Identifying (territorial) tensions in the servitization value chain

Purpose: To understand the tensions that servitization activities create between actors within networks. Design/methodology/approach: Interviews were conducted with manufacturers, intermediaries and customers across a range of industrial sectors. Findings: Tensions relating to two key sets of capabilities are identified: in developing or acquiring (i) operant technical expertise and (ii) operand service infrastructure. The former tension concerns whom knowledge is co-created with and where expertise resides. The latter involves a territorial investment component; firms developing strategies to acquire greater access to, or ownership of, infrastructures closer to customers. Developing and acquiring these capabilities is a strategic decision on the part of managers of servitizing firms, in order to gain recognized power and control in a particular territory. Originality/value: This paper explores how firms’ servitization activities involve value appropriation (from the rest of the network), contrasting with the narrative norm for servitization: that it creates additional value. There is a need to understand the tensions that servitization activities create within networks. Some firms may be able to improve servitization performance through co-operation rather than competition, generating co-opetitive relationships. Others may need to become much more aggressive, if they are to take a greater share of the ‘value’ from the value chain.

Let's stick together? Explaining boundaries to territorial policy variation:the case of Germany's prisons legislation

This article offers an initial impact assessment regarding the introduction of new legislative responsibilities at the Land level in a case study of prisons policy (Strafvollzug). Combining an analysis of new legislation produced across the 16 Länder since the responsibility for prisons policy was transferred to the Land level, and insights into the mechanics of policy development obtained through a series of interviews with senior politicians and officials, this article finds that the desire among Länder to legislative independently has varied, with substantial backing for co-ordination in the development of new legislation. This has helped to confound expectations of a ‘competition of harshness’ which many expected to result from decentralisation. However, even before the 2006 reforms, there were substantial variations between the Länder when it came to implementing prisons policy, so consideration of the sub-national level in this area remains essential.