The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

https://www.emerald.com/insight/0959-6119.htm

IJCHM
35,1 Customer value co-creation in the
hospitality and tourism industry: a
systematic literature review
250 Pedro Carvalho
School of Technology and Management and CITUR,
Received 21 December 2021 Polytechnic Institute of Viana do Castelo, Viana do Castelo, Portugal, and
Revised 11 March 2022
26 May 2022
12 July 2022
Helena Alves
Accepted 29 July 2022 Management and Economics Department and NECE,
University of Beira Interior, Covilhã, Portugal

Abstract
Purpose – This study aims to develop a systematic literature review of customer value co-creation in the
hospitality and tourism industry and present the different views of the scientific community, highlighting the
dimensions, antecedents and outcomes of customer value co-creation.
Design/methodology/approach – This study adopted a systematic review process guided by the
preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses protocol. Data were collected through a
search for papers in Scopus, EBSCO, Web of Science and Science Direct databases. The systematic review
was performed based on 216 validated articles.
Findings – The study reveals that the manifestations of customer value co-creation can be understood,
based on two fundamental dimensions: customer behaviours and factors that shape co-creation. However,
some antecedents are closely linked to the customer, social environment, service provider and technological
resources. Moreover, there are numerous outcomes resulting from customer value co-creation, grouped in
customer results, perceived value and organizational performance and market outcomes.
Practical implications – This research contributes to a more informed explanation for hospitality and
tourism organizations about the importance of tourist and guest involvement in value co-creation. This
systematic knowledge can facilitate the design of the service, as well as the value proposition offered by
hospitality and tourism organizations.
Originality/value – The study extends the literature by systematizing the empirical and conceptual
knowledge, using for the first time a systematic literature review.
Keywords Value co-creation, Service-dominant logic, Customer-dominant logic,
Social exchange theory, Systematic literature review
Paper type Research paper

International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality
Management
Vol. 35 No. 1, 2023
pp. 250-273
© Emerald Publishing Limited
0959-6119
DOI 10.1108/IJCHM-12-2021-1528
1. Introduction
The concept of value co-creation, which has been widely addressed in different areas of
Management, was first introduced in 2004 by Prahalad and Ramaswamy (2004a). The
concept of customer value co-creation should not be confused with the concept of customer
value creation that is widely disseminated in the literature. Customer value creation is
created and delivered over time by the organization. From a customer perspective, it
consists of the relationship between the customer’s perceptions of the benefits they derive
from a particular purchase, compared to the price they have to pay (Ravald and Grönroos,
1996; Christopher et al., 2002). According to Prahalad and Ramaswamy (2004a), the meaning
of value creation was shifting from a product- and firm-centric view to personalized
consumer experiences, as consumers had new tools and were not satisfied with the available Customer
choices. For these authors, the interaction between the company and customer had become value co-
the locus of value creation. They explained that co-creation is about joint creation of value by
the company and the customer. It is not the firm attempting to please the customer.
creation
Interestingly, in the same year, Vargo and Lusch (2004) presented a crucial question
associated with the definition and determination of value with service-dominant (S-D) logic
perspective. According to these authors, value is determined by the customer based on
usage. Therefore, the value perceived by customers is dependent on how they use the good 251
through their own knowledge. This premise justified that the customer is an active
participant in the value creation process or a value co-creator (Vargo and Lusch, 2006).
Being pioneers in the use of this concept, these authors introduced the basis of countless
later scientific studies (Vargo and Lusch, 2004, 2006; 2016; Lusch and Vargo, 2014), which
serve as a foundation for the majority of value co-creation studies in a dyadic, triadic and
networked perspective (Vargo and Akaka, 2009; Chandler and Vargo, 2011; Akaka et al.,
2012) and the theoretical basis for the development of other theories (Heinonen and
Strandvik, 2015).
From the previous paragraphs, it is observable that there are several approaches in the
literature to value co-creation. Prahalad and Ramaswamy (2004a) develop a vision of co-
creation based on the approach initiated by the firms, where an active participation by firms
and customers is essential. Contrary, Vargo and Lusch (2004) present a vision where value
co-creation emerges from the integration of resources owned by the firm and the customer
and where goods and services, when used by customers, are only the vehicle to that
integration. Another vision of value co-creation is that of the service science approach,
where the vision of Vargo and Lusch (2004) is transposed from dyadic relationships to
relationships between different service systems. Lastly, another possible vision, although
not the last, proposed by researchers such as Grönroos (2006, 2008) and Grönroos and
Gummerus (2014) is the service logic approach, which is based on the service marketing
research stream and proposes that co-creation takes place during the direct interactions that
occur during the service process. In this case, the customer can participate as a co-producer,
if seen from a production perspective, or the firm as a co-creator of value, if seen as a value
creation approach. In this study, we considered all visions of co-creation as they complement
each other.
The co-creation of value approach and its conceptual contributions have also received
particular attention in the tourism sector, since 2009, by researchers such as Hollebeek and
Brodie (2009), Binkhorst and Dekker (2009) and Fyrberg and Juriado (2009). Studies on the
co-creation of customer value in tourism organizations have also been highlighted by the
scientific community, for using different theoretical approaches, namely, S-D Llogic
(Grissemann and Stockburger-Sauer, 2012; Liang, 2017), co-creation experience theory
(Chen, 2018), customer-dominant logic (Rihova et al., 2018), social exchange theory (Hsiao
et al., 2015a), complexity theory (Foroudi et al., 2022) and others (Peng et al., 2021; Zhang
et al., 2022).
Although several authors mention the importance of continuing to develop studies in the
context of co-creating customer value in this industry (Grissemann and Stockburger-Sauer,
2012; Cha et al., 2016), it is worth noting the paucity of work systematizing the empirical
knowledge produced by the scientific community. Existing studies focus on the tourist co-
creation experience (Campos et al., 2018), on an agenda for innovative tourism experience
research (Binkhorst and Dekker, 2009), on a conceptual framework where tourists are
situated at three social levels (liminoid, liminoid and post-liminoid) of the tourism experience
(Rihova et al., 2015), on the evolution of the value co-creation concept, through a bibliometric
IJCHM analysis (Alqayed et al., 2021) and on the similarities and differences between the research
35,1 method and concepts of value co-creation (Lis et al., 2022).
Even in the broadest sense, involving the service sector, there are works that focus on the
unit of analysis and locus of value co-creation (Hansen, 2019), on the classification of studies on
co-creation in the field of management of technology and innovation (Najera-Sanchez et al.,
2020) and on different theoretical perspectives and lines of research that characterize the co-
252 creation literature (Galvagno and Dalli, 2014). However, these scarce articles only address
methodological issues and theoretical perspectives, or they are outdated (Leclercq et al., 2016).
Besides, it should also be noted that the difference between the concepts of value co-
creation in the hospitality and tourism industry in relation to other services industries is
plausible, considering some specificities of this industry. Thus, Hemmington (2007) denotes
that the notion of hosts and guests is fundamentally different to that of managers and
customers and is much more socially and culturally defined. On the other hand, it is
necessary to maintain interest and excitement of experience over time, revealing “little
surprises” (e.g. offering canapés), showing a great sense of generosity.
Now, based on the theoretical reviews developed and the specificities found, it is possible
to highlight that there is no conceptual model that, through an integrative (holistic)
understanding of empirical and conceptual knowledge, emphasizes the different dimensions
contained in the literature on customer value co-creation in the hospitality and tourism
industry. Furthermore, it should be noted that the value co-creation in this industry has been
recurrently conceptualized from Yi and Gong (2013) approach, disregarding the relevance of
other factors that also shape it. On the other hand, the literature presents a great variety of
studies associated with the antecedents and consequences of value co-creation. Hence, an
effort is needed to aggregate these different variables into categories, which facilitates a
broader understanding of this field of knowledge, not only for academic and research
purposes, but also for decision-making in public and private organizations.
In this setting, the following research question arises:

RQ1. What are the antecedents, outcomes and dimensions of customer value co-creation
studied in the literature, in the hospitality and tourism industry?
Thus, this article aims to develop a systematic literature review on customer value co-
creation in the hospitality and tourism industry, to understand the different views of the
scientific community on the dimensions, antecedents and outcomes of customer value co-
creation. This study has implications for theory and practice. With a more holistic
knowledge, it is possible to develop more complex empirical models that integrate multiple
theoretical approaches, resulting from the diversity of individual studies. On the other hand,
systematic knowledge can facilitate the design of the service, as well as the value
proposition offered by hospitality and tourism organizations.

2. Methodology
This study adopted a systematic review process guided by a review protocol, seeking to ensure
reviews less open to researcher bias (Brereton et al., 2007). In a preliminary stage, the systematic
review team formed by two researchers was involved in discussion and development of the
review protocol. Three main steps were considered in preparing the formal document:
(1) description of the study objectives;
(2) definition of the search strategy, namely, data collection method and assessment
method; and
(3) approach to synthesize and analyse the studies (Tranfield et al., 2003).
The review process implemented followed the methodology of preferred reporting items for Customer
systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA), as a useful guideline for reporting systematic value co-
reviews, recognized by the scientific community (Moher et al., 2009; Page et al., 2021). The
PRISMA approach ensures that all aspects of this type of research are reported accurately and
creation
transparently, as it helps authors better describe what was done, what was found and, in the
case of a review protocol, what are they are planning to do (Sarkis-Onofre et al., 2021).

2.1 Search strategy and selection criteria

253
This study aimed to develop a systematic literature review, assuming conceptual, qualitative
and quantitative studies as eligible, to promote better understanding of the various dimensions,
antecedents and outcomes of customer value co-creation (Pawson, 2006).
Data were collected through a search for papers in Scopus, EBSCO, Web of Science and
Science Direct databases. Considering the high scrutiny of the scientific community, only
international peer-reviewed academic journal articles were included. Books, book chapters,
conferences and other publications were excluded (Ordanini et al., 2008). The research
process covered the period from 2004 to 2020, since the first two studies presenting the
concepts of value co-creation were published in 2004 (Prahalad and Ramaswamy, 2004a;
Vargo and Lusch, 2004). However, the first studies on value co-creation applied to the
tourism industry were published in 2009. Therefore, there is a difference between the period
of research in the databases and the period with published articles in this field.
Records were gathered using the keywords of “customer co-creation”, “customer
cocreation” AND “tourism” or “hotel” in the title and abstract. It is worth noting that with
the terms “hotel” and “tourism”, it was possible to include in the research the different
subsectors integrated in the tourism and hospitality industry, such as hotels, transport,
restaurants, events, among others.
After collecting the articles identified in the databases, screening was performed to find
duplicate articles. Concerning eligibility criteria linked to the characteristics of the study, all
studies focusing exclusively on customer value co-creation in the hospitality and tourism
context were considered. However, all studies identified in which the main focus was on
value creation, perceived value, perceived experience and customer engagement, despite the
term “customer co-creation” being present in the title and abstract, were considered in the
exclusion criteria. Therefore, it was frequently necessary to read the text in full due to
inconsistencies in the content of abstracts (Brereton et al., 2007). Furthermore, other studies
on customer value co-creation outside the hospitality and tourism industry were excluded as
well (Denyer and Tranfield, 2009).
For a better understanding of the search strategy and record selection in this study, a
PRISMA diagram was produced (Appendix 1).
At the beginning of the review process, 467 articles were identified, coming from four
databases – Scopus, Web of Science, EBSCO and Science Direct. As the duplication of 130
articles was identified, 337 articles were validated after removing the duplicates. Thereby, 337
articles were validated as potentially eligible. Considering that 121 articles were included in the
exclusion criteria, after being scrutinized and confirmed by two reviewers (Tranfield et al.,
2003), 216 articles were used for synthesis and analysis, since they met the inclusion criteria.

2.2 Synthesis and analysis of records

Data from the complete review of articles were inserted in a table on an Excel worksheet,
classified and pooled in the fields: article overview (author/year/journal/title), study context,
customer value co-creation dimensions, antecedents, consequences, type of study and
method. To minimize (or eliminate) the need for reviewers to use their own coding schema
IJCHM (Potter and Levine-Donnerstein, 1999), the data extraction forms of both reviewers were
35,1 compared, to resolve some differences and minimize errors of interpretation (Denyer and
Tranfield, 2009;).
The Excel worksheet was uploaded in NVivo software for content analysis. This
software ensured a more systematic and trustworthy data analysis process as well as
facilitating the visualization of data and coding in the categories (Gaur and Kumar, 2018).
254 To perform a content analysis of the pooled data in the fields of the excel worksheet
“dimensions of customer value co-creation”, “antecedents” and “outcomes”, it was necessary
to proceed with the coding of data. For that purpose, the NVivo 12 software was used,
specifically the theme autocoding function. This allowed the formation of relationships
(groupings) between semantically analogous words. This means that each thematic code
created by the NVivo 12 software resulted from simple words that were conceptually related
to each other (Edhlund and McDougall, 2019).
The reliability of the coding process depended on the overlapping of the reviewers’
individual coding and on how they agreed with each other on decisions (Douglas et al., 2008).
Considering that the systematic literature review was performed by two reviewers, when
any disagreement arose, it was resolved considering the perspective of the researcher who
was an expert in the field of value co-creation and services marketing, with several studies
published in prestigious journals (Potter and Levine-Donnerstein, 1999).

3. Findings
3.1 Research overview
This research considered articles published in indexed journals from 2009 to 2020, since the
first studies on value co-creation applied to the hospitality and tourism industry were
published in 2009. Considering the 216 articles validated, as shown in Table 1, the
International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Tourism Management,
International Journal of Hospitality Management and Current Issues in Tourism stand out,
with 34, 15, 10 and 10 articles published, respectively. This shows the relevance of these four
journals, as together they represent approximately 31% of all articles published.
From 2009 to 2014, there was a smaller number of publications than in subsequent years,
as during that six-year period, only 28 articles were published. This reveals the growing
significance of this field of research in the period between 2015 and 2020, when the majority
of studies were published (n = 188). The systematic review of the literature shows that the
most frequent methodological approach involves empirical studies (90.74%), highlighting
the qualitative method in 41.20% of publications (Appendix 2).
Regarding the research focus, it is possible to identify three thematic areas presented in
the literature, namely, its dimensions, composed of the variables that characterize customer
value co-creation; antecedents, factors that influence customer value co-creation and
outcomes, implications of customer value co-creation.

Journal N (%)

International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 34 15.74

Tourism Management 15 6.94
Current Issues in Tourism 10 4.63
Table 1. International Journal of Hospitality Management 10 4.63
Journals included in Other journals 147 68.06
the analysis Total 216 100
3.2 Research theme I: dimensions of customer value co-creation Customer
This theme encompasses studies explaining what customer value co-creation is. The review value co-
identifies several topics and two dimensions that sum up customer value co-creation, i.e. customer
behaviours and factors that shape co-creation (two dimensions of customer value co-creation):
creation
Factors
(1) Customer behaviours:
 customer participation; 255
 customer citizenship;
 co-production;
 resources integration;
 networking;
 trust;
 open dialogue;
 responsiveness; and
 reciprocity.
(2) Factors that shape co-creation
 emotional bonding
 collaboration
 Personalization
 Collectiveness
 Interactivity
 Learning
3.2.1 Customer behaviours. In the hospitality and tourism industry, the literature reveals
that customer value co-creation depends on behaviours, such as customer participation, co-
production, collective action, resource integration and customer citizenship.
Studies show that customer participation involves spending time and effort (physical and
mental), (Prebensen et al., 2013), information exchange (Sengupta and Pillai, 2017; Taheri
et al., 2017) (information seeking, information sharing), personal interaction (Alexiou, 2020)
expressing sentiments (Ge and Gretzel, 2018) with service providers (Li and Hsu, 2018) and
other customers (Dolan et al., 2019) and also self-perceived mastering (Prebensen and Xie,
2017). However, customer participation may be “co-creative” or “co-destructive” (Luo et al.,
2019; Sigala, 2018; Peng et al., 2021). Sometimes, customers neither benefit from the
accommodation provider’s resources, nor experience a reduction in well-being in terms of
loss of resources. This means there is “value no-creation” (Sthapit and Björk, 2020).
While some authors conclude that customer participation is an essential element of the
value co-creation process (Vargo et al., 2010), others claim that is co-production that is
essential for value co-creation (Rather et al., 2019). Simeoni and Cassia (2019), in line with
Chandler and Vargo (2011), highlighted the importance of observing value co-creation at
different levels (micro, meso and macro) and showed that at the micro level, only co-
production activities emerged.
The literature also explores value co-creation as a collective action, based on social values,
such as trust, dialogue and reciprocity, through which stakeholders are oriented to
sustainable goals and local community (Cannas et al., 2019). Several articles reveal that in the
IJCHM value co-creation process the connections between actors may be characterized by trust
35,1 (Cannas, 2018), open dialogue (Lo†rincz et al., 2020) and reciprocity (Notzke, 2019). Empirical data
also emphasize that the quality of the actor network is a crucial aspect in the value co-creation
process (Cannas, 2018), not only in a formalized tourism network (Baccarani and Cassia, 2017),
but also in a virtual or social network (He and Wang, 2016). Other studies highlighted the
concept of responsiveness (Cannas, 2018). For example, Lin et al. (2018) argued that
256 responsiveness is an important dimension in the value co-creation process, considering this to
be “a firm-initiated brand engagement, focusing on the value that companies create for a brand
in the consumer buying process during the value co-creation process” (p. 2156).
According to the S-D logic approach (Vargo and Lusch, 2004), participation is seen as
resource integration. Resource integration must be understood at different levels, namely,
individual, meso and macro (Altinay et al., 2016). Prahalad and Ramaswamy (2004b)
underlined the relevance of resource access, in distinct contexts, i.e. beach hotels (Gonzalez-
Mansilla et al., 2019), travel agencies (Chen et al., 2017) and tour operators (Limburg, 2011),
as well as other articles demonstrating the importance of this factor in the value co-creation
process (Hamidi et al., 2020).
Customer co-creation can also be revealed by the customer citizenship dimension
composed of four sub-dimensions: feedback, advocacy, helping and tolerance (Yi and Gong,
2013). Li and Hsu (2018) and Wong and Lai (2018) mention that co-creation means knowledge
transfer, i.e. the process through which one unit is affected by the experience of another. In
effect, several articles showed that customers contribute to knowledge transfer, giving
feedback, suggestions and recommendations, sharing their experiences with the hosts and
other guests (cf. Wood and Kinnunen, 2020). Morosan and DeFranco (2016) and Zhang
(2019) highlighted the relevance of the technological element in performing this behaviour
(e.g. online reviews). However, in the hospitality and tourism industry, tourists co-create
using technology before, during and after visits, sharing knowledge online (McLeay et al.,
2019), namely, by sharing multimedia content, giving travel reviews on websites (Neuhofer
et al., 2012), sharing stories, photos (Wang et al., 2013) and solving problems (Fu and Lehto,
2018), posting frequently on websites or social network platforms to share their experiences
(Zhang, 2019).
3.2.2 Factors that shape co-creation. Studies on the co-creation of value within the
hospitality and tourism industry have shown that, in addition to customer behaviours, there
are other factors that shape the customer value co-creation, namely, emotional bonding,
collaboration and learning, interactivity, collectiveness and personalization.
Emotional bonds between customer and employee, resulting in customers’ affections (e.g.
tolerance, smiling, patience and kindness) have been one of the value co-creation dimensions
presented by the scientific community (Chen, 2018; Busser and Shulga, 2018). Some
researchers have highlighted the importance of emotions or attachment (positive and
negative) to shape value co-creation and value destruction processes (Ge and Gretzel, 2018;
Erhardt et al., 2019). Furthermore, memorable experiences seem to be more likely when there
are emotional connections between customers and providers (Prebensen et al., 2016).
García-Rosell et al. (2019) concluded that co-creation involves multiple stakeholders
using their knowledge and skills in service development and other joint activities. Indeed, a
significant number of articles show the relevance of collaboration, where customers are
involved in co-creation practices (Phi and Dredge, 2019), in specific tourist sectors, such as
hospitality (Busser and Shulga, 2018), outdoor activities (Rihova et al., 2018), agritourism
(Liang, 2017), exhibitions (Wong and Lai, 2018) and leisure farms and hostel restaurants
(Hsu et al., 2013). It is interesting to note two articles, by Rihova et al. (2015) and
Reichenberger (2017), illustrating how manifestations of social interactions differ as well as
the type of value co-created. These studies draw attention to the communitas level, as a way Customer
of collaboration, where a sense of togetherness and belonging develops among tourists who value co-
share their experience (e.g. at festivals, tourists engage in fun practices of playing together).
Some research still proves that customers’ learning from service providers is fundamental in
creation
the value co-creation process, allowing an enhanced cultural tourism experience (Chiscano
and Binkhorst, 2019) and hotel stay experience (Richard, 2016).
The scientific community has explained the importance of interactive experience in
customer value co-creation (Alexiou, 2020). For example, robots enhance relationships 257
between parents and children, turning a hotel stay into an interactive experience, where
parents also play with children (Tung and Au, 2018). Therefore, the quality of experience in
the value co-creation process depends on social interaction, interaction with employees and
relatedness (with companions) (Harkison et al., 2018).
The natural environment also supports social interaction, collective experience and gives
a feeling of co-experience in a group, elucidating that the provider’s role is secondary in
customers’ experiences (Alakoski and Tikkanen, 2019), as well as dark tourism sites
promoting collective co-creation, through the existence of associations between the self
(tourist), the social identity, the tangible (e.g. artefacts) and intangible (e.g. role of the guide)
aspects (Tinson et al., 2015).
Lastly, customer co-creation involves the creation of unique personalized experiences, not
only in the hotel industry through personal interactions between customer and provider
(Chathoth et al., 2013), but also in mobile-based services in this industry (Lei et al., 2019). In
addition, each person is surrounded by a unique experience environment in the co-creation of
tourism experience (Binkhorst and Dekker, 2009).
A synthesis of Theme III results is shown in two dimensions of customer value co-creation.
The results reveal that the dimensions of customer value co-creation should not be
understood only from the perspective of customer participation behaviour and customer
citizenship behaviour, as presented in the study by Yi and Gong (2013), very frequently used in
the literature applied to the hospitality and tourism industry, especially in studies that apply
quantitative methodologies. A systematic review of qualitative and conceptual studies allowed
us to understand the relevance of other dimensions and their complementary role for
understanding the concept of value co-creation. The value co-creation dimension comprises the
integration of customer resources (skills, knowledge) and frequently the active presence of the
customer in co-production of the company’s value proposition. In addition, customer value co-
creation depends on social networks involving various actors, building on social values such as
responsiveness, trust, dialogue and reciprocity among actors.
Furthermore, the use of non-quantitative methodological approaches has revealed the
existence of other factors that shape customer co-creation, which are often underestimated in
customer value co-creation models. Hence, the creation of affective connections between the
customer–provider plays a key role, as they strongly encourage a positive and tolerant
attitude on the part of the customer. The customer is committed to a mutual learning
process, through the sharing of skills and knowledge, not only with the service provider, but
also with other customers and residents of the community where they enjoy the experience.
In fact, studies reveal that the co-creation of customer value, at times, should be seen as a
collective experience that necessarily involves social interaction, reducing the service
provider to a secondary role. Lastly, customer co-creation involves interaction with
employees and other customers, always representing a unique and personalized experience.
These results can guide future research on co-creation in the hotel and tourism industry,
by providing a more holistic understanding and considering the complementary role of
other underestimated factors in customer value co-creation models.
IJCHM 3.3 Research theme II: antecedents of customer value co-creation in tourism
35,1 The systematic literature review allowed us to identify the antecedent factors of customer value co-
creation in tourism and hospitality and organize them into four categories: customer-related factors,
social environment, organizational factors and facilitating technological resources. Several topics are
associated with each of these categories (antecedents of customer value co-creation).
Antecedent factors
258 (1) Customer-related factors*:
 customer innovativeness;
 customer mood;
 customer experience;
 customer expertise;
 consumer’s habits;
 willingness-to-participate;
 escapism experience; and
 brand attachment.
(2) Social environment factors*:
 social activities; and
 social pressure.
(3) Organizational factors*:
 employee posture;
 employee incentives;
 employee psychological capital;
 service innovativeness;
 corporate social responsibility; and
 servicescape.
(4) Facilitating technological resources*:
 technologies’ ease of use;
 technology adoption;
 similar information systems;
 technological orientation; and
 technological experience.
Note: *Positive effects on customer value co-creation.
The way the customer is oriented to the innovation process is one of the customer-related
factors that must be taken into consideration among the antecedents of customer value co-
creation. Different studies showed that the customer’s innovativeness is positively related to
guests’ intention to co-create (Sarmah et al., 2017; Morosan and DeFranco, 2019). Several
studies have also shown the relevance of tourist experience (Zhang et al., 2018; Kang, 2020)
and previous knowledge for value co-creation (Anton et al., 2018; Prayag et al., 2020).
The willingness to participate in value co-creation is also important in the tourist co-
creation process (Shulga et al., 2018; Sarmah et al., 2017), not only in online co-creation
experiences (Jiménez-Barreto and Campo-Martínez, 2018), but also in customers’ desire for
active participation in innovations (Rodríguez et al., 2011).
 Escapism experience has also been pointed out as a factor that would have a positive Customer
impact on the intention to participate in other activities in the future, as well as on the value co-
intention to share experiences on social networks (Anton et al., 2018). Other studies reveal
the importance of other variables, such as brand attachment (Shulga et al., 2018; Hollebeek
creation
and Brodie, 2009), consumer’s habit (Morosan and DeFranco, 2016), customer expertise
(Guan et al., 2018) and customer mood (Taheri et al., 2017), as determinants of customer
value co-creation.
Social environment factors also antecede co-creation. The direct interactions between 259
tourists and residents allow them to be both value creators and beneficiaries. From the
residents’ perspective, they can obtain some economic benefits and externalize their local
cultural pride. As for tourists, they can learn about and live a real story of romance (Bertella
et al., 2018).
The literature shows that when guests share their experiences with other guests (e.g.
interacting during the canapé or at the cocktail before and during dinner), there is value co-
creation (Harkison, 2018), not neglecting the importance of conversation among these actors,
via social media platforms (Lin et al., 2018).
Different studies explained that consumers’ behaviours are frequently determined by the
way others judge and support them. Consequently, some authors have shown that even in
the tourism context, social pressure can be seen as an antecedent variable of customer value
co-creation, revealing that the perceived social pressure to perform a behaviour or not,
significantly affects guests’ intention to co-create (Sarmah and Rahman, 2018).
Concerning organizational factors, it is possible to highlight employees’ role in providing
customer services effectively (Lee et al., 2017), and the way they are customer oriented in
establishing relationships with customers, through frequent communication, special
treatment, efforts to solve problems quickly and carrying out social activities, which seems
to be paramount for customer value co-creation (Xie et al., 2020a; Guan et al., 2018; Sthapit,
2019; Prayag et al., 2020). However, some authors explain the relevance of empowering
employees through the use of internal marketing practices to be customer-oriented (Harkison,
2018; Rodríguez et al., 2011). Other studies still showed the significance of employee positive
psychological capital on customer value co-creation (Hsiao et al., 2015b; Lee et al., 2017).
The scientific community shows also the relevance of other organizational variables
associated with management affecting customer value co-creation, namely, service
innovativeness (Hollebeek and Rather, 2019) and corporate social responsibility (CSR) (Tuan
et al., 2019).
Several studies have demonstrated the importance of the servicescape as a determining
factor of value co-creation, in different contexts (Al Halbusi et al., 2020; Prayag et al., 2020).
For instance, in the cruise tourism sector, the quality of public rooms and spaces can improve
guest-to-guest interactions and socialization. Thus, guests tend to be more satisfied, and
complaints through interactions with service personnel tend to be fewer (Brejla and Gilbert,
2014). On the other hand, in the context of tourists’ experiences in Finnish hotels, findings
also show that the room and its attributes contribute to customer value co-creation (Sthapit,
2019). Additionally, consumers tend to recommend friends or family members to experience
the service, and therefore co-create value, through the experience they felt from the
personalized interior layout design of a hotel room (Hsiao et al., 2015b). Besides the relevance
of the physical servicescape, the virtual environment must be highlighted, considering that
the person-virtual environment has a positive impact on customer experience co-creation
(Hudson et al., 2019).
Facilitating technological resources also arises from the literature. A number of studies
highlight the importance of adoption, ease of use, similarity, orientation and experience in
IJCHM relation to the company’s technological resources, for the customer value co-creation
35,1 process. Some articles demonstrated that value co-creation is influenced by tourists’
expectancy of interactive information technologies that are user-friendly and facilitate tasks
such as the personalization of a stay (e.g. purchase food, beverage, check-in) and the
simplification of sub-decisions (e.g. information search) (Lei et al., 2019; Morosan and
DeFranco, 2019).
260 Other studies explain that technology adoption has a positive impact on co-creation
dynamics (Ponsignon and Derbaix, 2020). For example, Diffley and McCole (2015, 2019)
demonstrated that the use of social media network sites facilitated customer co-creation, and
Zhang et al. (2018) found that online platform experiences through two attributes, aesthetics
(aesthetic feeling of interface design) and trust (in the online environment), increase tourist
value co-creation.
Additionally, prior experience with similar information systems is an antecedent of
customer value co-creation revealed in the literature (Chuang, 2018). In the future, hotel
chains will have to co-create value through listening to and learning from guests (Shin et al.,
2020), incorporating big data insights (website, call centre, mobile, social networks),
collaborating in an open innovation process with employees, customers, brand followers and
the general public (Richard, 2016).
A synthesis of Theme III results is shown in the antecedents of customer value co-creation.
This research allows us to highlight the customer as a category of factors that stimulate
the co-creation of value (for themselves). Thus, the customer’s attitude towards innovation,
the importance of tourist experience, prior knowledge, willingness to participate in the
development of new services or to share their experiences are examples of antecedents of
customer value co-creation and which are strictly self-regarding. Thus, the pre-disposition of
the tourist/guest towards co-creation can be stimulated by organizations, through a culture
oriented to service innovation and a communication that highlights the benefits of their
participation in value co-creation activities (e.g. emphasizing greater adaptation and speed
in the service provided and/or a reduction in the financial costs of the relationship).
In addition, the literature shows a group of antecedents that form the customer’s social
environment, which also determine their involvement in the value co-creation process, such
as interactions between tourists and residents, interactions between hotel guests and other
guests and how others judge and support their co-creation behaviours. It means that
encouraging direct interactions between tourists and residents, as well as between guests,
for example, through frequent communications, publicizing the activities developed locally
by the community or carrying out social activities within the hotel units, are measures that
support a social environment conducive to value co-creation.
Furthermore, this review highlights that the organization should also be seen as a
category of antecedents of customer value co-creation, not only because of how it develops
policies in favour of CSR, but also how the organization involves its employees in co-
creation, based on internal marketing. Studies mention the importance of organizations
creating a physical servicescape or even a virtual environment, which stimulates customers’
value co-creation. Hence, it is important for organizations to design a servicescape that
enhances guest interactions (eg social rooms or bars). On the other hand, it is essential to
develop an incentive strategy that encourages the engagement of employees in the
development of new services.
Finally, studies show that value co-creation is influenced by “user-friendly” information
technologies that customers feel familiar with. Therefore, previous experience with
information technologies known to customers, as well as the orientation that organizations
have to learn from customers, employees and the general public based on big data analysis,
are important antecedents in customer value co-creation. Thus, it is recommended to provide Customer
guests a unique, interactive and learning experience, fostering user-friendly interactive value co-
information technologies, focused on aesthetics and mobile-based services that facilitate
personalization, searching for information and communication with the organization
creation
anytime and anywhere.
These results present a wide variety of studies associated with the antecedents of value
co-creation, which, when grouped into categories, facilitate a broader conceptual
understanding and the creation of more complex empirical models, to measure the effects of 261
the antecedents on the customer value co-creation. This better empirical and conceptual
understanding will contribute to the creation of more efficient incentives for guest
engagement in the value co-creation process.

3.4 Research theme III: outcomes of customer value co-creation

This theme relates to consequences of customer value co-creation. Different topics resulting
from the systematic literature review allow this theme to be organized in three categories:
customer results, perceived value and organizational performance and market outcomes
(outcomes of customer value co-creation).
Consequences/outcomes
(1) Customer results:
 customer ability*;
 customer citizenship behavior*;
 customer expenditure*;
 customer loyalty *;
 customer satisfaction*;
 adoption intention*;
 future co-creation intention**; and
 well-being **.
(2) Perceived value:
 economic value*;
 experience value*;
 creation value*;
 emotional value*;
 knowledge value*;
 novelty value*;
 quality value*;
 relational value*;
 social value*; and
 personalization value*.

(3) Organizational performance and market outcomes:

 service innovation*;
 service market outcomes (market share, sales and profits)*;
 service quality**;
IJCHM  service development*;
35,1  coordination costs***; and
 employees satisfaction*.
Note: *positive effects of customer value co-creation;**positive and negative effects of
customer value co-creation;***negative effects of customer value co-creation.
The literature presents a diversity of customer results as a consequence of value co-
262 creation, and these will be explained below. It is important to highlight that the scientific
community presents a range of benefits allowing not only improved business performance,
but also helping customers to maximize their own “value-in-use”.
Customer ability can be understood as customers’ knowledge and skills that enable them
to perform effectively in co-creative innovation (Sarmah and Rahman, 2018). However, some
studies show that customer ability is an outcome of customer value co-creation (Zatori, 2016),
and it is positively affected by customer value co-creation (Sarmah and Rahman, 2018).
In turn, willingness to engage in customer citizenship behaviour is also a positive outcome
of customer value co-creation, according to Assiouras et al. (2019) and Arıca and Çorbaci
(2020). Other researchers shared the same ideas and consequently presented
recommendations for prospective guests (Johnson and Neuhofer, 2017), as well as customer-
advocacy as an outcome positively influenced by customer value co-creation (Hollebeek and
Rather, 2019). Curiously, these studies contradict the perspective mentioned above, where
the customer citizenship behaviour factor is integrated into the dimensions of customer
value co-creation. Indeed, these studies justify further investigation in the future.
The influence of customer value co-creation on customer satisfaction is seen as positive in
studies associated with hotel service (Kamboj and Gupta, 2020), travel agencies (Hamidi
et al., 2020), whale watching (Xie et al., 2020b), cultural arts and creative workshops (Al
Halbusi et al., 2020) and immersive underwater virtual reality experience (Hudson et al.,
2019). However, other articles show this outcome, drawing upon qualitative and conceptual
studies, in leisure farms and hostel restaurants (Hsu et al., 2013), hospitality services
(Harrington et al., 2019), city tourism (Arıca and Çorbaci, 2020) and personalised hotel room
layout service (Hsiao et al., 2015b).
A diversity of studies has shown that customer value co-creation has a positive impact
on tourist loyalty (Hollebeek and Rather, 2019; Moise et al., 2020) as well as on customer
expenditure (Grissemann and Stockburger-Sauer, 2012). In addition, the literature revealed
that consumers’ degree of co-creation or their willingness to co-create affects their
technological adoption intention (Sarmah et al., 2017), future co-creation intention (Sarmah
and Rahman, 2018) and well-being (Fan et al., 2020).
The perceived value of co-creation is identified as other outcome and should be understood
as the “value-in-use” that is construed by consumers in their own terms (Morosan and
DeFranco, 2016). However, customer co-creation behaviour also influences the different types of
perceived value (Xie et al., 2020b). For instance, studies explain this enhances quality value,
economic value, novelty value, emotional value, social value, knowledge value (Prebensen and Xie,
2017; Guan et al., 2018), relational value (Taheri et al., 2017), experience value (Prebensen and
Xie, 2017) and, in the context of mobile instant messaging, personalization value (Lei et al., 2020).
Organizational performance and market outcomes are other outcomes that depend on
customer value co-creation. Some authors explain that service quality may be influenced
negatively or positively by customer co-creation (Luo et al., 2019; Sengupta and Pillai, 2017).
Other studies indicated a positive influence of customer co-creation on new service
development (cf. Kamboj and Gupta, 2020), as well as a direct and positive relationship
between customer co-creation and new service market outcomes, namely, market share, sales
and profits (Santos-Vijande et al., 2018). Lastly, value co-creation dynamics have a positive Customer
impact on service innovation (Xie et al., 2020a) and on employees’ satisfaction (Boadi et al., value co-
2020), but may lead to an increase in coordination costs (Ma et al., 2017).
A synthesis of Theme III results is shown in outcomes of customer value co-creation.
creation
The scientific community has mostly presented, as the main consequences of value co-
creation in the hospitality and tourism industry, tourist loyalty (Moise et al., 2020) and tourist
satisfaction (Kamboj and Gupta, 2020). However, this systematic review reveals the existence of
three categories of consequences of customer value co-creation not yet highlighted by the 263
scientific community. Regarding customer results, in addition to satisfaction and loyalty,
frequently found, the literature shows that customer value co-creation stimulates their own
well-being and their recommendations of the place or organization to prospective customers,
besides leading customers to spend more money. Moreover, customer value co-creation enables
them to make a greater contribution to the innovation process in organizations and therefore
become less averse to technology adoption and more prone to value co-creation. Therefore,
organizations must consider a set of measures (e.g. contests offering prizes or discount
coupons) that encourage tourists and guests’ participation in content sharing (videos and
photos), through the use of social networks, encouraging consequently, tourist mimicry and the
mobilizing of other potential tourists and references to support co-creation behaviours.
In addition to the diversity of outcomes associated with the customer, this review shows
that customer value co-creation also positively influences their perceived value. Hitherto, this
category has not been addressed in the more conceptual literature on value co-creation. Several
articles also explain that value co-creation can improve organizational performance, as well as
the organization’s market results. Thus, a new category of value co-creation outcomes must be
highlighted, understanding that organizations can benefit from more satisfied employees and
lower coordination costs, provide better service quality and increase the development of new
services. Customer value co-creation allows organizations to improve their “key results” in the
market, such as market share, sales and profits. Thus, organizations will be able to view
organizational performance and market results resulting from value co-creation, as a new
“tableau de bord”, to be considered in their management control.
To better understand the effect of customer value co-creation on its consequences, this
section justifies an empirical study that allows measuring the effect of the new dimensions
of value co-creation on the perceptions and value created for the customer, as well as on the
company’s own performance and market results.

4. Conclusion, implications and limitations

4.1 Conclusion
The aim of this study was to develop a systematic literature review of customer value co-
creation in the hospitality and tourism industry. The study reveals that, in the literature,
manifestations of customer value co-creation are related to customer behaviours and factors
that shape co-creation. The antecedents of co-creation are closely linked to the customer,
social environment, service provider and technological resources. The outcomes resulting
from customer value co-creation can be grouped in customer results, perceived value and
organizational performance and market outcomes.

4.2 Theoretical implications

This study contributes to the academic literature in several ways. Firstly, this study
responds to previous calls highlighting the importance of continuing to develop studies, in
the context of customer value co-creation, in the hospitality and tourism industry
(Grissemann and Stockburger-Sauer, 2012; Cha et al., 2016).
IJCHM Secondly, the current study extends the literature, using for the first time a systematic
35,1 literature review, emphasizing the different dimensions contained in the literature on
customer value co-creation in the hospitality and tourism industry, through a holistic
understanding of empirical and conceptual knowledge.
Lastly, this research highlights factors less addressed in the literature, which are relevant
to understanding the concept of value co-creation, as well as introduces new dimensions
264 associated with the antecedents and outcomes of value co-creation. This contribution
facilitates a better conceptual understanding, which is extremely important for the creation
of more robust empirical models.

4.3 Practical implications

This study supports the value proposition offered by practitioners in this industry, driven by new
organizational performance indicators, to increase customer involvement in value co-creation.
Thus, the findings emphasize that the tourist or guest’s attitude towards co-creation can be
stimulated by organizations, through a communication more oriented towards the benefits of
value co-creation. In turn, interactions between tourists or guests and residents should be
encouraged, through the dissemination of activities developed locally by residents and through
social activities in hotels (in lounges or bars). In addition, tourism organizations should promote
interactive and user-friendly information technologies, which facilitate personalization and
learning experiences.
The findings also reveal the importance of tourism organizations encouraging the
participation of tourists and guests in content sharing on social networks, through the
creation of contests and other measures, such as offering prizes or discounts, to make them
less averse to technology adoption and more prone to value co-creation. Furthermore, the
highlighted category “organizational performance and market results” should be seen by
these organizations as a new “tableau de bord” in their management control.

4.4 Limitations and future research

This article extends extant literature, but has limitations. Thus, other sources, such as
books, book chapters and conferences, were not included in the search criteria in the
databases and could have brought other conceptual and empirical contributions to this
work. This study also opens up future lines of research, namely, new empirical studies,
through empirical validation of a questionnaire measuring the categories identified
resulting from a holistic perspective of several theoretical approaches and coming from
the different sectors of the hospitality and tourism industry. Another suggestion,
considering the categories of antecedents observed, is to understand how the
dimensions of antecedents grouped in this study can influence the dimensions of
customer value co-creation identified, as well as understand how the dimensions of
customer value co-creation can impact on outcomes of value co-creation, through the
development of new empirical studies in this industry.

References
Akaka, M.A., Vargo, S.L. and Lusch, R.F. (2012), “An exploration of networks in value cocreation: a
service-ecosystem view”, Review of Marketing Research, Vol. 9, pp. 13-50.
Al Halbusi, H., Estevez, P.J., Eleen, T., Ramayah, T. and Uzir, M.U.H. (2020), “The roles of The physical
environment, social servicescape, co-created value, and customer satisfaction in determining tourists’
citizenship behavior: Malaysian cultural and creative industries”, Sustainability, Vol. 12 No. 8, p. 3229.
Alakoski, L. and Tikkanen, I. (2019), “End consumer’s value creation in a nature-based tourism Customer
service”, Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Insights, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 18-36.
value co-
Alexiou, M.-V. (2020), “Experience economy and co-creation in a cultural heritage festival: consumers’
views”, Journal of Heritage Tourism, Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 200-216.
creation
Alqayed, Y., Foroudi, P., Kooli, K., Foroudi, M. and Ferri, M.A. (2021), “Exploring value co-creation concept:
a bibliometric analysis of 20 years of research and theory”, in Foroudi, P. and Palazzo, M. (Eds),
Sustainable Branding: Ethical, Social, and Environmental Cases and Perspectives, Routledge,
pp. 291-309, available at: www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9780367855703-19/exploring- 265
value-co-creation-concept-yousef-alqayed-pantea-foroudi-kaouther-kooli-mohammad-foroudi-
maria-antonella-ferri
Altinay, L., Sigala, M. and Waligo, V. (2016), “Social value creation through tourism enterprise”,
Tourism Management, Vol. 54, pp. 404-417.
Anton, C., Camarero, C. and Garrido, M.-J. (2018), “Exploring the experience value of museum visitors
as a co-creation process”, Current Issues in Tourism, Vol. 21 No. 12, pp. 1406-1425.
Arıca, R. and Çorbaci, A. (2020), “The mediating role of the tourists’ citizenship behavior between the
value co-creation and satisfaction”, Advances in Hospitality and Tourism Research, Vol. 8 No. 1,
pp. 125-150.
Assiouras, I., Skourtis, G., Giannopoulos, A., Buhalis, D. and Koniordos, M. (2019), “Value co-creation
and customer citizenship behavior”, Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 78, p. 102742, doi:
10.1016/j.annals.2019.102742.
Baccarani, C. and Cassia, F. (2017), “Evaluating the outcomes of service ecosystems”, The TQM
Journal, Vol. 29 No. 6, pp. 834-846.
Bertella, G., Cavicchi, A. and Bentini, T. (2018), “The reciprocal aspect of the experience value: tourists
and residents celebrating weddings in the rural village of petritoli (Italy)”, Anatolia, Vol. 29
No. 1, pp. 52-62.
Binkhorst, E. and Dekker, T.D. (2009), “Agenda for co-creation tourism experience research”, Journal of
Hospitality Marketing and Management, Vol. 18 Nos 2/3, pp. 311-327.
Boadi, E.A., He, Z., Boadi, E.K., Antwi, S. and Say, J. (2020), “Customer value co-creation and employee
silence: emotional intelligence as explanatory mechanism”, International Journal of Hospitality
Management, Vol. 91, p. 102646.
Brejla, P. and Gilbert, D. (2014), “An exploratory use of web content analysis to understand
cruise tourism services”, International Journal of Tourism Research, Vol. 16 No. 2,
pp. 157-168.
Brereton, P., Kitchenham, B., Budgen, D., Turner, M. and Khalil, M. (2007), “Lessons from applying the
systematic literature review process within the software engineering domain”, Journal of
Systems and Software, Vol. 80 No. 4, pp. 571-583.
Busser, J.A. and Shulga, L.V. (2018), “Co-created value: multidimensional scale and nomological
network”, Tourism Management, Vol. 65, pp. 69-86.
Campos, A.C., Mendes, J., Oom do Valle, P. and Scott, N. (2018), “Co – creation of tourist experiences: a
literature review”, Current Issues in Tourism, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 369-400.
Cannas, R. (2018), “Diverse economies of collective value co-creation: the open monuments event”,
Tourism Planning and Development, Vol. 15 No. 5, pp. 535-550.
Cannas, R., Argiolas, G. and Cabiddu, F. (2019), “Fostering corporate sustainability in tourism
management through social values within collective value co-creation processes”, Journal of
Sustainable Tourism, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 139-155.
Cha, M.-K., Yi, Y. and Bagozzi, R.P. (2016), “Effects of customer participation in corporate social
responsibility (CSR) programs on the CSR-brand fit and brand loyalty”, Cornell Hospitality
Quarterly, Vol. 57 No. 3, pp. 235-249.
IJCHM Chandler, J.D. and Vargo, S.L. (2011), “Contextualization and value-in context: how context frames
exchange”, Marketing Theory, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 35-49.
35,1
Chathoth, P., Altinay, L., Harrington, R.J., Okumus, F. and Chan, E.S. (2013), “Co-production versus co-
creation: a process based continuum in the hotel service context”, International Journal of
Hospitality Management, Vol. 32, pp. 11-20.
Chen, Z. (2018), “A pilot study of the co-creation experience in traditional cantonese teahouses in Hong
266 Kong”, Journal of Heritage Tourism, Vol. 13 No. 6, pp. 506-527.
Chen, J.-S., Kerr, D., Chou, C.Y.,. and A., C. (2017), “Business co-creation for service innovation in the
hospitality and tourism industry”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality
Management, Vol. 29 No. 6, pp. 1522-1540.
Chiscano, M.C. and Binkhorst, E. (2019), “Heritage sites experience design with special needs
customers”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 31 No. 11,
pp. 4211-4226.
Christopher, M., Payne, A. and Ballantyne, D. (2002), Relationship Marketing: Creating Stakeholder
Value, Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford.
Chuang, S.-H. (2018), “Facilitating the chain of market orientation to value co-creation: the mediating role of
e-marketing adoption”, Journal of Destination Marketing and Management, Vol. 7, pp. 39-49.
Denyer, D. and Tranfield, D. (2009), “Producing a systematic review”, in Buchanan, D.A. and Bryman,
A. (Eds), The Sage Handbook of Organizational Research Methods, Sage Publications,
pp. 671-689, available at: www.cebma.org/wp-content/uploads/Denyer-Tranfield-Producing-a-
Systematic-Review.pdf
Diffley, S. and McCole, P. (2019), “The value of social networking sites in hotels”, Qualitative Market
Research: An International Journal, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 114-132.
Diffley, S. and McCole, P. (2015), “Extending customer relationship management into a social context”,
The Service Industries Journal, Vol. 35 Nos 11/12, pp. 591-610.
Dolan, R., Seo, Y. and Kemper, J. (2019), “Complaining practices on social media in tourism: a value co-
creation and co-destruction perspective”, Tourism Management, Vol. 73, pp. 35-45.
Douglas, A.C., Mills, J.E., Niang, M., Stepchenkova, S., Byun, S., Ruffini, C., Lee, S.K., Loutfi, J., Lee, J.-K.,
Atallah, M. and Blanton, M. (2008), “Internet addiction: meta-synthesis of qualitative research
for the decade 1996-2006”, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 24 No. 6, pp. 3027-3044.
Edhlund, B.M. and McDougall, A.G. (2019), Your Guide to the Leading Qualitative Dana Analysis
Software, Form and Kunskap, Stallarholmen.
Erhardt, N., Martin-Rios, C. and Chan, E. (2019), “Value co-creation in sport entertainment between internal and
external stakeholders”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 31 No. 11,
pp. 4192-4210.
Fan, D.X., Hsu, C.H.C. and Lin, B. (2020), “Tourists’ experiential value co-creation through online social contacts:
customer-dominant logic perspective”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 108 No. C, pp. 163-173.
Foroudi, P., Marvi, R. and Colmekcioglu, N. (2022), “Antecedents and consequences of co-creation value
with a resolution of complex P2P relationships”, International Journal of Contemporary
Hospitality Management, doi: 10.1108/IJCHM-10-2021-1278.
Fu, X. and Lehto, X. (2018), “Vacation co-creation: the case of chinese family travellers”, International
Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 980-1000.
Fyrberg, A. and Juriado, R. (2009), “What about interaction? Networks and brands as integrators within
service-dominant logic”, Journal of Service Management, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 420-432.
Galvagno, M. and Dalli, D. (2014), “Theory of value co-creation: a systematic literature review”,
Managing Service Quality, Vol. 24 No. 6, pp. 643-683.
García-Rosell, J.-C., Haanpaa, M. and Janhunen, J. (2019), “Dig where you stand: values-based through
improvisation”, Tourism Recreation Research, Vol. 44 No. 3, pp. 348-358.
Gaur, A. and Kumar, M. (2018), “A systematic approach to conducting review studies: an assessment of Customer
content analysis in 25years of IB research”, Journal of World Business, Vol. 53 No. 2, pp. 280-289.
value co-
Ge, J. and Gretzel, U. (2018), “A taxonomy of value co-creation on weibo - a communication perspective”,
International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 30 No. 4, pp. 2075-2092.
creation
Gonzalez-Mansilla, Ó., Berenguer-Contrí, G. and Serra-Cantallops, A. (2019), “The impact of value co-
creation on hotel Brand equity and customer satisfaction”, Tourism Management, Vol. 75, pp. 51-65.
Grissemann, U. and Stockburger-Sauer, N.E. (2012), “Customer co-creation of travel services: the role of
company support and customer satisfaction with the co-creation performance”, Tourism
267
Management, Vol. 33 No. 6, pp. 1483-1492.
Grönroos, C. (2006), “Adopting a service logic for marketing”, Marketing Theory, Vol. 6 No. 3,
pp. 317-333.
Grönroos, C. (2008), “Service logic revisited: who creates value? and who co-creates?”, European
Business Review, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 298-314.
Grönroos, C. and Gummerus, J. (2014), “The service revolution and its marketing implications: service
logic vs service-dominant logic”, Managing Service Quality, Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 206-229.
Guan, X.-H., Xie, L. and Huan, T.-C. (2018), “Customer knowledge sharing, creativity and value co-
creation: a triad model of hotels, corporate sales employees and their customers”, International
Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 961-979.
Hamidi, F., Fatemeh, Gharneh, N.S. and Khajeheian, D. (2020), “A conceptual framework for value co-
creation in service enterprises (case of tourism agencies)”, Sustainability, Vol. 12 No. 1, p. 213.
Hansen, A.V. (2019), “Value co-creation in service marketing: a critical (re)view”, International Journal
of Innovation Studies, Vol. 3 No. 4, pp. 73-83.
Harkison, T. (2018), “The use of co-creation within the luxury accommodation experience - myth or
reality?”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 71, pp. 11-18.
Harkison, T., Hemmington, N. and Hyde, K. (2018), “Creating the luxury accommodation experience:
case studies from New Zealand”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality
Management, Vol. 30 No. 3, pp. 1724-1740.
Harrington, R., J., Hammond, R.K., Ottenbacher, M.C., Chathoth, P.K. and Marlowe, B. (2019), “From
goods-service logic to a memory-dominant logic: business logic evolution and application in
hospitality”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 76, pp. 252-260.
He, W. and Wang, F.-W. (2016), “A process-based framework of using social media support innovation
process”, Information Technology and Management, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 263-277.
Heinonen, K. and Strandvik, T. (2015), “Customer-dominant logic: foundations and implications”,
Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 29 Nos 6/7, pp. 472-484.
Hemmington, N. (2007), “From service to experience: understanding and defining the hospitality
business”, The Service Industries Journal, Vol. 27 No. 6, pp. 747-755.
Hollebeek, L. and Brodie, J.R. (2009), “Wine service marketing, value co-creation and involvement:
research issues”, International Journal of Wine Business Research, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 339-353.
Hollebeek, L. and Rather, R.A. (2019), “Service innovativeness and tourism customer outcomes”,
International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 31 No. 11, pp. 4227-4246.
Hsiao, W.-B., Chiu, M.C., Chu, C.-Y. and Chen, W.F. (2015b), “A systematic service design methodology
to achieve mass personalisation”, International Journal of Agile Systems and Management, Vol. 8
Nos 3/4, pp. 243-263.
Hsiao, C., Lee, Y.-H. and Chen, W.-J. (2015a), “The effect of servant leadership on customer value co-
creation: a cross-level analysis of key mediating roles”, Tourism Management, Vol. 49, pp. 45-57.
Hsu, S.-M., Hsieh, P.H. and Yuan, S.-T. (2013), “Roles of ‘small and medium-sized enterprises’ in service
industry innovation: a case study on leisure agriculture service in tourism regional innovation”,
The Service Industries Journal, Vol. 33 No. 11, pp. 1068-1088.
IJCHM Hudson, S., Matson-Barkat, S., Pallamin, N. and Jegou, G. (2019), “With or without you? Interaction and
immersion in a virtual reality experience”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 100, pp. 459-468.
35,1
Jiménez-Barreto, J. and Campo-Martínez, S. (2018), “Destination website quality, users’ attitudes and the
willingness to participate in online co-creation experiences”, European Journal of Management
and Business Economics, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 26-41.
Johnson, A.G. and Neuhofer, B. (2017), “Airbnb – an exploration of value co-creation experiences in Jamaica”,
International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 29 No. 9, pp. 2361-2376.
268
Kamboj, S. and Gupta, S. (2020), “Use of smart phone apps in co-creative hotel service innovation:
evidence from India”, Current Issues in Tourism, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 323-344.
Kang, J. (2020), “Identifying antecedents and consequences of well-being: the case of cruise passengers”,
Tourism Management Perspectives, Vol. 33, p. 100609.
Leclercq, T., Hammedi, W. and Poncin, I. (2016), “Ten years of value cocreation: an integrative review”,
Recherche et Applications en Marketing (English Edition), Vol. 31 No. 3, pp. 26-60.
Lee, Y.-H., Hsiao, C. and Chen, Y.-C. (2017), “Linking positive psychological capital with customer value
co-creation”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 29 No. 4,
pp. 1235-1255.
Lei, S., Wang, D. and Law, R. (2019), “Hoteliers’ service design for mobile-based value co-creation”,
International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 31 No. 11, pp. 4338-4356.
Lei, S.I., Ye, S., Wang, D. and Law, R. (2020), “Engaging customers in value co-creation through mobile
instant messaging in the tourism and hospitality industry”, Journal of Hospitality and Tourism
Research, Vol. 44 No. 2, pp. 229-251.
Li, M. and Hsu, C.H.C. (2018), “Customer participation in services and employee innovative behavior:
the mediating role of interpersonal trust”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality
Management, Vol. 30 No. 4, pp. 2112-2131.
Liang, A.R.-D. (2017), “Considering the role of agritourism co-creation from a service-dominant logic
perspective”, Tourism Management, Vol. 61, pp. 354-367.
Limburg, B. (2011), “Tourism to Suriname, using dart to analyze a visitor’s perspective in a cocreation
environment”, Information Technology and Tourism, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 119-132.
Lin, S., Yang, S., Ma, M. and Huang, J. (2018), “Value co-creation on social media”, International Journal
of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 30 No. 4, pp. 2153-2174.
Lis, X., Zeng, Y., H., J. and Li, Z. (2022), “Value co-creation research in tourism and hospitality a
comparative bibliometric analysis”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality
Management, Vol. 34 No. 2, pp. 663-686.
Lo†rincz, K., Banasz, Z. and Csapo, J. (2020), “Customer involvement in sustainable tourism planning at
lake balaton, hungary – analysis of the consumer preferences of the active cycling tourists”,
Sustainability, Vol. 12 No. 12, p. 5174.
Luo, J., Wong, I., King, B., Liu, M. and Huang, G. (2019), “Co-creation and co-destruction of service
quality through customer-to-customer interactions: why prior experience matters”, International
Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 31 No. 3, pp. 1309-1329.
Lusch, R.F. and Vargo, S.L. (2014), Service-Dominant Logic: Premises, Perspectives, Possibilities,
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
McLeay, F., Lichy, J. and Major, B. (2019), “Co-creation of the ski-chalet community experiencescape”,
Tourism Management, Vol. 74, pp. 413-424.
Ma, S., Gu, H., Wang, Y. and Hampson, D. (2017), “Opportunities and challenges of value co-creation:
the role of customer involvement in hotel service development”, International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 29 No. 12, pp. 3023-3043.
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D.G. and The PRISMA Group (2009), “Preferred reporting
items for systematic reviews and meta-Analyses: the PRISMA statement”, PLoS Medicine, Vol. 6
No. 7, p. e1000097.
Moise, M.S., Gil-Saura, I. and Ruiz-Molina, M.-E. (2020), “Implications of value co-creation in green hotels: the Customer
moderating effect of trip purpose and generational cohort”, Sustainability, Vol. 12 No. 23, p. 9866.
value co-
Morosan, C. and DeFranco, A. (2016), “Co-creating value in hotels using mobile devices: a conceptual model
with empirical validation”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 52, pp. 131-142.
creation
Morosan, C. and DeFranco, A. (2019), “Using interactive technologies to influence guests’
unplanned dollar spending in hotels”, International Journal of Hospitality Management,
Vol. 82, pp. 242-251.
Najera-Sanchez, J.-J., Ortiz-de-Urbina-Criado, M. and Mora-Valentín, E.-M. (2020), “Mapping value co-
269
creation literature in the technology and innovation management field: a bibliographic coupling
analysis”, Frontiers in Psychology, Vol. 11, p. 588648.
Neuhofer, B., Buhalis, D. and Ladkin, A. (2012), “Conceptualising technology enhanced destination
experiences”, Journal of Destination Marketing and Management, Vol. 1 Nos 1/2, pp. 36-46.
Notzke, C. (2019), “Equestrian tourism: animal agency observed”, Current Issues in Tourism, Vol. 22
No. 8, pp. 948-966.
Ordanini, A., Rubera, G. and DeFillippi, R. (2008), “The many moods of inter-organizational imitation: a
critical review”, International Journal of Management Reviews, Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 375-398.
Page, M.J., McKenzie, J.E., Bossuyt, P.M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T.C., Mulrow, C.D., Shamseer, L.,
Tetzlaff, J.M., Akl, E.A., Brennan, S.E. and Chou, R. (2021), “The PRISMA 2020 statement: an
updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews”, PLoS Med, Vol. 18 No. 3, p. e1003583.
Pawson, R. (2006), Evidence-Based Policy: A Realist Perspective, Sage Publications, London.
Peng, J.-M., Guan, X.-H. and Huan, T.-C. (2021), “Not always co-creating brand: effects of perceived
justice on employee brand sabotage behaviours in the hotel industry”, International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 333, pp. 973-993.
Phi, G.T. and Dredge, D. (2019), “Collaborative tourism-making: an interdisciplinary review of co-
creation and a future research agenda”, Tourism Recreation Research, Vol. 44 No. 3, pp. 284-299.
Ponsignon, F. and Derbaix, M. (2020), “The impact of interactive technologies on the social experience:
an empirical study in a cultural tourism context”, Tourism Management Perspectives, Vol. 35,
p. 100723.
Potter, W.J. and Levine-Donnerstein, D. (1999), “Rethinking validity and reliability in content analysis”, Journal
of Applied Communication Research, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 258-284, doi: 10.1080/00909889909365539.
Prahalad, C.K. and Ramaswamy, V. (2004a), The Future of Competition: Co-Creating Unique Value with
Customers, Harvard Business School Press, Boston.
Prahalad, C.K. and Ramaswamy, V. (2004b), “Co-creation experiences: the next practice in value
creation”, Journal of Interactive Marketing, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 5-14.
Prayag, G., Gannon, M.J., Muskat, B. and Taheri, B. (2020), “A serious leisure perspective of culinary
tourism co-creation: the influence of prior knowledge, physical environment and service
quality”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 32 No. 7,
pp. 2453-2472.
Prebensen, N.K., Kim, H.L. and Uysal, M. (2016), “Cocreation as moderator between the experience
value and satisfaction relationship”, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 55 No. 7, pp. 934-945.
Prebensen, N.K., Vittersø, J. and Dahl, T.I. (2013), “Value co-creation significance of tourist resources”,
Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 42, pp. 240-261.
Prebensen, N.K. and Xie, J. (2017), “Efficacy of co-creation and mastering on perceived value and
satisfaction in experiential consumption”, Tourism Management, Vol. 49, pp. 45-57.
Rather, R.A., Hollebeek, L.D. and Islam, J.U. (2019), “Tourism-based customer engagement: the
construct, antecedents and consequences”, The Service Industry Journal, Vol. 39, pp. 7-8.
Ravald, A. and Grönroos, C. (1996), “The value concept and relationship marketing”, European Journal
of Marketing, Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 19-30.
IJCHM Reichenberger, I. (2017), “C2C value co-creation through social interactions in tourism”, International
Journal of Tourism Research, Vol. 19 No. 6, pp. 629-638.
35,1
Richard, B. (2016), “Hotel chains: survival strategies for a dynamic future”, Journal of Tourism Futures,
Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 56-65.
Rihova, I., Buhalis, D., Gouthro, M.B. and Moital, M. (2018), “Customer-to-customer co-creation practices in
tourism: lessons from customer-dominant logic”, Tourism Management, Vol. 67, pp. 362-375.
270 Rihova, I., Buhalis, D., Moital, M. and Gouthro, M.B. (2015), “Conceptualising customer-to-customer value
co-creation in tourism”, International Journal of Tourism Research, Vol. 17 No. 4, pp. 356-363.
Rodríguez, N.G., Álvarez, B.A. and Vijande, M.L.S. (2011), “Service dominant logic in the tourism sector:
internal marketing as an antecedent of an innovations’ co-creation culture with clients and first-
line employees”, Cuadernos de Gestion, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 53-75.
Santos-Vijande, M.L., Lopez-Sanchez, J.Á. and Pascual-Fernandez, P. (2018), “co-creation with clients of
hotel services: the moderating role of top management support”, Current Issues in Tourism,
Vol. 21 No. 3, pp. 301-327.
Sarkis-Onofre, R., Ferran Catala-Lopez, F., Aromataris, E. and Craig Lockwood, C. (2021), “How to
properly use the PRISMA statement”, Systematic Reviews, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 1-3.
Sarmah, B. and Rahman, Z. (2018), “Customer co-creation in hotel service innovation: an interpretive
structural modeling and MICMAC analysis approach”, Benchmarking: An International Journal,
Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 297-318.
Sarmah, B., Kamboj, S. and Rahman, Z. (2017), “Co-creation in hotel service innovation using smart
phone apps: an empirical study”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality
Management, Vol. 29 No. 10, pp. 2647-2667.
Sengupta, A. and Pillai, S. (2017), “Impact of other customers on service quality evaluation and revisit
intention in hospitality services”, International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality
Research, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 182-192.
Shin, H., Perdue, R. and Pandelaere, M. (2020), “Managing customer reviews for value Co-creation: an
empowerment theory perspective”, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 59 No. 5, pp. 792-810.
Shulga, L.V., Busser, J.A. and Bai, B. (2018), “Factors affecting willingness to participate in consumer
generated advertisement”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 74, pp. 214-223.
Sigala, M. (2018), “Implementing social customer relationship management”, International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 30 No. 7, pp. 2698-2726.
Simeoni, F. and Cassia, F. (2019), “From vehicle suppliers to value co-creators: the evolving role of
italian motorhome manufacturers”, Current Issues in Tourism, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 218-236.
Sthapit, E. (2019), “Exploring the antecedents of value co-creation: guests’ perspectives on finnish
hotels”, Anatolia, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 140-142.
Sthapit, E. and Björk, P. (2020), “Towards a better understanding of interactive value formation: three
value outcomes perspective”, Current Issues in Tourism, Vol. 23 No. 6, pp. 693-706.
Taheri, B., Coelho, F., Sousa, C.M.P. and Evanschitzky, H. (2017), “Mood regulation, customer
participation, and customer value creation in hospitality services”, International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 29 No. 12, pp. 3063-3081.
Tinson, J.S., Saren, M. and Roth, B.E. (2015), “Exploring the role of dark tourism in the creation of national
identity of young americans”, Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 31 Nos 7/8, pp. 7-8.
Tranfield, D., Denyer, D. and Smart, P. (2003), “Towards a methodology for developing evidence-
informed management knowledge by means of systematic review”, British Journal of
Management, Vol. 14, pp. 207-222, doi: 10.1111/1467-8551.00375.
Tuan, L.T., Rajendran, D., Rowley, C. and Khai, D.C. (2019), “Customer value co-creation in the
business-to-business tourism context: the roles of corporate social responsibility and customer
empowering behaviors”, Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, Vol. 39, pp. 137-149.
Tung, V.W.S. and Au, N. (2018), “Exploring customer experiences with robotics in hospitality”, Customer
International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 30 No. 7, pp. 2680-2697.
value co-
Vargo, S.L. and Akaka, M.A. (2009), “Service-dominant logic as a foundation for service science”,
Clarifications. Service Science, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 32-41. creation
Vargo, S.L. and Lusch, R. (2004), “Evolving to a new dominant logic for marketing”, Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 68 No. 1, pp. 1-17.
Vargo, S.L. and Lusch, R. (2006), “Service–dominant logic: what it is, what is not, what it might be”, in
Lush, R.F. and Vargo, S.L. (Eds), The Service-Dominant Logic of Marketing: Dialog, Debate, and
271
Directions, M. E. Shape, New York, NY, pp. 43-56.
Vargo, S.L. and Lusch, R. (2016), “Institutions and axioms: an extension and update of service-dominant
logic”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 44 No. 1, pp. 5-23.
Vargo, S.L., Lusch, R., Akaka, M.A. and He, Y. (2010), “Service dominant-logic: a review and
assessement”, Review of Marketing Research, Vol. 6, pp. 125-167.
Wang, D., Li, X.R. and Li, Y. (2013), “China’s smart tourism destination” initiative: a taste of the service-
dominant logic”, Journal of Destination Marketing and Management, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 59-61.
Wong, J.W.C. and Lai, I.K.W. (2018), “Evaluating value co-creation activities in exhibitions: an impact-
asymmetry analysis”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 72, pp. 118-131.
Wood, E.H. and Kinnunen, M. (2020), “Emotion, memory and re-collective value: shared festival experiences”,
International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 32 No. 3, pp. 1275-1298.
Xie, L., Guan, X., Cheng, Q. and Huan, T.-C. (2020a), “Using customer knowledge for service innovation in
travel agency industry”, Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, Vol. 45, pp. 113-123.
Xie, J., Tkaczynski, A. and Prebensen, N.K. (2020b), “Human value co-creation behavior in tourism: insight from
an Australian whale watching experience”, Tourism Management Perspectives, Vol. 35, p. 100709.
Yi, Y. and Gong, T. (2013), “Customer value co-creation behavior: scale development and validation”,
Journal of Business Research, Vol. 66 No. 9, pp. 1279-1284.
Zatori, A. (2016), “Exploring the value co-creation process on guided tours (the ‘AIM-model’) and the
experience-centric management approach”, International Journal of Culture, Tourism and
Hospitality Research, Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 377-395.
Zhang, T. (2019), “Co-creating tourism experiences through a traveller’s journey: a perspective article”,
Tourism Review, Vol. 75 No. 1, pp. 56-60.
Zhang, X., Balaji, M.S. and Jiang, Y. (2022), “Robots at your service: value facilitation and value co-
creation in restaurants”, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 34
No. 5, pp. 2004-2025.
Zhang, H., Gordon, S., Buhalis, D. and Ding, X. (2018), “Experience value cocreation on destination
online platforms”, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 57 No. 8, pp. 1093-1107.

Further reading
Buhalis, D. and Foerste, M. (2015), “SoCoMo marketing for travel and tourism: empowering co-creation
of value”, Journal of Destination Marketing and Management, Vol. 4 No. 3, pp. 151-161.
IJCHM Appendix 1
35,1
Identification
keywords: “customer co-creation” or “customer cocreation”, “co-created value”, AND “tourism”, “hotel”

202 articles identified 179 articles identified 25 articles identified 61 articles identified
272 through Web of Science through Scopus through Science Direct through EBSCO

Screening
337 articles left after duplicates removed

121 articles were excluded according to the

exclusion criteria – These studies focused on
Eligibility value creation, perceived value, perceived
337 articles assessed for eligibility experience and customer engagement. Other
studies of customer value co-creation outside the
tourism industry were also excluded.

Figure A1.
The PRISMA Included
diagram 216 articles included in the review
Appendix 2 Customer
value co-
creation

N (%)

Year 273
2020 33 15.28
2019 47 21.76
2018 46 21.30
2017 33 15.28
2016 16 7.41
2015 13 6.02
2014 6 2.78
2013 9 4.17
2012 3 1.39
2011 5 2.31
2010 1 0.46
2009 4 1.85
Total 216 100
Methods
Conceptual 20 9,26
Empirical 196 90,74
Quantitative methods 85 39,35
Qualitative methods 89 41,20 Table A1.
Mixed methods 22 10,19 Publication year and
Total 216 100 methodology

Corresponding author
Pedro Carvalho can be contacted at: pc@estg.ipvc.pt

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com