Paradigms, Pluralisms, and Peripheries: On the Assessment of the S-D Logic

This commentary addresses some common themes of the papers from the 3rd EMAC/ANZMAC Research Symposium track on service-dominant (S-D) logic: issues and approaches to measurement, the need for plural versus singular paradigms, and questions concerning the boundary conditions of S-D logic.

Abstract

This commentary addresses some common themes of the papers from the 3rd EMAC/ANZMAC Research Symposium track on service-dominant (S-D) logic: (1) issues and approaches to measurement, (2) the need for plural versus singular paradigms, and (3) questions concerning the boundary conditions of S-D logic. It suggests that since S-D logic is not a normative theory and is an alternative to the current (goods-) dominant logic, caution must be exercised in designing empirical tests. It also suggests that since S-D logic transcends the goods vs. services logics, it obviates the need for pluralism and is capable of spanning boundaries created by goods-dominant-logic…possible path for its development.