Co-creation between consumers or with firms: determinants, consequences and components of value consumption in services - INRAE - Institut national de recherche pour l’agriculture, l’alimentation et l’environnement Access content directly
Conference Papers Year : 2020

Co-creation between consumers or with firms: determinants, consequences and components of value consumption in services


In the context of leisure sports, many people are leaving sporting clubs to self- organize (Chillet 2019), alone or with other consumers (Heinonen, Campbell, and Ferguson 2019). This poses a problem for clubs and sport federations as it leads to a decrease in members’ number (Eslan, Vial, Costa and Rollet 2019). This presentation will review the literature on value co- creation (VCC) / prosumption to understand (i) what determines consumer participation in the produc- tion process and (ii) whether the service offering of a firm using value co-creation could substitute for consumer self-organization. We first present the determinants and consequences of consumer participa- tion in a co-creation process with a business or among consumers. This part highlights the crucial role of value in customer decisions, introducing the value creation process described in the second part. Thirdly, we propose an integrative approach of value co-creation in the choice of service production applied to self-organized activities. Prosumption, the act of consuming and producing, allows con- sumers to personalize their products or services. If this process is carried out in relation with several actors (professionals, consumer groups, organizations or individuals), we speak of value co- creation, with personalization often mainly managed by companies. Leclercq, Hammedi, and Poncin (2016) defines co-creation as “a joint process during which value is reciprocally created for each actor (individu- als, organizations or networks)” to interact and exchange resources. In line with Heinonen, Jaakkola, and Neganova (2018), we posit that C to C co- creation depends on the value inherent in the interaction between the customer and the provider, but also emerging from the interactions between customers. Prior research has shown the importance of motivations for en- gaging in prosumption. Its antecedents are rooted in either the cus- tomer’s buying experience or the decision-making process. Carrying out a project of prosumption requires knowledge, skills, community seeking and time (Wolf, Albinsson, and Becker 2015). Heinonen et al. (2018) show a range of drivers of C to C interactions induced by firms, situations or customers (motivations), these are either for dif- ferent social or personal benefits. Benefits are thus emotional value or reinforcement of affective (i.e., emotional) and network (i.e., so- cial) values for focal clients through the playful and ludic behav- iors of other clients (Kim, Byon, and Baek 2019). In sport, C to C co-creation studies show that the presence of interactions motivates participants, thereby enhancing consumer experience (Kolyperas, Maglaras, and Sparks 2019). Moreover, willingness to participate to future co-creation activities depends on past experience, thus on the consequences of the process influenced by moderators such as trust or demographic determinants. These moderators act either before, during or after VCC process. Furthermore, in line with Aurier, Evrard, and N’Goala (2004), we integrate overall perceived value as a consequence of VCC pro- cess. The sacrifices made and the benefits perceived constitute over- all perceived value. It goes beyond the profit to cost ratio shown by Xie, Bagozzi, and Troye (2008), which is not only an economic benefit or cost. However, if this overall value is in favour of sac- rifice, consumers will turn to outsourcing rather than prosumption. The relationship between value creation and process outcomes then underlines the central role of value in the consumer’s decision to par- ticipate in production, especially under the influence of overall per- ceived value, as some components of value seem more decisive than others in consumer participation. The absence of certain components may lead to the co-creation process being halted. Our position herein is to analyze value creation resulting from consumer interactions and components of this value as preferential judgments. We propose an integrative picture of the different dimensions of value based on Holbrook (2002) and Aurier et al. (2004). The above criteria have thus resulted in a typology that breaks down the value into four main components: instrumental, hedonic, social and spiritual value. We enrich the spiritual value component with holistic value (Lai 1995) which is the perceptual benefits that depends on how compatible or coherent this consumption is perceived by the consumer. Furthermore, we support Medberg and Heinonen (2014) research on the influence of invisible values. These authors consider that value creation emerges either by the companies, in the relation- ship between companies and customers, or by the customer alone. Thus, spiritual value also refers to shared moral value as the adequa- cy between customers’ own moral standards and the standards of the other stakeholder. Corneloup (2016) in climbing activity shows an opposition of practitioners according to their practice style. Califor- nian-style practitioners focused on their relationship with nature and do not wish a more competitive form motivated by quick climbing on an artificial wall. Moreover, responsibility value is defined as the firm’s “practice of responsibility and integrity towards its custom- ers”. Both values relate indirectly to how the companies operate, then they can be integrated as intrinsic others-orientated approach. For heritage value, based on the history of the customer and its rela- tives with the company, we consider it more as social value, as heri- tage exclusively depends on consumption experience of the customer and its relatives. Like the relationship value, defined as a long-term relationship between actors, these values are based specifically on the clients’ own logic. This critical qualitative analysis of VCC literature tries to un- derstand why consumers do engage in VCC with companies or in C to C. The analysis of value components highlights invisible values that may explain why consumers prefer to co-create with others than with firms. Indeed, when consumers do not find all value dimensions they are looking for in the professional structures, then they drop out of professional structures. Future researches should focus on supply and demand adequacy to restructure service offer for companies, and confirm the integrative approach of value in the analysis of consum- ers’ participation to co- creation. Firms have leverage if they take into account the value dimensions in the co- creation process in order to recapture consumers organized in C to C, but also, on a critical perspective, to find out what occurs when consumers are not able to co-create, do not want or see value in the process.
No file

Dates and versions

hal-03238409 , version 1 (27-05-2021)


  • HAL Id : hal-03238409 , version 1


Camille Eslan, Sandrine Costa, C. Vial. Co-creation between consumers or with firms: determinants, consequences and components of value consumption in services. 51st Annual Conference of the Association for Consumer Research (ACR), Oct 2020, Paris (Online Conference), France. pp.316-317. ⟨hal-03238409⟩
40 View
0 Download


Gmail Facebook X LinkedIn More