Co-creation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Co-creation is a management initiative, or form of economic strategy, that brings different parties together (for instance, a company and a group of customers), in order to jointly produce a mutually valued outcome.[1] Co-creation brings the unique blend of ideas from direct customers or viewers (who are not the direct users of the product) which in turn gives a plethora of new ideas to the organization.

Co-created value arises in the form of personalized, unique experiences for the customer (value-in-use) and ongoing revenue, learning and enhanced market performance drivers for the firm (loyalty, relationships, customer word of mouth). Value is co-created with customers if and when a customer is able to personalize his or her experience using a firm's product-service proposition – in the lifetime of its use – to a level that is best suited to get his or her job(s) or tasks done and which allows the firm to derive greater value from its product-service investment in the form of new knowledge, higher revenues/profitability and/or superior brand value/loyalty.[2]

Scholars C. K. Prahalad and Venkat Ramaswamy popularized the concept in their 2000 Harvard Business Review article, "Co-Opting Customer Competence".[3] They developed their arguments further in their book, published by the Harvard Business School Press, The Future of Competition, where they offered examples including Napster and Netflix showing that customers would no longer be satisfied with making yes or no decisions on what a company offers.[4]

Within the study of Prahalad and Ramaswamy,[5] they defined co-creation as “The joint creation of value by the company and the customer; allowing the customer to co-construct the service experience to suit their context” (Prahalad and Ramaswamy, 2004, p. 8).

The process of Co-creation

The process of co-creation essentially involves 2 core steps:

  1. Contribution: Submission of contributions by the public to the firm
  2. Selection: Selection of the most promising and appealing contributions/submissions

Types of Co-creation

Depending on the degree of control exercised by the firm/public over the contribution and selection activities, co-creation may be broadly classified into 4 categories:

  1. Tinkering: Public exercises control over the contribution activity while the firm exercises control over the selection activity
  2. Submitting: Firm exercises complete control over both the activities
  3. Co-designing: Firm exercises control over the contribution activity while the public exercises control over the selection activity
  4. Collaborating: Public exercises complete control over both the activities

Tinkering

Tinkering is a customer co-creation model that involves procurement of contributions from the public by the firm, a comprehensive and scrupulous examination of the contributions, selection of the most promising and enterprising contributions by the firm and finally implementation of the contributions.For example, Little Big Planet, a puzzle platform video game by Sony Interactive Entertainment allows the gamers to create their own levels in the game.The created levels can then be shared with other gamers or submitted to Sony. Owing to this "Create and Share" feature, this game has the tagline 'Play, Create, Share'.The most promising contributions are incorporated into the final game and the contributors are rewarded.

Submitting

In the case of submitting, the firm exercises control over the contribution activity by placing constraints on the basic design, contribution size etc. and also the selection activity by selecting the winning contributions.

Co-designing

Co-designing involves placement of constraints by the firm on the contribution activity and selection of the winning contributions by the contributors themselves, for example, Local Motors employs the co-designing model of customer co-creation to develop its vehicles.In 2010, Local Motors developed a car named Rally Fighter in a record 18 months, which is about 5 times faster than what a conventional car manufacturing process takes.By empowering a community of over 2000 designers to submit their designs while still placing some constraints on the basic design, color schemes etc., Local Motors effectively utilized the co-designing model of customer co-creation.The winning designing (By Sangho Kim) was chosen as the winning design by the designer community through voting.

An interesting bit of trivia about Local Motors is that it doesn't even have a design team. All the designing is done by the public itself.

Threadless, one of the leading T-shirt manufacturing brands in America also employs co-designing.

Collaborating

Also known as open sourcing, collaborating involves releasing the source code of the product and making it accessible to the general public.The released source code is then open to modification as per the requirement of the users. Examples like, Mozilla Firefox, Apache and Linux are all based on collaborating.

The Art of Co-creation

The traditional company-centric view says: (1) the consumer is outside the domain of the value chain; (2) the enterprise controls where, when, and how value is added in the value chain; (3) value is created in a series of activities controlled by the enterprise before the point of purchase; (4) there is a single point of exchange where value is extracted from the customer for the enterprise. The consumer-centric view says: (1) the consumer is integral part of the system for value creation; (2)the consumer can influence where, when, and how value is generated; (3) the consumer need not respect industry boundaries in the search for value; (4) the consumer can compete with companies for value extraction; (5) there are multiple points of exchange where the consumer and the company can co-create value. In the customer-centric mass production and marketing of automobiles, for example, suppliers provide raw materials, components, subcomponents, and systems to manufacturers, who create value by assembling these inputs into vehicles. Consumers actively decide what vehicle to buy, but companies decide what their choices will be. Cars are sold by dealers acting as intermediaries for the automakers, for companies reliant on this scenario, value creation is defined solely by extracting profit from end consumers. The Saturn Corporation, billing itself as “a different kind of car company,” has spurned the industry’s traditional ways; in 1985, when the General Motors Corporation launched Saturn, it didn’t just start a new car company, it created a “community.” Saturn works with its customers in the design, manufacturing, and sales processes, and it engages Saturn owners to help continuously innovate and improve its cars. Consumers think about the place of a car in their life — how it fits their budget, their desire for comfort, their need for peace of mind, their aesthetics. Companies think about their competitive strategy and their operations — engineering, differentiation, logistics, pricing, and, above all, revenue and profit, although these views of value do clash, they’re not irreconcilable. Saturn is a company trying to merge these two ways of looking at value; in the pages that follow, we present a framework — a new value creation paradigm — to suggest how companies can better understand the consumer’s view of value and productively work with them to co-create more satisfying value for both sides.[6]

The four building blocks of interaction[edit]

Prahalad and Ramaswamy[7] suggested that in order to apply co-creation, the following fundamental requirements should be prepared in advance.

Terms Definition Managerial Implication
Dialogue Interaction between customer Two-way connection instead of one-way selling strategy
Access Allow customer to access the data Create value with customer; beyond traditional value chain process
Risk-benefit To monitor risk and gaps between customer and firm Share the risk of product development with guest through communication (In later work of Ramaswamy,[8] this is replaced by "reflexivity")
Transparency Information among business is accessible Information barriers should be eliminated to certain degree in order to gain trust from guest

From co-production[edit]

In their review of the literature on "customer participation in production", Neeli Bendapudi and Robert P. Leone found that the first academic work dates back to 1979.[9]

From 1990 onwards, new themes are emerging: John Czepiel suggests that customer's participation may lead to greater customer's satisfaction.[10] Scott Kelley, James Donnelly and Steven J. Skinner are dealing with productivity but suggest other ways to look at customer participation: quality, employee's performance, and emotional responses.[11]

Although not reviewed by Bendapuli and Leone, the groundbreaking article by R. Normann and R. Ramirez suggests that successful companies do not focus on themselves or even on the industry but on the value-creating system.[12]

Michel, Vargo and Lusch recognize the influence of Normann on their own work and acknowledge similarity between the concepts of co-production and co-creation: "his customer co-production mirrors the similar concept found in FP6",[13] the authors suggest that Normann enriched the S-D Logic particularly through his idea of "density" of offerings.

In a letter sent to the editor of the Harvard Business Review in reaction to an article by Pine, Peppers and Roger ("Do you want to keep your customers forever"), Michael Schrage argues that not all customers are alike in their capacity to bring some kind of knowledge to the firm.[14]

Wikström sees the role of consumers changing.[15]

Firat, Fuat, Dholakia, and Venkatesh introduced the concept of customerization (which is a buyer-centric evolution of the mass-customization process) and stated that it enables consumers to serve as "the co-producer of the product and service offering".[16] However, Bendapudi and Leone (2003) concluded in an empirical paper that "the assumption of greater customization under co-production may hold only when the customer has the expertise to craft a good or service to his or her liking".[9]

At the turn of the century, Prahalad and Ramaswamy (2000) produced another important piece of work and built further on Normann and Ramirez's ideas.[3]

In 2004, Prahalad and Ramaswamy kept working on their original idea published four years earlier,[17] at the same time, Vargo and Lush (2004) published on the service-dominant logic of marketing. The process of value creation is dealt with in FP6. Opposing the goods-dominant logic and the service-dominant logic, the authors state: "the customer is always a coproducer". FP6 will be later (Vargo and Lush, 2006) altered in "the customer is always a co-creator".

Prahalad commented in an issue of the Journal of Marketing on Vargo and Lusch's FP6 and found that the authors did not go far enough.[18]

In the same book, Kalaignanam and Varadarajan (2006) also follow Prahalad's comments and elaborate on the IT implications on coproduction, as the authors put it "developments in information technology [...] enable customers to create value by collaborating with the firm". The main contribution of the authors in this article is a conceptual model of the intensity of customer participation as function of product characteristics, market and customer characteristics, firm characteristics; in their conclusions and directions for future research the authors deal with three promising topics. First they propose to study supply-side issues and how increasing communication, participation from the customers and the emergence of communities enable customers to interact between them, sometimes leading to new creations. Second they see the "locus of innovation" as of interest and in particular how the shift of firm-centric networks to user-centric networks can lead to increased innovation capabilities. Third they wonder whether demand-side issues may not result in negative consequences on satisfaction, the third issue is already mentioned by Bendapuli and Leone: "A customer who believes he or she has the expertise and chooses to co-produce may be more likely to make self-attributions for success and failure than a customer who lacks the expertise. A customer who lacks the expertise but feels forced to co-produce [...] may make more negative attributions about co-production".[9]

Early applications[edit]

In the early 2000s, consultants and companies deployed co-creation as a tool for engaging customers in product design. Examples include Nike giving customers online tools to design their own sneakers, at a MacWorld conference in 2007, Sam Lucente, the legendary design and innovation guru at Hewlett-Packard, described his epiphany that designers can no longer design products alone, using their brilliance and magic. They are no longer in the business of product and service design, he stated; they are really in the business of customer co-creation.[19]

During the mid-2000s, co-creation became a driving concept in social media and marketing techniques, where companies such as Converse persuaded large numbers of its most passionate customers to create their own video advertisements for the product, the Web 2.0 phenomenon encompassed many forms of co-creation marketing, as social and consumer communities became "ambassadors", "buzz agents", "smart mobs", and "participants" transforming the product experience. Other examples of co-creation can be found in arts.[20]

Digital era: types of customer co-creation[edit]

Types of co-creation

According to recent research conducted by Aric Rindfleisch and his former doctoral student, Matt O'Hearn, customer co-creation was categorized into four different types based on a two-by-two matrix, it was based on two key steps in the customer co-creation process.The X axis had the contribution step towards the idea creation/suggestion.The Y-axis had the selection step for the proposed ideas. And each of this axis had both a high and a low degree of customer control over each process. Under contribution, the first box was fixed, which means that the customer has very little control over the contribution process and the firm will fix the types of contribution that it wants, on selection, under the firm-led process, it was largely the firm that does the selection activity and the firm pick the winning submissions. In the customer-led category, the firm relies more on the customers to select the winning submissions.

Thus defining the four types of customer co-creation as below:

  1. Submission – This section has the least contribution in terms of idea submission by the customer and holds a high degree of firm-led selection in the limited ideas proposed by the customer.
  2. Tinkering – a unique type of co-creation where the customer comes up with a variety of ideas for the organization, whereas the selection is defined by multiple parameters of the firm. In tinkering, the firm usually releases a final product (e.g. Little Big Planet video games by Sony). Although the users create the platform, the firm decides which ones get published and distributed.
  3. Collaborative – a mix of leveraging both the firm and users to conclude with the final idea. The customer has full liberty to suggest and select the idea along with the combined efforts of the firm. E.g. Apache Server is a completely open source tool available on the web for all customers.
  4. Co-designing – the customer approach to select the limited ideas given by the customers. Any community forum where customers have to give ideas into defined areas e.g. for the website of any company etc., whereas the final idea is selected by the community forum by liking/disliking the proposed idea. e.g. Threadless-where customer designs the T-shirt with his own innovation and idea, whereas the firm restricts the customer to design only T-shirts and the final selection is done by the firm itself, but customers have a strong voice in selecting contributions that move forward.

Corporate management[edit]

During the mid-2000s, these innovations in customer engagement and collaboration expanded and morphed into global economic trends including the co-created development of products and services. Authors published bestselling books developing theories influenced by "co-creation" and customer collaboration. Major concepts included crowdsourcing, coined by Jeff Howe in a June 2006 Wired magazine article,[21] open innovation, promoted by Henry Chesbrough,[22] a professor and executive director at the Garwood Center for Corporate Innovation at Berkeley, and consultant Don Tapscott's and Anthony D. Williams's Wikinomics: How Mass Collaboration Changes Everything,[23] a book that popularized the concept of corporations using mass collaboration and open source innovation.

Of this rapid morphing of co-creation, Ramaswamy and his co-author Francis Gouillart wrote: "Through their interactions with thousands of managers globally who had begun experimenting with co-creation, they discovered that enterprises were building platforms that engaged not only the firm and its customers but also the entire network of suppliers, partners, and employees, in a continuous development of new experiences with individuals."[24]

The rise of customer co-creation[edit]

The rise of co-creation could be attributed to three distinct issues as suggested by O'hern & Rindfleisch (2010).[25]

  • The information asymmetry between customer demands and manufacturer capability
  • Customer empowerment
  • The advent and widespread application of digital technology

Process[edit]

Successful co-creation requires two key steps.[25]

The contribution of ideas: A firm must convince its customers to submit their ideas (i.e., to contribute). However, receiving contribution is actually quite hard because most customers are quite busy and hardly care about the company's call. Unless customers are incentivized in an attractive way they are reluctant to participate and benefit the company, as a result, most co-creation efforts fail because they don't get many submissions.

Selecting the viable ideas: After receiving the contributions, the firm must then select the most profitable, viable and implementable ones, the challenge of the selection process is that most submissions are not very useful, impractical and difficult to implement. Firms have to deal the submitted ideas in a very subtle way as throughout the process they don't want to reject customer submissions and risk of alienating them which may eventually lead to customer disengagement.

Challenges[edit]

Although co-creation is an excellent activity to gather unique and various ideas from the customers, but it brings a lot of challenges onto the table such as:

  1. Pareto principle-Selection of the ideas from multiple redundant ideas submitted. Only 20% of the submitted ideas out of the all holds value for any firm
  2. Risk in losing out on the brand image – if the ideas highlight more on the negative scenarios of the firm's products or services.

See also[edit]

References[edit]

  1. ^ Prahalad, C.K.; Ramaswamy, V. (2004) "Co-Creation Experiences: The Next Practice in Value Creation". Journal of Interactive Marketing. Volume 18, Number 3.
  2. ^ Wim Rampen - My Personal Definition of Business with Customer Value Co-Creation and comments by Chris Lawer.
  3. ^ a b Prahalad, C.K.; Ramaswamy, V. (January–February 2000) "Co-Opting Customer Competence". Harvard Business Review.
  4. ^ Prahalad, C.K.; Ramaswamy, Venkat (2004) The Future of Competition. Harvard Business School Press. ISBN 1-57851-953-5.
  5. ^ Prahalad, C. K (2004). "The Future of Competition: Co-Creating Unique Value With Customers". Harvard business school press. 
  6. ^ Prahalad, C.K.; Ramaswamy, V. (2009) "Co-Creation Connection".
  7. ^ Prahalad, K. C.; Ramaswamy, V (2004). The Future of Competition: Co-creating Unique Value with Customers. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. 
  8. ^ Ramaswamy, Venkat; Ozcan, Kerimcan (2014). "The co-creation paradigm". Stanford University Press. Retrieved 28 May 2017. 
  9. ^ a b c Bendapudi, Neeli; Leone, Robert P. (January 2003). "Psychological Implications of Customer Participation in Co-Production" Journal of Marketing. Vol. 67, No. 1.
  10. ^ Czepiel, John A. (1990), "Service Encounters and Service Relationships: Implications for Research". Journal of Business Research. 20 (1), 13-21.
  11. ^ Kelley, Scott W.; Donnelly Jr., James H.; Skinner, Steven J. (1990), "Customer Participation in Service Production and Delivery". Journal of Retailing. 66 (3), 315–35.
  12. ^ Normann, R.; Ramirez, R. (July–August 1993) "From Value Chain to Value Constellation: Designing Interactive Strategy". Harvard Business Review. pp. 65–77.
  13. ^ Michel, S.; Vargo, S. L.; Lusch, R. F. (2008). "Reconfiguration of the Conceptual Landscape: A Tribute to the Service Logic of Richard Normann". Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science. 36:152–155.
  14. ^ Schrage, M. (July–August 1995). "Customer Relations". Harvard Business Review. pp. 154–156.
  15. ^ Wikström, S. (1996). "Value Creation by Company-Consumer Interaction". Journal of Marketing Management. 12, 359–374.
  16. ^ Firat, A. Fuat; Dholakia, Nikhilesh; Venkatesh, Alladi (1995). "Liberatory Postmodernism and the Reenchantment of Consumption". Journal of Consumer Research, 22 (3), 239–67.
  17. ^ Prahalad, C.K.; Ramaswamy, V. (2004) "Co-Creation Experiences: The Next Practice In Value Creation". Journal of Interactive Marketing. Volume 18; Number 3.
  18. ^ Prahalad, C.K. (January 2004). "The Cocreation of Value in 'Invited Commentaries' on 'Evolving to a New Dominant Logic for Marketing'". Journal of Marketing. Vol. 68. pp. 18–27.
  19. ^ "Nussbaum on Design". BusinessWeek.
  20. ^ Chaney, D. (2012). The Music Industry in the Digital Age: Consumer Participation in Value Creation. International Journal of Arts Management, 15(1), 42-52.
  21. ^ Howe, Jeff (June 2006). "The Rise of Crowdsourcing". Wired . Retrieved March 17, 2007.
  22. ^ Chesbrough, H.W. (2003). Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
  23. ^ Tapscott, Don; Williams, Anthony D. (2006, 2008). Wikinomics: How Mass Collaboration Changes Everything. Portfolio.
  24. ^ Ramaswamy, Venkat; Gouillart, Francis (2010). The Power of Co-Creation: Build It with Them To Boost Growth, Productivity, and Profits. Free Press.
  25. ^ a b O'hern, M., & Rindfleisch, A. (2010). Customer co-creation. Review of marketing research, 84-116.

Further reading[edit]

  • Aric Rindfleisch ; Matt O'Hearn (2008) ."Customer Co‐creation: A Typology and Research Agenda" Working Paper 4 publications on ResearchGate
  • Andersson, P.; Rosenqvist, C. (2007). "Mobile Innovations in Healthcare: Customer Involvement and the Co-Creation of Value". International Journal of Mobile Communications. Volume 5, No. 4.
  • Auh, S.; et al. (2007). "Co-Production and Customer Loyalty in Financial Services". Journal of Retailing. Volume 83, Issue 3. pp. 359–370.
  • Ballantyne, D. (2004). "Dialogue and Its Role in the Development of Relationship Specific Knowledge". Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing. Volume 19, Issue 2. p. 114.
  • Becker, Gary (September 1965). "A Theory of the Allocation of Time". The Economic Journal. Volume LXXV, Issue 299. pp. 493–517.
  • Bilgram, V.; Brem, A.; Voigt, K.I. (2008). "User-Centric Innovations in New Product Development – Systematic Identification of Lead Users Harnessing Interactive and Collaborative Online-Tools". International Journal of Innovation Management. Volume 12, No. 3. pp. 419–458.
  • Diwon, D. (1990). "Marketing as Production: The Development of a Concept". Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science. Volume 18, Number 4. pp. 337–343.
  • Edvardsson, B.; Enquist B.; Johnston, R. (2005). "Cocreating Customer Value through Hyperreality in the Prepurchase Service Experience". Journal of Service Research. Volume X, Number X, Month 2003 1-.
  • Firat, F.A.; Venkatesh, A. (December 1995) "Liberatory Postmodernism and the Reenchantment of Consumption". Journal of Consumer Research. Volume 22, Number 3. pp. 239–267.
  • Fodness, Dale; Pitegoftf, Barry E.; Sautter, Elise Truly (1993), "From Customer to Competitor: Consumer Co-Option in the Service". The Journal of Services Marketing. 7 (3). pp. 18–25.
  • Forsström, F. (September 2003). "A Conceptual Exploration into 'Value Co-Creation' in the Context of Industrial Buyer-Seller Relationships, Work-in-Progress Paper". 19th Annual IMP Conference; September 4–6, 2003; Lugano, Switzerland (International Marketing and Purchasing Group)
  • Füller, J.; Mühlbacher, H.; Matzler, K.; Jawecki, G. (Winter 2009–10). "Consumer Empowerment through Internet-Based Co-Creation". Journal of Management Information Systems. Volume 26, Number 3. pp. 71–102.
  • Füller, J. (Winter 2010). "Refining Virtual Co-Creation from a Consumer Perspective". California Management Review. Volume 52, Number 2. pp. 98–122.
  • Grönroos, C.; Ravald, A. (2009) "Marketing and the Logic of Service: Value Facilitation, Value Creation and Co-Creation, and Their Marketing Implications – Working Paper". Hanken School of Economics.
  • Gummesson, E. (2004) "Return on Relationships (ROR): The Value of Relationship Marketing and CRM in Business-to-Business Contexts". Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing. 19, 2. p. 136.
  • Holbrook, M.B. (June 1987). "What Is Consumer Research?". Journal of Consumer Research. Volume 14, Number 1. pp. 128–132.
  • Lindsay, K. (July 28, 2009). "The Power of Collaboration". Computer Weekly. pp. 14–15.
  • Nambisan, S.; Baron, R.A. (July 2009). "Virtual Customer Environments: Testing a Model of Voluntary Participation in Value Co-Creation Activities". Journal of Product Innovation Management. Volume 26, Issue 4. pp. 388–406.
  • Ordanini, A.; Pasini, P. (2008). "Service Co-Production and Value Co-Creation: The Case for a Service-Oriented Architecture (SOA)". European Management Journal. 26, pp. 289–297.
  • Payne, A.; Holt., S. (2001). "Diagnosing Customer Value: Integrating the Value Process and Relationship Marketing". British Journal of Management. Volume 12. pp. 159–182.
  • Payne, A.F.; Storbacka, K.; Frow, P.; Knox, S. (2009). "Co-Creating Brands: Diagnosing and Designing the Relationship Experience". Journal of Business Research. 62. pp. 379–389.
  • Potts, J.; et al. (October 2008) "Consumer Co-creation and Situated Creativity" Industry and Innovation. Volume 15, Number 5. pp. 459–474.
  • Prahalad, C.K.; Ramaswamy, V. (2004) "Co-Creation Experiences: The Next Practice in Value Creation". Journal of Interactive Marketing. Volume 18, Number 3.
  • Prahalad, C.K.; Ramaswamy, V. (2009) "Co-Creation Connection".
  • Ramaswamy, V. (2009) "Leading the Transformation to Co-Creation of Value. Strategy and Leadership. Volume 37, Number 2. pp. 32–37.
  • Roseira, C.; Brito, C. (2009) "Value Co-Creation With Suppliers, FEP working papers, n°342".
  • Shah, D.; Rust, R.; Parasuraman, A.; Staelin, R.; Day, G. (November 2006). "The Path to Customer Centricity". Journal of Service Research. 9, 2.
  • Simonson, A.; Schmitt, B. (1997). Marketing Aesthetics – Identity and Image. New York: Free Press.
  • Spohrer, J.; Maglio, P.P. (2008). "The Emergence of Service Science: Toward Systematic Service Innovations To Accelerate Co-Creation of Value".
  • Tanev, S.; Seppä, M.; Chowaniec, A. (2013). "Value Co-Creation". Best of TIM Review. Book 3. Talent First Network.
  • Tynan, C.; McKechnie, S.; Chhuon, C. (2009). "Co-Creating Value for Luxury Brands". Journal of Business Research. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2009.10.012.
  • Vandermerwe, S. (Summer 1993). "Jumping into the Customer's Activity Cycle – A New Role for Customer Services in the 1990s". Columbia Journal of World Business. pp. 46–65.
  • Weigand, H. (2009). "Value Encounters – Modeling and Analyzing Co-creation of Value – Working Paper".
  • Wind, J.; Rangaswamy, A. (2000). "Customerization: The Next Revolution in Mass Customization – Marketing Science Institute Working Paper No. 00-108". Cambridge, Massachusetts: Marketing Science Institute
  • Wong, V. (2010). "Co-Creation: Not Just Another Focus Group". BusinessWeek. Retrieved April 28, 2010.
  • Xiang, Z.; Rongqiu, C. (2008). "Examining the Mechanism of the Value Co-Creation with Customers". International Journal of Production Economics. 116. pp. 242–250.
  • Zwass, V. (Fall 2010). "Co-Creation: Toward a Taxonomy and an Integrated Research Perspective". International Journal of Electronic Commerce. pp. 11–48. http://www.ijec-web.org/v15n1/p011full.pdf

External links[edit]