Antecedents of value co-creation, co-destruction and co-recovery: Airbnb guests' perspectives
Creators: name: Sthapit, Erose
name: Björk, Peter
Publisher: name: ZPID (Leibniz Institute for Psychology)
Year: 2020
Subjects: subject: 150

description: Background of the study: Given that ‘value is uniquely, experientially and contextually perceived and determined by customers’ and, in the context of Airbnb, the service provider predefines both the tangible and intangible aspects of various product/service bundles, a goods-dominant approach (Vargo &amp; Lusch, 2004), an Airbnb experience may lead to multiple perceptions of value, that is, making them better off (co creation) or worse off (co-destruction) (Plé, 2017). There have been calls for studies to examine both value co-creation and value co-destruction and its sources in the context of the sharing economy (Nadeem, Juntunen, Shirazi, &amp; Hajli, 2020). In addition, the inherently inconsistent nature of these services and the interactive nature of service encounters may lead to service failures and service recoveries. However, to date, there has been limited research on the impact of service recovery from the perspective of value co-creation, also referred to as value co-recovery (Skourtis, Decaudin, Assioura, &amp; Karaosmanoglu, 2018). Purpose of the study: The overarching aim of this study was to explore the antecedents of value co-creation, co-destruction and co-recovery in the context of Airbnb, also referred to as value dimension. The research question this study aims to answer is the following: What are the antecedents of co-creation, co-destruction and co recovery in the context of Airbnb from a guest’s perspective? Methodology: For the data collection method, the study employed nonparticipant observation in the form of netnography. We adapted Kozinets’ (2002) netnography procedure to the sharing economy context. The first step was the search for forums, online communities and distribution lists related to the focus of the study. We selected online reviews about Airbnb guests’ experiences posted on Trustpilot. Data collection and analysis were conducted between August 2019 and January 2020. The search words ‘good’, ‘excellent’, ‘great’, ‘nice’ and ‘amazing’ were used to capture online visitors’ narratives that indicated value co-creation and value co-recovery, while the keywords ‘awful’, ‘bad’, ‘worst’, ‘terrible’ and ‘poor’ were linked to value co-destruction. Results: A major theme that elicited both value co-recovery and co-destruction is Airbnb’s customer service. Of the 371 reviews posted online (102 positive and 269 negative reviews), 253 were linked to Airbnb’s customer service. More specifically, 69 online posts were positive, while 184 were negative. Some guests experienced positive customer service, while others felt that it their problems could not be solved in a timely and proper manner. Another significant theme that appeared from our analysis was Airbnb hosts’ actions as the source of both positive and negative outcomes of the IVF process (value co-creation and co destruction). Of the 371 reviews posted, 118 (31.80%) emphasised Airbnb hosts’ actions. Some guests perceived the host’s actions as positive, while others considered the actions as a predominant dissatisfier that did not fulfil Airbnb’s resource (value proposition) and their expectations. In fact, 33 online posts were positive, while 85 were negative. The subsequent uncertainty and lack of clarity resulted in a decline in the guest’s well being because of the unexpected resource loss (emotional, financial and temporal).Besides, a lack of communication, reports of unethical actions by the host, particularly Airbnb hosts cancelling bookings at the last minute, also generated value co-destruction among the guests and resulted in a decline in their well-being. Evidently, the host’s friendly behaviour, including prompt communication between the host and the guest, led to value co-creation. However, incongruent resource applications by the host, such as inappropriate actions by the host contributed to value co-destruction. Conclusions: First, the present study includes the antecedents of value co-creation, co-destruction and co-recovery in the context of Airbnb: customer service and hosts’ actions. Second, the findings showed that not all service failures lead to value co-destruction and collaborative engagement involving a congruent application of resources, particularly operant resources, between actors following a service failure results in value co-recovery in the context of Airbnb. Third, another important finding is that particular value dimensions can individually act as a source of value co-creation, value co-recovery and value co-destruction for the customer (Airbnb guest). Mkono, 2019). Research implications and limitations: First, hosts who are frequently reported as unresponsive, unhelpful and unprofessional towards guests should be banned from hosting on Airbnb. Second, hosts must be held accountable in situations where things go wrong because of them, for example, if guests complain about a lack of communication and last minute cancellations by the host. Third, there remains a need for Airbnb to develop a strict policy on service failure and establish clear and efficient procedures for service recovery. References: Camilleri, J., &amp; Neuhofer, B. (2017). Value co-creation and co-destruction in the Airbnb sharing economy. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 29(9), 2322–2340. Furunes, T., &amp; Mkono, M. (2019). Service-delivery success and failure under the sharing economy. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 31(8), 3352–3370. Grönroos, C., &amp; Gummerus, J. (2014). The service revolution and its marketing implications: Service logic vs service-dominant logic. Managing Service Quality: An International Journal, 24(3), 206–229. Kozinets, R. V. (2002). The field behind the screen: Using netnography for marketing research in online communities. Journal of Marketing Research, 39(1), 61–72. Nadeem, W., Juntunen, F., Shirazi, M., &amp; Hajli, N. (2020). Consumers’ value co-creation in sharing economy: The role of social support, consumers’ ethical perceptions and relationship quality. Technological Forecasting &amp; Social Change, 151, 119786. Plé, L. (2017). Why do we need research on value co-destruction? Journal of Creating Value, 3(2), 162–169. Skourtis, Decaudin, Assioura, &amp; Karaosmanoglu, (2018). Does the Co‐Creation of Service Recovery Create Value for Customers? The Underlying Mechanism of Motivation and the Role of Operant Resources. European Management Review, 16(4), 997–1013. Vargo, S. L., &amp; Lusch, R. F. (2004). Evolving to a new dominant logic for marketing. Journal of Marketing, 68(1), 1–17.