The module gives an overview to the field of service and services, service economy and service productivity.
Required learning material:
Lillrank, Service Economy 2019 - slides (under For Aalto users)
9.9.2019 Paul Lillrank lecture slides
Lillrank & Heiskala 2019 - Service Economy Podcast (under For Aalto users)
This podcast discusses similar things as the lecture - but the two are not 1-1 match. The podcast could help you prepare for the lecture and also to recap some of its main points.
Lillrank, P., 2017. Co-Creation and Healthcare Operations Management. In Handbook of Research on Strategic Alliances and Value Co-Creation in the Service Industry (pp. 400-414). IGI Global (Lillrank - 2017 under For Aalto users)
Moeller, S., 2010. Characteristics of services–a new approach uncovers their value. Journal of Services Marketing, 24(5), pp.359-368.
Use https://aalto.finna.fi/ and the Articles -search on the front page using e.g. the article title. In the results list under the correct article use ABI Inform links to access the article.
Due to copyright reasons you need to obtain your own copy (hint DON'T leave it to just before the DL).
Materials and readings possibly from both scientific and non-scientific sources. These help the interested student to delve deeper into the topic. These are not required for the assignment.
Bowen, J. and Ford, R.C., 2002. Managing service organizations: Does having a “thing” make a difference?. Journal of management, 28(3), pp.447-469.
Pajarinen, M., Rouvinen, P. and Ylä-Anttila, P., 2013. Services: a new source of value. ETLA Briefs, 11.
Gummesson, E., Lusch, R.F. and Vargo, S.L., 2010. Transitioning from service management to service-dominant logic: Observations and recommendations. International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences, 2(1), pp.8-22.
Module 1 Assignment
Both parts of the assignment will appear here.
Before you begin doing the assignment be sure to read...
chapter 7 'On Assignments' of the course syllabus (TU-E2000 syllabus 2019 under For Aalto users)
the generic peer-grading rubric (under For Aalto users)
Both documents contain important information on assignment requirements and criteria your submissions will be evaluated upon.
This is Part 1 of Module 1 assignment. You will be given two random questions from a larger set. Each question should be answerable in roughly 100 words. You will have a limited time to submit your answers to both questions: 40mins.
The questions are based on the learning materials of Module 1, including the lecture and lecture slides. You should study them carefully before you start the quiz (and see your questions).
Part 1 will be evaluated and graded by the course staff with scale 0-5 and form 30% of your Module 1 assignment grade.
You will be given one essay topic that you are expected to discuss. The expected length of the submission is around 1000 words (strive to stay within +-25%), excluding references and citations.
The essay topic is based on the learning materials of Module 1, including readings, lecture, lecture slides, and the podcast.
Part 2 will be evaluated with peer-grading. Each of you will grade three submissions of your peers and receive grades from three peers. Part 2 forms 70% of your Assignment 1 grade.
Your submission should be a pdf with no identifying information in the text or file metadata. This is to ensure double-blind peer review.
Remember that all the requirements described in chapter 7 of the syllabus apply.
Module 1: Unhappy with peer-grading? Submit your self-evaluation here Assignment
If you think your Part 2 submission merits a higher grade than the aggregate grade received (= average of grades) from your peers you may do the following:
Conduct a self-evaluation of your Part 2 submission using the peer-grading rubric for Module 1 essay (under For Aalto users) by Monday September 30th 9:00.
Place extra care into the written justifications for the grade you think your submission merits. In the self-evaluation and the justifications argue the merits of your submission. Do NOT write the self-evaluation as a response to comments and justifications of the peers you disagree with. We use three peer graders to reduce the weight one grader has on your grade. So, rather write the self-evaluation as from a clean slate, like you evaluate and grade the peer submissions.
Do note that course staff will re-evaluate your submission considering both your self-evaluation and the essay submission itself - and can also lower the grade you received from your peers. I expect this to be very rare, however, as that would require the original peer-gradings to be off in your favour and that you would still consider the submission to merit a higher grade.