Innovating User Value - Jan Schmiedgen

News from our Design Thinking Research Program

Wed, 03 Sep 2014 14:37:04 +0000

The last two days I had the pleasure of getting updated again what has happened in 2014 within our research program. The range of topics, which are examined within this small community is very broad – as is design thinking. All of them are important but some – at least for me – are outstanding. So here is my very subjective and retitled list of current projects that I really liked:

Augmented reality wound care with Google Glass

Exploring interaction pattern for the upcoming (and moving!) Internet of things

Enabling fast electronic tiny task prototyping a.k.a. build stuff in seven seconds

How to measure design thinking, creative agency and output?

Exiting stuff! Looking forward to March 2015 and the next meeting in Stanford. Became also a fan of Susanne Katharina Asheuer: She captured the essences of all these wild and diverse presentations in her great graphic recordings. Oh, in case you’re interested in our contribution: We talked about different ways of design thinking appropriation.

News from our Design Thinking Research Program was originally published on Jan Schmiedgen

Disclosing Shared Value in Business Ecosystems

Mon, 10 Dec 2012 14:31:00 +0000

Any holistic user experience - especially when designing for ‘transformation’ - should create shared value. That means: Solutions for users do not only have to be aligned and negotiated with the economic realities of the service provider, but also with its attached partner ecosystem and society in general. The clever and resilient configuration of “value flows” in business ecosystems will therefore more and more become a prerequisite for the development and delivery of truly “new” and complex value propositions (e.g. service design for health care, environmental matters, etc.).

A problem however is: Everyone talks about “shared value creation” (especially since Michael Porter made the concept famous). Yet only a few people so far have developed practical and/or theoretical approaches that help you tackle occurring trade-offs (e.g. “superior user value a.k.a. desirability” +/vs. “feasible technology” + “financial viability" +/vs. "responsible eco-footprint”) when trying to either find the »sweet spot between all of them« - or better - finding creative resolutions that makes our conception of mutual exclusiveness obsolete . I personally believe that a good starting point is to develop a holistic and clear understanding of what actually “value” is, how the staging of user/actor experiences contribute to its perception and on what levels it can be experienced by the different actors (e.g. of a business ecosystem). Knowing this may also give first hints on how to master the delicate balance/resolution of fore-mentioned trade-offs for the creation of new offerings with service-market-fit AND benefits for society/environment.

The slides are from a workshop presentation, I recently prepared for the World Usability Day 2012 in Berlin. I haven’t included all the (illustrative) examples yet, but the main key messages/concepts should become clear. I’m really looking forward to getting some feedback (critique, more examples, papers, links, etc.) on this! I’m especially interested on practical (but not as oversimplified as e.g. in advertising “creative briefs”) value (proposition) frameworks, templates, checklists from your recent research/projects …

View “Disclosing Shared Value in Business Ecosystems” on Scribd

Innovation and Fear: Continuum's Lara Lee "makes design thinking look sexy" - BIF-8 Summit

Sat, 20 Oct 2012 10:40:00 +0000

Lara Lee, Chief Innovation Officer at Continuum makes design thinking look sexy. Her passion for human centered design has helped companies like Pampers and Harley Davidson redesign the ways they deliver value. Always accepting failure as part of the process, Lee is fearless when it comes to trying new things…

http://www.businessinnovationfactory.com/iss/video/bif8-lara-lee

McKinsey on "Designing products for value" (for what else?)

Wed, 10 Oct 2012 16:21:41 +0000

“By combining deep insights about customers, competitors, and costs, a few leading companies are finding the “sweet spot” in product development: lowering costs while designing better products that customers value more. Along the way, these companies are strengthening organizational capabilities that will help them thrive in an era of heightened global competition.”

Sounds familiar, huh? However - again a typical McKinsey article, focusing on “product attributes” and design as a means to create value in terms of “optimization” (e.g. the “sweet spot” in terms of customer satisfaction à la KANO). No word about user experience or an accompanying innovation of meaning …

I think: Obvious, product-centered and boring! BUT nevertheless another step forward in building awareness on people-centric thinking and holistic value creation from the guys you would expect it the least. ;)

"Magic" Design Thinking

Wed, 10 Oct 2012 13:45:57 +0000

"Magic" Design Thinking:

Another nice description of the d.confestival spirit.

Frame Creation – Kees Dorst on the Importance of Reframing in Design Thinking

Sat, 06 Oct 2012 21:56:00 +0000

d.confestival d.note, Friday 21.-22.09.2012, Potsdam, Germany

“The goal must be to build frame creation ability into organisations! In the end one can view companies as a series of frames: Frames for resilience.” – Kees Dorst

Kees Dorst, industrial designer and professor from the University of Technology, Sydney is a man who is studying things thoroughly. All the more the d.confestival participants were listening reverently when he gave exclusive insights into his profound knowledge from 20 years of research into the practices of designers. With the objective of developing a design-based innovation method for governments, institutions and companies, he focuses his research on the pattern of what expert designers are really doing.

What he found is that design-like approaches and practices to problem-solving are especially powerful in situations were a problem owner succumbs to the »tried anything phenomenon«, which was already mentioned by SAP’s design thinking veteran Hanswerner Dreissigacker at the beginning of the d.confestival. Especially, if at the worst, problems can’t be owned and if they are open, highly complex, dynamic and networked – in short »wicked« – it makes sense to use design practices in search for a solution. This he explained has to do with the fact that problems can never be solved in the contexts in which they arose. Therefore experienced designers aren’t interested in unhesitatingly solving them. They rather focus on finding ways how to deal with them by asking themselves how new contexts and frames may help approaching issues from another perspective.

Deduced from these observations of expert procedure, he found nine distinct but overlapping phases, which he put up for discussion: Archeology → paradox → context → problem arena → themes → frames → futures → transformation → connections. Along these stages he explained how the methodology has already been used successfully by presenting some insightful examples projects. Especially his »Designing out Crime« program was an interesting example of how frame creation may shift perspective and even the problem owner. Whereas the responsibility for »crime« (public urination, young people fighting due to the overcrowded streets, drug and alcohol abuse, etc.) in Sydney’s entertainment and nightlife district Kings Cross laid with the city police it is now with the city council. How come? The issues to solve weren’t really related to »crime«. Once the new frame »organizing a music festival« was applied to the problem most of the »criminal incidents« suddenly disappeared…

Following his presentation, he gave an additional two hour workshop were participants had the opportunity to get advanced insights into his frame creation method. During the session he introduced more cases of wicked problems and projects were the method has already been applied.

One of the examples was the Sydney opera house, whose roof often gets »abused« for campaigns of environmental activists. The challenges the opera house administration faces withal were elucidated in detail by two guest speakers from the city council and the police department of Sydney. Both also helped explaining and discussing the several phases in more depth.

Finally the attendees were given time to form small groups and pick one of the distinct phases of the frame creation method. The task then was to collect activities, which from their point of view, happen in the respective stages. Or in other words: Which prerequisites in terms of knowledge, skills, methods and tools does one need to create new frames and innovate like an expert designer? Everyone noticeably enjoyed the insightful exercise and one participant from VW research finally stated: “This I will definitely bring back to my team!”

Professor Kees Dorst, Associate Dean (Research) of Design at UTS, talks about how design thinking can help businesses reframe problems in order to solve them.

—-

The above text chunks are part of the first drafts for the documentation booklet of the d.confestival. The complete documentation will be available soon at the official d.confestival site.

Experience Values and Service Design – Yong Se Kim (CDI, Korea) at d.confestival

Fri, 05 Oct 2012 21:58:00 +0000

d.confestival d.note, Friday 21.09.2012, Potsdam, Germany

Product Service Systems (PSS) are nothing new – they basically exist as early as we can think and with a wide variety of offerings. However, up to now the focus of design has often been on the product with a mere attachment of service. Today this seems a bad idea, as in the sheer mass of available consuming options product attributes alone aren’t a guarantee for differentiation anymore.

“But that is not all”, says Yong Se Kim, Director of the Creative Design Institute and Professor of Mechanical Engineering at Sungkyunkwan University, Korea: ”What is even more important to consider is the perceived value for the customer!” In today’s development of PSS’ a human values-focused service mindset (or service-dominant logic, known as SD-logic) should guide every design process, he claims. People are first – people and their subjective, context-dependent experiences!

What exactly that means he showed the participants by introducing his E3 value concept, which covers three main types of value: Economical, ecological and experience value. Especially the latter has been paid little regard to in the past. Through and through design researcher he first theoretically broke it down to its sub-categories (extrinsic value with functional and extrinsic social value as well as intrinsic value with emotional, intrinsic social and epistemic value) and elucidated its interplay with context-based activity modeling. He then gave further illustrative examples in how far the alteration of ‘mere’ experience value can radically change the success of a PSS. One out of many service design cases he presented was the improvement of a ‘clothing donation’ experience in Korea: Nowadays rather unaesthetic donation containers are usually placed in dark side roads. That’s why especially during evening hours woman often have a feeling of insecurity when inserting clothing alone. So in order to improve their psychological context and promote the experience value for any donator, the location context for the activity had to change.

Therefore widespread convenient stores have been chosen as the perfect new donation environment. Donation box models have been improved and now also cleverly feature many elements of co-creation (pre-washing at home, self-labeling, etc.). As all this needs some digital technology, the new ‘save’ environment provides the perfect location context, for the box as well as for the user and not least for the shop owners. A perfect example of systemic activity design for and with various stakeholders that focused on the experience, but created value on all levels.

These text chunks are part of the first drafts for the documentation booklet of the d.confestival. The complete documentation will be available soon at the official d.confestival site.

Defining »Designership« – Rick Schuhmann (MIT) at d.confestival

Thu, 04 Oct 2012 22:00:00 +0000

d.confestival d.note, Friday 21.09.2012, Potsdam, Germany

What is it, that constitutes a »good« designer? And what do citizen, sportsmen and leaders have in common with the latter? These were just few of the questions Prof. Rick Schuhmann (Program Manager and Senior Lecturer, Massachusetts Institute of Technology) posed to the initially perplexed d.confestival crowd. But it soon became clear were the philosophical discourse, he and his colleagues are wrestling with since 15 years, would be leading to: The personal responsibility and awareness of the designer.

But let’s start from the beginning: According to Schuhmann being a leader, sportsman or citizen doesn’t imply ethical and moral standards. One can be the »world leader of environmental pollution«, a doping sportsman or even a criminal citizen locked up in prison. Once one adds the little suffix »–ship« however, things look totally different. Sportsmanship stays for ethical and exemplary behavior and practice. Leadership usually gets associated with skill, integrity, responsibility, determination and many other traits, which have rather positive connotations. And if we apply now the same principle to design – ergo designership – will we have to assess the goodness of design differently? Apple may be conceived as a design leader, but it also is a leader in planned obsolescence. Is this good designership? And what does designership mean anyways?

In his search for ideas and characteristics that may describe designership he looked into the worldviews of many different domain experts like for instance Dieter Rams with his famous ten principles of a good designer. The latter were then used for a lively and still open-ended discussion with the d.confestival participants. There was broad agreement that designers act as change agents that move the world into new directions, being consciously or unconsciously in a leadership role – if they like it or not. Such leadership at best brings along responsibility for people and their surroundings. Therefore designership not only implies designing products and systems with a purpose but also doing that with the least possible negative impact on our environment. In its pure form most of the attendees sympathized with the idea of designership as striving for value creating solutions, which simultaneously have a positive impact on society and the world. One participant put it very well by saying “It is about looking into the future and caring. We need more leadership and more designership.” So it is individually up to every designer (as it is to every leader) to take it upon himself and to follow the principles a little suffix brings along with.

These text chunks are part of the first drafts for the documentation booklet of the d.confestival. The complete documentation will be available soon at the official d.confestival site.

Does Design Thinking Change Your Life? – Bernie Roth (d.school Stanford) on Empowerment

Thu, 04 Oct 2012 08:31:00 +0000

d.confestival d.note, Friday 21.09.2012, Potsdam, Germany

“In my other life I gave people ‘knowledge’. I was disempowering them. There was no way for them of being like me: the professor. […] D.school is different. After the second day they know more about the project as I do. This is very empowering and life changing.” – Bernie Roth

Bernie Roth, the Director of the d.school at Stanford University, probably gave the most moving and remarkable d.note of this year’s d.confestival. No other speech had such a strong human and emotional touch. The whole d.circus was listening spellbound when he told those stories and facets in remembrance of Bill Moggridge that usually aren’t known to the broader public. For him and many others Bill wasn’t just the »designer of the first laptop« or one of IDEO’s early co-founders. He moreover was a friend, family father and an incredibly inspiring and empowering person. And especially this latter unique characteristic of Bill Moggridge is the one Roth considers most important. “In the end”, he said, “it is all about empowerment, about making people feel good about themselves – something Bill was very good at.”

How important the experience of empowerment, as a kind of prerequisite for, but also as an outcome of design (thinking) for his development was, he showed by sharing some very interesting and sometimes funny insights into his own life. Being part of the 60’s »human potential movement« in California and confronted with the sudden death of his senior professor, he and some other rather inexperienced young guys had to develop a new curriculum for the mechanical engineering faculty. It turned out to be quite unusual, as it prompted his direct superior to conclude: “Roth! Engineering is about things not people!” Nowadays such a statement may sound like an anachronism but back then, he went on, it was a prevalent way of thinking. Only the constant stream of coincidences provoking permanent experimentation and dealing with new situations made him to what he is today. “In the end”, he said, “freaky weird stuff is what led me to the d.school.” And this exactly is what he also encourages his students to do. There are no rules set in stone, there is no slavish devotion on teaching plans, curricula, methods or tools – what matters for him is the transformation of the students itself. The methodology may be a catalyst but in the end it is up to us and how we’re going to transform our own personal lives and design thinking itself, which led him to the conclusion: “If we don’t change it, it is already dead! […] We want you to join the (design thinking) movement. But don’t be like us. It is a new way to free yourself!”

—-

These text chunks are part of the first drafts for the documentation booklet of the d.confestival. The complete documentation will be available soon at the official d.confestival site.

—-

Update (Dec 18'th 2012): Here is a video from the d.confestival site.

"Companies now know how to build anything but they don’t know what to build."

Wed, 03 Oct 2012 13:04:04 +0000

“Companies now know how to build anything but they don’t know what to build.”

- Patrick Whitney

Why Design, Why now? – Patrick Whitney (ID.IIT) on the Power of Reframing

Wed, 03 Oct 2012 13:03:00 +0000

d.confestival d.note, Friday 21.09.2012, Potsdam, Germany

In the last years there has been written and spoken a lot about the importance of design. All the more it was another highlight of the d.confestival to get a perspective on its future from the dean of an institute that has one of the longest traditions in teaching and preaching design thinking: Patrick Whitney from the Institute of Design at the Illinois Institute of Technology.

Right from the beginning he provoked a lot of amusement by showing Meg Whitman’s (CEO of Hewlett Packard) apparent understanding of »design«: Pretty Apple-lookalike hardware with nice features merely competing on the surface level of what holistic design is meant to be. He explained this »typical design underestimation trap« using an analysis-synthesis bridge model that illustrated HP’s proceeding – analysis of current situation and competitive space at hand and than the immediate creation of a solution or answer to it. “What HP misses here” he said “is the abstraction of the design problem.” An integral and probably the most important part of design is, to reframe the problem and move innovation processes into the abstract realm of identifying patterns and generating alternative options. This, he continued, is what Apple did when it prepared itself for disrupting the music industry. It was quite late to the »MP3 game« but didn’t just tried to build a better feature-rich player. Instead it asked, what is it that people really want and do with this new technology? The problem got reframed to the question »How might we change the way how people experience music?« The rest of the story is known. Their initial thinking and the willingness to experiment with iTunes (which came out even before the iPod) laid the ground for the later platform strategy and its resilient ecosystem, which couldn’t be attacked let alone, copied so far.

The real power of design for Whitney is therefore manifested in the process of reframing and rejecting initial problem definitions. This, he concluded, leads to better decisions and less waste of energy in organizations that are in the need to innovate. Or as he put it: “We move from an economy of scale to an economy of choice. […] Companies may now know how to build anything, but all too often they don’t know what to build.”

——

Below I added a short video were he shortly explains the importance of reframing for real innovation. Some of this important topic is also covered here.

Patrick Whitney, Institute of Design Dean and Steelcase / Robert C. Pew Professor explains the value of design for business and innovation–in under four minutes!

These text chunks are part of the first drafts for the documentation booklet of the d.confestival. The complete documentation will be available soon at the official d.confestival site.

Implementing Design Thinking in a Company

Mon, 24 Sep 2012 11:16:00 +0000

d.confestival d.note, Friday 21.09.2012, Potsdam, Germany

Design thinking the future? In a corporation? With more than 65,000 people? Not the easiest undertaking, but possible. P&G managed to do so, and so does SAP. Gordon Mühl, SAP’s Senior Vice President for Architecture Governance and Standards, gave impressive insights how the company from Waldorf deployed a design attitude for software development in its subsidies all over the world. It started with just eight little projects, expert coaches and the creation of respective spaces. After many internal coaching cycles and the extension to up to 40 projects, 30 design spaces and 72 coaches, the responsibility is now given to the developing units itself.

Hanswerner Dreissigacker, SAP’s design thinking veteran from the very start, added that the igniting of people doesn’t happen without getting a »bloody nose«. Especially successful teams and units in the organization may turn out to be resistant to change. So he recommended to find those, which for some reason have failed repeatedly and know that they can’t go forward anymore in their old ways. Due to the many skeptics, SAP also conducted internal research on design thinking’s impact for project success and quality. The results clearly proved improvements in the dimensions of creativity and feasibility compared to traditional approaches, he added.

How impressive those results – driven by the still ongoing merge of design thinking and lean development – can look like, finally was showcased by Cafer Tosun (Senior Vice President, SAP Innovation Center), Christian RA Regenbrecht (Institute of Pathology & Comprehensive Cancer Center, Charité), and Michael Gutsmann (CFO, Bigpoint). The former highlighted the important role design thinking played in the development of HANA (in-memory computing speeding up database access) while the latter both presented applications building on this fundamental research: The HANA oncolizer, which gives back time for patient care by analyzing complex data in real time and an incredibly clever system to activate casual online gamers for in-game purchases by running light-speed analyses on three million users with just some taps on an iPad. These are just two examples emerging out of the new spirit, Tonsun emphasized. As the system is that new and still beyond imagination for many, SAP now proactively approaches existing and prospective customers for co-creating and discovering possible use scenarios: A design thinking attitude on all fronts and at all levels.

View the video documentation of the d.note here!

These text chunks are part of the first drafts for the documentation booklet of the d.confestival. The complete documentation will be available soon at the official d.confestival site.

"Communication design focuses on delivering messages, and it encompasses most graphic design,..."

Mon, 24 Sep 2012 08:54:20 +0000

“Communication design focuses on delivering messages, and it encompasses most graphic design, signage, and communicative objects of all kinds, from printed materials to three-dimensional and digital projects. Interface and interaction design, which is sometimes brought under the more generic and functionalist rubric of user-experience design, delineates the behavior of products and systems, as well as the experience that people will have with them. Information or visualization design includes the maps, diagrams, and visualization tools that filter and make sense of the enormous amount of information that is more widely available than ever before. Critical design is one of the most promising and far-reaching new areas of study, using conceptual scenarios built around hypothetical objects to comment on the social, political, and cultural consequences of new technologies and behaviors. Its disciples are experts in ‘What if?’”

- MoMA’s Paola Antonelli defines the four key sub-disciplines of design in Talk to Me: Design and the Communication Between People and Objects (via explore-blog)

One big Family – Different Futures: d.confestival's final d.note

Sun, 23 Sep 2012 17:27:00 +0000

“Don’t be too religious about design thinking in its current form”, Arne van Oosterom said at the brilliant closing note of d.confestival’s last day, when members of the steering committee, guest speakers and all the other participants were invited to talk about its future.

The discussion turned out to be as diverse and lively as the whole confestival and the reactions in the auditorium and the manege ranged from highly emotional to hard-headed final speeches. Apart from the ’methodology’s’ obvious advantages and the commonly felt need to further diffuse a design thinking attitude to as many people and organizations as possible, a variety of interesting themes emerged which may really have a profound impact on its evolution. Many participants for example had the impression that there were only a few visible attendees from the existing service design communities, not to speak of members of the business model innovation discourse. How can this be? Why do these content-wise closely interconnected communites still seem to be isolated? The want for more connection with the friends of other interest groups also brought forward the question of how to better integrate the different networks of design thinkers, or as Eku Wand phrased it: “I’m just overwhelmed. Shall I use LinkedIn, SDN, DTN or Facebook? We need one international network!” “Ok, then the challenge is set”, said Bettina von Stamm, “let’s innovate, how innovaters connect!” This is just one out of many examples of the wonderful dynamic that accompanied the whole confestival. In three days probably as many new design challenges have been discovered as could fill the slots of all future dconfestivals. Therefore there was common agreement to continue bringing the ’d.spirit’to as many people as possible. However, always with having in mind that creative confidence will only then be created whenever there is no line drawn between ’design thinkers’ and ’other’ people. Or as George Kembel stated “We are still students. We can meet, we can have great conferences! But the best you can do is just keep moving forward. So, make! Do! Learn!” So design thinking also means being innovative on making the process itself your own. A process that will permanently have adapt to the context it is applied in. Therefore design thinking will have many futures not just one. So the greatest consensus was reached by not viewing it as a methodology with ’fixed rules’ but as a mindset, which demands less and less rules and more and more empowering. Or as Bernie Roth and George Kembel put it over and over: “People first, methodology second. If you don’t change it, it is already dead!”

Dconfestival Potsdam

Wed, 19 Sep 2012 14:26:00 +0000

Dconfestival is coming! I will report! :)

Visual Business Modeling

Sun, 02 Sep 2012 22:00:00 +0000

Some slides from a “Visual Business Modeling” workshop (in that case with Alex’ Osterwalders famous Business Model Canvas) I did recently with and for the Service Design Drinks Berlin.

Visual Business Modeling | Service Design Drinks Berlin from Service Design Berlin

Book Review: Innovation Design

Sun, 06 May 2012 18:16:00 +0000

How many times have you heard people and organisations talking about the superior value they or their business are supposed to create? And how often do you end up terrified by how trivial, unconvincing or insubstantial their claims a.k.a. value propositions are? And do you also have the feeling that the term value suffers a fuzziness that invites its abusive use? Well, this book finally brings some substantial structure to the »value mess« …

Whereas most of the literature in the business realm still deals with value in rather utilitarian and often supplier-driven terms (e.g. costs vs. benefits or pains vs. gains) or takes a shallow marketing perspective on the topic, Elke den Ouden’s book is one of the first which provides a holistic view on what actually constitutes value in a context of innovation in a transformation age […] Read more on Designfacilitators.com

Innovating User Value

Thu, 09 Feb 2012 23:00:00 +0000

Having finally finished my M.A. thesis on “Innovating User Value” and being still not satisfied with its outcomes (as it a quite complex topic), I will definitely perform future research on value creation and its relations to service design, design thinking and innovation management in general. The results I will publish from time to time here in this micro blog.

News from our Design Thinking Research Program

Wed, 03 Sep 2014 14:37:04 +0000

Augmented reality wound care with Google Glass

Exploring interaction pattern for the upcoming (and moving!) Internet of things

Enabling fast electronic tiny task prototyping a.k.a. build stuff in seven seconds

How to measure design thinking, creative agency and output?

Disclosing Shared Value in Business Ecosystems

Thu, 17 Oct 2013 07:47:21 +0000

Any holistic user experience – especially when designing for ‘transformation’ – should create shared value. That means: Solutions for users do not only have to be aligned and negotiated with the economic realities of the service provider, but also with its attached partner ecosystem and society in general. The clever and resilient configuration of “value flows” in business ecosystems will therefore more and more become a prerequisite for the development and delivery of truly “new” and complex value propositions (e.g. service design for health care, environmental matters, etc.).

A problem however is: Everyone talks about “shared value creation” (especially since Michael Porter made the concept famous). Yet only a few people so far have developed practical and/or theoretical approaches that help you tackle occurring trade-offs (e.g. “superior user value a.k.a. desirability” +/vs. “feasible technology” + “financial viability” +/vs. “responsible eco-footprint”) when trying to either find the »sweet spot between all of them« – or better – finding creative resolutions that makes our conception of mutual exclusiveness obsolete.

I personally believe that a good starting point is to develop a holistic and clear understanding of what actually “value” is, how the staging of user/actor experiences contribute to its perception and on what levels it can be experienced by the different actors (e.g. of a business ecosystem). Knowing this may also give first hints on how to master the delicate balance/resolution of fore-mentioned trade-offs for the creation of new offerings with service-market-fit AND benefits for society/environment (Ng, Smith, 2012).

Shared #value creation in #ecosystems? Know what is value first!
Click To Tweet

Some nice literature on the topic

Ng, I. C. L., & Smith, L. A. (2012). An Integrative Framework of Value. Review of Marketing Research, 9, 207–243. doi:10.1108/S1548-6435(2012)0000009011 Cite