially where technical knowledge is still important; suggesting that a learning orientation is also an important salesperson quality in this context. oSome competences might also have a dark side. Analysis is on-going, especially on consequences and preliminary results will be presented at the conference. AUTHOR CONTACT DETAILS Judy Zolkiewski, Alliance Manchester Business School, The University of Manchester, UK, [email protected] Vicky Story, Loughborough Business School, Loughborough University, UK, [email protected] Jamie Burton, Alliance Manchester Business School, The University of Manchester, UK, [email protected] 46 Executive Paper Servitizing in a Global Network: Contingencies and Configurations of Industrial Service Ecosystems Timon Urs Knapp, Kathrin Nauth RESEARCH MOTIVATION Servitization fundamentally transforms how manufacturers create and capture value by shifting from product-based to service-based offerings (Oliva & Kallenberg 2003). Much research has focused on servitization at the firm level (Baines et al. 2017; Kowalkowski et al. 2015), however manufacturers rarely operate in isolation. Instead, servitization unfolds within dense, interdependent networks of suppliers, distributors, service partners, and customers, all of whom influence how servitization unfolds (Reim et al. 2019). This ecosystem perspective is crucial because servitization success depends not only on internal transformation but also on external alignment – ensuring that ecosystem actors adopt, support, and co-create value within the new service-driven logic (Kohtamäki et al. 2019a). The challenge is further magnified when servitization is implemented at an international scale. Servitization research highlights required capabilities and structural shifts (Coreynen et al. 2017), whereas internationalization research emphasizes market entry strategies, liability of foreignness, and global integration-responsiveness dilemmas (Bartlett and Ghoshal 1989). Combining these perspectives, recent contributions (Shleha et al. 2023) argue that successful international servitization depends on a firm’s ability to align its strategy with the contextual contingencies of foreign markets. This aligns with contingency theory, which posits that the effectiveness of establishing organizational structures and strategies depends on how well they adapt to exogenous and endogenous factors (Donaldson 2001). The adaption process of firms is not linear, servitization unfolds in a dynamic and interdependent manner. Hence, a configurational perspective, which considers how multiple interrelated factors combine to drive performance (Fiss 2011), is needed to capture the causal complexity of international servitization. To address this gap, we ask the following research question: How can manufacturers successfully implement service-based offerings across a global, multi-actor network? Our study employs a two-phase research design. In Phase 1, we conducted an in-depth case study of a manufacturer operating within a global, multi-actor service network, consisting of both local subsidiaries and partners. All partners interviewed in this study acted as integrated distributors and service partners in their respective countries. In these countries, the firm does not own any subsidiaries. In Phase 2, we apply qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) to examine how these factors combine into distinct configurations that enable successful international servitization within ecosystems. This research design allows us to go beyond isolated success factors and uncover the complex interactions shaping international servitization pathways. At the current stage, Phase 1 has been completed and another round of data collection to improve the empirical basis for Phase 2 is underway. CONTRIBUTION TO THEORY AND PRACTICE Preliminary findings reveal five categories of contingency factors – processes, strategy, organization, technology, and market – that influence the international implementation of service-based offerings across the ecosystem. Each category encompasses 2–3 specific factors, which are divided between firm-level and local-level contingencies (s. Appendix A). The findings from Phase 1 suggest that successful international servitization depends not only on a firm’s internal capabilities but also on its ability to orchestrate and align its partners across Proceedings of the Spring Servitization Conference SSC2025 47 Executive Paper different market environments. Some ecosystem actors can be managed through centralized control over service implementation, while others require adaptive governance mechanisms with different incentives and service readiness levels. Our key contribution to servitization research is twofold: First, we extend contingency-based perspectives on servitization (Reim et al. 2019) by demonstrating that servitization success depends on both firm-level and local-level contingencies. A key insight is that the extent to which a manufacturer can standardize service offerings across international markets is shaped by its control over the service ecosystem – subsidiaries can be managed through strict standards, while partners must co-evolve with the focal firm. Second, by applying configurational theory, we contribute to a growing stream of research using set-theoretic methods to analyze servitization (Salonen et al. 2021). Rather than assuming one ideal way to implement servitization, our study suggests that multiple viable configurations exist, depending on how ecosystem conditions interact, creating an understanding of causal complexity between contingencies on firm-level and local-level. For practitioners, our study provides a structured way to assess and navigate the challenges of international servitization. By mapping ecosystem contingencies and their interdependencies, firms can make more informed strategic decisions about conceptualizing service offerings across different ecosystems, engaging and incentivizing partners to align with a global servitization strategy, and governance mechanisms to ensure value co-creation and service delivery quality. As our QCA progresses in Phase 2, we will generate empirical evidence on which ecosystem constellations lead to successful international servitization, providing actionable insights for firms seeking to scale servitization globally. KEY DISCUSSION POINTS •QCA provides a more nuanced understanding of international servitization than traditional variance-based approaches. Future studies should further explore its applicability in servitization research and its integration with contingency theory. •While most servitization research focuses on OEMs and end customers, distributors and service partners act as key gatekeepers (Reim et al. 2019). Future research should examine how these actors influence servitization feasibility and how OEMs can better align them with new service models. •Data sharing and interoperability of digital systems are crucial for servitization at scale, yet many networks lack sufficient IT infrastructure. Future research should investigate how firms can overcome data silos and create shared digital platforms for ecosystem-wide servitization (Kohtamäki et al. 2019b). •Not every process can be tightly controlled within an OEM’s network. However, our findings suggest that centralized control is not always superior – successful international servitization depends on the fit between governance structures and ecosystem characteristics (Kohtamäki et al. 2019a). •While this study adopts the OEM’s perspective, the interdependence of ecosystem contingencies suggests that foreign service ecosystems may, in turn, shape OEMs’ overall servitization strategies. Future research should explore how embedding in diverse ecosystems influences servitization pathways (Vendrell-Herrero et al. 2021). AUTHOR CONTACT DETAILS Timon Urs Knapp (M.Sc.), Chair for Industrial Sales and Service Engineering, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, [email protected] Kathrin Nauth (M.Sc.), Chair for Industrial Sales and Service Engineering, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, [email protected] Proceedings of the Spring Servitization Conference SSC2025 48 APPENDIX A Processes Organisation Strategy Technology Market Firmlevel Central mechanisms for process control Interlinkage between product and service functions Hierarchical levels Communication routines within the network Strategy documentation Execution of strategy workshops and trainings Duration and interorganizational integration of R&D processes Locallevel Standardization of local processes Process documentation Structure of local service function and interlinkage with product functions Strategic literacy and commitment Technological advancement in the market Intensity of technology usage Reliable APIs for data exchange Market position compared to local competition Local customer structure Cultural circumstances Table 1: Contingencies 49 Proceedings of the Spring Servitization Conference SSC2025 Executive Paper 56