Chapter 4: Data Collection and Derivation
4.2. Identifying a Common Understanding of Co-service
4.2.1. Co-service as a Collaborative Practice
國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
47
For example, Richard Brown of VIA Technologies comments that “there is not much room for open co-creation via the Web for high entry barrier collaboration practices.”
He further suggests that high entry barrier collaboration practices are often associated with significant monetary values and complex legal issues that difficult to distribute. He mentioned, for instance, TSMC’s (Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company) Open Innovation Platform cannot be opened to the Web simply because the co-creation processes involve resources that cannot be distributed over the Web. Therefore, Brown suggested that low entry barrier collaboration appears to be more practical over the Web because not every participating agent has the resource to practice high entry barrier collaboration.
Since co-creation over the Web resonant more with distributive cooperation and low entry level collaboration, the interviewees all agreed that such co-creation requires clear incentive to operate. Richard Brown suggests that for participating agents to be attracted sometimes this kind of co-creation practice requires very strong centralization in order for the incentives to be established clearly and distributed effectively. The interviewee also have a common understanding that co-creation of content and software/application over the Web is of collective nature, since the distributed efforts needs to be collected back to the platform to complete a task or even create value.
4.2. I
DENTIFYING AC
OMMONU
NDERSTANDING OFC
O-
SERVICEAlthough the interviewees have divided perspectives on co-service, they appear to share a common understanding of co-service. The divided perspectives are combined in this research into a more comprehensive understanding of co-service.
4.2.1. Co-service as a Collaborative Practice
Although the interviewees have divided perspectives on co-service, they appear to share a common understanding of co-service as a collaborative practice to fulfill a demand for service. In addition, the interviewees share a common agreement on the understanding that co-service is a collaborative practice that enables the iteration of
‧
value creation and consumption. Therefore, they shared a common understanding that co-service is the next evolving collaborative practice after co-creation. Brian Chang suggests that, “co-service is an advanced version of co-creation, thus it is a collaborative practice” He believes that co-service not only creates values like co-creation, but co-service also provide the service to fulfill the needs created by those values, i.e. consume the created values via service. Indeed, Shang-Sheng Jeng suggests that, “service is the natural progression from creation, because it is there to satisfy the needs that creation created, but cannot fulfill.” Carson Chen also commented that, “when producers and consumer interact intensely, there will be a demand of service generated out of this interaction that needs to be fulfilled.”
While the interviewees shared a common understanding for the definition of co-service, the value creation and consumption implication of co-service as a collaborative practice varied among the interviewee due to different perspectives.
Richard Brown believes that the practice of co-service may not lead to a final product or contribution to another product. In addition, he believes that co-service is trading a service for another service, but the value created and consumption in such services trade is likely to be of low or near commodity monetary value. He suggests that the value of such collaborative practice may lie in creating and consuming experience and social values. Cynthia Chyn and Dr. Shang-Sheng Jeng also shares the same perspective with Richard Brown that co-service is trading a service for another service, but she suggests sizable and significant monetary value can be created and consumed. Brian Chang believes that the practice of co-service can create and consume monetary, experience and social values while supporting further development of a platform, making possible contribution to another product on the platform, and fulfilling the demand for service that emerged from the interactions between the collaborating agents. In other words, Brian Chang believes that the practice of co-service will encourage collaboration initiatives that focus on enabling solutions for creating and consuming emerging values. Carson Chen suggests that co-service relies on creating and consuming social and experience values in order to create and consume monetary values as well as more social and
‧
experience values. Table 4.1 summarizes the value creation and consumption implication of co-service as a collaborative practice of all the interviewees.
Nonetheless, regardless of the value creation and consumption implication that co-service has introduced as a collaborative practice, they all have suggested that the values were created and/or consumed based on the intense interactive relationship between the participating agents.
Interviewee Values Created/Consumed
Richard Brown nearly no monetary value created
mostly creating and consuming experience and social values
Brian Chang create and consume significant monetary,
experience and social values
Carson Chen creating and consuming social and experience values in order to create and consume monetary values as well as more social and experience values Cynthia Chyn sizable and significant monetary value can be
Table 4.1.: Summary of the value creation and consumption implication of co-service as a collaborative practice
The interviewees share a common perspectives and vision on relationships characteristics between the participating agents that emerged and will be emerging when co-service is practiced. The interviewees share a common agreement that the interaction between the participating agents is extremely complex. They believe that co-service will further blur the distinction between the producer and consumers roles among the participating agents. For instance, Brian Chang comments that there will be more decentralization leading to co-service, and eventually when co-service is practiced, it is implied that the collaboration is essentially decentralized. Shang-Sheng Cheng, Cynthia Chyn, Richard Brown and Carson Chen all shared this decentralized collaboration vision that co-service is presenting and
‧
co-service will occur on passive platforms that require the users’ active participating to operate. Brian Chang also believes that the collaboration process of co-service requires the users’ active participation on the platform as opposed to platforms actively distribute or organize initiatives for users to participate. Another relationships characteristic of co-service between the participating agents that the interviewees shared is the converging interest characteristics. Richard Brown believes that if the interest of the participating agents does not converge, then the collaboration initiative will become a cooperative process that is usually short-termed.Co-service not only introduced complex interactions between the participating agents, the interviewees also believe that co-service introduced complex interaction between the platform and the participating agents as well. Richard Brown suggests that the practice of co-service is built upon a platform with strong feedback and iteration mechanism. Brian Chang, Carson Chen and Shang-Sheng Jeng believe that co-service is a collaborative practice that builds on a platform between the platforms users as well as building onto the platform. He refers to this behavior as
“building an eco-system” that enables complex interaction between the producer and consumer. Brian Chang suggests that such eco-system for co-service will enhance the interactive relationship including user to user, content and user, content to content relationship. In addition, he comments that this interaction will ultimately develop into content for user, user for user and user to content relationships.
Two of the interviewees elaborated on the interactive characteristics of co-service. Cynthia Chyn believes that co-service is of connecting nature, and it is built upon connecting participating agents in order for them to create and consume services. Brian Chang believes that the practice of co-service will cause a complex iteration of collection and connection. He suggests that a platform needs to collect content and user base before making connections. He further adds that as more
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
51
connection is made, collection of content from current user is also required to build and develop the platforms content and technological infrastructure, or the eco-system. He stresses that co-service requires and causes iterative interactive processes of collection and connection with emphasis on connection.