Brand Co-creation: Innovation Opportunities and Ethical Challenges. Special Interest Group Proposal

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference abstract in proceedingsResearchpeer-review

Abstract

Nowadays, brands face a socioeconomic scenario that is characterized by online communities, decentralized organizations, fast and flexible new production facilities, and a rapid evolution of information technologies (Lindfelt & Törnroos, 2006). This evolution has led to an improved brand-stakeholder interconnectivity, which has provided brands with the opportunity of involving their key stakeholders in co-creation projects (Ind, Iglesias, & Markovic, 2017). This interconnectivity is not restricted to brand-led initiatives, but is continuous and multifarious (Jones, 2005; Hillebrand, Driessen, & Koll, 2015). Customers and other stakeholders are not passive receivers of brand innovations anymore, but they have the skills and expertise that permit them to undertake an active role in co-creation (e.g., Cova & Dalli, 2009). Accordingly, informed, networked, empowered, and active stakeholders participate ideally in every stage of the co-creation process, from idea generation to implementation (Payne, Strobacka, & Frow, 2008). This movement toward stakeholder involvement and a greater organizational openness has nurtured the recent development of open innovation, open business models and strategies, as well as stakeholder co-creation of brand meaning and identity (Gyrd-Jones & Kornum, 2013; von Wallpach, Hemetsberger, & Espersen, 2017). However, the current enhanced brand-stakeholder interconnectivity has also turned the environment into a more transparent one, giving rise to ethical concerns (Fan, 2005; Iglesias, Markovic, Singh, & Sierra, 2017; Markovic, Iglesias, Singh, & Sierra, 2015) that are not always well considered. For example, who owns intellectual property rights of the co-created outputs? Where does responsibility lie when things go wrong? What is the proper division of labour? Can we talk of “working consumers” or is this just free labour? What reward systems are equitable and relevant? Furthermore, what are the expectations on brands involved in co-creation— compared to brands not involved in co-creation? This special session has been convened to address these unanswered ethical questions. The four contributions approach the phenomenon of interest from different perspectives and provide us with a ground for critical reflection. In the contribution “Multi-stakeholder knowledge sharing and brand co-creation: Ethical considerations”, Markovic et al. conceptually explore brand co-creation as a social and dynamic process in which various stakeholders share knowledge in order to co-create relevant brand innovations. They discuss how stakeholders’ perception of ethicality influences actualized value for both the stakeholder and the brand. In “The gift of co-creation”, Ind argues that co-creation places new demands on organisations to respect the reciprocity that co-creation implies. Cocreation should be conceptually seen as a gift from the participating stakeholders. Koporcic et al. study the “Construction and destruction of a corporate reputation: Ethical challenges in international business markets” by empirically exploring how corporate reputation and network relations are impacted by the perceived ethicality of focal firm FDI. Finally, Vallaster empirically explores “Hybrid Corporate Brands”: “bifocal” brands that are committed to economic and social goals as a socio-cultural form that has the potential to unleash scaling-up innovations to achieve significant social impacts.
Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationProceedings of the European Marketing Academy (EMAC) Conference 2018 : People Make Marketing
EditorsKathy Hamilton, Matthew Alexander, Spiros Gounaris, Maria Karampela, Ewelina Lacka
Number of pages1
Place of PublicationGlasgow
PublisherEuropean Marketing Academy. EMAC
Publication date2018
Publication statusPublished - 2018
EventThe 47th EMAC Annual Conference 2018 - University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, United Kingdom
Duration: 29 May 20181 Jun 2018
Conference number: 47
http://www.emac-2018.org/r/default.asp?iId=IDHGLH

Conference

ConferenceThe 47th EMAC Annual Conference 2018
Number47
LocationUniversity of Strathclyde
CountryUnited Kingdom
CityGlasgow
Period29/05/201801/06/2018
Internet address

Bibliographical note

CBS Library does not have access to the material

Cite this

von Wallpach, S., Gyrd-Jones, R., & Markovic, S. (2018). Brand Co-creation: Innovation Opportunities and Ethical Challenges. Special Interest Group Proposal. In K. Hamilton, M. Alexander, S. Gounaris, M. Karampela, & E. Lacka (Eds.), Proceedings of the European Marketing Academy (EMAC) Conference 2018: People Make Marketing Glasgow: European Marketing Academy. EMAC.
von Wallpach, Sylvia ; Gyrd-Jones, Richard ; Markovic, Stefan . / Brand Co-creation : Innovation Opportunities and Ethical Challenges. Special Interest Group Proposal. Proceedings of the European Marketing Academy (EMAC) Conference 2018: People Make Marketing. editor / Kathy Hamilton ; Matthew Alexander ; Spiros Gounaris ; Maria Karampela ; Ewelina Lacka. Glasgow : European Marketing Academy. EMAC, 2018.
@inbook{371f9c65de0d4b33b870ae58ea88b694,
title = "Brand Co-creation: Innovation Opportunities and Ethical Challenges. Special Interest Group Proposal",
abstract = "Nowadays, brands face a socioeconomic scenario that is characterized by online communities, decentralized organizations, fast and flexible new production facilities, and a rapid evolution of information technologies (Lindfelt & T{\"o}rnroos, 2006). This evolution has led to an improved brand-stakeholder interconnectivity, which has provided brands with the opportunity of involving their key stakeholders in co-creation projects (Ind, Iglesias, & Markovic, 2017). This interconnectivity is not restricted to brand-led initiatives, but is continuous and multifarious (Jones, 2005; Hillebrand, Driessen, & Koll, 2015). Customers and other stakeholders are not passive receivers of brand innovations anymore, but they have the skills and expertise that permit them to undertake an active role in co-creation (e.g., Cova & Dalli, 2009). Accordingly, informed, networked, empowered, and active stakeholders participate ideally in every stage of the co-creation process, from idea generation to implementation (Payne, Strobacka, & Frow, 2008). This movement toward stakeholder involvement and a greater organizational openness has nurtured the recent development of open innovation, open business models and strategies, as well as stakeholder co-creation of brand meaning and identity (Gyrd-Jones & Kornum, 2013; von Wallpach, Hemetsberger, & Espersen, 2017). However, the current enhanced brand-stakeholder interconnectivity has also turned the environment into a more transparent one, giving rise to ethical concerns (Fan, 2005; Iglesias, Markovic, Singh, & Sierra, 2017; Markovic, Iglesias, Singh, & Sierra, 2015) that are not always well considered. For example, who owns intellectual property rights of the co-created outputs? Where does responsibility lie when things go wrong? What is the proper division of labour? Can we talk of “working consumers” or is this just free labour? What reward systems are equitable and relevant? Furthermore, what are the expectations on brands involved in co-creation— compared to brands not involved in co-creation? This special session has been convened to address these unanswered ethical questions. The four contributions approach the phenomenon of interest from different perspectives and provide us with a ground for critical reflection. In the contribution “Multi-stakeholder knowledge sharing and brand co-creation: Ethical considerations”, Markovic et al. conceptually explore brand co-creation as a social and dynamic process in which various stakeholders share knowledge in order to co-create relevant brand innovations. They discuss how stakeholders’ perception of ethicality influences actualized value for both the stakeholder and the brand. In “The gift of co-creation”, Ind argues that co-creation places new demands on organisations to respect the reciprocity that co-creation implies. Cocreation should be conceptually seen as a gift from the participating stakeholders. Koporcic et al. study the “Construction and destruction of a corporate reputation: Ethical challenges in international business markets” by empirically exploring how corporate reputation and network relations are impacted by the perceived ethicality of focal firm FDI. Finally, Vallaster empirically explores “Hybrid Corporate Brands”: “bifocal” brands that are committed to economic and social goals as a socio-cultural form that has the potential to unleash scaling-up innovations to achieve significant social impacts.",
author = "{von Wallpach}, Sylvia and Richard Gyrd-Jones and Stefan Markovic",
note = "CBS Library does not have access to the material",
year = "2018",
language = "English",
editor = "Kathy Hamilton and Matthew Alexander and Spiros Gounaris and Maria Karampela and Ewelina Lacka",
booktitle = "Proceedings of the European Marketing Academy (EMAC) Conference 2018",
publisher = "European Marketing Academy. EMAC",

}

von Wallpach, S, Gyrd-Jones, R & Markovic, S 2018, Brand Co-creation: Innovation Opportunities and Ethical Challenges. Special Interest Group Proposal. in K Hamilton, M Alexander, S Gounaris, M Karampela & E Lacka (eds), Proceedings of the European Marketing Academy (EMAC) Conference 2018: People Make Marketing. European Marketing Academy. EMAC, Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom, 29/05/2018.

Brand Co-creation : Innovation Opportunities and Ethical Challenges. Special Interest Group Proposal. / von Wallpach, Sylvia; Gyrd-Jones, Richard; Markovic, Stefan .

Proceedings of the European Marketing Academy (EMAC) Conference 2018: People Make Marketing. ed. / Kathy Hamilton; Matthew Alexander; Spiros Gounaris; Maria Karampela; Ewelina Lacka. Glasgow : European Marketing Academy. EMAC, 2018.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference abstract in proceedingsResearchpeer-review

TY - ABST

T1 - Brand Co-creation

T2 - Innovation Opportunities and Ethical Challenges. Special Interest Group Proposal

AU - von Wallpach, Sylvia

AU - Gyrd-Jones, Richard

AU - Markovic, Stefan

N1 - CBS Library does not have access to the material

PY - 2018

Y1 - 2018

N2 - Nowadays, brands face a socioeconomic scenario that is characterized by online communities, decentralized organizations, fast and flexible new production facilities, and a rapid evolution of information technologies (Lindfelt & Törnroos, 2006). This evolution has led to an improved brand-stakeholder interconnectivity, which has provided brands with the opportunity of involving their key stakeholders in co-creation projects (Ind, Iglesias, & Markovic, 2017). This interconnectivity is not restricted to brand-led initiatives, but is continuous and multifarious (Jones, 2005; Hillebrand, Driessen, & Koll, 2015). Customers and other stakeholders are not passive receivers of brand innovations anymore, but they have the skills and expertise that permit them to undertake an active role in co-creation (e.g., Cova & Dalli, 2009). Accordingly, informed, networked, empowered, and active stakeholders participate ideally in every stage of the co-creation process, from idea generation to implementation (Payne, Strobacka, & Frow, 2008). This movement toward stakeholder involvement and a greater organizational openness has nurtured the recent development of open innovation, open business models and strategies, as well as stakeholder co-creation of brand meaning and identity (Gyrd-Jones & Kornum, 2013; von Wallpach, Hemetsberger, & Espersen, 2017). However, the current enhanced brand-stakeholder interconnectivity has also turned the environment into a more transparent one, giving rise to ethical concerns (Fan, 2005; Iglesias, Markovic, Singh, & Sierra, 2017; Markovic, Iglesias, Singh, & Sierra, 2015) that are not always well considered. For example, who owns intellectual property rights of the co-created outputs? Where does responsibility lie when things go wrong? What is the proper division of labour? Can we talk of “working consumers” or is this just free labour? What reward systems are equitable and relevant? Furthermore, what are the expectations on brands involved in co-creation— compared to brands not involved in co-creation? This special session has been convened to address these unanswered ethical questions. The four contributions approach the phenomenon of interest from different perspectives and provide us with a ground for critical reflection. In the contribution “Multi-stakeholder knowledge sharing and brand co-creation: Ethical considerations”, Markovic et al. conceptually explore brand co-creation as a social and dynamic process in which various stakeholders share knowledge in order to co-create relevant brand innovations. They discuss how stakeholders’ perception of ethicality influences actualized value for both the stakeholder and the brand. In “The gift of co-creation”, Ind argues that co-creation places new demands on organisations to respect the reciprocity that co-creation implies. Cocreation should be conceptually seen as a gift from the participating stakeholders. Koporcic et al. study the “Construction and destruction of a corporate reputation: Ethical challenges in international business markets” by empirically exploring how corporate reputation and network relations are impacted by the perceived ethicality of focal firm FDI. Finally, Vallaster empirically explores “Hybrid Corporate Brands”: “bifocal” brands that are committed to economic and social goals as a socio-cultural form that has the potential to unleash scaling-up innovations to achieve significant social impacts.

AB - Nowadays, brands face a socioeconomic scenario that is characterized by online communities, decentralized organizations, fast and flexible new production facilities, and a rapid evolution of information technologies (Lindfelt & Törnroos, 2006). This evolution has led to an improved brand-stakeholder interconnectivity, which has provided brands with the opportunity of involving their key stakeholders in co-creation projects (Ind, Iglesias, & Markovic, 2017). This interconnectivity is not restricted to brand-led initiatives, but is continuous and multifarious (Jones, 2005; Hillebrand, Driessen, & Koll, 2015). Customers and other stakeholders are not passive receivers of brand innovations anymore, but they have the skills and expertise that permit them to undertake an active role in co-creation (e.g., Cova & Dalli, 2009). Accordingly, informed, networked, empowered, and active stakeholders participate ideally in every stage of the co-creation process, from idea generation to implementation (Payne, Strobacka, & Frow, 2008). This movement toward stakeholder involvement and a greater organizational openness has nurtured the recent development of open innovation, open business models and strategies, as well as stakeholder co-creation of brand meaning and identity (Gyrd-Jones & Kornum, 2013; von Wallpach, Hemetsberger, & Espersen, 2017). However, the current enhanced brand-stakeholder interconnectivity has also turned the environment into a more transparent one, giving rise to ethical concerns (Fan, 2005; Iglesias, Markovic, Singh, & Sierra, 2017; Markovic, Iglesias, Singh, & Sierra, 2015) that are not always well considered. For example, who owns intellectual property rights of the co-created outputs? Where does responsibility lie when things go wrong? What is the proper division of labour? Can we talk of “working consumers” or is this just free labour? What reward systems are equitable and relevant? Furthermore, what are the expectations on brands involved in co-creation— compared to brands not involved in co-creation? This special session has been convened to address these unanswered ethical questions. The four contributions approach the phenomenon of interest from different perspectives and provide us with a ground for critical reflection. In the contribution “Multi-stakeholder knowledge sharing and brand co-creation: Ethical considerations”, Markovic et al. conceptually explore brand co-creation as a social and dynamic process in which various stakeholders share knowledge in order to co-create relevant brand innovations. They discuss how stakeholders’ perception of ethicality influences actualized value for both the stakeholder and the brand. In “The gift of co-creation”, Ind argues that co-creation places new demands on organisations to respect the reciprocity that co-creation implies. Cocreation should be conceptually seen as a gift from the participating stakeholders. Koporcic et al. study the “Construction and destruction of a corporate reputation: Ethical challenges in international business markets” by empirically exploring how corporate reputation and network relations are impacted by the perceived ethicality of focal firm FDI. Finally, Vallaster empirically explores “Hybrid Corporate Brands”: “bifocal” brands that are committed to economic and social goals as a socio-cultural form that has the potential to unleash scaling-up innovations to achieve significant social impacts.

M3 - Conference abstract in proceedings

BT - Proceedings of the European Marketing Academy (EMAC) Conference 2018

A2 - Hamilton, Kathy

A2 - Alexander, Matthew

A2 - Gounaris, Spiros

A2 - Karampela, Maria

A2 - Lacka, Ewelina

PB - European Marketing Academy. EMAC

CY - Glasgow

ER -

von Wallpach S, Gyrd-Jones R, Markovic S. Brand Co-creation: Innovation Opportunities and Ethical Challenges. Special Interest Group Proposal. In Hamilton K, Alexander M, Gounaris S, Karampela M, Lacka E, editors, Proceedings of the European Marketing Academy (EMAC) Conference 2018: People Make Marketing. Glasgow: European Marketing Academy. EMAC. 2018