Contextualization and value-in-context: How context frames exchange (Term Paper Sample)

Contextualization and value-in-context: How context frames exchange
Contextual framing in this case, is the act of putting an aspect in a certain point of view. Contextual frames are most probably built up during actual world experiences whereby certain scenarios are knowledgeable and then influence individuals perceive and predict the certain aspects. On the other hand, Value co creation has been conceptualized as value in context whereby the emphasis of this market strategy is based on ongoing realization of joint firm-consumer value. In this case context is a set of factors that are unique with mutual links among themselves. Service provision is the act of undertaking a certain business task that requires compensation in return that is acceptable. Qualified staff in a business that specializes in service provision is a key factor to consider in order to ensure they are available to undertake the services that are required by its customers. Contextualization is the process of putting an idea or issue within its large setting where it is able to get its true meaning. The aim of this paper is to have a critical analysis of the provision off services and more so in the marketing value co creation. The contextualization aspect in this case would be to oscillate ideas from an individual actor at the market micro, and macro level, in order give the scaleable influence of the context a real meaning. In other words, the aim is to show how the micro and macro market levels influence each other. The whole issue will be to conceptualize these markets in instantaneous and continuous connections that are under the boundary of one of these context levels.
According to a number of scholars in the marketing field, studying marketing and the implications contained there in is an exchange concern. The aim of exchange is accessing resources, however, scholars in this case has disagreed upon the role that exchange plays in the value co creation. This brings in the point of placing the whole issue in its contextual frame work by critical reviewing the critical values in the whole issue. The orientation process on the other hand, puts more emphasis on the joint efforts different actors puts through exchange process in a certain context. The process of exploring the role held by context in framing exchange is very an important area to focus. The way actors come together in exchange within a definite context aiming to explore the role played by context in exchange framing is also important in this analysis. In regard to these conceptualizations, making salient the context manipulation is comparatively isomorphic. Likewise, these emphases proposed adapts in a network of market perspective. Such perspectives are most extensive in marketing especially in IMP group work. Insights on the other hand, can also be found where Nordic School of marketing service approach more on the marketing approach of many to many service. It is also important to note that the emphasis under this context is based on relationship interactions other than value creation. However, this work in line with the framework proposed converge in an external perspective that is shared on the processes that lie outside actors and their insinuation that value is embryonic at intersections of network resource.
The framework proposed is aimed at extending the literature by making explicit, salient market contexts, and co creation of value to be more related theoretically. It is clear that, study of markets and co creation of value requires an individual to refer to academic marketing facts on markets to be able to clearly understand the value co creation procedure and the entrenched contextual scenery of value. Sarcastically, this does not apply to all aspects, but it is limited to an extent. According to Venkatesh, market is every where rather than nowhere within marketing. This implies that there is no real theory for marketing and it is urged that it inherited one theory from economics. Market can be built on the abovementioned studies through the conceptualization on how markets are framed by context such that there is evidence of exchange between two actors that can simultaneously see as a substitute within the service ecosystems. The important aspect about this is that market constitutes are within different exchange contexts.
A multi level perspective in view of the context is basically based on the theory of social network making the economic sociology very important. This perspective can also be intergraded with service dominant perspective on value concretion, as well as, markets. In this case context, macro, meso, and micro market levels are in line with the essential processes of value co creation. The most salient layer is the conceptualizing layer, which is the Meta layer, which is concerned with how these levels simultaneously evolve. This frame work can help in exploring the resources role as it is articulated in several market and theories network. In order to understand the whole issue on the market theory and context frame exchange involving salient as the simultaneous and interactive process at each level the following areas are important to address.
Service dominant perspective
The service dominant perspective is the first area to address. This is a representation of a broader perspective on the markets compare ration to the traditional perspective on the markets. The traditional perspective mainly focused on the exchange of goods and services known as the G-D logic. On the other hand, the logic on S-D focuses mostly on the services and the resource application for the beneficial side of the other actors. This logic looks more into this issue far beyond goods as the main contributors of an economy and puts more emphasis on the skills and knowledge as the main social and economic resources, which opposes the G-D logic that emphasis on physical resources as the primary resources. As a result of this perspective, skills and knowledge integration are viewed as important when it comes to co value creation exchange. However, in order to have a clear understanding of this perspective reviewing conceptual extension is important. This conceptual extension can be addressed in the following more detailed areas.
Resources in context
As seen in the above analysis scholars traditionally focused marketing on the context of goods as resources that are complementary to the asserted marketing view. These recourses and goods are regarded as supplemental core production processes of any firm. In this sense, traditionally marketing is viewed as a factor that adds value to the already inherently valuable goods. The other conceptualization that is similar to this is where resources are viewed as goods owned by a certain firm or as production inputs. However, according to Morgan and Hunt resources can be possessed by a number of actors. Resources are able to connect and bring in an interaction between actors which happens these characters seek to get access to the available resources. Resources are also not static rather they expand in contraction in response to human actions. Therefore, once an actor in the market gets access to resources that they do not own a connection occurs. The reasoning behind it is that being they are able to access a resource jointly. Actors are able to maintain brand associations that are favorable, strong and unique and as a result they are able to expand the potential knowledge brand as a resource. While those that are not in a position to form brands that are favorable associates’ contract possible knowledge as a resource.
Knowledge in this case is a resource that cannot be controlled due to the fact that it can not be owned by anybody neither can it be controlled unilaterally. This brand can provide some benefits such as reduction in uncertainty, familiarity with the product, and price premiums that are higher. Those resources that are not owned or controlled by any actor they end up being resources that represents the indirect exchange. Indirect exchange governance can be undertaken by several institutions, some of these institutions include ownership systems that are drawn on property rights and are aimed at facilitating exchange. Traditionally, actors were viewed as resource owners an attribute that made them unique and separate from the contexts and resources within which they were themselves embedded.
The above analysis brings in the need to have a differentiation among contexts. This is important because there are points where actors are drawn in line with some resources from different contexts. Although this is the case there are times when these actors behaves like deterrents in other market contexts. This means that a certain context can act like a resource for an actor and as a deterrent to a different actor. Therefore, it is note able that resource value is influenced by contexts and this is one of the ways that contexts frame exchange, as well as, the co creation of markets is addressed.
Service in context
In the above analysis value co creation is influenced by the resources and the context on its service. This can clearly be show in the following areas.
The theory of Growth of a firm by Penrose shows that resources give rise to services. This process takes many steps. The first one is where the firms compete over resources especially when resources are used in offering service streams which finally fills and replaces the context with service inputs. In addition, the output services are later chosen from the context formed. For example, two firms competing for coal to fuel their rail transport. Due to the varying control and coal ownership the two firms are forced to apply service outputs that are heterogeneous where by each become woven with each other and other firms
Another case is where the actors occupy unique positions within their context and from these positions ...