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.
Dougherty, D., 2004. Organizing practices in services: capturing practice-based knowledge for innovation. Strategic Organization, 2(1), pp.35-64.
Edvardsson, B. and Olsson, J., 1996. Key concepts for new service development. Service Industries Journal, 16(2), pp.140-164.
Eloranta, V. & Turunen, T. (2016). Platforms in service-driven manufacturing: Leveraging complexity by connecting, sharing and integrating. Industrial Marketing Management, 55(2), 178-186..
Ettlie, J.E. and Rosenthal, S.R., 2011. Service versus manufacturing innovation. Journal of product innovation management, 28(2), pp.285-299.
Mathieu, V. (2001). Service strategies within the manufacturing sector: Benefits, costs and partnership. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 12(5), 451-475
Helkkula, A., Kowalkowski, C. and Tronvoll, B., 2018. Archetypes of Service Innovation: Implications for Value Cocreation. Journal of Service Research, 21(3), pp.284-301.
Nambisan, S., Lyytinen, K., Majchrzak, A. & Song, M. (2017). Digital innovation management: Reinventing innovation management research in digital world. MIS Quarterly, 41(1), 223-238
Oliva, R. & Kallenberg, R. (2003). Managing the transition from products to services. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 14(2), 160-172.
Sundbo, J. (1997). Management of innovation in services. The Service Industries Journal, 17(3), pp.432-455.
de Vries, E. J. (2006). Innovation in services in networks of organizations and in the distribution of services. Research Policy, 35(7), pp.1037-1051.
Module 5 assignment: Part 1 - concept definitions Quiz
This is Part 1 of Module 5 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 5. You should study them carefully before you start the quiz (and see your questions).
Contrary to the syllabus, you are not required to cite and reference your sources in Part 1.
Part 1 will be evaluated and graded by the course staff with scale 0-5 and form 30% of your Module 5 assignment grade.
Do note that the questions are designed with the assumption that you have studied the learning material carefully before starting the quiz. In section 5 Workload of the syllabus you can see the estimated workload. For studying materials, this totals at 12h (lecture + learning materials).
Module 5 Assignment: Part 2 - Essay Workshop
This is the Part 2 of the Module 5 assignment.
You will be given one essay topic or mini-case that you are expected to discuss. The essay topic or mini-case is based on the learning materials of Module 5.
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 Module 5 assignment grade.
Your submission should be a single pdf file 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, unless otherwise stated in assignment instructions.
Module 5: 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 5 essay (under For Aalto users) by Monday October 29th 9:00.
Place extra care into the written justifications for the grade you think your submission merits.
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.
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. Rather write the self-evaluation as from a clean slate, like you evaluate and grade the peer submissions.