Conceptualizing digital service: coconstitutive essence and value cocreation dynamics
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 This paper presents a new conceptualization of digital service anchored in a coconstitutive ontology of digital “x” phenomena, illuminating the pivotal role of the digital qualifier in the service context. Our objective is to provide a theoretically grounded conceptualization of digital service and its impact on the nature of the value cocreation process that characterizes digital phenomena. Design/methodology/approach Drawing from scholarly works on digital phenomena and fundamental principles of service-dominant logic, this paper delineates the essence of digital service based on the interplay between digitization and digitalization as well as the operational dynamics of generativity and its constitutive dimensions (architecture, community, governance). Findings The paper defines digital service as a sociotechnical process of value cocreation, where participants dynamically architect, govern and leverage digital resources. This perspective highlights the organic development of digital service and the prevalence of decentralized control mechanisms. It also underscores how the intersection between generativity’s dimensions—architecture, community and governance—shapes the dynamic evolution and outcomes of digital services. Originality/value Our conceptual framework sheds light on our understanding of digital service, offering a foundation to further explore its nature and implications for research and practice, which we illustrate using the case of ChatGPT.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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