Operational Impact of Service Innovations in Multi‐Step Service Systems
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Service quality is an important attribute that is used to characterize many service systems. In this study, we examine a service system with two consecutive steps that have shared resources. The service process consists of a base service (first step in the process) followed by a second step that adds additional value. We first look at a social surplus maximizing service provider (SP) who decides the optimal service capacity and re‐optimizes in response to changes in the speed of service of the first step due to local innovations. Our main objective is to explore using simple and stylized models, the effect on the service system of local innovations in step 1 that decrease this step's service times. We find that the effect of such innovations can sometimes lead to the worsening of certain critical service quality measures when SPs are monopolists. Next, using a model of competition, we find that this effect continues to hold in settings where SPs compete for arrivals. Our results have interesting consequences for many service systems and may help explain some of the unintended effects of service innovations reported in the literature.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it