IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/teinso/v43y2015icp105-114.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Stakeholder involvement in software system development – Insights into the influence of product-service ratio

Author

Listed:
  • Yip, Man Hang
  • Juhola, Tomi

Abstract

Software systems have a growing importance in how services are delivered in the present-day. New methods and technologies are constantly introduced for realizing novel services in a wide range of industries. In this study, stakeholder involvement in the development of financial service software system is examined, as software has been integral to the delivery of financial services. Two projects are selected for their varying degrees of product and service content. Both teams used an adapted stakeholder identification framework developed for the healthcare industry to identify stakeholders and their involvement need in the development projects. The suitability of this framework for financial service software development, and the differences in stakeholders for the development of new software systems of dissimilar product-service mix are discussed in the paper. Four insights into the influence of product-service ratio in stakeholder involvement are gained in the perspectives of product quality, relationship management, product support by customer, and service delivery process.

Suggested Citation

  • Yip, Man Hang & Juhola, Tomi, 2015. "Stakeholder involvement in software system development – Insights into the influence of product-service ratio," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 105-114.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:43:y:2015:i:c:p:105-114
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2015.05.006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160791X15000470
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techsoc.2015.05.006?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. von Hippel, Eric, 1976. "The dominant role of users in the scientific instrument innovation process," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 5(3), pages 212-239, July.
    2. Wil Williams & Duncan Lewis, 2008. "Strategic management tools and public sector management," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(5), pages 653-671, September.
    3. Jordan, Angel G., 2008. "Frontiers of research and future directions in information and communication technology," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 388-396.
    4. Peter Hill, 1999. "Tangibles, intangibles and services: a new taxonomy for the classification of output," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 32(2), pages 426-446, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Raza, Syed Arshad, 2021. "Managing ethical requirements elicitation of complex socio-technical systems with critical systems thinking: A case of course-timetabling project," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    2. Rodríguez, Rocio & Svensson, Göran & Mehl, Erik Jens, 2020. "Digitalization process of complex B2B sales processes – Enablers and obstacles," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Michael Peneder, 2003. "Industry Classifications: Aim, Scope and Techniques," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 109-129, March.
    2. Arman Avadikyan & Gilles Lambert & Christophe Lerch, 2016. "A Multi-Level Perspective on Ambidexterity: The Case of a Synchrotron Research Facility," Working Papers of BETA 2016-44, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    3. Meinel, Martin & Eismann, Tobias T. & Baccarella, Christian V. & Fixson, Sebastian K. & Voigt, Kai-Ingo, 2020. "Does applying design thinking result in better new product concepts than a traditional innovation approach? An experimental comparison study," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 661-671.
    4. Isaksson, Olov H.D. & Simeth, Markus & Seifert, Ralf W., 2016. "Knowledge spillovers in the supply chain: Evidence from the high tech sectors," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 699-706.
    5. Thomas Pircher & Conny J. M. Almekinders, 2021. "Making sense of farmers’ demand for seed of root, tuber and banana crops: a systematic review of methods," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 13(5), pages 1285-1301, October.
    6. Parry, Glenn & Bustinza, Oscar F. & Vendrell-Herrero, Ferran, 2012. "Servitisation and value co-production in the UK music industry: An empirical study of Consumer Attitudes," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(1), pages 320-332.
    7. Carmelina Bevilacqua & Yapeng Ou & Pasquale Pizzimenti & Guglielmo Minervino, 2019. "New Public Institutional Forms and Social Innovation in Urban Governance: Insights from the “Mayor’s Office of New Urban Mechanics” (MONUM) in Boston," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-24, December.
    8. Miozzo, Marcela & Desyllas, Panos & Lee, Hsing-fen & Miles, Ian, 2016. "Innovation collaboration and appropriability by knowledge-intensive business services firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(7), pages 1337-1351.
    9. Habicht, Hagen & Oliveira, Pedro & Shcherbatiuk, Viktoriia, 2012. "User Innovators: When Patients Set Out to Help Themselves and End Up Helping Many," Die Unternehmung - Swiss Journal of Business Research and Practice, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG, vol. 66(3), pages 277-295.
    10. Oerlemans, L.A.G. & Meeus, M.T.H. & Boekema, F.W.M., 2001. "Firm clustering and innovation," Other publications TiSEM c4398688-1710-449a-83e7-e, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    11. Pamela D. Morrison & John H. Roberts & Eric von Hippel, 2000. "Determinants of User Innovation and Innovation Sharing in a Local Market," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(12), pages 1513-1527, December.
    12. Nanditha Mathew & George Paily, 2022. "STI-DUI innovation modes and firm performance in the Indian capital goods industry: Do small firms differ from large ones?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(2), pages 435-458, April.
    13. C. Michael Wernerheim & Christopher A. Sharpe, 2001. "The Potential Bias in Producer Service Employment Estimates: The Case of the Canadian Space Economy," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 38(3), pages 563-591, March.
    14. Cristiano, Antonelli & Scellato, Giuseppe, 2007. "Complexity and Innovation: Social Interactions and Firm Level Total Factor Productivity," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis LEI & BRICK - Laboratory of Economics of Innovation "Franco Momigliano", Bureau of Research in Innovation, Complexity and Knowledge, Collegio 200709, University of Turin.
    15. Fourcroy, Charlotte & Gallouj, Faiz & Decellas, Fabrice, 2012. "Energy consumption in service industries: Challenging the myth of non-materiality," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 155-164.
    16. Harms, Philipp & Shuvalova, Daria, 2020. "Cultural distance and international trade in services: A disaggregate view," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 44(2).
    17. Álvarez, Inmaculada C. & Barbero, Javier & Rodríguez-Pose, Andrés & Zofío, José L., 2018. "Does Institutional Quality Matter for Trade? Institutional Conditions in a Sectoral Trade Framework," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 72-87.
    18. Letty, Brigid & Shezi, Zanele & Mudhara, Maxwell, 2012. "An exploration of agricultural grassroots innovation in South Africa and implications for innovation indicator development," MERIT Working Papers 2012-023, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    19. Hötte, Kerstin, 2023. "Demand-pull, technology-push, and the direction of technological change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(5).
    20. Djellal, Faridah & Gallouj, FaIz, 2005. "Mapping innovation dynamics in hospitals," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 817-835, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:43:y:2015:i:c:p:105-114. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/technology-in-society .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.