Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Uncovers factors impacting service ecosystem viability in open-innovation initiatives, suggesting pathways for resilience.
Purpose Service ecosystems are arenas for value co-creation, yet how and why they become (un)viable over time remains underspecified. This study explores how service ecosystem viability unfolds through the interplay of valence (positive-negative) and forms of becoming (building-dwelling). Design/methodology/approach Drawing on a rich palette of qualitative data from a single-case study of a two-year open-innovation initiative in the Netherlands in a tightly regulated, high-tech public–business context, we scrutinize how intra- and inter-organizational dynamics evolve within and contribute to the viability of service ecosystems. Findings The findings reveal that intra-ecosystem interactions and performative landscape factors – including institutional arrangements, rules of engagement, legislation and inter-ecosystem trade-offs – episodically shape the viability of service ecosystems. Critically, actors’ relational embeddedness and awareness strongly influence the viability of the service ecosystem. Originality/value Theoretically, the study advances service research by offering a process-sensitive account of viability as a dynamic interplay of bright-dark valences and building-dwelling becoming. We propose an integrative framework with theoretical and empirical cues for tracing service ecosystem viability episodically. Managerially, the study offers pathways and warns of pitfalls in “wayfinding,” fostering organizations’ capability to navigate resiliently in service ecosystems.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sahhar et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: