IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i18p4954-d266073.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Pathologies and Paradoxes of Co-Creation: A Contribution to the Discussion about Corporate Social Responsibility in Building a Competitive Advantage in the Age of Industry 4.0

Author

Listed:
  • Anna Adamik

    (Department of Management, Faculty of Management and Production Engineering, Lodz University of Technology, 90-924 Lodz, Poland)

  • Michał Nowicki

    (Department of Management, Faculty of Management and Production Engineering, Lodz University of Technology, 90-924 Lodz, Poland)

Abstract

Research problem: Revolution Industry 4.0. forces companies to face specific competence-related, technological, organizational and even ethical challenges. The use of innovative “tools” associated with that revolution not only brings new technological challenges, opportunities to build new competitive advantages, new areas of activity, and new types of business benefits but also doubts, questions, or even pathologies and paradoxes. Sometimes, entities that do not fully understand the essence of the new concepts, methods, or techniques use them incorrectly or abuse them for private goals and expose themselves to criticism—sometimes even social condemnation. These are examples of the lack of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) of these organizations. This situation also has reached co-creation. In theory, it is a very positive concept, aimed at building competitiveness, or various types of competitive advantages of companies by creating value for clients with their participation. In economic practice, unfortunately, it is not always successful. Purpose: The main purpose of this paper is to identify and characterize the key paradoxes and areas of potential pathologies of creating competitive advantage based on co-creation without CSR in the case of companies operating in the age of Industry 4.0. Originality/value of the paper: A theoretical study based on the extensive literature review describing paradoxes, ethical and CSR problems of co-creation in organizations creating competitive advantage in the age of the Fourth Industrial Revolution and a qualitative methodology of research. This study attempts to systematize paradoxes of co-creation and the areas and industries in which the related pathologies of co-creation occur particularly often and distinctively in economic practice. The empirical studies were conducted as a review of case studies of companies that use the concept of co-creation in an irregular way (paradoxical or with pathologies). This study identified and characterized the key 31 paradoxes and pathologies of creating competitive advantage based on co-creation in the case of 14 companies operating in the age of Industry 4.0. Implications: The identification of main dilemmas, paradoxes and pathologies of co-creation; signaling the role of governance and CSR in processes of the valuable use of co-creation in the age of Industry 4.0. Based on the observations described in the paper, it is worth recommending that when becoming involved in co-creation, one should observe ethical standards and assumptions of CSR, and require the same from partners and other parties involved. Otherwise, the risk is that instead of co-creation, the result achieved will be exactly the opposite to that intended, which is co-destruction, and condemnation instead of glory. This is why it is worth considering the paradoxes that are key to co-creation and approaching solutions in a conscious way.

Suggested Citation

  • Anna Adamik & Michał Nowicki, 2019. "Pathologies and Paradoxes of Co-Creation: A Contribution to the Discussion about Corporate Social Responsibility in Building a Competitive Advantage in the Age of Industry 4.0," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-38, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:18:p:4954-:d:266073
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/18/4954/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/18/4954/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Schiereck, D. & Hachenberg, B. & Kiesel, F., 2018. "Dieselgate and its expected consequences on the European auto ABS market," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 106637, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    2. Robert Strand & R. Freeman & Kai Hockerts, 2015. "Corporate Social Responsibility and Sustainability in Scandinavia: An Overview," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 127(1), pages 1-15, March.
    3. Hachenberg, Britta & Kiesel, Florian & Schiereck, Dirk, 2018. "Dieselgate and its expected consequences on the European auto ABS market," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 171(C), pages 180-182.
    4. Walsh, John P. & Lee, You-Na & Tang, Li, 2019. "Pathogenic organization in science: Division of labor and retractions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 444-461.
    5. J. Emil Morhardt, 2010. "Corporate social responsibility and sustainability reporting on the Internet," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(7), pages 436-452, November.
    6. Ertimur, Burçak & Venkatesh, Alladi, 2010. "Opportunism in co-production: Implications for value co-creation," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 18(4), pages 256-263.
    7. Stefan Cristian, 2018. "Tales from the crypt: might cryptocurrencies spell the death of traditional money? - A quantitative analysis -," Proceedings of the International Conference on Business Excellence, Sciendo, vol. 12(1), pages 918-930, May.
    8. Włodzimierz Sroka & Štefan Hittmár, 2013. "Management of Alliance Networks," SpringerBriefs in Business, Springer, edition 127, number 978-3-642-34246-2, October.
    9. Luis Fonseca & Amílcar Ramos & à lvaro Rosa & Ana Cristina Braga & Paulo Sampaio, 2016. "Stakeholders satisfaction and sustainable success," International Journal of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 24(2), pages 144-157.
    10. Child, John & Faulkner, David & Tallman, Stephen, 2005. "Cooperative Strategy: Managing Alliances, Networks, and Joint Ventures," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, edition 2, number 9780199266258.
    11. Niladri B. Syam & Amit Pazgal, 2013. "Co-Creation with Production Externalities," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(5), pages 805-820, September.
    12. Constantine Andriopoulos & Marianne W. Lewis, 2009. "Exploitation-Exploration Tensions and Organizational Ambidexterity: Managing Paradoxes of Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 696-717, August.
    13. Shameen Prashantham & Mariya Eranova & Carole Couper, 2018. "Globalization, entrepreneurship and paradox thinking," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 35(1), pages 1-9, March.
    14. Wolfgang Ulaga & Werner Reinartz, 2011. "Hybrid Offerings: How Manufacturing Firms Combine Goods and Services Successfully," Post-Print hal-00642039, HAL.
    15. Fullerton, R. A. & Punj, G., 2004. "Repercussions of promoting an ideology of consumption: consumer misbehavior," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 57(11), pages 1239-1249, November.
    16. Noordhoff, C.S. & Kyriakopoulos, K. & Moorman, C. & Pauwels, P. & Dellaert, B.G.C., 2011. "The Bright Side and Dark Side of Embedded Ties In Business-to-Business Innovation," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2011-008-MKT, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    17. Laursen, Keld & Salter, Ammon J., 2014. "The paradox of openness: Appropriability, external search and collaboration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(5), pages 867-878.
    18. Belen Fernandez-Feijoo & Silvia Romero & Silvia Ruiz, 2014. "Effect of Stakeholders’ Pressure on Transparency of Sustainability Reports within the GRI Framework," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 122(1), pages 53-63, June.
    19. Bowen, Melanie & Freidank, Jan & Wannow, Stefanie & Cavallone, Mauro, 2018. "Effect of Perceived Crisis Response on Consumers' Behavioral Intentions During a Company Scandal – An Intercultural Perspective," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 222-237.
    20. Jordi Surroca & Josep A. Tribó & Sandra Waddock, 2010. "Corporate responsibility and financial performance: the role of intangible resources," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(5), pages 463-490, May.
    21. Dubois, Anna & Gadde, Lars-Erik, 2002. "Systematic combining: an abductive approach to case research," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 55(7), pages 553-560, July.
    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. Jaroslav Vrchota & Petr Řehoř & Monika Maříková & Martin Pech, 2020. "Critical Success Factors of the Project Management in Relation to Industry 4.0 for Sustainability of Projects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-19, December.
    2. Paweł Kłobukowski & Jacek Pasieczny, 2020. "Impact of Resources on the Development of Local Entrepreneurship in Industry 4.0," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-25, December.
    3. T. Praveen Kumar & Santosh Basavaraj & K. Soundarapandiyan, 2024. "Can co‐creating in CSR initiatives influence loyal customers? Evidence from the banking industry," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(1), pages 180-195, January.
    4. Verónica Sansabas-Villalpando & Iván Juan Carlos Pérez-Olguín & Luis Asunción Pérez-Domínguez & Luis Alberto Rodríguez-Picón & Luis Carlos Mendez-González, 2019. "CODAS HFLTS Method to Appraise Organizational Culture of Innovation and Complex Technological Changes Environments," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-28, December.
    5. Madanaguli, Arun & Dhir, Amandeep & Talwar, Shalini & Clauss, Thomas & Kraus, Sascha & Kaur, Puneet, 2023. "Diving into the uncertainties of open innovation: A systematic review of risks to uncover pertinent typologies and unexplored horizons," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    6. Zoltán Csedő & József Magyari & Máté Zavarkó, 2022. "Dynamic Corporate Governance, Innovation, and Sustainability: Post-COVID Period," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-21, March.
    7. Anna Adamik & Michał Nowicki & Andrius Puksas, 2022. "Energy Oriented Concepts and Other SMART WORLD Trends as Game Changers of Co-Production—Reality or Future?," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-38, June.
    8. Huidong Sun & Mustafa Raza Rabbani & Naveed Ahmad & Muhammad Safdar Sial & Guping Cheng & Malik Zia-Ud-Din & Qinghua Fu, 2020. "CSR, Co-Creation and Green Consumer Loyalty: Are Green Banking Initiatives Important? A Moderated Mediation Approach from an Emerging Economy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-22, December.
    9. David Caldevilla-Domínguez & Almudena Barrientos-Báez & Graciela Padilla-Castillo, 2021. "Twitter as a Tool for Citizen Education and Sustainable Cities after COVID-19," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-17, March.
    10. Jarmila Straková & Ismi Rajiani & Petra Pártlová & Jan Váchal & Ján Dobrovič, 2020. "Use of the Value Chain in the Process of Generating a Sustainable Business Strategy on the Example of Manufacturing and Industrial Enterprises in the Czech Republic," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-15, February.
    11. Ilka Marie Frerichs & Thorsten Teichert, 2023. "Research streams in corporate social responsibility literature: a bibliometric analysis," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 73(1), pages 231-261, February.

    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. Franck Brulhart & Sandrine Gherra & Bertrand V. Quelin, 2019. "Do Stakeholder Orientation and Environmental Proactivity Impact Firm Profitability?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 158(1), pages 25-46, August.
    2. Kirsti Iivonen, 2018. "Defensive Responses to Strategic Sustainability Paradoxes: Have Your Coke and Drink It Too!," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 148(2), pages 309-327, March.
    3. Andrea Pérez & Carlos López & María del Mar García-De los Salmones, 2017. "An empirical exploration of the link between reporting to stakeholders and corporate social responsibility reputation in the Spanish context," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 30(3), pages 668-698, March.
    4. Arora, Ashish & Athreye, Suma & Huang, Can, 2016. "The paradox of openness revisited: Collaborative innovation and patenting by UK innovators," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(7), pages 1352-1361.
    5. Laura Sierra-Garcia & Maria Antonia Garcia-Benau & Helena Maria Bollas-Araya, 2018. "Empirical Analysis of Non-Financial Reporting by Spanish Companies," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-17, July.
    6. Daniela Corsaro, 2017. "Disclosing the dark side of value processes in business relationships," MERCATI & COMPETITIVIT?, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2017(4), pages 125-149.
    7. Silvia Ruiz-Blanco & Silvia Romero & Belen Fernandez-Feijoo, 2022. "Green, blue or black, but washing–What company characteristics determine greenwashing?," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 4024-4045, March.
    8. Huikkola, Tuomas & Kohtamäki, Marko & Rabetino, Rodrigo & Makkonen, Hannu & Holtkamp, Philipp, 2022. "Overcoming the challenges of smart solution development: Co-alignment of processes, routines, and practices to manage product, service, and software integration," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    9. Rosaria Marcone, Maria, 2019. "Innovative Supply Chain in Italian Knitwear Industry. The Case of Medium-Sized Firms," 7th International OFEL Conference on Governance, Management and Entrepreneurship: Embracing Diversity in Organisations (Dubrovnik, 2019), in: 7th International OFEL Conference on Governance, Management and Entrepreneurship: Embracing Diversity in Organisations. April 5th - 6th, 2019, Dubrovn, pages 224-235, Governance Research and Development Centre (CIRU), Zagreb.
    10. Langlois, Jonathan & BenMahmoud-Jouini, Sihem & Servajean-Hilst, Romaric, 2023. "Practicing secrecy in open innovation – The case of a military firm," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(1).
    11. Max Finne & Saara Brax & Jan Holmström, 2013. "Reversed servitization paths: a case analysis of two manufacturers," Service Business, Springer;Pan-Pacific Business Association, vol. 7(4), pages 513-537, December.
    12. Kindström, Daniel & Ottosson, Mikael, 2016. "Local and regional energy companies offering energy services: Key activities and implications for the business model," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 171(C), pages 491-500.
    13. Datta, Partha Priya, 2020. "Hidden costs in different stages of advanced services – A multi-actor perspective of performance based contracts," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 667-685.
    14. Battisti, Enrico & Nirino, Niccolò & Leonidou, Erasmia & Salvi, Antonio, 2023. "Corporate social responsibility in family firms: Can corporate communication affect CSR performance?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    15. Kohtamäki, Marko & Einola, Suvi & Rabetino, Rodrigo, 2020. "Exploring servitization through the paradox lens: Coping practices in servitization," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 226(C).
    16. Belen Fernandez‐Feijoo & Silvia Romero & Silvia Ruiz, 2018. "Financial Auditor and Sustainability Reporting: Does it matter?," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(3), pages 209-224, May.
    17. Ali Uyar & Abdullah S Karaman & Merve Kilic, 2021. "Institutional drivers of sustainability reporting in the global tourism industry," Tourism Economics, , vol. 27(1), pages 105-128, February.
    18. Coreynen, Wim & Vanderstraeten, Johanna & van Witteloostuijn, Arjen & Cannaerts, Nele & Loots, Ellen & Slabbinck, Hendrik, 2020. "What drives product-service integration? An abductive study of decision-makers’ motives and value strategies," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 189-200.
    19. Valentina Cillo & Antonio Messeni Petruzzelli & Lorenzo Ardito & Manlio Del Giudice, 2019. "Understanding sustainable innovation: A systematic literature review," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(5), pages 1012-1025, September.
    20. Karen LaPierre & Naomi Wakayama & Toshiro Wakayama, 2016. "Creating Shared Value In The Presence Of Conflicts And Tradeoffs: A Paradox Perspective On Business And Society," Working Papers EMS_2016_11, Research Institute, International University of Japan.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:18:p:4954-:d:266073. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.