Value co-destruction: a typology of resource misintegration manifestations
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
Purpose Actors who participate in co-created service experiences typically assume that they will experience improved well-being. However, a growing body of literature demonstrates that the reverse is also likely to be true, with one or more actors experiencing value co-destruction (VCD), rather than value co-creation, in the service system. Building on the notion of resource misintegration as a trigger of the VCD process, this paper offers a typology of resource misintegration manifestations and to present a dynamic conceptualization of the VCD process. Design/methodology/approach A systematic, iterative VCD literature review was conducted with a priori aims to uncover the manifestations of resource misintegration and illustrate its connection to VCD for an actor or actors. Findings Ten distinct manifestations of resource misintegration are identified that provide evidence or an early warning sign of the potential for negative well-being for one or more actors in the service system. Furthermore, a dynamic framework illustrates how an affected actor uses proactive and reactive coping and support resources to prevent VCD or restore well-being. Originality/value The study presents a typology of manifestations of resource misintegration that signal or warn of the potential for VCD, thus providing an opportunity to prevent or curtail the VCD process.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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