<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Archiving and Interchange DTD v1.0 20120330//EN" "JATS-archivearticle1.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
  <front>
    <journal-meta>
      <journal-title-group>
        <journal-title>Education,” Sustainability</journal-title>
      </journal-title-group>
    </journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3390/su11195292</article-id>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>Software Product Structure in the context of Service-Dominant (S-D) Logic - A Scoping Review</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Akwasi G. Adusei</string-name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Janne Härkönen</string-name>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff0">
          <label>0</label>
          <institution>University of Oulu, Industrial Engineering and Management</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>Oulu</addr-line>
          ,
          <country country="FI">Finland</country>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <pub-date>
        <year>2019</year>
      </pub-date>
      <volume>11</volume>
      <issue>19</issue>
      <fpage>956</fpage>
      <lpage>966</lpage>
      <abstract>
        <p>This scoping review paper aims to identify and synthesize the existing literature on software product structure in the context of service-dominant (S-D) logic. The paper highlights the importance of software product structure as a critical aspect in the software industry especially in software development as it can help to ensure that the software product meets the needs of all stakeholders. Despite the growing importance of software product structure and its perceived insight in the context of S-D logic, few studies have explored this topic. This paper, therefore, seeks to fill this gap by examining the findings of studies that have explored this topic. The review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the current state of knowledge in this area and identify gaps that require further investigation. The findings of this study will be beneficial for software developers, service providers, and customers to co-create value effectively and ensure that the software product meets the needs of all stakeholders. Overall, this scoping review aims to contribute to the understanding of software product structure in the context of S-D logic and provide insights that can help software developers, service providers, and customers create value effectively.</p>
      </abstract>
      <kwd-group>
        <kwd>1 Software product structure</kwd>
        <kwd>Software productization</kwd>
        <kwd>Software product</kwd>
        <kwd>Service-dominant logic</kwd>
      </kwd-group>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <sec id="sec-1">
      <title>1. Introduction</title>
      <p>
        Software products have become an integral
part of the modern digital economy [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref34">1</xref>
        ].
Consequently, the concept of software product
structure has gained significant attention in recent
years [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref34">1</xref>
        ];[2]. However, there has also been a
growing discussion and application of new
service dominant (S-D) logic thinking in service
science research since its introduction in 2004 by
Vargo and Lusch [3]. S-D logic emphasizes the
importance of service exchange processes and
cocreation among stakeholders [4].
      </p>
      <p>Given the complexity of the software
development process and the involvement of
multiple stakeholders including developers,
customers, and end-users, software product
structure is a critical aspect that can help ensure
the software product meets the needs of all
stakeholders. As such, understanding software
product structure from an S-D logic perspective is
essential for software developers, service
providers, and customers. Despite the growing
importance of software product structure and its
perceived importance in the context of S-D logic,
few studies have explored this topic, and those
that have are often limited in scope, methodology,
and context.</p>
      <p>To address this gap in the literature, this
scoping review aims to identify and synthesize the
existing literature on software product structure in
the context of S-D logic. The review will provide
insights into what is currently known about
software product structure in the context of S-D
logic by identifying the key factors that influence
software product structure design and their
implications for service providers and customers.
The research question that guides this scoping
review is, "What is known from literature about
software product structure in the context of
service-dominant logic?"</p>
      <p>The findings of this study will be beneficial for
software developers, service providers, and
customers to co-create value effectively and
ensure that the software product meets the needs
of all stakeholders. The review will examine the
research aims, methodologies, and findings of the
studies that have explored this topic. By doing so,
the review will provide a comprehensive
overview of the current state of knowledge in this
area and identify gaps that require further
investigation.</p>
      <p>Overall, this scoping review aims to contribute
to the understanding of software product structure
in the context of S-D logic and provide insights
that can help software developers, service
providers, and customers create value effectively.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-2">
      <title>2. Key Concepts</title>
      <p>This section presents an overview of key
concepts in the literature related to software
product structure from the perspective of
ServiceDominant (S-D) Logic.
2.1.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-3">
      <title>Software productization</title>
      <p>
        Software product sector has in recent years
become the most rapidly growing industry,
becoming a significant economic contributor
around the world [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref34">1</xref>
        ]. In recent years, increasing
attention has been paid to software productization
due to its importance in bringing software
products to market [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref34">1</xref>
        ]. As a result, most
customer-driven organizations have trended
towards standardizing software as a product for
market purchase. The digital nature of software
platforms is in line with digitalization, allowing
for new ways of value co-creation [5].
      </p>
      <p>
        Software products are intangible products that
consist of different computer programmes,
procedures, documents as well as delivery of data
to users and other offerings [6]. According to [2],
software products are packaged configurations of
software components or software-based services
with auxiliary materials released for trade in a
specific market. However, when it comes to
productization of software products, various
authors view it differently. In the software
development context, the concept of
productization is related to the product release
process that involves all stakeholders [7]. [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref34">1</xref>
        ]
view productization in the software perspective as
a process of turning customer specific or
customised software to a standardised software
product.
      </p>
      <p>Software productization in general enables the
understanding of software offering as well as
management of the software product portfolios by
systematising, tangibilising and formalising the
software product [8]. Standardization of service
offerings through productization allows for the
problems such as heterogeneity that face the
software service industry to be addressed [9].
Productization through product structure
facilitates the organisation of software products in
a manner that is logical and related for customer
product configuration. [8]. However, some
companies struggle to optimize their product
structure to be compatible with data systems,
leading to conflicts with their existing product
portfolio [2].</p>
      <p>
        [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref14 ref17 ref22 ref28 ref4 ref44 ref48 ref8">10</xref>
        ] emphasised the need for traditional
product sales of software to move to Software as
a Service (SaaS). The author stated that software
life cycle has shown that initially, companies
made a lot of revenue from software products but
gradually shifted to a mixture of software
products and SaaS. SaaS managers should
productize SaaS product such that they can be
delivered effectively to customers. He then
explained the possible productization of service as
having a standardized process framework, design
reuse and computer aided design tools. [8]
proposed a product structure model to facilitate
the identification and clarification of different
SaaS packages, which can often be complex and
difficult for customers and companies to
differentiate. Product structure is known to bring
a logical understanding of every product through
standardization approach to clarify the product
offering to all stakeholders. [8]; [11]. It presents
different views of the product to different business
departments such as sales, research and
development, product development, etc in the
company. [11]. The product structure defines the
list of product items that makes it possible for
customers to configure standardised product to
their choice.[11]
      </p>
      <p>Despite the increasing concept of
productization by researcher in general, few
studies can be found on productization as it relates
to the software industry. Specifically, insufficient
study can be found in relation to how companies
can convert their software packages into a
standardised software product. [2].</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-4">
      <title>Service-Dominant logic</title>
      <p>Until 2014, the traditional exchange of
physical products and services popularly known
as the goods-dominant (G-D) logic was the trend
and logic of the marketing economy [4], [12]–
[14]. However, in the past two decades, there has
been a paradigm shift from the traditional G-D
logic of marketing to a new dominant logic called
the Service dominant (S-D) logic, fundamentally
since its first publication [3]. The S-D logic is
defined as “the application of specialized
competences such as knowledge and skills
through deeds, processes and performances” [4],
[15].</p>
      <p>In the new S-D logic, intangibility, exchange
process and relationship have been the central
pillars. [4]. This S-D logic thinking highlights that
customers do not in actual sense buy goods or
services as in the traditional G-D logic approach
in marketing, rather customers buy offerings
which produce value. In addition, the S-D logic
postulates that service is exchanged for service
and value is co-created with the customer. [14],
[16]. This service centered thinking presents a
philosophy that is relevant to the marketing
offering including even tangible products in the
provision of the service process [4]. [16]
emphasised that the relationship between
customers and producers should be longitudinal,
interactive, and dynamic as well. This is because,
the S-D logic suggests that the co-creation
between customers and producers are is such that
firms makes a value proposition whilst the
customers determine the value through the usage
or experience. [16]</p>
      <p>The S-D logic was developed on 8
foundational premises in 2004 and has progressed
into 11 foundational premises (Table 1). These
foundational premises provide the basics on
which the service dominant logic can be
understood. [4], [17].</p>
      <p>
        In the value formation process, there is a need
for all stakeholders to understand operand and
operant resources. The former are those resources
on which an operation or an act is performed to
produce an effect, whilst the latter are those
employed to create value for the operand
resources. [4]. Operant resources are especially
used to provide benefits to other actors, and
therefore in the service dominant logic, service is
exchanged for service among the actors. [14],
[
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref47">18</xref>
        ]. All customers, suppliers, employees can thus
be categorised under the bracket of operant
resources. [19]
      </p>
      <p>Many researchers from different fields have
discussed the topic of the S-D logic widely and
attempted to apply this new logic to their different
research areas. [3]. For instance, Figure 1 and 2
shows the number and trend of types of
publications on S-D logic per year.</p>
      <p>
        Again, [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref47">18</xref>
        ] reported that Vargo and Lusch
together with other authors have for the past 17
years of existence of the service dominant logic
produced 146 publications on the S-D logic alone.
      </p>
      <p>Specifically, [13] discussed sustainable
tourism in the light of S-D logic by examining
value co-creation which is one of the foundational
premises of S-D logic perspective. The author’s
study contributed to the S-D logic discussion by
introducing features that are sustainable enough to
facilitate value co creation within the tourism
offering, for example improving well-being.</p>
      <p>
        From the software perspective, [12] is one of
the few studies that examined the ways by which
SaaS releases could be improved by applying S-D
logic principles. This study revealed the
knowledge concerning the value co-creation that
should exist between SaaS suppliers and their
customers by improving and fine-tuning
relationships and communications between them.
Examples of other research areas that have
applied the S-D logic thinking include Medicine
[13], [20], [21], education [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref16">22</xref>
        ], governance [23],
supply chain [24], manufacturing [25], and
Energy [26]. This shows how vast the new service
dominant logic has since then been discussed.
However, throughout the literature search, no
study seems to have been conducted on software
productization and product structure through the
S-D logic perspective.
      </p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-5">
      <title>3. Analysis Framework</title>
      <p>This chapter discuss the methodology
employed for this study which aimed to explore
the literature on software productization and
product structure in the context of
ServiceDominant (S-D) Logic. To achieve this objective,
a scoping review was chosen as the research
methodology. A Scoping review is a type of
systematic review that aims to map the existing
literature on a particular topic, identify gaps in the
literature and provide an overview of the available
evidence [27]. Figure 3 shows the modified five
stage scoping process that was utilized for this
study [27]</p>
      <p>Firstly, our research question “what is known
from literature about software product structure
from the contest of service dominant logic” was
identified. Guided by the key concepts of the
study and our research questions, we compiled
key words that could be utilized for the literature
search from the chosen data base. These key
words are “software product structure”, “software
productization”, “software product”, and “service
dominant logic”.</p>
      <p>In the second stage, key words in relation to
software productization and S-D logic were
combined to conduct a database search. The
search for the related studies was conducted
mainly in Scopus database. To increase the scope
of search, a Google Scholar was also utilized to
get some selected and hand-picked research</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-6">
      <title>4. Results and Discussion</title>
      <p>This chapter presents the findings and
discussions from the analysis of literature on
software product structure in the context of S-D
logic utilizing a scoping review methodology. In
order to provide a more comprehensive
understanding of the subject matter, the study
have identified five key themes that emerged from
the selected literature. These themes include the
Service-Dominant Logic (S-D Logic)
Perspective, Value Co-Creation, Service-Oriented
Product Development, Co-Creation of
Knowledge, and Value Co-Creation Networks.
The purpose of organizing the findings into these
themes is to highlight the common patterns that
exist in the literature and to present a more
coherent picture of the state of research in this
area. By doing so, the study aims to contribute to
the ongoing discourse on software product
structure through the lens of S-D logic and to
provide insights that can inform future research
efforts.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-7">
      <title>4.1. Service-Dominant logic</title>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-8">
      <title>Logic) perspective (S-D</title>
      <p>Software product structure has become an
important area of research in the context of
Service-Dominant Logic (S-D Logic) perspective.
One of the key themes that emerged from the
review is the importance of applying S-D Logic to
the design of service-dominant business models
for digital innovation in software product
development [28], [29]. These studies highlight
the need for software companies to shift from a
product-centric approach to a service-centric
approach that emphasizes value co-creation with
customers. This involves understanding customer
needs, co-designing solutions with them, and
continuously iterating and improving the product
based on customer feedback.</p>
      <p>Another important theme that emerged from
the review is the role of institutions and
technology in the value co-creation process of
restaurant consumers [28]. This study highlights
how the adoption of S-D Logic can help restaurant
businesses to create value by leveraging
institutional and technological resources to
cocreate experiences with customers.</p>
      <p>The adoption of S-D Logic can also help
companies to achieve radical service innovation
in manufacturing, by focusing on value
cocreation with customers and other stakeholders
[25]. This involves identifying and leveraging
new sources of value, such as customer data, and
integrating them into the product development
process.</p>
      <p>Applying S-D Logic to translation service
provision can help service providers to better
understand and meet customer needs, by
cocreating solutions with [29]. This involves
understanding the customer's context,
preferences, and expectations, and designing
solutions that are tailored to their needs.</p>
      <p>The adoption of S-D Logic can also help to
address the challenges of energy transitions, by
providing an integrative framework for assessing
the impact of new technologies and policies on
value co-creation with [26]. This involves
understanding the needs and preferences of
energy consumers and designing solutions that are
aligned with their values and goals.</p>
      <p>Finally, applying S-D Logic to smart city
development can help to create sustainable and
livable cities that provide value to all stakeholders
[30]. This involves understanding the needs and
preferences of different stakeholders and
designing solutions that are tailored to their needs
and preferences.</p>
      <p>In conclusion, the adoption of S-D Logic can
provide a useful framework for understanding and
designing software product structures that are
focused on value co-creation with customers and
other stakeholders.
4.2.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-9">
      <title>Value Co-creation</title>
      <p>Value co-creation is an important aspect of
service-dominant logic (S-D logic), which
emphasizes the importance of collaboration
between service providers and customers in value
creation. In recent years, there has been an
increasing interest in exploring the concept of
value co-creation across various industries,
including the software industry. In this scoping
review, we examine the literature on software
product structure in the context of
servicedominant logic and its relation to value
cocreation.</p>
      <p>
        One of the key subject that emerged from the
literature is the importance of aligning resources,
actors, and contexts for value creation. [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref3">31</xref>
        ] argue
that knowledge management can play a critical
role in this alignment process, by facilitating the
sharing of knowledge and expertise between
different actors involved in value co-creation.
This is particularly relevant in the context of
software development, where different
stakeholders, including developers, designers, and
users, need to collaborate and share information
to create value.
      </p>
      <p>Also, [32] discussion on the role of customer
participation in value co-creation suggest that
customers should be seen as active participants in
the value creation process, rather than passive
recipients of value. This is especially relevant in
the context of software, where users often play an
important role in providing feedback and
suggestions for improving the software product.
Similarly, [32] demonstrate how digital platforms
like Airbnb can facilitate value co-creation by
providing users with opportunities to share their
experiences and insights with others.</p>
      <p>A related context that emerged from the
literature is the importance of brand communities
in value co-creation [33] develop a brand
community engagement model that emphasizes
the importance of building strong relationships
with customers and fostering a sense of
community among users. This is particularly
relevant in the software industry, where many
software products have dedicated user
communities that provide support and feedback to
developers.</p>
      <p>Finally, the literature also highlights the
importance of innovation in value co-creation.
[34] argue that innovation is a critical driver of
value creation in service industries, and that firms
need to continually innovate and adapt to
changing customer needs and preferences. This is
particularly relevant in the software industry,
where rapid technological advancements and
changing user expectations require firms to
continually innovate and improve their products.</p>
      <p>Overall, the findings from this scoping review
suggest that value co-creation is a critical aspect
of software industry in the context of
servicedominant logic. By aligning resources, actors, and
contexts, engaging customers in the value creation
process, leveraging digital platforms and brand
communities, and fostering a culture of
innovation, firms can create software products
that provide value to both the firm and its
customers.</p>
      <p>In conclusion, this review sheds light on the
importance of value co-creation in the software
industry and its relation to service-dominant logic.
By understanding and leveraging the principles of
S-D logic, software firms can create products that
better meet the needs and preferences of their
customers, while also driving innovation and
growth.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-10">
      <title>4.3. Service-Oriented development product</title>
      <p>The software product development process has
undergone significant changes in recent years
with the increasing emphasis on service-oriented
product development. This approach focuses on
creating software products that offer services to
the customers, rather than just selling a product.
Service-dominant (S-D) logic provides a
theoretical framework for understanding the value
co-creation process in service-oriented product
development.</p>
      <p>The scoping review of software product
structure in the context of service-dominant logic
examines the various design aspects of
servicedominant business models in software
development. The evaluation of the design of
service-dominant business models is crucial to the
success of the software product development
process. The study by [35] provides a qualitative
method for evaluating the design of
servicedominant business models. The study emphasizes
the importance of understanding the customer's
value proposition and how the software product
can deliver value to the customers.</p>
      <p>The design principles for digital value
cocreation networks in service-dominant logic are
essential in software product development. The
study by [36] proposes five design principles for
digital value co-creation networks: (1)
modularity, (2) openness, (3) connectivity, (4)
heterogeneity, and (5) dynamicity. These design
principles enable software developers to create
software products that offer services to the
customers in a collaborative manner.</p>
      <p>The service-dominant business model design
for digital innovation in smart mobility is another
critical aspect of software product development.
The study by [37] proposes a service-dominant
business model design for digital innovation in
smart mobility. The study emphasizes the
importance of understanding the value
proposition of the customers and how the software
product can deliver value in the context of smart
mobility.</p>
      <p>The service-dominant logic perspective also
provides insight into the paths towards radical
service innovation in manufacturing companies.
The study by [25] highlights the importance of
understanding the customer's value proposition
and the co-creation of value with the customers in
service-oriented product development. The study
emphasizes the need for a shift from a
productdominant logic to a service-dominant logic
perspective in the software product development
process.</p>
      <p>In conclusion, the theme of service-oriented
product development is essential in the software
product development process. The scoping review
of software product structure in the context of
service-dominant logic provides insights into the
various design aspects of service-dominant
business models in software development. The
studies by [25], [35]–[37] highlight the
importance of understanding the customer's value
proposition and the co-creation of value with the
customers in service-oriented product
development. The service-dominant logic
perspective offers a theoretical framework for
understanding the value co-creation process in
service-oriented product development, and
software developers can utilize this framework to
create software products that offer services to the
customers.
4.4.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-11">
      <title>Co-creation of knowledge</title>
      <p>The concept of co-creation of knowledge is an
important theme in the context of
servicedominant (S-D) logic, which emphasizes the
importance of collaboration between service
providers and customers in the creation of value.
In this scoping review on software product
structure in the context of S-D logic, several
articles shed light on the importance of
cocreation of knowledge in software development.</p>
      <p>One article that highlights the significance of
bringing the individual into the co-creation of
value is [38] study on individual involvement in
value co-creation. The study emphasizes the role
of customer participation in the co-creation
process, which allows software developers to gain
valuable insights into customer needs and
preferences. This, in turn, helps software
developers to design and develop software
products that better meet customer requirements.</p>
      <p>
        Similarly, [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref3">31</xref>
        ] discuss the alignment of
resources, actors, and contexts for value creation,
which emphasizes the importance of knowledge
management in service-dominant logic. The
authors argue that knowledge management plays
a crucial role in facilitating the co-creation of
knowledge between service providers and
customers. In the context of software
development, knowledge management can help
developers to gain insights into customer needs,
preferences, and behaviors, which can be used to
design and develop software products that better
meet customer requirements.
      </p>
      <p>Another article by [39] explores the
antecedents and outcomes of service co-creation
in the sharing economy. The study emphasizes the
importance of customer participation in the
cocreation process, which is essential for creating
value in the sharing economy. The authors argue
that customer participation in the co-creation
process helps to create a sense of ownership
among customers, which can lead to increased
loyalty and satisfaction. In the context of software
development, this sense of ownership can help to
ensure that software products are developed in a
way that meets customer requirements and
expectations.</p>
      <p>Lastly, [40] discuss the concept of co-creation
of knowledge in higher education, which
emphasizes the importance of collaboration
between educators and students in the creation of
knowledge. The authors argue that co-creation of
knowledge in higher education can help to create
a more engaging and effective learning
experience for students. In the context of software
development, this concept can be applied to the
development of educational software products,
where collaboration between educators and
software developers can help to create software
products that better meet the needs of students and
educators.</p>
      <p>In conclusion, the theme of co-creation of
knowledge is an essential concept in the context
of service-dominant logic, and several articles
highlight its importance in the development of
software products. By emphasizing the
importance of customer participation, knowledge
management, and collaboration, software
developers can design and develop software
products that better meet customer requirements
and expectations.
4.5.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-12">
      <title>Value Co-creation Networks</title>
      <p>The theme of value co-creation networks is
central to the software product structure in the
context of service-dominant (S-D) logic. The
concept of value co-creation networks posits that
value is created through the collaboration of
multiple actors in a network, such as customers,
employees, and partners [41]. In the software
industry, value co-creation networks are
increasingly important, as software products are
becoming more complex and require
collaboration across various stakeholders. This
scoping review explores the literature on software
product structure in the context of S-D logic, with
a focus on the theme of value co-creation
networks.</p>
      <p>One study that contributes to the theme of
value co-creation networks is the research by [36],
which proposes design principles for digital value
co-creation networks from a service-dominant
logic perspective. The authors argue that value
cocreation networks in the digital space require a
design that is based on collaboration,
transparency, and interoperability. This study
highlights the importance of designing value
cocreation networks in software development, as
software products are increasingly becoming a
collaboration of various actors.</p>
      <p>Another study that contributes to the theme of
value co-creation networks is the research by [37],
which proposes a service-dominant business
model design for digital innovation in smart
mobility. The authors argue that a
servicedominant business model can facilitate value
cocreation networks in smart mobility, as it
encourages collaboration among stakeholders and
the use of digital technologies. This study
highlights the importance of adopting a
servicedominant business model in software
development, as it can facilitate the creation of
value co-creation networks.</p>
      <p>Furthermore, the study by [12] applies
servicedominant logic to recurrent release of software in
an action research study. The authors argue that
service-dominant logic provides a framework for
continuous improvement in software
development, as it emphasizes the importance of
collaboration among stakeholders and the
cocreation of value. This study highlights the
importance of adopting service-dominant logic in
software development, as it can facilitate the
creation of value co-creation networks.</p>
      <p>Moreover, the research by [25] explores paths
toward radical service innovation in
manufacturing companies from a
servicedominant logic perspective. The authors argue
that service-dominant logic can facilitate radical
service innovation by enabling collaboration
among stakeholders and the co-creation of value.
This study highlights the importance of adopting
service-dominant logic in software development,
as it can facilitate the creation of value co-creation
networks and enable radical innovation.</p>
      <p>Finally, the research by [28] examines the role
of institutions and technology in the value
cocreation process of restaurant consumers from a
service-dominant logic perspective. The authors
argue that value co-creation networks in the food
service industry require collaboration among
actors and the use of technology to enable value
co-creation. This study highlights the importance
of technology in enabling value co-creation
networks in software development, as software
products increasingly require collaboration
among various actors.</p>
      <p>In conclusion, the theme of value co-creation
networks is central to the software product
structure in the context of service-dominant logic.
The studies reviewed in this scoping review
demonstrate the importance of adopting
servicedominant logic and designing value co-creation
networks to facilitate collaboration among
stakeholders and the co-creation of value in
software development. These findings have
implications for software developers who seek to
create software products that are responsive to the
needs of various actors in value co-creation
networks.
4.6.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-13">
      <title>Key synthesis and summary</title>
      <p>Figure 8 provides a synthesis and summary of
the five key themes related to the software product
structure within the context of S-D logic, as
identified from the articles reviewed in this study.
These themes highlight how S-D logic is relevant
to various aspects of the software industry. They
emphasize the importance of adopting a
servicecentric approach and value co-creation strategies
from an S-D logic perspective, enabling
companies to better understand and meet
customer needs, design tailored solutions, and
continuously improve products based on customer
feedback.</p>
      <p>However, it appears that the specific aspects of
software product structure within the context of
SD logic, which is the main research question of
this study, are not well-defined in the reviewed
articles, and hence this study’s relevance is
established. Additionally, the literature lacks
discussion on productization through product
structure for software product releases, which is
an important business practice in the software
industry.</p>
      <p>Further research is needed to address these
identified gaps and advance the understanding of
software product structure within the context of
SD logic. This will provide practical guidance for
software companies in implementing S-D logic
and value co-creation strategies. This scoping
review serves as a valuable resource for future
research and aims to generate interest among
researchers in this topic.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-14">
      <title>5. Conclusion</title>
      <p>In conclusion, this study highlights the
significance of approaching software product
structures from a Service-Dominant Logic (S-D
Logic) perspective. The study employed a scoping
review methodology to examine the literature on
software productization and product structure in
the context of Service-Dominant (S-D) Logic.
The five-stage scoping process by [27] including
identifying the research question, compiling
relevant studies for the literature search, applying
inclusion criteria to select relevant articles, and
extracting data to chart and synthesize the
findings was adopted. A total of 56 research
articles were selected for the final analysis. The
study found patterns and gaps in the literature
related to software product structure in the S-D
logic context, which can inform future research
and development in this area.</p>
      <p>The review identifies five key themes: the S-D
Logic Perspective, Value Co-Creation,
ServiceOriented Product Development, Co-Creation of
Knowledge, and Value Co-Creation Networks.
These themes provide a comprehensive picture of
the state of research in this area software
productization from S-D logic perspective and
suggest several avenues for future research.</p>
      <p>The review provides a valuable resource for
researchers interested in this topic by synthesizing
the existing literature on software product
structure in the context of S-D Logic. It highlights
the importance of value co-creation, which has
become an important aspect of S-D Logic and has
been shown to drive innovation and enhance
customer satisfaction. Additionally, the review
underscores the need for software companies to
shift from a product-centric approach to a
servicecentric approach that emphasizes co-creation of
value with customers.</p>
      <p>From a managerial perspective, the findings of
this review have important implications for
software companies. The adoption of S-D Logic
can help companies to better understand and meet
customer needs, design solutions that are tailored
to their needs, and continuously iterate and
improve the product based on customer feedback.
Additionally, the review highlights the
importance of aligning resources, actors, and
contexts for value creation, which underscores the
need for companies to foster strong relationships
with customers and to leverage institutional and
technological resources to co-create experiences
with them.</p>
      <p>The review also emphasizes the importance of
designing value co-creation networks in software
development, as software products increasingly
require collaboration among various stakeholders.
The reviewed studies demonstrate the importance
of adopting service-dominant logic and designing
value co-creation networks to facilitate
collaboration among stakeholders and the
cocreation of value in software development.</p>
      <p>However, the review also has some
limitations. The scoping review methodology
may not have captured all relevant literature on
the topic, and the literature analyzed focused
mainly on the software industry, which may limit
the generalizability of the findings. Additionally,
while the review identified several avenues for
future research, the specific research questions
that need to be addressed in order to advance the
understanding of software product structure in the
context of S-D Logic are not well-defined.</p>
      <p>In summary, this scoping review provides a
comprehensive understanding of the literature on
software product structure in the context of S-D
Logic. It highlights the importance of adopting a
service-centric approach to software product
development, emphasizes the role of value
cocreation, and identifies several avenues for future
research. The findings of this review have
important implications for software companies, as
they underscore the need for companies to foster
strong relationships with customers and to
leverage institutional and technological resources
to co-create experiences with them. While the
review has some limitations, it provides a valuable
resource for researchers interested in this topic
and lays the groundwork for future research in this
area.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-15">
      <title>6. Acknowledgements</title>
      <p>Foundation for Economic Education supported
this work: [Grant Number 22-12080]</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-16">
      <title>7. References</title>
      <p>
        [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref34">1</xref>
        ] P. Artz, I. van de Weerd, and S.
Brinkkemper, “Productization: The process of
transforming from customer-specific software
development to product software development”.
      </p>
      <p>[2] L. Xu and S. Brinkkemper, “Concepts of
Product Software: Paving the Road for Urgently
Needed Research,” The first International
Workshop on Philosophical Foundations of
Information Systems Engineering (PHISE’05),
pp. 523–528, 2005.</p>
      <p>[3] M. A. Akaka, K. Koskela-Huotari, and S.
L. Vargo, “Further Advancing Service Science
with Service-Dominant Logic: Service
Ecosystems, Institutions, and Their Implications
for Innovation,” in Handbook of Service Science,
Volume II, P. P. Maglio, C. A. Kieliszewski, J. C.
Spohrer, K. Lyons, L. Patrício, and Y. Sawatani,
Eds., in Service Science: Research and
Innovations in the Service Economy. Cham:
Springer International Publishing, 2019, pp. 641–
659. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-98512-1_28.</p>
      <p>[4] S. L. Vargo and R. F. Lusch, “Evolving to
a New Dominant Logic for Marketing,” Journal of
Marketing, vol. 68, no. 1, pp. 1–17, Jan. 2004, doi:
10.1509/jmkg.68.1.1.24036.</p>
      <p>[5] S. Gbadegeshin, “The Effect of
Digitalization on the Commercialization Process
of High-Technology Companies in the Life
Sciences Industry,” Technology Innovation
Management Review, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 49–63,
2019, doi:
http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1211.</p>
      <p>[6] S. A. Fricker, “Software Product
Management,” in Software for People:
Fundamentals, Trends and Best Practices, A.
Maedche, A. Botzenhardt, and L. Neer, Eds., in
Management for Professionals. Berlin,
Heidelberg: Springer, 2012, pp. 53–81. doi:
10.1007/978-3-642-31371-4_4.</p>
      <p>[7] K. Rautiainen, L. Vuornos, and C.
Lassenius, “An experience in combining
flexibility and control in a small company’s
software product development process,” in 2003
International Symposium on Empirical Software
Engineering, 2003. ISESE 2003. Proceedings.,
Sep. 2003, pp. 28–37. doi:
10.1109/ISESE.2003.1237962.</p>
      <p>[8] A. G. Adusei, J. Härkönen, and E.
Mustonen, “Productization and Product Structure:
Extending The Perspective to Software
Business,” Int. j. bus. adm. stud, vol. 7, no. 2, Apr.
2021, doi: 10.20469/ijbas.7.10004-2.</p>
      <p>[9] S. Mohapatra and R. Roy, “Moving to
products: entrepreneurial IT firms in India,”
International Journal of Project Organisation and
Management, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 86–97, Jan. 2012,
doi: 10.1504/IJPOM.2012.045361.</p>
      <p>
        [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref14 ref17 ref22 ref28 ref4 ref44 ref48 ref8">10</xref>
        ] M. A. Cusumano, “The Changing
Software Business: Moving from Products to
Services,” Computer, vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 20–27,
Jan. 2008, doi: 10.1109/MC.2008.29.
      </p>
      <p>[11] K.-V. Hanna, H. Harri, J. Olli, and P.
Kongkiti, “Product Configuration Management in
ICT Companies: The Practitioners’ Perspective,”</p>
    </sec>
  </body>
  <back>
    <ref-list>
      <ref id="ref1">
        <mixed-citation>
          <source>Technology and Investment</source>
          , vol.
          <year>2011</year>
          , Nov.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref2">
        <mixed-citation>
          <year>2011</year>
          , doi: 10.4236/ti.
          <year>2011</year>
          .
          <volume>24028</volume>
          . [12]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>N.</given-names>
            <surname>Barqawi</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>K.</given-names>
            <surname>Syed</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and L. Mathiassen,
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref3">
        <mixed-citation>
          31, no.
          <issue>7</issue>
          , pp.
          <fpage>928</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>940</lpage>
          , Jan.
          <year>2016</year>
          , doi:
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref4">
        <mixed-citation>
          10.1108/JBIM-02-2015-
          <volume>0030</volume>
          . [13]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>X.</given-names>
            <surname>Font</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>R.</given-names>
            <surname>English</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
            <surname>Gkritzali</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <surname>W.</surname>
          </string-name>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref5">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Tourism</given-names>
            <surname>Management</surname>
          </string-name>
          , vol.
          <volume>82</volume>
          , p.
          <fpage>104200</fpage>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Feb</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref6">
        <mixed-citation>
          <year>2021</year>
          , doi: 10.1016/j.tourman.
          <year>2020</year>
          .
          <volume>104200</volume>
          . [14]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
            <surname>Williams</surname>
          </string-name>
          , “
          <article-title>The logical structure of the</article-title>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref7">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Theory</surname>
          </string-name>
          , vol.
          <volume>12</volume>
          , no.
          <issue>4</issue>
          , pp.
          <fpage>471</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>483</lpage>
          , Dec.
          <year>2012</year>
          ,
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref8">
        <mixed-citation>
          <source>doi: 10</source>
          .1177/1470593112457745. [15]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>S. L.</given-names>
            <surname>Vargo</surname>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>R. F.</given-names>
            <surname>Lusch</surname>
          </string-name>
          , “Service-
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref9">
        <mixed-citation>
          <source>the Acad. Mark. Sci.</source>
          , vol.
          <volume>36</volume>
          , no.
          <issue>1</issue>
          , pp.
          <fpage>1</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>10</lpage>
          ,
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref10">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Mar</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2008</year>
          , doi: 10.1007/s11747-007-0069-6. [16]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>A. F.</given-names>
            <surname>Payne</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>K.</given-names>
            <surname>Storbacka</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>P.</given-names>
            <surname>Frow</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref11">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Acad. Mark. Sci.</surname>
          </string-name>
          , vol.
          <volume>36</volume>
          , no.
          <issue>1</issue>
          , pp.
          <fpage>83</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>96</lpage>
          , Mar.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref12">
        <mixed-citation>
          <year>2008</year>
          , doi: 10.1007/s11747-007-0070-0. [17]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>S. L.</given-names>
            <surname>Vargo</surname>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>R. F.</given-names>
            <surname>Lusch</surname>
          </string-name>
          , “Institutions
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref13">
        <mixed-citation>
          44, no.
          <issue>1</issue>
          , pp.
          <fpage>5</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>23</lpage>
          , Jan.
          <year>2016</year>
          , doi:
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref14">
        <mixed-citation>
          10.1007/s11747-015-0456-3. [18]
          <string-name>
            <surname>A. J. Ibnu</surname>
            <given-names>WIBOWO</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , U. Sumarwan,
          <string-name>
            <surname>B.</surname>
          </string-name>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref15">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Suharjo</surname>
            , and
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Simanjuntak</surname>
          </string-name>
          , “17 Years of
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref16">
        <mixed-citation>
          22, no.
          <issue>2</issue>
          , pp.
          <fpage>482</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>492</lpage>
          , Jul.
          <year>2021</year>
          , doi:
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref17">
        <mixed-citation>
          10.3846/btp.
          <year>2021</year>
          .
          <volume>13050</volume>
          . [19]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>S. L.</given-names>
            <surname>Vargo</surname>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>R. F.</given-names>
            <surname>Lusch</surname>
          </string-name>
          , “Service-
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref18">
        <mixed-citation>
          <source>dominant logic</source>
          <year>2025</year>
          ,” International Journal of
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref19">
        <mixed-citation>
          Research in Marketing, vol.
          <volume>34</volume>
          , no.
          <issue>1</issue>
          , pp.
          <fpage>46</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>67</lpage>
          ,
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref20">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Mar</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2017</year>
          , doi: 10.1016/j.ijresmar.
          <year>2016</year>
          .
          <volume>11</volume>
          .001. [20]
          <string-name>
            <surname>M.-K. Vespestad</surname>
            and
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Clancy</surname>
          </string-name>
          , “Service
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref21">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Sciences</surname>
          </string-name>
          , vol.
          <volume>11</volume>
          , no.
          <issue>1</issue>
          , pp.
          <fpage>127</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>140</lpage>
          , Jan.
          <year>2018</year>
          ,
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref22">
        <mixed-citation>
          <source>doi: 10</source>
          .1108/IJQSS-02-2018-
          <volume>0012</volume>
          . [21]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>R. A.</given-names>
            <surname>Wells</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>M. G.</given-names>
            <surname>Gallarza</surname>
          </string-name>
          , L. Andreu,
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref23">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Public</given-names>
            <surname>Nonprofit</surname>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Mark</surname>
          </string-name>
          , vol.
          <volume>12</volume>
          , no.
          <issue>3</issue>
          , pp.
          <fpage>207</fpage>
          -
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref24">
        <mixed-citation>
          235,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Oct</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2015</year>
          , doi: 10.1007/s12208-015-0126-7. [22]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
            <surname>Díaz-Méndez</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>M. R.</given-names>
            <surname>Paredes</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <surname>M.</surname>
          </string-name>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref25">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Reframing</surname>
            the Role of Students in Higher [32]
            <given-names>Y.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Jiang</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M. S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Balaji</surname>
            , and
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Jha</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref26">
        <mixed-citation>
          <source>Journal of Hospitality Management</source>
          , vol.
          <volume>82</volume>
          , pp.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref27">
        <mixed-citation>
          169-
          <fpage>180</fpage>
          , Sep.
          <year>2019</year>
          , doi:
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref28">
        <mixed-citation>
          10.1016/j.ijhm.
          <year>2019</year>
          .
          <volume>05</volume>
          .004. [33]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>K.</given-names>
            <surname>Haverila</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
            <surname>Haverila</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <surname>C.</surname>
          </string-name>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref29">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Consumer</given-names>
            <surname>Marketing</surname>
          </string-name>
          , vol.
          <volume>39</volume>
          , no.
          <issue>2</issue>
          , pp.
          <fpage>166</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>179</lpage>
          ,
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref30">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Jan</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2022</year>
          , doi: 10.1108/JCM-01-2021-
          <volume>4390</volume>
          . [34]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>R. F.</given-names>
            <surname>Lusch</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>S. L.</given-names>
            <surname>Vargo</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
            <surname>Tanniru</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref31">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Acad. Mark. Sci.</surname>
          </string-name>
          , vol.
          <volume>38</volume>
          , no.
          <issue>1</issue>
          , pp.
          <fpage>19</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>31</lpage>
          , Feb.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref32">
        <mixed-citation>
          <year>2010</year>
          , doi: 10.1007/s11747-008-0131-z. [35]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>R.</given-names>
            <surname>Gilsing</surname>
          </string-name>
          et al.,
          <source>“Evaluating the Design</source>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref33">
        <mixed-citation>
          <source>Association for Information Systems</source>
          , vol.
          <volume>13</volume>
          , no.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref34">
        <mixed-citation>
          1,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Mar</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2021</year>
          , doi: 10.17705/1pais.
          <fpage>13102</fpage>
          . [36]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
            <surname>Blaschke</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>U.</given-names>
            <surname>Riss</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>K.</given-names>
            <surname>Haki</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <surname>S.</surname>
          </string-name>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref35">
        <mixed-citation>
          perspective,” Electron Markets, vol.
          <volume>29</volume>
          , no.
          <issue>3</issue>
          , pp.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref36">
        <mixed-citation>
          443-
          <fpage>472</fpage>
          , Sep.
          <year>2019</year>
          , doi: 10.1007/s12525-019-
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref37">
        <mixed-citation>
          00356-
          <fpage>9</fpage>
          . [37]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>O.</given-names>
            <surname>Turetken</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>P.</given-names>
            <surname>Grefen</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>R.</given-names>
            <surname>Gilsing</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <surname>O.</surname>
          </string-name>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref38">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Bus</given-names>
            <surname>Inf Syst Eng</surname>
          </string-name>
          , vol.
          <volume>61</volume>
          , no.
          <issue>1</issue>
          , pp.
          <fpage>9</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>29</lpage>
          , Feb.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref39">
        <mixed-citation>
          <year>2019</year>
          , doi: 10.1007/s12599-018-0565-x. [38]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>K. R.</given-names>
            <surname>Ranjan</surname>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
            <surname>Read</surname>
          </string-name>
          , “Bringing the
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref40">
        <mixed-citation>
          <source>of Services Marketing</source>
          , vol.
          <volume>33</volume>
          , no.
          <issue>7</issue>
          , pp.
          <fpage>904</fpage>
          -
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref41">
        <mixed-citation>
          920,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Jan</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2019</year>
          , doi: 10.1108/JSM-02-2019-
          <volume>0056</volume>
          . [39]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>F.</given-names>
            <surname>Evangelista</surname>
          </string-name>
          et al., “Antecedents and
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref42">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Economy</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,” SAGE Open, vol.
          <volume>12</volume>
          , no.
          <issue>2</issue>
          , p.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref43">
        <mixed-citation>
          21582440221096440,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Apr</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <year>2022</year>
          , doi:
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref44">
        <mixed-citation>
          10.1177/21582440221096438. [40]
          <string-name>
            <surname>M. de F. Cruz</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>H.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Alves</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and R. Gouveia
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref45">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Higher</given-names>
            <surname>Education</surname>
          </string-name>
          , vol.
          <volume>0</volume>
          , no.
          <issue>0</issue>
          , pp.
          <fpage>1</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>26</lpage>
          , Oct.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref46">
        <mixed-citation>
          <year>2022</year>
          , doi: 10.1080/08841241.
          <year>2022</year>
          .
          <volume>2134957</volume>
          . [41]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>C. K.</given-names>
            <surname>Prahalad</surname>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>V.</given-names>
            <surname>Ramaswamy</surname>
          </string-name>
          , “Co-
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref47">
        <mixed-citation>
          18, no.
          <issue>3</issue>
          , pp.
          <fpage>5</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>14</lpage>
          , Jan.
          <year>2004</year>
          , doi:
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref48">
        <mixed-citation>10.1002/dir.20015.</mixed-citation>
      </ref>
    </ref-list>
  </back>
</article>