Determining the purposefulness of new services on the grounds of the results of quantitative analysis.
Drejeris, Rolandas ; Bivainis, Juozas ; Tuncikiene, Zivile 等
1. Introduction
Contemporary competition in the field of services encourages firms
to look for new ways and methods of development in order to achieve
better satisfaction of growing customer needs and improve business
results. The main subject is what area of growing companies has to be
taken so that to achieve better customer allegiance, to retain or
improve the image of the company and to have profitable results of
development.
Service companies develop new products, penetrate into new markets
and expand the scope of the existing activities with the aim to reach
their objectives. Firms can take a chance to choose many courses of
development. However, which one is the best to support such
understanding and what time is the most useful for starting the
development of a new service? These are the questions relevant to every
service company. Thus, it is unquestioned demand for a focus on
determining the purposefulness of new service development and comparing
it with other courses on development.
To investigate the failures of implementing a new product, the
majority of researchers state that inadequate planning and insufficient
analysis of implementation are among the possible reasons of a new
tangible product or service failure. One of the possible reasons for new
product failure, as mentioned above, might be the failure or ineptitude
of substantiation or an inadequate substantiation of the purposefulness
of new product development. Salavou (2004) generalizes that a lack of
knowledge about the purposefulness of developing innovations can be one
of the reasons for their failure. In order to produce and successfully
commercialize a new service, firms must synthesize a wide variety of
expertise and knowledge that is usually very different. Such
circumstances challenge different results of implementation as often as
they are unsuccessful and unmarketable.
The above mentioned situation encouraged finding an objective
solution regarding the purposefulness of new service development with
the application of a more unprejudiced quantitative methodology. A
quantitative assessment of the situation is more objective in this case
and can more precisely express the needs of a modern and global market
(Kaplan 2004). Businesses have not an objective methodology for
determining the purposefulness of innovations addressed to a service
sector; an available basis of knowledge of these issues is very small
and consists though of minor fragments or experimentation but without
the allied analogy. Considering a variety of practical situations, an
all-rounded flexible methodology adapted for different service business
conditions is needed (Stevens, Dimitriadis 2005; Bivainis, Drejeris
2006). Thus, the overall absence of a particular scientific solution to
developing the purposefulness of quantitative determination is
considered to be a problem of the article. The aim of the paper is to
present the process model substantiating the purposefulness of
developing new services that would be created on the basis of the
conclusions of scientific literature and the application of systematic
and logical analysis as well as adapted for the service sector.
2. Process model of determining the purposefulness of new service
development
The determination of purposefulness means the first step of a new
service development process. Bivainis, Drejeris (2006) have mentioned
that such step is necessary for better readiness, and using the results
of assessment procedures is one of the conditions for the avoidance of
new service failure. The failures of new services show the importance of
this phase.
Scientific literature presents information on many exponents
stating the necessity of determining the purposefulness of new service
development; nevertheless, most of them only discuss the significance of
the process and do not suggest any methodology for assessing. Avlonitis
et al. (2001), Baker, Hart (2008) and many other researches, who
focussed on new product development, take the substantiation of
purposefulness for granted and do not find it is sufficiently considered
stating it is always worth developing a new product and providing the
description of positive results followed by any innovations implemented
in company's activity.
Scientific and special literature suggests only a few cases
considering the purposefulness of some process or product. Bivainis,
Drejeris (2008) tried to find a few solutions to determining the
purposefulness of new services, but their research was not finished and
was not clear enough to business practitioners. Bivainis, Tamosiunas
(2003) suggested a relevant methodology based on quantitative
computation for determining the purposefulness of restructuring
companies. Cozijnsen et al. (2000) presented an original method for
assessing new product requirements based on the conformance to the
company's objectives. Amara et al. (2004) proposed research results
introducing the determination of innovativeness and solutions to
manufacturing product innovation.
The purposefulness of some medical actions is reasoned quite
frequently in medical literature. A study on the management of
psychological human resources often uses the term
"purposefulness" as the fourth super-factor for describing
individual differences that influence personal innovativeness (Dyck
1994; Yun et al. 2007). Filippetti (2011) reviewed the process of
creating many innovation modes according to different procedural
factors, the size of a company, sectors, reasons for failure, but
neither of them found requirements for presenting information about the
methodology for determining purposefulness, though knowledge of this
process was mentioned as one of the main factors in success.
It is obvious that the direction for any trend towards business
development has conformity to the company's objectives and its
realization better meets the growing needs of customers (Santouridis,
Trivellas 2010). The existing product can be quite successful, and
therefore it is not necessary to promptly invest in the process of
implementing innovations. The assessment of the rate of market growth
and market share can determine such situation.
Environmental factors have to be also assessed, because the
direction of business development cannot contradict their requirements
(Forsman 2008). In the majority of cases, the development of innovations
presses for investment (Walters 2004), i.e. the assessment of investment
efficiency and risk assessment have to be important components in the
model for determining new service purposefulness.
A lack of innovation potential can disturb a successful process of
new service implementation (Grieco 2006). Thus, the innovation potential
for the company has to be also assessed. Resolving the degree of the
novelty of a new service is a relevant question for the companies
getting a positive result of its implementation (Grieco 2006).
Considering the requirements for new service development and
according to the results of practical research, the model consisting of
seven serialized components is proposed (Fig. 1). Every selected
component of the suggested model destines some respective assessment
particularly important to developing the process and having an influence
on the occurring business events of the company under contemporary
conditions. Requirements for the above mentioned components and their
content are presented in the following sections.
[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]
The use of the methodology forecasts the possibilities of
evaluating both business development directions: new service development
and an increase in the scope of the existing services. The model emerges
the possibilities of narrowing time for investigation down and reducing
unproductive expenditure. Even though James, O. et al. (2000), Avlonitis
et al. (2001) and a few more authors suggest more business development
directions (business development in different markets using other
business technologies and different marketing instrumentalities), in
this case, they agree that implementing new services and expanding the
scope of the existing ones are the main directions for developing
service companies and therefore are preferred to being analyzed. Though
the suggested methodology is appropriate to assessing other mentioned
directs, the findings of the article are more concentrated on
determining suitability for the situation starting the implementation of
new services.
Following the carried out assessment based on the first six
components of the model, eventually, the following decisions can be
made:
1) the development of any new activities should not be pursued;
2) the development of a new service should be pursued;
3) the scope of the existing services should be increased;
4) the development of a new service should be pursued and
simultaneously the scope of the existing services should be increased.
The designed model (Fig. 1) suggests the consistency to be followed
with respect to the evaluation of the purposefulness of both business
development trends in parallel with the established criteria and using
the given methods. The direction in business development is considered
to be purposeful only in case it is positively evaluated by all criteria
encapsulated in the components of the model, because each aspect, the
evaluation of which is recommended in the components of the model, is
regarded as significant enough for service business. The direction of
development that failed to comply with at least one value of the
proposed criteria of the models will be regarded as inappropriate. In
two cases determining it is purposeful to develop a new service or to
increase a growth in the scope of the existing services, it is necessary
to extend investigation into the seventh component that explains
reasoning behind the novelty of the service. The structure of the
proposed model allows suspending assessment when taking any direction
for development does not fully satisfy one requirement scheduled in the
components of the model.
The suggested model is appropriate and fitted for the service
sector because of better flexibility of the product and a better
possibility of adjusting to contemporary changeable environmental
factors. The sequence of the components is fitted for the service
sector, and, after testing a few service companies, was proved out.
Furthermore, some assessments provided in the suggested components of
the model can be applied for service companies only. A consistent
evaluation of the purposefulness of both business development trends by
stages provides a possibility of identifying unpromising efforts (trends
towards development) at each stage of research, cancelling such efforts
and constricting research thus reducing non-productive costs and time
for preparing the implementation of a new service. It is an important
presumption, because time for marketing has become a key competitive
element (Gremyr et al. 2010; Jimenez-Zarco et al. 2011). The suggested
construction of the proposed model and quantitative evaluations
encapsulated in the components of the model create preconditions for
transposing these evaluations in the medium of modern information
technologies.
2.1. Assessment of customer satisfaction
Conditions for business service development, on one hand, are
closely related to the possibility of improving the satisfaction of
customer needs and requirements (for example, in relation to price and
quality). On the other hand, they are linked to customer readiness to
pay for the service a certain amount that would be also appropriate for
the service company. The satisfaction of service customers and the
effective use of company expenditures, in most of cases, are understood
as the main business development conditions predetermining the necessity
to assess the desirability of the existing services provided at service
companies. It is one of the most important criteria that allow making a
decision regarding the directions of service company activities that are
worth pursuing, have to be improved and can be refused.
Capelia and Turner (2004) have offered a questionnaire for
measuring the degree of customer satisfaction where the majority of
criteria are of a qualitative character. Similarly, the method is
suggested by Santouridis and Trivellas (2010) and Jiang, Wang (2006)
stating that customer satisfaction can be measured and evaluated by
either a single-item scale or as a multi-item construct assessing the
satisfaction of each component of the service. However, for improving
the objectivity of computation, changing some criteria into the
quantitative ones and imposing constraint upon the set of criteria can
be suggested: not less than a half of them have to be quantitative.
According to the results of the customer survey, the satisfaction degree
of the current services might be computed in the following way:
[G.sub.e] = [n.summation over (j=1)] [W.sub.ej] [[eta].sub.j] (1)
where: [W.sub.ej]--the value of assessing criterion j of the
current service e; [[eta].sub.j]--the significance of criterion j. The
above mentioned Capelia and Turner (2004) propose a scoring method and
assessment of customer answers within the interval [2 (absolutely
agree); -2 (absolutely disagree)]. This is a simplified assessment of
criteria importance by giving them weight from limited selection 2, 1
and 0. Based on the values of a cumulative criterion, it is possible to
rank services according to customer satisfaction. Thus, the above
mentioned methodology can be really used for assessing the degree of
customer satisfaction.
2.2. Determining the rate of market growth and market share
The implementation of a new service can be a critically important
competitive factor in service industry. A greater market share, in turn,
reduces the likelihood of business dissolution while introducing
important new services providing little or no reduction in the
likelihood of business dissolution net of the market share effects that
the firm achieved. Thus, it is necessary to determine a situation
looking at the current services provided at the company. It is
recommended to determine the marginal value of the cumulative criterion
below which the values of the criteria have to be treated as confirming
customer dissatisfaction regarding provided services. In order to
provide a comprehensive assessment of market possibilities, it is worth
determining the rate of market growth of the company and the market
share during the last five years according to classical formulas, when
providing the current certain services.
The summary of the conducted assessment based on the above
mentioned two first components of the suggested model is described
below:
1) Following the analysis of the services that do not satisfy
customer needs and following determination that market growth in the
current services is not sufficient while the market share of the company
is decreasing, the only decision is possible--it is not worth increasing
the scope of such services for a company and continuing research on the
purposefulness of new service implementation while rejecting the idea of
expanding the scope of the presently provided (current) services.
2) When the assessment confirms a growth in services satisfying
customer needs or a growth in the company's market share, the
conclusion provides that the customer needs the service, provision for
the service has to be improved, research on the reasons for customer
dissatisfaction has to be continued and the reasons have to be detected.
The disclosed reasons have to be eliminated for gaining a competitive
advantage.
3) When the provided services meet customer demands, the rate of
market growth is evident, the company's market share grows and it
is worth continuing research on the feasibility of both development
directions based on other components of the suggested model.
Salavou (2004) and Trot (2001) state that the result showing that
concept of some business trend development corresponds to market
requirements and substantially increases the probability of the
commercial success of a new product. Incidentally, it is meaningful to
accept the proposition of the researchers that the analysis of market
requirements is necessary at most stages of new product development. It
means that such analysis is also necessity for determining the
purposefulness of new service development.
2.3. Conformity of business development to the objectives of the
company
Quite a few researches consider the conformity of business
development to company's objectives as the most important factor in
determining the purposefulness of new service development. The majority
of them find the necessity for satisfying customer needs as one of the
objectives of innovations stimulated by the company. Chaitanya (2005)
analysed financial services, and one of the conclusions argues that the
main objective of the analysed financial services provided by the
company is to improve the satisfaction of customer needs. The research
results confirmed that implementing a new financial service was
purposeful. Forsman (2008) shows a framework of success dimensions as an
objective of every company, but, unfortunately, they are not
quantitative. Cozijnsen et al. (2000) presented a list of company's
objectives, and the most of them are for better effectiveness and for
improving the quality of services. It would be better to add more
specific objectives the importance of which for the service company is
argued by Mohanty (1999):
1) shortening the term of service provision;
2) increasing service package.
Only Cozijnsen et al. (2000) suggest an application of a relative
indicator for assessing new product success and for selecting the most
feasible product or service. Undoubtedly, such assessment would be
useful for the validation of purposefulness regarding directions for the
development of a service company. The relative indicator (X) of reaching
objectives is calculated as follows
X = [n.summation over (i=1)] [T.sub.i][[eta].sub.i]/[n.summation
over (i=1)] [T.sub.i] (2)
where i is an objective index; [T.sub.i]--assessment indicating the
attainment of the objective (following new service implementation or an
increase in the scope of the existing services); [[eta].sub.i]--the
significance of the objectives.
The following assessment indicators for determining the attainment
of objectives can be suggested: 2--certainly positive impact on reaching
company's objectives, 1--probably positive impact on reaching
company's objectives, 0--business development will have no impact
on company's objectives, -1--probably negative impact on
company's objectives, -2--certainly negative impact on
company's objectives.
The computed values of indicator x allow making a decision as to
which an alternative for company's development better meets
company's objectives ([X.sub.n]--new service development,
Xs--increase in the scope of the existing services). When [X.sub.n] [??]
[X.sub.s], the implementation of new services better corresponds to
company's objectives, and therefore it is purposeful to implement
new services; when [X.sub.n] [??] [X.sub.s], it is purposeful to
increase the scope of new services. The following comparison of values
[X.sub.n] [congruent or equal to] [X.sub.s] is also possible. In this
case, it is worth continuing research on the purposefulness of both
business development directions.
It is worth sighting that a formal application of a relative
indicator for reaching objectives may provoke the rejection of excellent
ideas as not meeting company's objectives. In order to obviate, it
is also worth having a periodical revision of company's objectives
and assessing adequacy for changes in the recent business situation.
Promoting profitable and sustainable business activity that meets
customer requirements and expectations and remaining ahead of
competitors always recognize and maximize the opportunities of activity.
2.4. Assessment of environmental factors influencing business
development
Environmental factors that affect the selection of a direction for
business development may involve an economic state of the country
(region), for example, inflation rate, unemployment rate, currency
exchange rate, the attitude of society such as tolerance-intolerance,
encouragement, government policy, cultural, political environment, etc.
Such assessment would allow determining whether certain business
development alternatives do not go into conflict with environmental
requirements in the related market. Moreover, such assessment
demonstrates that business development alternatives are either
purposeful or not in certain markets. Therefore, the matrix determining
the influence of environmental factors (Table 1) on the favourability of
the markets developing alternatives for service business can be
suggested.
The nature and composition of the impact depends on the character
of services and the scope of company's activities. Therefore, it
may be different for the companies that provide different services. The
nature and strength of the influence could be expressed within the
following interval: -1 certainly negative impact on business development
in that market, +1 the most favourable environment for business
development in that market.
The aggregate columns of the matrix allow making a decision as to
which business development direction is more suitable for a certain
market. The cases, when the market is favourable for all above mentioned
business development alternatives may be also accepted. In such
situation, every business development alternatives should be assessed
further by the criterion for assessing investment efficiency and risk.
Thus, the present assessment will help in choosing even the best market
for business development.
2.5. Assessment of investment efficiency and risk
Both directions of business development (developing a new service
or expanding the scope of the existing services) have to be compared in
terms of investment efficiency, and the decision has to be taken to
develop activity having better efficiency of investments. Unfortunately,
the problem arises due to economic indicators of new services that are
highly indeterminate. Considering such situation, starting the
assessment of the rate of forecasted investment efficiency, regarding
the growth of recent services only, can be suggested, then following the
assessment of probabilities of new service development in case of equal
investments. It is worth judging the possibilities of applying for the
experts. Nevertheless, it is also important to highlight that new
services have to better meet customer requirements (Chaitanya 2005).
Customers will accept a new service when it meets one of the
following requirements (Se-Joon Hong et al. 2006):
1) utility;
2) pleasure/satisfaction;
3) accessible price;
4) exclusive use;
5) simplicity/comprehensibility.
Company managers and experts have to decide if particular
investment (calculated for the growth of provided current services) is
sufficient for the development and implementation of a new service that
would meet one of the conditions mentioned above, have better efficiency
of investment, conform to the customer's decision to buy stuff for
the price and satisfy company's requirements. The date for such
investigation can be set taking into consideration similar projects.
The reached conclusion would be a preliminary decision on selecting
business direction and the feasibility of new service development. If
conclusions demonstrated that potential investments were insufficient
for new service implementation, the company would have to dispose such
idea and continue investigation into a growth in the scope of the
current services. If the conclusion made by an expert states that
investment is sufficient for new service development, there is a need to
continue investigation according to other components of the suggested
model.
Thus, what investment efficiency indicators can be used? Which
comparison of indicators would enable the validation of a choice to
develop a new service or to grow the scope of recent services? The
authors of different papers have a varying opinion regarding this issue.
Ross (2002), Pogue (2004), Park and Choi (2011) suggest using these
indicators to determine the efficiency of investment in business
projects: net current value, the period of return on investment, the
index of profitability and the rate of investment efficiency. Other
authors (Mohanty 1999; Walters 2004; Mackevicius 2005), besides earlier
mentioned information, suggest using return on investment indicator.
Walters (2004) investigated the variants of the company's strategy
for business development and stated that any alternative of selecting
strategic activity had to be reasoned by the assessment of return on
investment.
It has to be noted that Walters (2004) suggests qualitative
indicators for computing return on investment. Therefore, such
assessment reduces the objectivity of the performed assessment.
Mackevicius (2005), in his monograph, accepts an indicator for return on
investment, which helps in comparing potential profit and investments
into business development. Hence, it can be assented to using a
classical formula calculating return on investment comprising of
proportion average profit per year and investment into business
development.
The managers of the companies always seek for profit. Consequently,
it is important to assess business risk, know its range and do not keep
on the edge. In conclusions of his monograph, Mackevicius (2005) states
there is no activity that is not related to particular risk, but in some
circumstances, risky decisions can become much more useful than the
cases without any risk.
Ahmed et al. (2007), Sanchez et al. (2009) and other researchers
support the opinion of evaluating investment projects. They determine
the risk of the project as the probability of the project results
deviating from the expected results. Sow-Lin Chan at al. (1992) and
other researchers recommend using a decision tree method and simulated
model for comparing two or more investment projects. These methods are
useful for determining the best investment solution to the company.
Verbano, Nosella (2010) described many methods that allow making a
decision whether investment projects should be undertaken, continued or
killed. They prefer quantitative methods and state that using them
depends on an economical situation. Mackevicius (2005) expresses the
risk in relation to alert and protection factors:
R = f(P)/f(A) (3)
where P--degree of alert; A--plenty of protection factors.
Thus, it means that increasing the degree of alertness expresses
the probability of increasing the risk. Mackevicius (2005), Walters
(2004) suggest calculating risk rate for quantitative risk assessment:
r = [L.sub.p]/[K.sub.o] (4)
where [L.sub.p]--possible supreme loosing; [K.sub.o]--own capital.
Mackevicius (2005) discusses a wide spectrum of relationships
between business development and company's profit. He argues it is
a miserable chance of getting large profit and low risk and warns that
high risk may involve more losses.
Williams et al. (2003), Verbano and Nosella (2010) and many other
researchers suggest assessing risk to dispose it for the experts. They
have to estimate the factors predetermining the risk of business
development, positive and negative characteristics of all business
development directions, return on investment of every case, predicting
possible losses and offering tools for reducing the risk. This
information helps in making a decision.
2.6. Assessing the innovation potential of companies
Analyzing the innovation potential has to be prosecuted by taking
both business development alternatives separately thus assessing the
possibilities of implementing new services and expanding the scope of
the current services if both alternatives has been assessed as
corresponding to the criteria of development by previous assessments.
Therefore, which development direction has a better potential that can
be determined only after measuring the innovation potential for the
company according to the possibilities of both above mentioned
directions for growth. Grieco (2006) states that maintaining sufficient
innovation potential seems to be one of the reasons for successful
company's development. The innovation potential for the company can
be measured by technicaltechnological potential and personnel creativity
(Grieco 2006). Mackevicius (2005) presented several indicators for
assessing the technical-technological potential for the companies;
however, not all of those can be used for determining the
technical-technological potential for the service company. Only the rate
of effective methods for processes can be suitable for the service
sector. Thus, M is the rate of effective methods for processes and is
appropriate for determining the technical-technological potential for
the service:
M = [V.sub.g]/[V.sub.v] (5)
where [V.sub.g]--gauge of effectively provided services;
[V.sub.v]--gauge of provided services at a particular time.
Particularly expedient information about the decision on business
development direction would be a dynamic analysis of effective ways of
service rates, including a comparative analysis of market share and
market growth dynamics. Changes in the function rates can facilitate the
diagnosis of the following decisions:
1) Technical-technological potential is unfulfilled, services are
provided using ineffective methods because of a lack of modern equipment
or shortage of skilled employees; in order to provide services more
efficiently, it is economically feasible to acquire better (more modern)
equipment for providing services or to recruit better (higher qualified)
employees;
2) Demand for services decline because of falling into desuetude,
i.e. requirements for changing technology or rejection of providing the
current services; it is worth analyzing the possibilities of
implementing a new service;
3) Demand is growing, technical possibilities are sufficient, and
therefore it is worth analyzing the possibilities implementing a new
service and extending the scope of the current services.
Following the above mentioned assessments, a decision about a
direction for the further development and purposefulness of new service
implementation can be made.
2.7. Substantiation degree of the novelty of a new service
Following the decision in favour of developing a new service, a
question about the degree of its novelty arises. Amara et. al. (2004)
found it the most important decision when a company had concluded to
develop a new producible item. Beyond doubt, such proposition also
obtains a new service. The before mentioned authors call the degree of
novelty as a radical degree and propose the findings of investigations
regarding innovations in traditional manufacturing industries. According
to their findings, the following factors influence the degree of novelty
in manufacturing industry:
1) the amount of finance intended for a process of making a new
product;
2) creative potential for available employees;
3) a possibility of getting raw materials for making a new product;
4) technical-technological potential for the company;
5) possession of necessary information about a business network.
It is evident that the analysis of the above mentioned factors is
necessary for determining not only the novelty of the producible item
but also a new service. Salavou (2004) described three levels of product
(service) novelty: the product (service) can be novel for customers, for
a company and for customers and the company at the same time. Thus,
novelty needs to be assessed according to the possibilities mentioned
above. Amara et. al. (2004), Salavou (2004) suggest the assessment of
novelty to be disposed to the experts of the companies.
Besides, the argumentation of expert decisions needs to complement
consistent patterns established by Grieco (2006) who determined future
innovations regarding various degrees of novelty:
1) The probability of success for implementing innovation is higher
when innovation is less of novelty comparing with high-novelty
innovation;
2) The immediate impact of percentage on profits after implementing
innovation is assumed to be lower in case of less modern innovations as
compared to the highly modern ones;
3) The presumable premium of less modern innovations is lower than
that of highly modern innovations;
4) While highly modern innovation determines a steady rise in the
profit trend equal to the percentage of the previous profit level, less
modern innovation produces an instantaneous rise in the profits of a
percentage that is followed by a gradual decline, but only as far as the
level that is higher than the initial level.
It should be noted to Jiang, Wang (2006) who admonish that
companies have to assess their possibilities of providing a new service
of high quality only, because good quality is the guarantee of success,
and these possibilities can help in making a decision what level of the
novelty of a new service is the best. Hence, service companies have to
asses every mentioned factor before making a decision about service
novelty, because this decision is responsible and important for future
results.
3. Conclusions
A competitive advantage in market economy can be achieved by
finding ways to realize company's opportunities to better satisfy
customer needs. Researches make contradiction points for the
purposefulness of developing a new product (service). This article
proves it is not only useful but also very important for service
companies to substantiate the purposefulness of developing a product
prior to implementing new services in order to reduce the failure
probability of novelty. In search of prospective solutions, both
business development directions (implementation of new and increasing
the scope of the existing services) have to be analysed in order to
determine their purposefulness.
The article presents the model made of seven components and
appropriate for the substantiation of the purposefulness of new service
development. The model allows a complex assessment of a wide spectrum of
actions determining the purposefulness of different business development
alternatives in order to compare them and making the most objective
solutions defining a proper time for starting the implementation of a
new service.
Each component of the model has to be purposefully assessed
considering the application of different quantitative methods that allow
reducing the aspect of coincidence and have a rather objective
assessment of each business development alternative.
The model of purposefulness presented in this article combines the
results of our exploratory research on new service development and can
be used for establishing a systematic framework for better new service
management. Using the proposed methodology will help service companies
in developing new services more effectively because of the growing
possibility of reducing the probability of failure and decreasing time
for implementing a new service. The construction of the model allows
cutting down assessment expenditure and time necessary for implementing
a new service.
doi: 10.3846/16111699.2013.772917
Caption: Fig. 1. Process model for determining the purposefulness
of new service development
References
Ahmed, A.; Kayis, B.; Amomsawadwatana, S. 2007. A review of
techniques for risk management in projects, Benchmarking: an
International Journal 14(1): 22-36.
Amara, N.; Landry, R.; Becheikh, N.; Ouimet, M. 2004. Radical
innovations in traditional manufacturing industries, in Druid Summer
Conference "Industrial Dynamics, Innovation and Development
2004", June 14-16, 2004, Elsinore, Denmark.
Avlonitis, J. G.; Papastathopoulou, P. G.; Gounaris, S. P. 2001. An
empirically-based typology of product innovativeness for new financial
services: success and failure scenarios, Journal of Product Innovation
Management 18(5): 324-342.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0737-6782(01)00102-3
Baker, M.; Hart, S. 2008. The Marketing book. Sixth edition.
London: Butterworth-Heinemann.
Bivainis, J.; Drejeris, R. 2006. Improvement of the pattern of new
service development, Business: Theory and Practice 1: 14-21.
Bivainis, J.; Drejeris, R. 2008. Complex assessment of new service
development, in Conference "Business and Management 2008",
April 14-16, 2008, Vilnius, Lithuania.
Bivainis, J.; Tamosiunas, A. 2003. Enterprise restructuring
programmes: evaluation and implementation, Management of Organizations:
Systematic Research 27: 17-33.
Capelia, F.; Turner, T. 2004. Development of an instrument to
measure consumer satisfaction in vocational rehabilitation,
Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin RCB 47(2): 76-85.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/00343552030470020201
Chaitanya, K. 2005. Metamorphosis of marketing financial services
in India, Journal of Services Research 5(1): 155-171.
Cozijnsen, A. J.; Vrakking, W. J.; Ijzerbo, M. 2000. Success and
failure of 50 innovation projects in Dutch companies, European Journal
of Innovation Management 3(3): 150-159.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14601060010322301
Dyck, M. J. 1994. What does proposed purposefulness superfactor
really describe?, Personality and Individual Differences 16(3): 411-415.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(94)90067-1
Filippetti, A. 2011. Innovation modes and design as a source of
innovation: a firm-level analysis, European Journal of Innovation
Management 14(1): 5-26. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14601061111104670
Forsman, H. 2008. Business development success in SMEs: a case
study approach, Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development
15(3): 606-622. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14626000810892382
Gremyr, I.; Lofberg, N.; Witell, L. 2010. Service innovations in
manufacturing firms, Managing Service Quality 20(2): 161-175.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09604521011027589
Grieco, D. 2006. Degree of innovativeness and market structure: a
model, in Druid Summer Conference 2006 "Knowledge, Innovation and
Competitiveness: Dynamic of Firms, Networks, Regions and
Institutions'", 18-20 June, 2006, Copenhagen, Denmark.
James, O.; James, C.; Rofee, I. 2000. The Evaluation of goal and
goal-free training innovation, Journal of European Industrial Training
24(1): 12-20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/03090590010308228
Jiang, Y.; Wang, C. L. 2006. The impact of affect on service
quality and satisfaction: the moderation of service contexts, Journal of
Service Marketing 20(4): 211-218.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/08876040610674562
Jimenez-Zarco, A. I.; Martineiz-Ruiz, M. P.; Izguirdo-Yusta, A.
2011. The impact of market orientation dimensions on client cooperation
in the development of new service innovations, European Journal of
Marketing 45(1/2): 43-67. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/03090561111095595
Kaplan, D. 2004. The sage handbook of quantitative methodology for
the social sciences. London: Sage publication.
Mackevicius, J. 2005. Analysis of company activity: compilation,
filing and assessment of information: Monograph. Vilnius: TEV.
Mohanty, R. P. 1999. Value innovation perspective in Indian
organizations, Participation and Empowerment: an International Journal
7(4): 88-103. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14634449910283561
Park, J.; Choi, B. P. 2011. Interest rate sensitivity of US
property/liability insurer stock returns, Managerial Finance 37(2):
134-150. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/03074351111103677
Pogue, M. 2004. Investment appraisal: a new approach, Managerial
Auditing Journal 19(4): 565-570.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02686900410530565
Ross, A. 2002. A multi-dimentional empirical exploration of
technology investment, coordination and Firm Performance, International
Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management 32(7):
591-609. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09600030210442603
Salavou, H. 2004. The concept of innovativeness: should we need to
focus?, European Journal of Innovation Management 7(1): 33-44.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14601060410515628
Sanchez, H.; Robert, B.; Bourgault, M.; Pellerin, R. 2009. Risk
management applied to projects programs, and portfolios, International
Journal of Managing Projects in Business 2(1): 14-35.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17538370910930491
Santouridis, I.; Trivellas, P. 2010. Investigating the impact of
service quality and customer satisfaction on customer loyalty in mobile
telephony in Greece, The TQM Journal 22(3): 330-343.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17542731011035550
Se-Joon Hong; Kar Yan Tam; Jinwoo Kim. 2006. Mobile data service
fuels the desire uniqueness, Communication of ACM 49(9): 89-95.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1151030.1151034
Sow-Lin Chan; Hian-Chye Koh; Chan-Kee Low. 1992. Making auditing
decisions: the Bayesian decision-tree approach, Managerial Auditing
Journal 7(1): 24-31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000001774
Stevens, E.; Dimitriadis, S. 2005. Managing the new service
development process: tovards a sistemic model, European Journal of
Marketing 39(1/2): 175-198. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/03090560510572070
Trot, P. 2001. The role of market research in the development of
discontinuous new products, European Journal of Innovation Management
4(3): 117-125. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14601060110390585
Verbano, C.; Nossella, A. 2010. Addressing R&D investmen
decisions: a cross analysis of R&D project selection, European
Journal of Innovation Management 13(3): 440-460.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14601061011060166
Walters, D. A. 2004. Business model for the new economy,
International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics
Management 34(3/4): 346-357. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09600030410533637
Williams, S.; Zainuba, M.; Jackson, R. 2003. Affective influences
on risk perceptions and risk intention, Journal of Managerial Psychology
18(2): 126-137. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02683940310465027
Yun, S.; Takeuchi, R.; Liu, W. 2007. Employee self-enhancement
motives and job performance behaviors: investigating the moderating
effects of employee role ambiguity and managerial perceptions of
employee commitment, Journal of Applied Psychology 92(3): 745-756.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.3.745
Rolandas DREJERIS. Doctor of Social Sciences, Associate Professor
at the Department of Social Economics and Management, Vilnius Gediminas
Technical University. Research interests: innovation management, process
of services development, theories of development, strategy for designing
a new product, sustainable processes.
Juozas BIVAINIS. Doctor Habil, Professor at the Department of
Social Economics and Management, Vilnius Gediminas Technical University.
The author of over 240 scientific works. Research interests:
intensification of economic development, business management theory,
economic legislation.
Zivile TUNCIKIENE. Doctor of Social Sciences, Associate Professor
at the Department of Social Economics and Management, Vilnius Gediminas
Technical University. Research interests: management of social economic
development, strategic management of public institutions, innovations in
public services.
Egle DREJERIENE. Doctor of Biomedical Sciences, lecturer at the
Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Medical Academy, Lithuanian
University of Health Sciences. Research interests: developing
innovations in medical services, new methods of infertility healing,
innovations in gynaecology, implementation of new methods in surgery.
Rolandas Drejeris (1), Juozas Bivainis (2), Zivile Tuncikiene (3),
Egle Drejeriene (4)
(1,2,3) Department of Social Economics and Management, Vilnius
Gediminas Technical University, Sauletekio al. 11, LT-10223 Vilnius,
Lithuania
(4) Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Lithuanian University
of Health Sciences, Medical Academy, A. Mickeviciaus g. 9, LT-44307
Kaunas, Lithuania
E-mails: (1) rolandas.drejeris@vgtu.lt (corresponding author); (2)
juozas.bivainis@vgtu.lt; (3) zivile.tuncikiene@vgtu.lt; (4)
edrejeriene@gmail.com
Received 08 November 2012; accepted 31 January 2013
Table 1. Matrix for determining the influence of environmental
factors on both directions of business development
Factors having an impact Market A Market B ... ... Market
on service development n and etc.
NSD DSCS NSD DSCS NSD DSCS
1.
2.
n. ... ... and etc
In total:
Notes: NSD--new service development, DSCS--development of the
scope of the current services.
