<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article
  PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Publishing DTD v1.0 20120330//EN" "http://jats.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/1.0/JATS-journalpublishing1.dtd">
<article article-type="research-article" dtd-version="1.0" specific-use="sps-1.8" xml:lang="en" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
	<front>
		<journal-meta>
			<journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">bbr</journal-id>
			<journal-title-group>
				<journal-title>BBR. Brazilian Business Review</journal-title>
				<abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">BBR, Braz. Bus.
					Rev.</abbrev-journal-title>
			</journal-title-group>
			<issn pub-type="ppub">1808-2386</issn>
			<issn pub-type="epub">1807-734X</issn>
			<publisher>
				<publisher-name>Fucape Business School</publisher-name>
			</publisher>
		</journal-meta>
		<article-meta>
			<article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.15728/bbr.2019.16.1.3</article-id>
			<article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">00003</article-id>
			<article-categories>
				<subj-group subj-group-type="heading">
					<subject>ARTICLES</subject>
				</subj-group>
			</article-categories>
			<title-group>
				<article-title>The Use of the 'Job to Be Done' methodology to identify value
					co-creation opportunities in the context of the Service Dominant
					Logic</article-title>
					<trans-title-group xml:lang="pt">
					<trans-title>A utilização da técnica Job to Be Done para identificação de oportunidades de cocriação de valor no contexto da Lógica Dominante do Serviço</trans-title>
				</trans-title-group>
			</title-group>
			<contrib-group>
				<contrib contrib-type="author">
					<contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">0000-0001-8260-3670</contrib-id>
					<name>
						<surname>Ribeiro</surname>
						<given-names>Áurea Helena Puga</given-names>
					</name>
					<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref>
				</contrib>
				<contrib contrib-type="author">
					<contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">0000-0002-5626-2945</contrib-id>
					<name>
						<surname>Monteiro</surname>
						<given-names>Plínio Rafael Reis</given-names>
					</name>
					<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2">2</xref>
				</contrib>
				<contrib contrib-type="author">
					<contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">0000-0001-7764-2755</contrib-id>
					<name>
						<surname>Luttembarck</surname>
						<given-names>Laura</given-names>
					</name>
					<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff3">3</xref>
				</contrib>
			</contrib-group>
			<aff id="aff1">
				<label>1</label>
				<institution content-type="original">Fundação Dom Cabral, Nova Lima, MG, Brazil</institution>
				<institution content-type="normalized">Fundação Dom Cabral</institution>
				<institution content-type="orgname">Fundação Dom Cabral</institution>
				<addr-line>
					<named-content content-type="city">Nova Lima</named-content>
					<named-content content-type="state">MG</named-content>
				</addr-line>
				<country country="BR">Brazil</country>
				<email>aureap@fdc.org.br</email>
			</aff>
			<aff id="aff2">
				<label>2</label>
				<institution content-type="original">Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil</institution>
				<institution content-type="normalized">Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais</institution>
				<institution content-type="orgname">Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais</institution>
				<addr-line>
					<named-content content-type="city">Belo Horizonte</named-content>
					<named-content content-type="state">MG</named-content>
				</addr-line>
				<country country="BR">Brazil</country>
				<email>preisufmg@gmail.com</email>
				</aff>
			<aff id="aff3">
				<label>3</label>
				<institution content-type="original">Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil</institution>
				<institution content-type="normalized">Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais</institution>
				<institution content-type="orgname">Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais</institution>
				<addr-line>
					<named-content content-type="city">Belo Horizonte</named-content>
					<named-content content-type="state">MG</named-content>
				</addr-line>
				<country country="BR">Brazil</country>
				<email>lauralut@hotmail.com</email>
			</aff>
			<pub-date pub-type="epub-ppub">
				<season>Jan-Feb</season>
				<year>2019</year>
			</pub-date>
			<volume>16</volume>
			<issue>1</issue>
			<fpage>32</fpage>
			<lpage>45</lpage>
			<history>
				<date date-type="received">
					<day>26</day>
					<month>12</month>
					<year>2017</year>
				</date>
				<date date-type="rev-recd">
					<day>14</day>
					<month>03</month>
					<year>2018</year>
				</date>
				<date date-type="accepted">
					<day>22</day>
					<month>03</month>
					<year>2018</year>
				</date>
				<!--<date date-type="pub">
					<day>10</day>
					<month>10</month>
					<year>2018</year>
				</date>-->
			</history>
			<permissions>
				<license license-type="open-access"
					xlink:href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/" xml:lang="en">
					<license-p>This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the
						Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use,
						distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is
						properly cited.</license-p>
				</license>
			</permissions>
			<abstract>
				<title>ABSTRACT</title>
				<p>Organizations that operate in B2B contexts adopt value-creation strategies aimed
					at customer loyalty. Based on the concepts of the Service Dominant Logic (SDL),
					the study proposes the use of the Job to Be Done (JTBD) technique as a method to
					support the implementation of SDL concepts, applying the Outcome Driven
					Innovation (ODI) approach. Results of a survey carried out with 450 customers of
					a chemical company pointed out that the jobs revealed by the customers, once
					solved, actually result in better performance, thus contributing to confirm the
					adequacy of the technique for the purpose of identifying and prioritizing
					customers with greater potential for co-creation. The study also evaluates the
					variable 'professional management' as a moderator of this relationship and
					confirms that the solution of the jobs considered relevant by the customers, in
					a context of professional management, enhances co-created value.</p>
			</abstract>
			<trans-abstract xml:lang="pt">
				<title>RESUMO</title>
				<p>Organizações que atuam em contextos B2B adotam estratégias de cocriação de valor
					visando à fidelização de clientes. Fundamentando-se nos conceitos da Lógica
					Dominante do Serviço (LDS), o estudo propõe a utilização da técnica de Job to be
					done (JTBD) como método para apoiar a implementação dos conceitos da LDS. O
					resultado de um levantamento realizado com 450 clientes de uma empresa do setor
					químico apontou que os jobs revelados pelos clientes, uma vez solucionados,
					geram de fato performance superior, contribuindo para a afirmativa da adequação
					da técnica para fins de identificar e priorizar clientes com maior potencial
					para cocriação. O estudo também avalia a variável "gestão profissional" como
					moderadora dessa relação e confirma que a solução dos jobs considerados
					relevantes pelos clientes, em contexto de gestão profissional, potencializa o
					valor cocriado.</p>
			</trans-abstract>
			<kwd-group xml:lang="en">
				<title>Keywords:</title>
				<kwd>Value</kwd>
				<kwd>Job to be done</kwd>
				<kwd>Co-creation</kwd>
			</kwd-group>
			<kwd-group xml:lang="pt">
				<title>Palavras-chave</title>
				<kwd>Valor</kwd>
				<kwd>Job to be done</kwd>
				<kwd>Cocriação</kwd>
			</kwd-group>
			<counts>
				<fig-count count="3"/>
				<table-count count="1"/>
				<equation-count count="0"/>
				<ref-count count="52"/>
				<page-count count="14"/>
			</counts>
		</article-meta>
	</front>
	<body>
		<sec sec-type="intro">
			<title>1. INTRODUCTION</title>
			<p>The strategy of services has been practiced in business-to-business markets as a
				means for an alternative differentiation between offers (GUMMERSSON, 1987, <xref
					ref-type="bibr" rid="B28">LOVELOCK, 2004</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B8"
					>BITNER and BROWN, 2008</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B41">RIBEIRO et al.,
					2009</xref>). Marketing professionals have developed broader concepts of
				solutions to customers, adding services to products and thus leveraging valuable
				opportunities for competitive advantage and higher profitability (<xref
					ref-type="bibr" rid="B42">SAWHENY and BALASUBRAMANIAN, 2004</xref>, <xref
					ref-type="bibr" rid="B16">FANG and others, 2008</xref>). Suppliers, for
				instance, besides supporting customers in the use of their products, are now willing
				to support them in the conduction of their own managerial processes, in the services
				they provide to their own end customers, and even in the identification of
				opportunities that might increase their competitiveness within the segments they
				operate.</p>
			<p>In their efforts to differentiate their offers, organisations are experimenting with
				new strategies that might improve the process of creating value for the customer,
				while literature on marketing introduces new approaches to value creation that
				emphasise both the relevance of services and the establishment of more relational
				processes.</p>
			<p>Along this theoretical evolution, the relational marketing approach appears as
				evolution and intensification of service strategies, and emphasises the relevance of
				building long-term links, which, contrary to what happens with more transactional
				approaches where the offered value is intrinsic to the product, enable the
				co-creation of value (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B23">HAKANSSON, H. and SNEHOTA,
					1995</xref>; LORENZZONI, G and LIPPARINI, A 1999, <xref ref-type="bibr"
					rid="B19">GADE and SNEHOTA, 2000</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B47">ULAGA
					and EGGERT, 2006</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B41">RIBEIRO et al.,
					2009</xref>). Organisations that practice relational strategies try to get
				involved in their customers' operations in order to generate measurable value from
				interactions and from the expansion of the services offered, as do suppliers when
				they offer customers their resources and know-how, aiming at increasing the benefits
				generated and committing themselves to the success of the customers in their own
				markets. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B47">ULAGA and EGGERT, 2006</xref>, STEINMAN et
				al., 2016). In even more intensive co-creation processes, customers, suppliers and
				other players further strengthen their mutual links and, in addition to cooperating
				to maximise mutual benefits, expend joint efforts to leverage new competences and to
				develop new opportunities and market innovations (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B23"
					>HAKANSSON, H. and SNEHOTA, 1995</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B40"
					>PRAHALAD and RAMASWAMY, 2004</xref>).</p>
			<p>Concomitantly with the theoretical debate, where the relevance of more relational
				approaches is emphasised, the beginning of the years 2000 witnessed the introduction
				of the Service Dominant Logic (SDL) into the academic environment. The proponents of
				this theory try to approach the creation of value to the customer from a different
				perspective. The SDL approach focuses on the discussion of co-creation, arguing that
				consumers are always involved in the process of value creation in an interactive way
				with the organisation, since, according to this approach, the customer does not
				acquire offers based on their inherent characteristics, but on their ability to
				solve problems. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B21">Grönroos and Voima (2013)</xref>
				deepen the understanding of the concept of value co-creation agreeing with the SDL
				approach in that value is always a co-creation, in spite of arguing that this
				process takes place only in the realm of the customer and that the supplier will
				only take part in this co-creation process if it is invited by the customer to
				participate in activities that create value in the context of its domain. The
				authors state further that the co-created value may be potentiated by interactions
				with other resources available to the organisation and with additional players,
				other than the suppliers under consideration.</p>
			<p>As observed along the last decades, organisational practices and marketing and
				network theories are emphasising the benefits of establishing closer proximity to
				customers and other players when it comes to the creation of more sustainable value.
				The SDL theory, however unveils the challenge faced by suppliers when trying to take
				part in the value creation process, because value is created by the customer in its
				own context and when interacting with the offer, and a customer may or may not allow
				the participation of the supplier in this process (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B21"
					>GRÖNROOS and VOIMA, 2013</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B35">OSTERWALDER et
					al., 2014</xref>, p. 6).</p>
			<p>In the face of said challenge, it is very important to improve methods capable of
				supporting the organisations in the identification of opportunities for value
				co-creation and in improving assertiveness in the selection of customers,
				identifying variables that signalise higher potential of a customer for changing
				resources offered by the supplier into value.</p>
			<p>In this particular aspect, this article explores the Outcome Driven Innovation - ODI
				method, supported by the Jobs to be done - JTBD technique as a tool to identify
				value creation opportunities in the realm of the customer. Value offer opportunities
				are revealed by the identification of problems that the customer needs to solve
					(<italic>jobs</italic>) and by the results they expect when looking for a
				solution among those offered to the market. Such expected results correspond,
				therefore, to the value it intends to co-create when applying the solution to its
				own context. Although the customer may co-create said value without the intervention
				of the supplier, the method helps the identification of valuable opportunities to
				potentiate the co-created value due to the collaborative intervention of the
				supplier - the relationship value (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B46">ULAGA,
					2006</xref>).</p>
			<p>The research herein described proposes, therefore, the use of the JTBD technique to
				support the identification of opportunities for the co-creation of value, thus
				supporting the application of the SDL as a conceptual framework for the
				establishment of organisational strategies, since the opportunities opened up by the
				identification of problems the customers need to solve (jobs), point to the
				co-creation of value in the relationship with the supplier. Still based on the
				hypothesis that the transformation of resources and capabilities into competitive
				advantages is guided by managerial processes (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">BARNEY
					and ARIKAN, 2006</xref>), we emphasise that the capacity for finding a joint
				solution for a customer's job is a specially relevant predictor of the performance
				in organisations that have more professional managements. Accordingly, the study
				here presented tries to answer two research questions:</p>
			<p>Do the jobs presented by the customers (problems for which solutions are searched),
				once solved, actually result in higher performance? In other words, does the
				solution of questions that are relevant from the point of view of the customer
				enable higher co-creation of value that can be measured by previously defined
				performance indicators?</p>
			<p>Does the solution of jobs considered relevant by customers, mediated by a
				professional management, potentiate co-created value measurable in terms of higher
				performance?</p>
			<p>The relevance of the present research lies in that it presents the JTBD technique as
				a method to support the implementation of the SDL concepts, as suggested by <xref
					ref-type="bibr" rid="B9">Brodie et al. (2011)</xref>. According to these
				authors, additional studies would be necessary to apply the SDL framework to the
				reality. In addition to the aforementioned contribution, the study proposes the
				evaluation of the variable 'professional management' as an agent that potentiates
				the value co-created by the customer.</p>
		</sec>
		<sec>
			<title>2. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE</title>
			<sec>
				<title>2.1. VALUE</title>
				<p>The concept of value is of fundamental importance in marketing. The attempt to
					deliver superior value, and consequently the search for customer's satisfaction
					and even loyalty, are prime objectives of the marketing area of organisations.
					The concept of value, however, is not a precise one, presenting different
					nuances and allowing different perspectives. In addition, it changes with time.
					In the face of so many marketing perspectives on the value for costumers, we
					will introduce two frameworks, proposed by different authors, which summarise
					some interpretations of value and allow us to visualise the concept's evolution,
					thus supporting this study.</p>
				<p><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B44">Smith and Colgate (2007)</xref> propose a
					framework of value-creation strategies that identifies and classifies the types
					of value found in the literature into four categories. The value types
					summarised by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B44">Smith and Colgate (2007)</xref>
					are: functional / instrumental, experiential / hedonic, symbolic / expressive
					and cost / sacrifice. In another classification found in the literature,
					different kinds of generated value form the base for organisational strategies:
					exchange value, added value, performance value and value co-creation (<xref
						ref-type="bibr" rid="B31">MÖLLER et al., 2005</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr"
						rid="B40">PRAHALAD; RAMASWAMY, 2004</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B2"
						>ANDERSON; NARUS; VON ROSSUN, 2006</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B41"
						>RIBEIRO et al., 2009</xref>). The exchange value is the most basic among
					them and is based on economic principles; it is inherent in the offer, being
					measured by the value received in exchange for the offer. Added value, on the
					other hand, is the value generated when a supplier adds value by means of
					elements or characteristics that generate a new value proposition, thus
					increasing the exchange value and the competitiveness of an offer. The
					performance value or value in use is the value created in interrelated
					activities performed by suppliers and buyers; in other words, through their
					relationship. This point of view emphasises the fact that value is mutually
					created and presupposes the sharing of resources and benefits. Finally, in a
					value co-creation relational strategy, value is coproduced by both customers and
					suppliers along the process of creation, and not only at the moment of the
					exchange. Decisions concerning value are jointly created to maximise value for
					both parties (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B41">RIBEIRO et al., 2009</xref>).</p>
				<p>The sources of value introduced by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B44">Smith and
						Colgate's (2007)</xref> classification particularly highlight the production
					of value by the supplier, in the activities and processes of its value-adding
					chain. The role of the consumer is restricted to perceiving the value as more or
					less adapted to his or her necessities and particularities. The consumer then
					judges the product according to his or her own expectations. The point of view
					of <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B41">Ribeiro et al. (2009)</xref> on the types of
					generated value, on the other hand, shows a tendency to displace the
					responsibility for value creation. The customer, who previously did not
					interfere in value creation processes, becomes now a player, not only in moments
					of exchange and relationship with the supplier - creating performance value -
					but also in coproducing value, together with the organisation, along all
					organisational processes.</p>
			</sec>
			<sec>
				<title>2.2. SERVICE DOMINANT LOGIC</title>
				<p>The Service Dominant Logic (SDL) perspective has come to contrast with
					marketing's traditional approach guided by the Product Dominant Logic (PDL). SDL
					introduces an even more advanced understanding of value creation relative to
					customers: it provides the bases that allow the marketing co-creation process to
					be understood in a more comprehensive way.</p>
				<p>The Service Dominant Logic (SDL) refreshes thoughts on marketing, in that it
					assumes that any offer is a service (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B51">VARGO;
						LUSCH, 2004</xref>) and that consumers do not acquire offers because of
					their inherent characteristics, but rather because of their capacity for solving
					the problems they are facing (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B5">BAKER; HART,
						2008</xref>). According to this approach, consumers are regarded not only as
					receptors of a delivered value, but rather as key players, co-creators of value,
					interactively involved with the organisation in the process of value creation
						(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B15">DIETRICH et al. 2013</xref>). This
					transcends the orientation to customers, in that the value of the offer is
					defined and co-created by the customer and not simply incorporated to the end
					product (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B51">VARGO and LUSCH, 2004</xref>). Before
					the customer buys the offer, the organisation may only make a value proposition,
					"describing the benefits customers may expect from a given product or service"
						(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B35">OSTERWALDER et al., 2014</xref>, p. 6).
					Accordingly, companies do not deliver value to consumers; they rather contribute
					to and facilitate value creation.</p>
				<p>From the point of view of the SDL, consumers co-create and assess values when
					goods and services are put to use. This concept of value in use, previously
					mentioned, is a fundamental element of value co-creation processes involving
					companies and consumers. Also known as relationship value, it is the value
					generated "in consequence of the relationship between the parties [...] which is
					created in the process of using the products and services and in the activities
					involving both suppliers and buyers" (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B1">ALEJANDRO
						et al., 2011</xref>).</p>
				<p>Another major aspect illuminated by the SDL is the integration of resources. An
					SDL axiom states that all involved players are integrators of resources coming
					from multiple sources and that the co-creation of value takes place through that
					integration. The capacity for transforming a potential resource into a specific
					benefit becomes the focus; the emphasis shifts from the attribute to the offer
					capability for solving the problem the customer is facing. Co-creation takes
					place in consequence of the interaction between the customer, the organisation
					and their resources, based on experiences and by means of an integration of
					resources in search for valuable results (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B24">KARPEN
						et al., 2015</xref>).</p>
				<p>The concepts of value creation and co-creation tend to overlap in the SDL
					literature, where producer and consumer are value co-creators. This makes the
					concept of value extremely comprehensive, making more difficult the attempts to
					understand the role of the players in the process. In an effort to better
					understand the concepts of value creation and co-creation from the point of view
					of SDL, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B21">Grönroos and Voima's (2013)</xref>
					research goes deeper into the subject and proposes descriptions of the roles
					players take relative to each of these concepts. The authors explain the roles
					of the consumer and the organisation using the concept of spheres of value
					creation. These spheres mark the boundaries between player systems and are named
					as producer sphere, consumer sphere and joint sphere; interactions among them
					may occur. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B21">GRÖNROOS; VOIMA, 2013</xref>).</p>
				<p>In the supplier sphere, the activities of the organisation are aimed at
					facilitating value creation by customers when using a product or service, which
					is not part of the process of value creation itself. The authors emphasise the
					fact that, in the supplier sphere, there is no creation of value; what happens
					there is the construction of a possibility of generating potential value. This
					is in agreement with <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B52">Vargo and Lusch's
						(2016)</xref> point of view about the value proposition. The customer
					sphere, according to the authors, is where value creation effectively takes
					place. The customer sphere is where the consumer performs the creation by
					integrating contextual resources.</p>
				<p>As for the possibility of co-creation, the authors argue that the producer
					controls only the production process, prior to the exchange therefore, while the
					customer controls the value creation process. Value co-creation would then be an
					interactive and dialogic process involving producer and consumer either in the
					joint sphere or in the customer sphere. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B21">Grönroos
						and Voima (2013)</xref> argue that the service provider evolves from value
					facilitator to value co-creator when it interacts with customers, understanding
					customers' actions and practices, and how customers combine resources, processes
					and results. Said co-creation takes place in the joint sphere. The joint sphere
					may expand into one or the other sphere, enlarging the value creation platform:
					when a customer admits the participation of a supplier in its own value creation
					process, the latter takes the role of value co-creator; conversely, when the
					supplier invites the customer to participate in its processes, the customer
					becomes a co-producer.</p>
				<p>In the face of the challenge of co-creation, the level of understanding an
					organisation has on the consumer and its collective context influences the value
					creation process both in the consumer sphere and in the joint sphere. SDL's
					focus on understanding what problems customers are facing would be the starting
					point to the proposition of solutions, both for offers and products, to these
					same problems. Thus, marketing becomes the provider of solutions for the tasks
					that customers need to accomplish (their 'jobs to be done') (<xref
						ref-type="bibr" rid="B5">BAKER; HART, 2008</xref>). Hence, identifying and
					understanding the tasks customers must accomplish in a given context become
					priorities: understanding the customer's process of value-creation, its
					resources and its context may help organisations propose superior value to
					customers and, consequently, contribute to the creation of additional value by
					the consumer.</p>
			</sec>
			<sec>
				<title>2.3. INNOVATION ORIENTED TO RESULTS AND THE JOBS TO BE DONE TECHNIQUE</title>
				<p>Created by author Anthony W. Ulwick, Outcome-Driven Innovation (ODI) is an
					approach to offer development and innovation. It appears as an alternative to
					Customer-Driven innovation, a paradigm popularised when organisations migrated
					from a product-oriented to a marketing-oriented perspective (<xref
						ref-type="bibr" rid="B49">ULWICK, 2005</xref>). Customer-Driven Innovation
					argues that organisations have to understand the needs and wishes of the
					consumers in order to develop products and services that better respond to
					demand (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B45">SOARES; PERIN; SAMPAIO, 2016</xref>,
						<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B49">ULWICK, 2005</xref>). Therefore, ODI comes
					as an alternative way for organisations to generate innovative ideas. It employs
					the concept of Jobs to be done (JTBD) as source of information on customers to
					conceive more applicable and successful solutions, thus reducing the variability
					of the process of creating innovations (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B49">ULWICK,
						2005</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B48">ULWICK, 2002</xref>).</p>
				<p>The customer's JTBD may be defined as a task or activity that the customer has to
					solve. The term became popular after the article entitled "<italic>Finding the
						Right Job for your Product</italic>" by professor Clayton <xref
						ref-type="bibr" rid="B11">Christensen and co-authors was published in
						2007</xref> (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B43">SILVERSTEIN; SAMUEL; DECARLO,
						2009</xref>). Silverstein et al. (2012) state that, just as in the Service
					Dominant Logic, the technique and the power of the <italic>Jobs to be
						done</italic> concept is the shift of focus that now favours the development
					of solutions for customers' actual problems. For instance, when buying a mower,
					the purpose of the customer is to have the grass cut, but a business that
					produces mowers may examine the customer's objective more deeply and find out an
					even higher purpose that may lead to the development of a genetically modified
					grass that does not need to be mowed (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B43"
						>SILVERSTEIN; SAMUEL; DECARLO, 2009</xref>). According to the Outcome-Driven
					Innovation (ODI), it is important to identify the customer's jobs as well as the
					results it wishes. Once companies understand these demands, they glean insight
					into the market and may therefore create viable growth strategies. If there is
					no good solution available, then there is an opportunity to innovate (<xref
						ref-type="bibr" rid="B48">ULWICK, 2002</xref>).</p>
				<p>ODI's JTBD method is a way of materialising efforts that are subjacent to SDL,
					not only assuming the co-creation of value but also positioning the critical
					problems faced by the customers as the crucial point for the development of a
					value proposition and for the search of joint solutions that may respond to
					demands to the market (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B29">LUSCH; VARGO,
					2014</xref>). Therefore, Outcome-Driven Innovation and its Jobs-to-be-done logic
					enable deep understanding of the actual problems customers are facing and
					identification of where the better opportunities for action may be found and
					seized by supplier organisations, increasing the potential for value creation.
					It may be observed that there is a relationship between the process demonstrated
					by the job value map of a customer, constituted of steps and their corresponding
					results, and the process of value creation by the customer, which takes place
					during the use of the offer in the customer's context. Accordingly, helping to
					solve a customer's JTBD at a higher level would potentiate value creation. <xref
						ref-type="fig" rid="f1">Figure 1</xref>, adapted from <xref ref-type="bibr"
						rid="B21">Grönroos and Voima's (2013)</xref> work, incorporates this point
					of view.</p>
				<p>
					<fig id="f1">
						<label>Figure 1</label>
						<caption>
							<title>Spheres of Value Creation</title>
						</caption>
						<graphic xlink:href="gf01.jpg"/>
						<attrib>Source: Adapted from <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B21">Grönroos and
								Voima (2013, p.136)</xref>.</attrib>
					</fig>
				</p>
				<p>Knowing the customer's value creation process and information on the context it
					operates gives an organisation an excellent opportunity to both create
					additional potential value and co-create additional value for the customer.</p>
			</sec>
		</sec>
		<sec>
			<title>3. THE RESEARCH</title>
			<p>Taking into consideration the evolution presented in the literature on value creation
				and the relevance of the identification of differentiation opportunities that may
				result from the participation of the supplier in the process of co-creation, the
				study tries to answer the questions raised by testing out two hypotheses that
				supported the application of the ODI method and the JTBD technique to the context of
				the relationship between a supplier of chemical products and its customers. In
				consequence of these validations, the research also tries to present a path to the
				application of value co-creation concepts suggested by the SDL and further developed
				by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B21">Grönroos and Voima (2013)</xref>.</p>
			<p>The first question of the research asks whether the jobs defined as relevant from the
				point of view of customers, once accomplished, actually result in the creation of
				superior value.</p>
			<p>We propose measuring the created value by the organisational performance and by means
				of classic indicators such as productivity, profitability, quality of products and
				increase in revenue (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B39">PERIN; SAMPAIO, 2004</xref>).
				In business-to-business contexts it may be stated that the solutions and services
				proposed to customers aim basically at supporting the solution of problems that, in
				essence, are linked to the purpose of the customer organisation, be it through an
				increase in productivity or a reduction of costs (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B2"
					>ANDERSON; NARUS; VAN ROSSUM, 2006</xref>). Thus, the potential for value
				creation of an offer in a business-to-business context emerges from the supplier's
				capacity for improving the performance of its customers offering solutions that
				solve problems in activities that are essential to their businesses - that are
				important, but exhibit poor performance. From an empirical perspective, we propose
				the first hypothesis as follows:</p>
			<p>
				<disp-quote>
					<p><italic>H1: There is a positive relationship between the solution of problems
							considered as relevant from the point of view of the customer and the
							performance of the organisation</italic></p>
				</disp-quote>
			</p>
			<p>The second question of the research is related to the importance of a capacitating
				context for the ability of a customer to create superior value. This question
				results from the hypothesis of the Service Dominant Logic and from the provocations
				introduced by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B21">Grönroos and Voima (2013)</xref> when
				they stated that the creation of value takes place through the integration of
				resources made by the players. If the customer organisation is professionally more
				advanced, it will theoretically have more and better resources to create value and,
				because of that, achieve higher performance.</p>
			<p><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B14">Dekker <italic>et al</italic> (2015)</xref> conducted
				a study on the effects of the professionalization of family business on performance.
				The authors identified that this question is still not solved by the literature and
				three groups of results were found. A set of studies demonstrates the negative
				impact of the professionalization on the performance (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B3"
					>ANDERSON and REEB, 2003</xref> and <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B30">MCCONAUGBY;
					MATTHEWS and FIALKO, 2001</xref>). A second group demonstrates a positive impact
				on the performance. These results are justified by the fact that professionals bring
				relevant competences to the company and that altruistic and self-controlled
				behaviour of shareholders allows the alignment of the professionals' objectives with
				those of the company and the family (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B7">Barth
						<italic>et</italic> al 2005</xref>, Duréndez <italic>et</italic> al 2007). A
				third group has found no significant relationship whatsoever (<xref ref-type="bibr"
					rid="B12">Daily and Dalton (1992)</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B13">Daily
					and Dollinger (1992)</xref> and <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B27">Lin and Hu
					(2007)</xref>).</p>
			<p>According to <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B14">Dekker <italic>et al</italic>
					(2015)</xref>, the lack of consistence exhibited by the results is because
				professionalization is only grossly measured; only the presence or absence of
				professionals in the managerial body being detected. The authors will attempt to
				develop a scale capable of measuring the level of professionalization of a company.
				According to <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B14">Dekker <italic>et al</italic>
					(2015)</xref>, the scale must take into consideration all aspects that appear in
				the literature on professional management, for instance: the involvement of people
				from outside the company in its management, non-members of the owner family in the
				directorate, including professional CEOs, professionalization of the board of
				directors, decentralisation of the control, authority and decision-making processes,
				diffusion of the company's control by means of mechanisms such as formal recruiting,
				training, incentive and assessment systems.</p>
			<p>Taking into consideration the relevance the literature attributes to professional
				management for a company's performance, we propose as a second hypothesis:</p>
			<p>
				<disp-quote>
					<p>H2: <italic>There is a positive moderation of the effect of the
							professionalization of management on the impact of the solved Job and
							performance of the organisation on each other.</italic></p>
				</disp-quote>
			</p>
		</sec>
		<sec sec-type="methods">
			<title>4. METHOD</title>
			<p>In order to check the proposed hypotheses, we conducted a two-stage
				business-to-business study: a qualitative stage and a descriptive quantitative stage
				implemented through a questionnaire addressing the items proposed by the JTBD method
				and associated with the subject under research. The construction of the tool
				followed procedures presented by the literature (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B49"
					>ULWICK, 2005</xref>).</p>
			<p>Initially twenty-eight customer companies and a total of fifty-four respondents took
				part in an in-depth qualitative interviews with companies of the segment under
				study. The content analyses of these interviews formed the base for the
				identification of the jobs included in the research. We performed the definition and
				writing of the items by means of interactions among specialised academics and
				professionals working in the segment. We defined eleven jobs based on the analysis
				of the interviews. They represent the major tasks or activities that customer
				companies need to perform in order to achieve their goals. We list the main jobs
				used in the research below:</p>
			<p>
				<list list-type="order">
					<list-item>
						<p>To increase productivity of all processes of the organisation;</p>
					</list-item>
					<list-item>
						<p>To make safer decisions, based on available data and information;</p>
					</list-item>
					<list-item>
						<p>To plan production in a more assertive way and to achieve alignment with
							other internal processes such as purchasing and marketing;</p>
					</list-item>
					<list-item>
						<p>To capture superior value when marketing our products and services;</p>
					</list-item>
					<list-item>
						<p>To be ahead of competitors owing to innovation in products, processes or
							business models;</p>
					</list-item>
					<list-item>
						<p>To get credit in better conditions and to reduce the financial risk;</p>
					</list-item>
					<list-item>
						<p>To grow safely;</p>
					</list-item>
					<list-item>
						<p>To define business, management and governance processes;</p>
					</list-item>
					<list-item>
						<p>To count on skilled people, committed to the outcomes of the
							operation;</p>
					</list-item>
					<list-item>
						<p>To have more efficient (inbound and outbound) logistic solutions
							available, capable of reducing costs and improving customer
							satisfaction;</p>
					</list-item>
					<list-item>
						<p>To keep valuable relationships with stakeholders: suppliers, buyers,
							shareholders and society.</p>
					</list-item>
				</list>
			</p>
			<p>For each customer <italic>job,</italic> the activities necessary for its execution
				have been also defined (<italic>the jobs steps</italic>), but these items have not
				been highlighted in this study, because they are not necessary for testing the
				hypotheses of the research. As defined by the JTBD method, we assessed each
					<italic>job</italic> in the dimensions of <italic>job</italic> satisfaction -
				how much of the <italic>job</italic> has been solved- and of <italic>job</italic>
				importance - how close the <italic>job</italic> is to the focus kept by the current
				management of the organisation. To assess the jobs solved, respondents evaluated job
				satisfaction ranging from '0' (not solved) to '10' (fully solved) scale. To assess
				the importance of a <italic>job,</italic> respondents were asked to indicate the
				priority the business assigned to activities, according to a scale ranging from '0'
				(no priority or out of focus) to '10' (highest priority or in focus). Another very
				important indicator to this study is the Index of Jobs Solved (IJS), since we will
				be checking if the <italic>jobs</italic> the customers see as important, once
				solved, impact the performance of the organisations. To compile this index, we
				performed a multiplication of the indicators. Therefore, the more solved and
				important the <italic>jobs</italic> are, the higher and closer to one hundred the
				IJS will be.</p>
			<p>The business performance scale's conception results from adaptations to previous
				subjective scales (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B26">KOHLI; JAWORSKI, 1990</xref>,
					<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B33">NARVER; SLATER, 1990</xref>), from information
				gathered during the qualitative interviews and from debates with specialists in the
				field. We measured the performance according to an eleven-mark scale, with
				respondents comparing their performances with those of other known producers (0
				standing for very low and 10 for far superior) relative to five (sic) items, namely
				the Productivity, the Overall Profitability, the Quality of Products and Increase in
				Revenue.</p>
			<p>The sample researched included four hundred and fifty customer companies of the
				chemical industry. The sample was stratified so as to create strata proportional to
				the company's market segments, whose definition is based on the criteria of size and
				administrative organisation. The sampling method adopted was the self-filled
				physical questionnaire distributed by the sales team of the multinational company
				and sent back directly to the researchers by mail. At the end of the collection
				period, one hundred and nine answers had been sent (24% of responses and coverage).
				We detected no significant difference between the sample and the population relative
				to the profile of the segments, the sizes or regions. This demonstrates that the
				sample carries some representativeness relative to the criteria suggested for this
				study. The analysis of the data, carried out with the aid of the software
				applications SPSS(r) 20.0, Smartpls(r) 2.0 and Excel2013(r), started with an
				analysis of the hypotheses and proceeded with the application of the model and the
				comparison of parameters, as described below.</p>
		</sec>
		<sec sec-type="results">
			<title>5. RESULTS</title>
			<p>Average- and large-size organisations (according to segment criteria, are those
				exhibiting annual revenue above 3.6 million BRL) that use input and services from
				the Brazilian chemical industry participated in the study. Approximately 55% of
				these companies are family companies beginning to get a professional management
				staff.</p>
			<p>We began the data analysis by screening missing values; diagnostics revealed few
				(less than 2%) dispersed missing values among respondents and variables. Thus, we
				replaced missing values using multiple regression imputation. Outliers were a
				marginal occurrence (32 univariate respondents and none multivariate outliers). The
				data normality assumption does not hold, but multicolinearity was not regarded as a
				problem since correlations were within the &#x00b1;0.90 range and VIF values were
				below 10 (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B25">KLINE, 2005</xref>). We selected
				scatterplots at random and none departure from linearity was present.</p>
			<p>Next, we assessed the measurement quality regarding performance and Index of Jobs
				Solved (IJS) scales according to the following criteria: unidimensionality,
				reliability and construct validity (convergent, discriminant and nomological
				validities).</p>
			<p>We evaluated dimensionality by performing the Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) for
				each construct, using principal components extraction and direct oblimin rotation.
				Conditions proved to fulfil EFA requirements (KMO &gt; 0.70 and explained variance
				higher than 50%), and both satisfaction and performance resulted in unidimensional
				solutions, no exclusion of items being needed. All items achieved significant
				loadings within factors (greater than = 0.66) and communalities above the suggested
				cut-offs (higher than 0.40).</p>
			<p>In the following stage, we checked the construct validity, starting with the
				discriminant and convergent validity, as proposed by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B18"
					>Fornell and Larcker (1981)</xref>. Convergent validity was achieved given that
				all factor weights were significant (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B4">BAGOZZI; YI;
					PHILLIPS, 1991</xref>). Cronbach's Alpha (CA), Composed Reliability (CR) and
				Average Variance Extracted (AVE) support item and scales reliability for IJS (EAV =
				0.58; CR = 0.94; CA = 0.93) and performance (EAV = 0.60; CR = 0.88; CA = 0.83).</p>
			<p>To evaluate the discriminant validity, the squared correlation between constructs
				were compared with AVE measures. The squared correlation between Index of Jobs
				Solved (IJS) and <italic>performance</italic> (r = 0.477; R<sup>2</sup> = 0.228)
				were lower than the Average Variance Extracted of constructs. Since the
					R<sup>2</sup> value is lower than AVE estimates, we may assume that there is
				discriminant validity for the constructs (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B34">NETEMEYER;
					BEARDEN; SHARMA, 2003</xref>).</p>
			<sec>
				<title>5.1. OVERALL EVALUATION OF THE RESEARCHED HYPOTHESES</title>
				<sec>
					<title>5.1.1. HYPOTHESIS 1</title>
					<p>The first part of the study consists of finding out if there is a positive
						relationship between the solution of important customer´s jobs (IJS - Index
						of Jobs Solved) and organizational performance.</p>
					<p>This is the basic assumption that supports the JTBD approach, according to
						which when problems that are relevant to customers are solved there is an
						increase in the overall customer performance. Accordingly, the JTBD approach
						would be a major source of information that that may lead to the
						identification of competence gaps in customers, which in turn could guide
						suppliers in the development of new solutions and services. We checked this
						hypothesis measuring the direct effect of the IJS on performance. This
						analysis was carried out assessing the nomological validity and testing the
						structural relation proposed in the model shown in <xref ref-type="fig"
							rid="f2">Figure 2</xref>.</p>
					<p>
						<fig id="f2">
							<label>Figure 2</label>
							<caption>
								<title>Research structural model</title>
								<p>Note: Values inside ellipses represent the percentage of
									construct variance explained (R<sup>2</sup>). Values close to
									the paths (arrows) represent the factor loadings or standard
									structural weights. All structural weights and factor loadings
									are significant (p &lt; 0.01).</p>
							</caption>
							<graphic xlink:href="gf02.jpg"/>
							<attrib>Source: research data.</attrib>
						</fig>
					</p>
					<p>As previously mentioned, the IJS explains 22.8% of the performance's
						variance. The percentage may be considered low to moderate, but is in
						conformity with the research hypothesis' support. Since the structural
						weight is significant, we may support the hypothesis 1 of the study.</p>
				</sec>
				<sec>
					<title>5.1.2. HYPOTHESIS 2</title>
					<p>The second proposed hypothesis is related to the role of management
						professionalization as a moderator between the IJS level and the
						organisational performance. In respect to this particular issue, we expect
						that as customers develop a more professional management, the impact of IJS
						on the performance grows.</p>
					<p>To check this hypothesis, we divided the database into two groups according
						to a question that segments respondents in seven groups according to
						different levels of professionalization within the company. The lowest level
						of professionalization is that of "centralised family companies" and compose
						the first group - these are companies that do not count on professionals
						recruited from the market for managerial and board positions, in which
						founders are still intensely present in central administration of the
						business. Fifty-four companies were classified in this group and
						characterised as family companies. The remaining business exhibit various
						levels of professionalization, ranging from "family business undergoing a
						professionalization process" (n = 25), to professionalised family companies
						(n = 13), to private groups of investment (n = 5) and open capital groups (n
						= 2). We termed this second group of forty-five companies as
						professionalised companies and companies undergoing a professionalization
						process.</p>
					<p>The test of the second hypotheses was conducted with the support of the
						Excel2013(r), with the formulas being implemented from results extracted
						from the Smartpls2.0(r). We performed calculations comparing the effect of
						IJS on the two groups, in conformity with the model exhibited in <xref
							ref-type="fig" rid="f1">Figure 1</xref>. For the group of family
						companies, the impact of IJS on the performance was 0.437 (R<sup>2</sup> =
						0.191; p &lt; 0.001). For the group of professionalised companies (or
						undergoing professionalization processes) the impact of IJS on the
						performance reached 0.591 (R<sup>2</sup> = 0.349; p &lt; 0.001), showing an
						apparently higher impact on the second group. To assess the differences
						between the groups, we adopted a procedure suggested by <xref
							ref-type="bibr" rid="B10">Chin (2000)</xref>, termed Smith-Satterthwait
						test. It consists of a test that compares parameters and standard deviations
						of the groups under analysis, resulting on an independent sample t test. In
						applying the suggested procedure, we obtained a t-statistic of 2.023 (with
						107 degrees of freedom), whose two-tailed significance is 0.045. It is worth
						mentioning that no significant differences between the averages of the
						groups in terms of IJS were detected, as demonstrated by <xref
							ref-type="table" rid="t1">table 1</xref>:</p>
					<table-wrap id="t1">
						<label>Table 1</label>
						<caption>
							<title>Average comparison tests between the groups:</title>
						</caption>
						<alternatives>
							<graphic xlink:href="t1.jpg"/>
						<table frame="hsides" rules="groups" style="border-color:#2465b0">
							<colgroup>
								<col width="14%"/>
								<col width="14%"/>
								<col width="14%"/>
								<col width="14%"/>
								<col width="14%"/>
								<col width="14%"/>
								<col width="14%"/>
							</colgroup>
							<thead>
								<tr>
									<th align="left">Measurements</th>
									<th align="center" colspan="2">Family companies</th>
									<th align="center" colspan="2">Professionalised companies</th>
									<th style="border-bottom-width:thin;border-bottom-style:solid"
										align="center" colspan="2">T Test</th>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<th align="left">&#x00A0;</th>
									<th align="center">Performance</th>
									<th align="center">&#x00A0;</th>
									<th align="center">Performance</th>
									<th align="center">IJS</th>
									<th align="center">Performance</th>
									<th align="center">IJS</th>
								</tr>
							</thead>
							<tbody>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Average</td>
									<td align="center">6.99</td>
									<td align="center">58.26</td>
									<td align="center">7.04</td>
									<td align="center">61.38</td>
									<td align="center" rowspan="2">0.800</td>
									<td align="center" rowspan="2">0.351</td>
								</tr>
								<tr>
									<td align="left">Standard Deviation</td>
									<td align="center">1.03</td>
									<td align="center">17.09</td>
									<td align="center">1.17</td>
									<td align="center">17.18</td>
								</tr>
							</tbody>
						</table>
					</alternatives>
					</table-wrap>
					<p>We may argue, therefore, that the results provide support to the hypothesis
						two of the study, confirming that the influence of IJS on the performance
						for the group of professionalised companies is higher when compared to that
						of the group of family companies, even when, theoretically, both the IJS and
						the performance are equivalent, in average, among groups.</p>
					<p>
						<fig id="f3">
							<label>Figure 3</label>
							<caption>
								<title>Impact of the professionalization level on the
									performance</title>
								<p>Note: The value inside the ellipse represents the percentage of
									the explained variance of the construct (R<sup>2</sup>). Values
									close to the paths (arrows) represent the factor loadings or
									standard structural weights. The structural weight is
									significant (p &lt; 0.01).</p>
							</caption>
							<graphic xlink:href="gf03.jpg"/>
							<attrib>Source: Research data</attrib>
						</fig>
					</p>
				</sec>
			</sec>
		</sec>
		<sec sec-type="conclusions">
			<title>6. FINAL CONSIDERATIONS</title>
			<p>Research results constitute a relevant contribution, both managerial and academic,
				despite its limitations. The fact that the study was applied to a single segment and
				to the customer base of one company may hinder generalisations. Therefore, we
				suggest for additional studies to be conducted in other contexts in the future.</p>
			<p>As for its managerial contributions, the study indicates that acting upon the
					<italic>jobs</italic> considered relevant by customers indeed increases the
				co-created value. This evidence reinforces the service and relationship strategies
				as an instrument of high potential to increase customer loyalty, because by acting
				on relevant problems, it is possible to improve and to generate higher shared value
				as a result of the relationship between customer and company.</p>
			<p>Another managerial contribution is that of the selection of customers to whom a
				relational approach is to be directed; this is a challenging task. The current study
				suggests that the supplier must observe variables in the context of the customer's
				management that may potentially help increase the co-created value. In the
				population researched, we have observed that the professionalization of the
				management would be one of said variables, confirming <xref ref-type="bibr"
					rid="B21">Grönroos and Voima's (2013)</xref> suggestion that the co-created
				value is a consequence of resources integration within their context. Hence, more
				professional business contexts, exhibiting more structured processes and governance,
				may foster the created value, being, therefore, a variable to be taken into
				consideration in the process of customer prioritisation. However, we suggest that
				other contextual variables could be tested in future studies, such as the culture of
				the organisation and knowledge management.</p>
			<p>As for the academic contribution, it is worth highlighting again the contribution
				relative to the relevance of management professionalization for firm performance.
				Studies addressing this relationship are still not consensual in the literature, but
				the current study reinforces the hypothesis by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B14"
					>Dekker et al. (2015)</xref> that the involvement of non-members of the family
				in a governance system positively influences a company's performance.</p>
			<p>The study also strengthens the connections between the Service Dominant Logic (SDL)
				and medium-reach methodologies such as the jobs to be done (JTBD), as suggested by
					<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B9">Brodie et al. (2011)</xref> and <xref
					ref-type="bibr" rid="B29">Lusch and Vargo (2014)</xref>. <xref ref-type="bibr"
					rid="B29">Lusch and Vargo (2014)</xref> argue that this approximation would
				bring great contributions to the development of these theories in the field of
				marketing, and that the current study contributes to reinforce this relationship.
				This effort brings important benefits, because relating the SDL with more practical
				tools, such as the JTBD and the ODI, broadens the understanding of SDL. Researchers
				start to empirically observe SDL's fundamentals, its relationships with other
				variables and its potential results. Still in the endeavour to apply SDL concepts,
				the study suggested that the co-created value could be measured by performance
				indicators, easily observable in a business, such as the increase in productivity,
				profitability, quality of products and increase in revenue.</p>
			<p>Both the SDL theory and the JTBD methodology stimulate practitioners and academics to
				observe the exchange relationships and the objectives of marketing in a different
				way. There are still many unexplored relationships, but the effort to implement the
				SDL theory, bringing it closer to the ODI and the JTBD, has opened new trails and
				stimulated ideas for future research aimed at widening the search for competitive
				advantages.</p>
		</sec>
	</body>
	<back>
		<ref-list>
			<title>7. REFERENCES</title>
			<ref id="B1">
				<mixed-citation>ALEJANDRO, T, SOUZA, D., BOLES, J. RIBEIRO, A.H, MONTEIRO, P.R. The
					outcome of company account manager relationship quality on loyalty, relationship
					value and performance. <bold>Industrial Marketing Management</bold>, v. 40,
					p.36-43, 2011.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>ALEJANDRO</surname>
							<given-names>T</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>SOUZA</surname>
							<given-names>D.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>BOLES</surname>
							<given-names>J.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>RIBEIRO</surname>
							<given-names>A.H</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>MONTEIRO</surname>
							<given-names>P.R.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>The outcome of company account manager relationship quality on
						loyalty, relationship value and performance</article-title>
					<source>Industrial Marketing Management</source>
					<volume>40</volume>
					<fpage>36</fpage>
					<lpage>43</lpage>
					<year>2011</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B2">
				<mixed-citation>ANDERSON, J. C.; NARUS, J. A.; VAN ROSSUM, W. Customer value
					propositions in business markets. <bold>Harvard Business Review</bold>, v. 84,
					n. 3, p. 1-8, 2006.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>ANDERSON</surname>
							<given-names>J. C.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>NARUS</surname>
							<given-names>J. A.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>VAN ROSSUM</surname>
							<given-names>W.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Customer value propositions in business markets</article-title>
					<source>Harvard Business Review</source>
					<volume>84</volume>
					<issue>3</issue>
					<fpage>1</fpage>
					<lpage>8</lpage>
					<year>2006</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B3">
				<mixed-citation>ANDERSON, R. C., REEB, D. M. Founding-Family Ownership, Corporate
					Diversification, and Firm leverage, <bold>Journal of Law &amp; Economics,</bold>
					v.46, n.2, p.653-680, 2003.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>ANDERSON</surname>
							<given-names>R. C.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>REEB</surname>
							<given-names>D. M.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Founding-Family Ownership, Corporate Diversification, and Firm
						leverage</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Law &amp; Economics</source>
					<volume>46</volume>
					<issue>2</issue>
					<fpage>653</fpage>
					<lpage>680</lpage>
					<year>2003</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B4">
				<mixed-citation>BAGOZZI, R. P.; YI, Y.; PHILLIPS, L. W. Assessing Construct Validity
					in Organizational Research. <bold>Administrative Science Quarterly</bold>, v.
					36, n. 3, p. 421, set. 1991.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>BAGOZZI</surname>
							<given-names>R. P.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>YI</surname>
							<given-names>Y.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>PHILLIPS</surname>
							<given-names>L. W.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Assessing Construct Validity in Organizational
						Research</article-title>
					<source>Administrative Science Quarterly</source>
					<volume>36</volume>
					<issue>3</issue>
					<fpage>421</fpage>
					<lpage>421</lpage>
					<month>09</month>
					<year>1991</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B5">
				<mixed-citation>BAKER, Michael J.; HART, Susan. <bold>The Marketing Book</bold>. 6.
					ed. Oxford: Elsevier Ltd, 2008.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="book">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>BAKER</surname>
							<given-names>Michael J.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>HART</surname>
							<given-names>Susan</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source>The Marketing Book</source>
					<edition>6</edition>
					<publisher-loc>Oxford</publisher-loc>
					<publisher-name>Elsevier Ltd</publisher-name>
					<year>2008</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B6">
				<mixed-citation>BARNEY, J. B.; ARIKAN, A. M. The Resource-based View: Origins and
					Implications. In: MICHAEL A. HITT, R. E. F. AND J. S. H. (Ed.). <bold>The
						Blackwell Handbook of Strategic Management</bold>. Blackwell Publishing,
					2006. p. 124-188.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="book">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>BARNEY</surname>
							<given-names>J. B.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>ARIKAN</surname>
							<given-names>A. M.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<chapter-title>The Resource-based View: Origins and Implications</chapter-title>
					<person-group person-group-type="editor">
						<name>
							<surname>MICHAEL</surname>
							<given-names>A.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>HITT</surname>
							<given-names>R. E. F.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>AND</surname>
							<given-names>J. S. H.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source>The Blackwell Handbook of Strategic Management</source>
					<publisher-loc>Blackwell Publishing</publisher-loc>
					<year>2006</year>
					<fpage>124</fpage>
					<lpage>188</lpage>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B7">
				<mixed-citation>BARTH, E., T. GULBRANDSEN, SCH&#x00d8;NEA, P. Family Ownership and
					Productivity: The Role of Owner-Management, <bold>Journal of Corporate
						Finance</bold>, v.11 n.1/2, p.107-127, 2005.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>BARTH</surname>
							<given-names>E.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>GULBRANDSEN</surname>
							<given-names>T.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>SCH&#x00d8;NEA</surname>
							<given-names>P.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Family Ownership and Productivity: The Role of
						Owner-Management</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Corporate Finance</source>
					<volume>11</volume>
					<issue>1/2</issue>
					<fpage>107</fpage>
					<lpage>127</lpage>
					<year>2005</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B8">
				<mixed-citation>BITNER, Mary Jo, BROWN. The service imperative, Business Horizons,
					51, p. 88-101, 2008.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>BITNER</surname>
							<given-names>Mary</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>BROWN</surname>
							<given-names>Jo</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>The service imperative</article-title>
					<source>Business Horizons</source>
					<volume>51</volume>
					<fpage>88</fpage>
					<lpage>101</lpage>
					<year>2008</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B9">
				<mixed-citation>BRODIE, R. J., HOLLEBEEK, L. D., JURIC, B., &amp; ILIC, A. Customer
					engagement: conceptual domain, fundamental propositions, and implications for
					research. <bold>Journal of Service Research,</bold> v.14, n.3, p.252-271,
					2011.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>BRODIE</surname>
							<given-names>R. J.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>HOLLEBEEK</surname>
							<given-names>L. D.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>JURIC</surname>
							<given-names>B.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>ILIC</surname>
							<given-names>A.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Customer engagement: conceptual domain, fundamental propositions,
						and implications for research</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Service Research</source>
					<volume>14</volume>
					<issue>3</issue>
					<fpage>252</fpage>
					<lpage>271</lpage>
					<year>2011</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B10">
				<mixed-citation>CHIN, W. W. Frequently Asked Questions - Partial Least Squares &amp;
					PLS-Graph. Home Page [On-line], 2000. Available: <ext-link ext-link-type="uri"
						xlink:href="http://disc-nt.cba.uh.edu/chin/plsfaq.htm"
						>http://disc-nt.cba.uh.edu/chin/plsfaq.htm</ext-link>
				</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="webpage">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>CHIN</surname>
							<given-names>W. W.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source>Frequently Asked Questions - Partial Least Squares &amp;
						PLS-Graph</source>
					<comment>Home Page [On-line]</comment>
					<year>2000</year>
					<comment>Available: <ext-link ext-link-type="uri"
							xlink:href="http://disc-nt.cba.uh.edu/chin/plsfaq.htm"
							>http://disc-nt.cba.uh.edu/chin/plsfaq.htm</ext-link></comment>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B11">
				<mixed-citation>CHRISTENSEN, C. M. et al. Finding the Right Job For Your Product.
						<bold>MIT Sloan Management Review</bold>, v. 48, n. 3, p. 38-47,
					2007.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>CHRISTENSEN</surname>
							<given-names>C. M.</given-names>
						</name>
						<etal/>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Finding the Right Job For Your Product</article-title>
					<source>MIT Sloan Management Review</source>
					<volume>48</volume>
					<issue>3</issue>
					<fpage>38</fpage>
					<lpage>47</lpage>
					<year>2007</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B12">
				<mixed-citation>DAILY, C. M., DALTON D. R. Financial Performance of Founder-Managed
					versus professionally Managed Small Corporations. <bold>Journal of Small
						Business Management,</bold> v.30, n.2, p.25-34, 1992.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>DAILY</surname>
							<given-names>C. M.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>DALTON</surname>
							<given-names>D. R.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Financial Performance of Founder-Managed versus professionally
						Managed Small Corporations</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Small Business Management</source>
					<volume>30</volume>
					<issue>2</issue>
					<fpage>25</fpage>
					<lpage>34</lpage>
					<year>1992</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B13">
				<mixed-citation>DAILY, C. M., DOLLINGER, M. J. An Empirical Examination of Ownership
					Structure in Family and Professionally Managed Firms. <bold>Family Business
						Review</bold>, v.5, n.2, p.117-136, 1992.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>DAILY</surname>
							<given-names>C. M.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>DOLLINGER</surname>
							<given-names>M. J.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>An Empirical Examination of Ownership Structure in Family and
						Professionally Managed Firms</article-title>
					<source>Family Business Review</source>
					<volume>5</volume>
					<issue>2</issue>
					<fpage>117</fpage>
					<lpage>136</lpage>
					<year>1992</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B14">
				<mixed-citation>DEKKER, Julie, LYBAERT, Nadine, STEIJVERS, Tensie, BENOÎT, Depaire.
					The effect of family business professionalization as a multidimensional
					construct on firm performance. <bold>Journal of Small Business
					Management</bold>, v.53, n. 2, p.516-538, 2011.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>DEKKER</surname>
							<given-names>Julie</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>LYBAERT</surname>
							<given-names>Nadine</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>STEIJVERS</surname>
							<given-names>Tensie</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>BENOÎT</surname>
							<given-names>Depaire</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>The effect of family business professionalization as a
						multidimensional construct on firm performance</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Small Business Management</source>
					<volume>53</volume>
					<issue>2</issue>
					<fpage>516</fpage>
					<lpage>538</lpage>
					<year>2011</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B15">
				<mixed-citation>DIETRICH, J. F.; BRASIL, V. S.; FRIO, R. S. <italic>O processo de
						cocriação de valor entre empresas e consumidores: uma análise comparativa de
						dois casos da indústria de bens de consumo</italic> (The process of value
					co-creation between companies and consumers: a comparative analysis of two cases
					from the consumer goods industry). <bold>Revista de Administração IMED</bold>,
					v. 3, n. 3, p. 221-238, 2013.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>DIETRICH</surname>
							<given-names>J. F.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>BRASIL</surname>
							<given-names>V. S.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>FRIO</surname>
							<given-names>R. S.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title><italic>O processo de cocriação de valor entre empresas e
							consumidores: uma análise comparativa de dois casos da indústria de bens
							de consumo</italic> (The process of value co-creation between companies
						and consumers: a comparative analysis of two cases from the consumer goods
						industry)</article-title>
					<source>Revista de Administração IMED</source>
					<volume>3</volume>
					<issue>3</issue>
					<fpage>221</fpage>
					<lpage>238</lpage>
					<year>2013</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B16">
				<mixed-citation>FANG, Fang, PALMATIER, Robert W. and STEENKAMP, Jan-Benedict E. M..
					Effect of Service Transition Strategies on Firm Value, <bold>Journal of
						Marketing</bold>, v.72, n. 5, p. 1-14, 2008.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>FANG</surname>
							<given-names>Fang</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>PALMATIER</surname>
							<given-names>Robert W.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>STEENKAMP</surname>
							<given-names>Jan-Benedict E. M.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Effect of Service Transition Strategies on Firm
						Value</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Marketing</source>
					<volume>72</volume>
					<issue>5</issue>
					<fpage>1</fpage>
					<lpage>14</lpage>
					<year>2008</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B17">
				<mixed-citation>FERNANDES, B.H.; FLEURY, M.T.; MILLS, J. <italic>Construindo o
						diálogo entre competência, recursos e desempenho organizacional</italic>
					(Building a dialogue between competence, resources and organisational
					performance) . <bold>Revista de Administração de Empresas (RAE)</bold>, São
					Paulo, v.46, n.4, p.48-65, Oct./Dec. 2006.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>FERNANDES</surname>
							<given-names>B.H.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>FLEURY</surname>
							<given-names>M.T.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>MILLS</surname>
							<given-names>J.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title><italic>Construindo o diálogo entre competência, recursos e
							desempenho organizacional</italic> (Building a dialogue between
						competence, resources and organisational performance)</article-title>
					<source>Revista de Administração de Empresas (RAE)</source>
					<publisher-loc>São Paulo</publisher-loc>
					<volume>46</volume>
					<issue>4</issue>
					<fpage>48</fpage>
					<lpage>65</lpage>
					<season>Oct-Dec</season>
					<year>2006</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B18">
				<mixed-citation>FORNELL, C.; LARCKER, D. F. Evaluating Structural Equation Models
					with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error. <bold>Journal of Marketing
						Research,</bold> v. 18, n. 1, p. 39, Feb. 1981.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>FORNELL</surname>
							<given-names>C.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>LARCKER</surname>
							<given-names>D. F.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables
						and Measurement Error</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Marketing Research</source>
					<volume>18</volume>
					<issue>1</issue>
					<fpage>39</fpage>
					<lpage>39</lpage>
					<month>02</month>
					<year>1981</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B19">
				<mixed-citation>GADDE, L.; SNEHOTA, I.. Making the most of supplier relationships.
						<bold>Industrial Marketing Management</bold>, v.29, n.4, p.305-316,
					2000.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>GADDE</surname>
							<given-names>L.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>SNEHOTA</surname>
							<given-names>I.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Making the most of supplier relationships</article-title>
					<source>Industrial Marketing Management</source>
					<volume>29</volume>
					<issue>4</issue>
					<fpage>305</fpage>
					<lpage>316</lpage>
					<year>2000</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B20">
				<mixed-citation>GRÖNROOS, C. Relationship marketing strategy continuum.
						<bold>Journal of Academy of Marketing Science.</bold> v. 23, n. 4, p.
					252-254, Falls 1995.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>GRÖNROOS</surname>
							<given-names>C.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Relationship marketing strategy continuum</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Academy of Marketing Science</source>
					<volume>23</volume>
					<issue>4</issue>
					<fpage>252</fpage>
					<lpage>254</lpage>
					<year>1995</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B21">
				<mixed-citation>GRÖNROOS, C.; VOIMA, P. Critical service logic: Making sense of
					value creation and co-creation. <bold>Journal of the Academy of Marketing
						Science</bold>, v. 41, n. 2, p. 133-150, 2013.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>GRÖNROOS</surname>
							<given-names>C.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>VOIMA</surname>
							<given-names>P.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Critical service logic: Making sense of value creation and
						co-creation</article-title>
					<source>Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science</source>
					<volume>41</volume>
					<issue>2</issue>
					<fpage>133</fpage>
					<lpage>150</lpage>
					<year>2013</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B22">
				<mixed-citation>HAIR, Joseph F. et al. <bold>Multivariate Data Analysis</bold>. 7TH.
					ed. U.S.A.: Prentice Hall, 2009.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="book">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>HAIR</surname>
							<given-names>Joseph F.</given-names>
						</name>
						<etal/>
					</person-group>
					<source>Multivariate Data Analysis</source>
					<edition>7TH</edition>
					<publisher-loc>U.S.A.</publisher-loc>
					<publisher-name>Prentice Hall</publisher-name>
					<year>2009</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B23">
				<mixed-citation>HAKANSSON, H.; SNEHOTA, I. <bold>Developing Relationships in
						Business Networks</bold>. London: Routledge, 1995.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="book">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>HAKANSSON</surname>
							<given-names>H.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>SNEHOTA</surname>
							<given-names>I.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source>Developing Relationships in Business Networks</source>
					<publisher-loc>London</publisher-loc>
					<publisher-name>Routledge</publisher-name>
					<year>1995</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B24">
				<mixed-citation>KARPEN, I. O. et al. Service-dominant orientation: Measurement and
					impact on performance outcomes. <bold>Journal of Retailing</bold>, v. 91, n. 1,
					p. 89-108, 2015.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>KARPEN</surname>
							<given-names>I. O.</given-names>
						</name>
						<etal/>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Service-dominant orientation: Measurement and impact on
						performance outcomes</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Retailing</source>
					<volume>91</volume>
					<issue>1</issue>
					<fpage>89</fpage>
					<lpage>108</lpage>
					<year>2015</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B25">
				<mixed-citation>KLINE, R. B. <bold>Principles and practice of structural equation
						modelling</bold> (2nd ed.). New York: The Guildford Press,
					2005.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="book">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>KLINE</surname>
							<given-names>R. B.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source>Principles and practice of structural equation modelling</source>
					<edition>2ndnd ed</edition>
					<publisher-loc>New York</publisher-loc>
					<publisher-name>The Guildford Press</publisher-name>
					<year>2005</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B26">
				<mixed-citation>KOHLI, A. K.; JAWORSKI, B. J. Market orientation: the construct,
					research propositions, and managerial implications. <bold>The Journal of
						Marketing</bold>, v. 54, n. April, p. 1-18, 1990.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>KOHLI</surname>
							<given-names>A. K.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>JAWORSKI</surname>
							<given-names>B. J.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Market orientation: the construct, research propositions, and
						managerial implications</article-title>
					<source>The Journal of Marketing</source>
					<volume>54</volume>
					<issue>April</issue>
					<fpage>1</fpage>
					<lpage>18</lpage>
					<year>1990</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B27">
				<mixed-citation>LIN, S.-H., HU, S.-Y. A Family Member or Professional Management?
					The Choice of a CEO and Its Impact on Performance, <bold>Corporate Governance:
						An International Review, n.</bold>15. v.6, p.1348-1362,
					2007.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>LIN</surname>
							<given-names>S.-H.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>HU</surname>
							<given-names>S.-Y.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>A Family Member or Professional Management? The Choice of a CEO
						and Its Impact on Performance</article-title>
					<source>Corporate Governance: An International Review</source>
					<issue>15</issue>
					<volume>6</volume>
					<fpage>1348</fpage>
					<lpage>1362</lpage>
					<year>2007</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B28">
				<mixed-citation>LOVELOCK Christopher H. GUMMERSSON, Evert. Whither services
					marketing? In search of a new paradigm and fresh perspectives. <bold>Journal of
						Services Research</bold>, v.7, p.20-41, 2004.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>LOVELOCK</surname>
							<given-names>Christopher H.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>GUMMERSSON</surname>
							<given-names>Evert</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Whither services marketing? In search of a new paradigm and fresh
						perspectives</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Services Research</source>
					<volume>7</volume>
					<fpage>20</fpage>
					<lpage>41</lpage>
					<year>2004</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B29">
				<mixed-citation>LUSCH, R. L.; VARGO, S. L. <bold>Service-Dominant Logic: premises,
						perspectives, possibilities. Cambridge:</bold> Cambridge University Press,
					2014.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="book">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>LUSCH</surname>
							<given-names>R. L.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>VARGO</surname>
							<given-names>S. L.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source>Service-Dominant Logic: premises, perspectives, possibilities</source>
					<publisher-loc>Cambridge</publisher-loc>
					<publisher-name>Cambridge University Press</publisher-name>
					<year>2014</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B30">
				<mixed-citation>MCCONAUGBY, D. L., C. H. MATTHEWS, and A. S. FIALKO. Founding Family
					Controlled Firms: Performance, Risk, and Value, <bold>Journal of Small Business
						Management</bold>, v.39, n.1, 31-49, 2001.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>MCCONAUGBY</surname>
							<given-names>D. L.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>MATTHEWS</surname>
							<given-names>C. H.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>FIALKO</surname>
							<given-names>A. S.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Founding Family Controlled Firms: Performance, Risk, and
						Value</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Small Business Management</source>
					<volume>39</volume>
					<issue>1</issue>
					<fpage>31</fpage>
					<lpage>49</lpage>
					<year>2001</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B31">
				<mixed-citation>MÖLLER, K.; RAJALA, A.; SVAHN, S. Strategic business nets - their
					types and management, <bold>Journal of Business Research</bold>, v. 58, n. 9, p.
					1274-1284, 2005.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>MÖLLER</surname>
							<given-names>K.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>RAJALA</surname>
							<given-names>A.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>SVAHN</surname>
							<given-names>S.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Strategic business nets - their types and
						management</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Business Research</source>
					<volume>58</volume>
					<issue>9</issue>
					<fpage>1274</fpage>
					<lpage>1284</lpage>
					<year>2005</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B32">
				<mixed-citation>MORGAN, Robert M. and HUNT, Shelby D. the Commitment-Trust Theory of
					Relationship Marketing. <bold>Journal of Marketing,</bold> v. 58, n. 3, p.
					20-38, 1994.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>MORGAN</surname>
							<given-names>Robert M.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>HUNT</surname>
							<given-names>Shelby D.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>the Commitment-Trust Theory of Relationship
						Marketing</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Marketing</source>
					<volume>58</volume>
					<issue>3</issue>
					<fpage>20</fpage>
					<lpage>38</lpage>
					<year>1994</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B33">
				<mixed-citation>NARVER, J. C.; SLATER, S. F. The Effect of a Market Orientation on
					Business Profitability. <bold>Journal of Marketing</bold>, v. 54, n. Oct. p.
					20-35, 1990.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>NARVER</surname>
							<given-names>J. C.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>SLATER</surname>
							<given-names>S. F.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>The Effect of a Market Orientation on Business
						Profitability</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Marketing</source>
					<volume>54</volume>
					<issue>Oct.</issue>
					<fpage>20</fpage>
					<lpage>35</lpage>
					<year>1990</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B34">
				<mixed-citation>NETEMEYER, Richard G.; BEARDEN, William O.; SHARMA, Subhash.
						<bold>Scaling procedures: issues and applications</bold>. First ed. New
					York, USA: Sage Publications, 2003.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="book">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>NETEMEYER</surname>
							<given-names>Richard G.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>BEARDEN</surname>
							<given-names>William O.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>SHARMA</surname>
							<given-names>Subhash</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source>Scaling procedures: issues and applications</source>
					<edition>Firstst ed</edition>
					<publisher-loc>New York, USA</publisher-loc>
					<publisher-name>Sage Publications</publisher-name>
					<year>2003</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B35">
				<mixed-citation>OSTERWALDER, A., PIGNEUR, Y., et al.: Value <bold>Proposition
						Design: How to Create Products and Services Customers Want.</bold>
					Strategyzer Series. Wiley, New Jersey, 2014.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="book">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>OSTERWALDER</surname>
							<given-names>A.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>PIGNEUR</surname>
							<given-names>Y.</given-names>
						</name>
						<etal/>
					</person-group>
					<source>Value <bold>Proposition Design: How to Create Products and Services
							Customers Want</bold></source>
					<comment>Strategyzer Series</comment>
					<publisher-name>Wiley</publisher-name>
					<publisher-loc>New Jersey</publisher-loc>
					<year>2014</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B36">
				<mixed-citation>OSTERWALDER, A.; PIGNEUR, Y. <bold>Business Model Generation: A
						Handbook for Visionaries, Game Changers, and Challengers.</bold> 1. ed.:
					John Wiley &amp; Sons, 2013.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="book">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>OSTERWALDER</surname>
							<given-names>A.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>PIGNEUR</surname>
							<given-names>Y.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source>Business Model Generation: A Handbook for Visionaries, Game Changers,
						and Challengers</source>
					<edition>1</edition>
					<publisher-name>John Wiley &amp; Sons</publisher-name>
					<year>2013</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B37">
				<mixed-citation>PAYNE, A; HOLT, S. A review of the 'value' literature and
					implications for relationship marketing. <bold>Autralasian Marketing
						Journal</bold>, v. 7, n. 1, p. 41-51, 1999.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>PAYNE</surname>
							<given-names>A</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>HOLT</surname>
							<given-names>S.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>A review of the 'value' literature and implications for
						relationship marketing</article-title>
					<source>Autralasian Marketing Journal</source>
					<volume>7</volume>
					<issue>1</issue>
					<fpage>41</fpage>
					<lpage>51</lpage>
					<year>1999</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B38">
				<mixed-citation>PAYNE, A; HOLT, S. Diagnosing customer value: integrating the value
					process and relationship marketing. <bold>British Journal of Management</bold>,
					v. 12, p. 159-182, 2001.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>PAYNE</surname>
							<given-names>A</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>HOLT</surname>
							<given-names>S.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Diagnosing customer value: integrating the value process and
						relationship marketing</article-title>
					<source>British Journal of Management</source>
					<volume>12</volume>
					<fpage>159</fpage>
					<lpage>182</lpage>
					<year>2001</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B39">
				<mixed-citation>PERIN, M. G.; SAMPAIO, C. H. <italic>Orientação para o Mercado,
						Porte Empresarial e Performance</italic> (Orientation to the market, company
					size and performance). <bold>Revista de Administração de Empresas - RAE</bold>,
					v. 44, n. 3, p. 76-88, 2004.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>PERIN</surname>
							<given-names>M. G.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>SAMPAIO</surname>
							<given-names>C. H.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title><italic>Orientação para o Mercado, Porte Empresarial e
							Performance</italic> (Orientation to the market, company size and
						performance)</article-title>
					<source>Revista de Administração de Empresas - RAE</source>
					<volume>44</volume>
					<issue>3</issue>
					<fpage>76</fpage>
					<lpage>88</lpage>
					<year>2004</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B40">
				<mixed-citation>PRAHALAD, C. K.; RAMASWAMY, V. (2004). Co-creation experiences: The
					next practice in value creation. <bold>Journal of Interactive Marketing</bold>,
					v. 18, n. 3, p. 5-14, 2004.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>PRAHALAD</surname>
							<given-names>C. K.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>RAMASWAMY</surname>
							<given-names>V.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<year>2004</year>
					<article-title>Co-creation experiences: The next practice in value
						creation</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Interactive Marketing</source>
					<volume>18</volume>
					<issue>3</issue>
					<fpage>5</fpage>
					<lpage>14</lpage>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B41">
				<mixed-citation>RIBEIRO, Á. H. P. et al. Marketing relationships in Brazil: trends
					in value strategies and capabilities. <bold>Journal of Business &amp; Industrial
						Marketing</bold>, v. 24, n. 5/6, p. 449-459, 2009.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>RIBEIRO</surname>
							<given-names>Á. H. P.</given-names>
						</name>
						<etal/>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Marketing relationships in Brazil: trends in value strategies and
						capabilities</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Business &amp; Industrial Marketing</source>
					<volume>24</volume>
					<issue>5/6</issue>
					<fpage>449</fpage>
					<lpage>459</lpage>
					<year>2009</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B42">
				<mixed-citation>SAWHNEY M, S BALASUBRAMANIAN, VV Krishnan. Creating growth with
					services. <bold>MIT Sloan Management Review,</bold> v.45, n.2, p. 34,
					2004.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>SAWHNEY</surname>
							<given-names>M</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>BALASUBRAMANIAN</surname>
							<given-names>S</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>Krishnan</surname>
							<given-names>VV</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Creating growth with services</article-title>
					<source>MIT Sloan Management Review</source>
					<volume>45</volume>
					<issue>2</issue>
					<fpage>34</fpage>
					<lpage>34</lpage>
					<year>2004</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B43">
				<mixed-citation>SILVERSTEIN, D.; SAMUEL, P.; DECARLO, N. <bold>The Innovator's
						Toolkit. Hoboken</bold>, New Jersey: John Wiley &amp; Sons,
					2009.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="book">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>SILVERSTEIN</surname>
							<given-names>D.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>SAMUEL</surname>
							<given-names>P.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>DECARLO</surname>
							<given-names>N.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source>The Innovator's Toolkit</source>
					<publisher-loc>Hoboken, New Jersey</publisher-loc>
					<publisher-name>John Wiley &amp; Sons</publisher-name>
					<year>2009</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B44">
				<mixed-citation>SMITH, J. B.; COLGATE, M. Customer value creation: a practical
					framework. <bold>The Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice,</bold> v. 15, n.
					1, p. 7-23, 2007.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>SMITH</surname>
							<given-names>J. B.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>COLGATE</surname>
							<given-names>M.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Customer value creation: a practical framework</article-title>
					<source>The Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice</source>
					<volume>15</volume>
					<issue>1</issue>
					<fpage>7</fpage>
					<lpage>23</lpage>
					<year>2007</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B45">
				<mixed-citation>SOARES, M.C.; PERIN, M.G.; SAMPAIO, C.H. <italic>Os Motivos das
						Relações entre Orientação para Mercado, Orientação para Aprendizagem e
						Sucesso de Novos Produtos</italic> (The reasons for the relationships
					between orientation to market, orientation to learning and success of new
					products). <bold>Revista de Administração IMED</bold>, v. 6, n. 1, p. 30-44,
					2016.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>SOARES</surname>
							<given-names>M.C.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>PERIN</surname>
							<given-names>M.G.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>SAMPAIO</surname>
							<given-names>C.H.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title><italic>Os Motivos das Relações entre Orientação para Mercado,
							Orientação para Aprendizagem e Sucesso de Novos Produtos</italic> (The
						reasons for the relationships between orientation to market, orientation to
						learning and success of new products)</article-title>
					<source>Revista de Administração IMED</source>
					<volume>6</volume>
					<issue>1</issue>
					<fpage>30</fpage>
					<lpage>44</lpage>
					<year>2016</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B46">
				<mixed-citation>ULAGA, W. Capturing Value Creation in Business Relationships: A
					Customer Perspective. <bold>Industrial Marketing Management</bold>, v. 32, n. 8,
					p. 677-693, 2003.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>ULAGA</surname>
							<given-names>W.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Capturing Value Creation in Business Relationships: A Customer
						Perspective</article-title>
					<source>Industrial Marketing Management</source>
					<volume>32</volume>
					<issue>8</issue>
					<fpage>677</fpage>
					<lpage>693</lpage>
					<year>2003</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B47">
				<mixed-citation>ULAGA, W.; EGGERT, A. Value-based differentiation in business
					relationships: gaining and sustaining key supplier status. <bold>Journal of
						Marketing</bold>, v. 70, n. 1, p. 119-36, 2006.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>ULAGA</surname>
							<given-names>W.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>EGGERT</surname>
							<given-names>A.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Value-based differentiation in business relationships: gaining
						and sustaining key supplier status</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Marketing</source>
					<volume>70</volume>
					<issue>1</issue>
					<fpage>119</fpage>
					<lpage>136</lpage>
					<year>2006</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B48">
				<mixed-citation>ULWICK, A. W. Turn customer input into innovation. <bold>Harvard
						Business Review</bold>, v. 80, n. 1, p. 91-97, 2002.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>ULWICK</surname>
							<given-names>A. W.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Turn customer input into innovation</article-title>
					<source>Harvard Business Review</source>
					<volume>80</volume>
					<issue>1</issue>
					<fpage>91</fpage>
					<lpage>97</lpage>
					<year>2002</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B49">
				<mixed-citation>ULWICK, A. W. <bold>What Customers Want</bold>. New York:
					McGraw-Hill, 2005.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="book">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>ULWICK</surname>
							<given-names>A. W.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<source>What Customers Want</source>
					<publisher-loc>New York</publisher-loc>
					<publisher-name>McGraw-Hill</publisher-name>
					<year>2005</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B50">
				<mixed-citation>ULWICK, A. W.; BETTENCOURT, L. A. Giving Customers a Fair Hearing.
						<bold>MIT Sloan Management Review</bold>, v. 49, n. 3, p. 62-68,
					2008.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>ULWICK</surname>
							<given-names>A. W.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>BETTENCOURT</surname>
							<given-names>L. A.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Giving Customers a Fair Hearing</article-title>
					<source>MIT Sloan Management Review</source>
					<volume>49</volume>
					<issue>3</issue>
					<fpage>62</fpage>
					<lpage>68</lpage>
					<year>2008</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B51">
				<mixed-citation>VARGO, S. L.; LUSCH, R. F. Evolving to a New Dominant Logic for
					Marketing. <bold>Journal of Marketing</bold>, v. 68, n. 1, p. 1-17,
					2004.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>VARGO</surname>
							<given-names>S. L.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>LUSCH</surname>
							<given-names>R. F.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Evolving to a New Dominant Logic for Marketing</article-title>
					<source>Journal of Marketing</source>
					<volume>68</volume>
					<issue>1</issue>
					<fpage>1</fpage>
					<lpage>17</lpage>
					<year>2004</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
			<ref id="B52">
				<mixed-citation>VARGO, S. L.; LUSCH, R. F. Institutions and Axioms: An Extension and
					Update of Service-Dominant Logic. <bold>Journal of the Academy of Marketing
						Science,</bold> v. 44, p. 5-23, 2016.</mixed-citation>
				<element-citation publication-type="journal">
					<person-group person-group-type="author">
						<name>
							<surname>VARGO</surname>
							<given-names>S. L.</given-names>
						</name>
						<name>
							<surname>LUSCH</surname>
							<given-names>R. F.</given-names>
						</name>
					</person-group>
					<article-title>Institutions and Axioms: An Extension and Update of
						Service-Dominant Logic</article-title>
					<source>Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science</source>
					<volume>44</volume>
					<fpage>5</fpage>
					<lpage>23</lpage>
					<year>2016</year>
				</element-citation>
			</ref>
		</ref-list>
	</back>
	<!--<sub-article article-type="translation" id="s1" xml:lang="pt">
		<front-stub>
			<article-categories>
				<subj-group subj-group-type="heading">
					<subject>ARTIGO</subject>
				</subj-group>
			</article-categories>
			<title-group>
				<article-title>A utilização da técnica Job to Be Done para identificação de
					oportunidades de cocriação de valor no contexto da Lógica Dominante do
					Serviço</article-title>
			</title-group>
			<contrib-group>
				<contrib contrib-type="author">
					<contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">0000-0001-8260-3670</contrib-id>
					<name>
						<surname>Ribeiro</surname>
						<given-names>Áurea Helena Puga</given-names>
					</name>
					<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff4">1</xref>
					<xref ref-type="corresp" rid="c4">†</xref>
				</contrib>
				<contrib contrib-type="author">
					<contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">0000-0002-5626-2945</contrib-id>
					<name>
						<surname>Monteiro</surname>
						<given-names>Plínio Rafael Reis</given-names>
					</name>
					<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff5">2</xref>
					<xref ref-type="corresp" rid="c5">Ω</xref>
				</contrib>
				<contrib contrib-type="author">
					<contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">0000-0001-7764-2755</contrib-id>
					<name>
						<surname>Luttembarck</surname>
						<given-names>Laura</given-names>
					</name>
					<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff6">3</xref>
					<xref ref-type="corresp" rid="c6">¥</xref>
				</contrib>
			</contrib-group>
			<aff id="aff4">
				<label>1</label>
				<institution content-type="original">Fundação Dom Cabral, Nova Lima, MG,
					Brasil</institution>
			</aff>
			<aff id="aff5">
				<label>2</label>
				<institution content-type="original">Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo
					Horizonte, MG, Brasil</institution>
			</aff>
			<aff id="aff6">
				<label>3</label>
				<institution content-type="original">Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo
					Horizonte, MG, Brasil</institution>
			</aff>
			<author-notes>
				<corresp id="c4"><label><sup>†</sup></label>Fundação Dom Cabral, Nova Lima, MG,
					Brasil. E-mail: <email>aureap@fdc.org.br</email></corresp>
				<corresp id="c5"><label><sup>Ω</sup></label>Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais,
					Belo Horizonte, MG, Brasil. E-mail: <email>preisufmg@gmail.com</email></corresp>
				<corresp id="c6"><label><sup>¥</sup></label>Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais,
					Belo Horizonte, MG, Brasil. E-mail:
					<email>lauralut@hotmail.com</email></corresp>
			</author-notes>
			<abstract>
				<title>RESUMO</title>
				<p>Organizações que atuam em contextos B2B adotam estratégias de cocriação de valor
					visando à fidelização de clientes. Fundamentando-se nos conceitos da Lógica
					Dominante do Serviço (LDS), o estudo propõe a utilização da técnica de Job to be
					done (JTBD) como método para apoiar a implementação dos conceitos da LDS. O
					resultado de um levantamento realizado com 450 clientes de uma empresa do setor
					químico apontou que os jobs revelados pelos clientes, uma vez solucionados,
					geram de fato performance superior, contribuindo para a afirmativa da adequação
					da técnica para fins de identificar e priorizar clientes com maior potencial
					para cocriação. O estudo também avalia a variável "gestão profissional" como
					moderadora dessa relação e confirma que a solução dos jobs considerados
					relevantes pelos clientes, em contexto de gestão profissional, potencializa o
					valor cocriado.</p>
			</abstract>
			<kwd-group xml:lang="pt">
				<title>Keywords:</title>
				<kwd>Valor</kwd>
				<kwd>Job to be done</kwd>
				<kwd>Cocriação</kwd>
			</kwd-group>
		</front-stub>
		<body>
			<sec sec-type="intro">
				<title>1. INTRODUÇÃO</title>
				<p>A estratégia de serviços tem sido praticada em mercados <italic>business to
						business</italic> como alternativa para a diferenciação das ofertas
					(GUMMERSSON, 1987, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B28">LOVELOCK, 2004</xref>; <xref
						ref-type="bibr" rid="B8">BITNER E BROWN, 2008</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr"
						rid="B41">RIBEIRO et al., 2009</xref>). Profissionais de marketing têm
					desenvolvido conceitos mais amplos de solução aos clientes, agregando serviços
					aos produtos, alavancando oportunidades valiosas de vantagem competitiva e maior
					lucratividade (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B42">SAWHENY E BALASUBRAMANIAN,
						2004</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B16">FANG E OUTROS, 2008</xref>).
					Fornecedores, por exemplo, além de apoiarem os clientes na utilização dos
					produtos têm se preocupado em apoiá-los em seus processos de gestão, no
					atendimento aos seus clientes finais e até identificação de oportunidades que
					podem ampliar sua competitividade nos setores nos quais atuam.</p>
				<p>É neste contexto de esforço de diferenciação da oferta que as organizações têm
					buscado novas estratégias para aprimorar o processo de criação de valor para o
					cliente, enquanto a literatura de marketing vem apresentando abordagens que
					enfatizam tanto a relevância dos serviços quanto o estabelecimento de processos
					mais relacionais para esse fim.</p>
				<p>Nesta evolução teórica, a abordagem de marketing de relacionamento surge como uma
					evolução e intensificação das estratégias de serviço e enfatiza a relevância de
					construção de vínculos de longo prazo e que, ao contrário do que acontece em
					abordagens mais transacionais nas quais o valor ofertado é intrínseco ao
					produto, a criação de valor em abordagens mais relacionais, é cocriado. (<xref
						ref-type="bibr" rid="B23">HAKANSSON, H. E SNEHOTA, 1995</xref>; LORENZZONI,
					G E LIPPARINI, A 1999, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B19">GADE E SNEHOTA,
						2000</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B47">ULAGA e EGGERT, 2006</xref>;
						<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B41">RIBEIRO et al., 2009</xref>). Organizações
					praticantes da estratégia de relacionamento buscam envolver-se nas operações dos
					clientes gerando um valor mensurável que emerge das interações, da ampliação dos
					serviços prestados, onde o fornecedor coloca à disposição do cliente seus
					recursos e <italic>know-how</italic> visando ampliar os benefícios gerados,
					compromete-se com o sucesso do cliente em seu mercado (<xref ref-type="bibr"
						rid="B47">ULAGA E EGGERT, 2006</xref>, STEINMAN et al., 2016). Em processos
					ainda mais intensos de cocriação, clientes, fornecedores e outros atores
					intensificam ainda mais os seus laços e além de cooperarem visando à ampliação
					de benefícios mútuos, ingressam em um esforço conjunto para alavancar novas
					competências e desenvolverem juntos novas oportunidades e inovações de mercado
						(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B23">HAKANSSON, H. e SNEHOTA, 1995</xref>; <xref
						ref-type="bibr" rid="B40">PRAHALAD e RAMASWAMY, 2004</xref>).</p>
				<p>Paralela à discussão teórica em que se enfatiza a relevância de abordagem mais
					relacionais, no início dos anos 2000 surge no ambiente acadêmico a abordagem da
					Lógica Dominante do Serviço (LDS) em que os autores proponentes dessa teoria
					lançam um novo olhar para o processo de criação de valor ao cliente. A LDS foca
					a discussão na cocriação, afirmando que o consumidor está sempre envolvido no
					processo de criação de valor de forma interativa com a organização, pois,
					segundo essa abordagem, o cliente não adquire ofertas pelas características
					inerentes a elas, mas sim por sua capacidade de solucionar problemas. <xref
						ref-type="bibr" rid="B21">Grönroos e Voima (2013)</xref> aprofundam no
					conceito de cocriação de valor concordando com a LDS a respeito de que o valor é
					sempre cocriado, entretanto defendem que tal processo somente acontece na esfera
					do cliente, e o fornecedor só será parte do processo de cocriação se for
					convidado pelo cliente a participar das atividades que criam o valor no contexto
					de seu domínio. Os autores ainda acrescentam que o valor cocriado pode ser
					potencializado por interações com outros recursos existentes na organização e
					outros atores para além dos fornecedores em questão.</p>
				<p>Como pode ser observado nas últimas décadas, tanto as práticas das organizações
					quanto as teorias de marketing e de redes vêm enfatizando os benefícios do
					estabelecimento de maior proximidade com clientes e outros atores com o objetivo
					de criar valor mais sustentável. Entretanto, a teoria da LDS traz à luz o
					desafio dos fornecedores de conseguirem participar do processo de criação de
					valor, uma vez que quem cria valor é o cliente na interação com a oferta e em
					seu contexto de uso e ele pode ou não permitir a participação do fornecedor
					nesse processo. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B21">GRÖNROOS E VOIMA, 2013</xref>;
						<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B35">OSTERWALDER et al., 2014</xref>, p. 6).</p>
				<p>Diante desse desafio, faz-se relevante aprimorar metodologias as quais podem
					apoiar as organizações na identificação de oportunidades para cocriação de valor
					e ainda na maior assertividade na escolha dos clientes, identificando variáveis
					reveladoras de maior potencial do cliente de transformar os recursos
					disponibilizados pelo fornecedor em valor.</p>
				<p>Nesse sentido, exploramos neste artigo a metodologia de Inovação Orientada a
					Resultados (Outcome Driven Innovation - ODI), que se apoia na técnica de
						<italic>Jobs to be done</italic> (JTBD) como ferramenta para identificar
					oportunidades para criação de valor na esfera do cliente. As oportunidades de
					oferta de valor são reveladas pela identificação dos problemas que o cliente
					precisa solucionar (<italic>jobs</italic>) e dos resultados almejados por ele
					quando busca uma solução no mercado. Tais resultados almejados pelo cliente
					seriam, portanto, o valor que ele almeja cocriar em decorrência da aplicação da
					solução em seu contexto. Entretanto, o cliente pode cocriar esse valor sem a
					participação do fornecedor, mas identificam-se por esse método oportunidades
					valiosas para que, por meio da intervenção do fornecedor, em uma relação
					colaborativa, o valor cocriado seja potencializado em decorrência da relação -
					valor do relacionamento (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B46">ULAGA,
					2006</xref>).</p>
				<p>Desta forma, propomos na presente pesquisa a utilização da técnica de JTBD para
					apoiar a identificação de oportunidades para cocriação de valor, suportando
					assim a aplicação da LDS como estrutura conceitual na definição de estratégias
					organizacionais. Isso dado que as oportunidades reveladas pela identificação dos
					problemas a serem solucionados pelos clientes (<italic>jobs</italic>) apontam
					oportunidades para cocriar valor no relacionamento com o fornecedor. Ainda
					apoiados na premissa de que a transformação de recursos e capacidades em
					vantagens competitivas é direcionada por processos gerenciais (<xref
						ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">BARNEY e ARIKAN, 2006</xref>), destacamos ainda que
					a capacidade de solução conjunta do <italic>Jobs</italic> dos clientes será um
					preditor especialmente relevante da performance em organizações com mais
					profissionalismo gerencial. Neste sentido, buscou-se responder neste estudo a
					duas perguntas de pesquisa:</p>
				<p>Os <italic>jobs</italic> revelados pelos clientes (problemas para os quais buscam
					solução) uma vez solucionados, geram de fato performance superior? Ou seja, a
					solução de questões relevantes do ponto de vista do cliente propicia a cocriação
					superior de valor mensurado a partir de indicadores de performance
					definidos?</p>
				<p>A solução dos <italic>jobs</italic> considerados relevantes pelos clientes,
					mediados por uma gestão profissional, potencializam o valor cocriado, mensurado
					por performance superior?</p>
				<p>A relevância desta pesquisa está em apresentar a técnica de JTBD como método para
					apoiar a implementação dos conceitos da LDS, conforme sugerido por <xref
						ref-type="bibr" rid="B9">Brodie et al (2011)</xref>. Segundo esses autores,
					seriam necessários estudos que visem tornar viável a aplicação da macroestrutura
					da LDS à prática empresarial . Além dessa contribuição, o estudo se propõe a
					avaliar a variável "gestão profissional" como potencializadora do valor cocriado
					pelo cliente.</p>
			</sec>
			<sec>
				<title>2. REVISÃO DA LITERATURA</title>
				<sec>
					<title>2.1. VALOR</title>
					<p>O conceito de valor é fundamental dentro do marketing. A busca pela entrega
						de valor superior, e como consequência, pela satisfação e mesmo a lealdade
						do cliente são objetivos centrais do marketing das organizações. Porém, o
						conceito de valor não é conciso, ele possui diversas perspectivas e
						vertentes, além de uma mudança ao longo do tempo. Diante da pluralidade de
						perspectivas de valor para o consumidor dentro do marketing, apresentamos
						dois frameworks propostos por diferentes autores os quais sumarizam algumas
						das vertentes do valor e nos permitem visualizar uma evolução do conceito
						que traz sustentação para este trabalho.</p>
					<p><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B44">Smith e Colgate (2007)</xref> propõem um
						framework de estratégias de criação de valor que identifica e agrupa em
						quatro categorias os tipos de valor encontrados na literatura. Os tipos de
						valor sumarizados por <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B44">Smith e Colgate
							(2007)</xref> são funcional/instrumental, experiencial/hedônico,
						simbólico/expressivo e custo/sacrifício. Outra classificação presente na
						literatura apresenta diferentes formas de valor gerado, que servem de base
						para as estratégias das organizações: valor de troca, valor agregado, valor
						de desempenho e cocriação de valor (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B31">MÖLLER
							et al., 2005</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B40">PRAHALAD;
							RAMASWAMY, 2004</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B2">ANDERSON; NARUS;
							VON ROSSUN, 2006</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B41">RIBEIRO et al.,
							2009</xref>). O valor de troca é o mais básico e baseia-se em princípios
						econômicos; é intrínseco à oferta e medido através do valor recebido em uma
						troca. Já o valor agregado é aquele gerado por meio da adição de valor por
						parte do fornecedor mediante elementos ou características, que geram uma
						nova proposta de valor que aumente o valor de troca e a competitividade da
						oferta. O valor de desempenho ou valor em uso, trata do valor que é criado
						nas atividades inter-relacionadas de fornecedores e compradores, ou seja, em
						seu relacionamento. Essa perspectiva enfatiza que o valor criado é mútuo e
						pressupõe o compartilhamento de recursos e benefícios. Finalmente, na
						estratégia relacional de cocriação de valor, o valor é coproduzido tanto
						pelo cliente quanto pelo fornecedor ao longo do processo de criação, e não
						somente no momento da troca. As decisões de valor são criadas conjuntamente
						para maximizar o valor para ambas as partes (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B41"
							>RIBEIRO et al., 2009</xref>).</p>
					<p>As fontes de valor apresentadas na classificação de <xref ref-type="bibr"
							rid="B44">Smith e Colgate (2007)</xref> evidenciam a produção de valor
						fortemente atribuída ao fornecedor, em atividades e processos em sua cadeia
						de adição de valor. O papel do consumidor resume-se a perceber esse valor
						sendo mais ou menos adaptado às suas necessidades e particularidades e com
						base nisso julgá-lo de acordo com suas expectativas. Na perspectiva
						evidenciada por <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B41">Ribeiro et al. (2009)</xref>
						sobre os tipos de valor gerado, pode-se observar uma tendência de
						deslocamento da responsabilidade da criação de valor. O cliente, que antes
						não tinha nenhum contato com o processo de criação de valor, passa a ser
						atuante, seja nos momentos de relacionamento e troca com o fornecedor,
						criando o valor de desempenho, seja coproduzindo valor com a organização ao
						longo de todos os processos organizacionais.</p>
				</sec>
				<sec>
					<title>2.2. LÓGICA DOMINANTE DO SERVIÇO</title>
					<p>A perspectiva da Lógica Dominante do Serviço (LDS), que vem como
						contraposição à abordagem tradicional do marketing orientada pela Lógica
						Dominante do Produto (LDP), apresenta uma visão ainda mais avançada no
						sentido da criação de valor com respeito ao cliente: ela oferece suporte
						para que o processo de cocriação no marketing seja compreendido de forma
						mais abrangente.</p>
					<p>A Lógica Dominante do Serviço promove uma renovação do pensamento de
						marketing, na qual se assume que toda e qualquer oferta é um serviço (<xref
							ref-type="bibr" rid="B51">VARGO; LUSCH, 2004</xref>) e que os
						consumidores não adquirem ofertas por suas características inerentes a elas,
						mas sim por sua capacidade de solucionar problemas que enfrentam (<xref
							ref-type="bibr" rid="B5">BAKER; HART, 2008</xref>). Nesta abordagem o
						consumidor não é visto apenas como um mero receptor do valor entregue, mas
						sim como um ator central, cocriador de valor, envolvido no processo de
						criação de valor de forma interativa com a organização (<xref
							ref-type="bibr" rid="B15">DIETRICH et al. 2013</xref>), o que transcende
						uma orientação para o cliente, dado que a ideia é que o valor da oferta seja
						definido e cocriado por ele, e não apenas incorporado ao produto final
							(<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B51">VARGO E LUSCH, 2004</xref>). Antes da
						aquisição da oferta por parte do cliente, a organização pode apenas fazer
						uma proposta de valor, que "descreve os benefícios que os clientes podem
						esperar de determinados produtos ou serviços" (<xref ref-type="bibr"
							rid="B35">OSTERWALDER et al., 2014</xref>, p. 6). Neste sentido, as
						empresas não entregam valor ao consumidor, e sim contribuem para sua criação
						e a facilitam.</p>
					<p>Na visão da LDS, os consumidores cocriam e avaliam o valor quando bens e
						serviços estão em uso. Esse conceito de valor em uso, citado anteriormente,
						é um dos elementos fundamentais relacionados aos processos de cocriação de
						valor entre empresas e consumidores. Também conhecido como valor da relação,
						ele é o valor gerado "decorrente do relacionamento entre as duas partes
						[...], que é criado no processo de uso dos produtos ou serviços e nas
						atividades entre fornecedores e compradores" (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B1"
							>ALEJANDRO et al., 2011</xref>).</p>
					<p>Outro ponto importante ressaltado pela LDS é a integração de recursos. Um dos
						axiomas da LDS enfatiza que todos os atores envolvidos são integradores de
						recursos, sendo estes de múltiplas fontes, e a cocriação de valor acontece
						através dessa integração. A capacidade de transformar um recurso potencial
						em um benefício específico torna-se o foco principal, a ênfase passa do
						atributo para a capacidade da oferta de solucionar um problema do cliente. A
						cocriação ocorre diante da interação dele com a organização e seus recursos,
						a partir de suas experiências, por meio da integração de recursos na busca
						de resultados valiosos (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B24">KARPEN et al.,
							2015</xref>).</p>
					<p>Os conceitos de criação de valor e cocriação se confundem na literatura da
						LDS, onde produtor e consumidor são cocriadores de valor, o que torna o
						conceito de criação de valor extremamente abrangente, dificultando o
						entendimento do papel dos atores no processo. Na busca por um entendimento
						mais claro sobre os conceitos de criação e cocriação de valor sob a ótica da
						LDS, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B21">Grönroos e Voima (2013)</xref> se
						aprofundam no tema e propõem explicitar os papéis dos atores em cada um
						desses conceitos. Os autores esclarecem os papéis do consumidor e da
						organização através de esferas de criação de valor. Essas esferas delimitam
						os sistemas entre os atores e são divididas em esfera do produtor, esfera do
						consumidor e uma esfera conjunta, onde podem acontecer interações entre
						eles. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B21">GRÖNROOS; VOIMA, 2013</xref>).</p>
					<p>Na esfera do fornecedor, as ações da organização visam facilitar a criação de
						valor por parte do cliente durante o uso dele, o que não faz parte do
						processo de criação de valor em si. Os autores salientam que na esfera do
						fornecedor não há criação de valor, ali se constrói a possibilidade de
						geração de valor potencial, o que corrobora a visão de <xref ref-type="bibr"
							rid="B52">Vargo e Lusch (2016)</xref> em relação à proposta de valor. Já
						na esfera do cliente, segundo os autores, é onde ocorre a criação efetiva do
						valor, a qual é feita pelo consumidor mediante a integração de recursos em
						seu contexto.</p>
					<p>Quanto à possibilidade de cocriação, os autores esclarecem que o produtor
						controla somente o processo de produção, anterior à troca, enquanto o
						processo de criação de valor é controlado pelo cliente. A cocriação de valor
						seria um processo interativo e dialógico entre produtor e consumidor na
						esfera conjunta ou na esfera do cliente. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B21"
							>Grönroos e Voima (2013)</xref> argumentam que o provedor do serviço
						evolui de facilitador para cocriador de valor quando passa a interagir com o
						cliente, entendendo suas ações e práticas, e como ele combina recursos,
						processos e resultados. Essa cocriação acontece na esfera conjunta, a qual
						pode expandir para uma ou outra esfera, tornando a plataforma de criação de
						valor mais ampla: quando o cliente permite a participação do fornecedor em
						seu processo de criação de valor, eles assumem o papel de cocriadores de
						valor, e quando o fornecedor convida o cliente para participar do seu
						processo, este se torna um coprodutor.</p>
					<p>Diante do desafio de cocriação, o nível de entendimento da organização sobre
						o consumidor e o contexto coletivo no qual ele está inserido influencia no
						processo de criação de valor, seja na esfera do consumidor ou na esfera
						conjunta. O foco da LDS em entender quais são os problemas que os clientes
						enfrentam seria o ponto de partida para propor soluções, independentemente
						de uma oferta ou um produto para esses problemas. Assim, o marketing passa a
						ser o provedor de soluções para as tarefas que os clientes precisam fazer
						(seus <italic>jobs to be done</italic>) (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B5"
							>BAKER; HART, 2008</xref>). Por isso identificar e entender as tarefas
						que precisam ser feitas pelos clientes em determinado contexto passa a ser
						uma prioridade: entender o processo de criação de valor do cliente, além de
						seus recursos disponíveis e seu contexto pode auxiliar as organizações a
						propor um valor superior aos clientes e consequentemente contribuir com a
						criação de um valor de uso maior por parte do consumidor.</p>
				</sec>
				<sec>
					<title>2.3. <italic>INOVAÇÃO ORIENTADA A RESULTADOS</italic> E A TÉCNICA
							<italic>JOBS TO BE DONE</italic></title>
					<p>Criada pelo autor Anthony W. Ulwick, a Inovação Orientada a Resultados,
							<italic>Outcome Driven Innovation</italic> (ODI) é uma abordagem para a
						inovação e desenvolvimento de ofertas. Ela nasce como alternativa à Inovação
						Orientada para o Cliente (<italic>Customer driven innovation),</italic>
						paradigma popularizado a partir da transição da orientação para o produto
						para a orientação para o marketing nas organizações (<xref ref-type="bibr"
							rid="B49">ULWICK, 2005</xref>). A Inovação Orientada para o Cliente
						defende que as organizações precisam entender as necessidades e desejos dos
						consumidores a fim de desenvolver os produtos e serviços que atendam melhor
						às suas demandas. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B45">SOARES; PERIN; SAMPAIO,
							2016</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B49">ULWICK, 2005</xref>). Sendo
						assim, a ODI busca ser uma alternativa para a geração de ideias inovadoras
						para as organizações. Para isso, utiliza o conceito de <italic>jobs to be
							done</italic> (JTBD) como fonte de informação sobre o cliente para
						construir soluções mais aplicadas e de sucesso, diminuindo assim a
						variabilidade do processo de criação da inovação (<xref ref-type="bibr"
							rid="B49">ULWICK, 2005</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B48">ULWICK,
							2002</xref>).</p>
					<p>O JTBD do cliente pode ser definido como uma tarefa ou atividade que ele
						precisa realizar. O termo se tornou popular com o artigo "<italic>Finding
							the Right Job for your Product</italic>" de 2007 do professor Clayton
						Christensen e coautores ( <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B43">SILVERSTEIN;
							SAMUEL; DECARLO, 2009</xref>). Silverstein et al. (2012) relatam que,
						assim como na Lógica Dominante do Serviço, o poder do conceito e técnica de
							<italic>Jobs to be done</italic> é o ajuste de foco, pois busca
						encontrar soluções para os reais problemas do cliente. Por exemplo, ao
						comprar um cortador de grama o objetivo do cliente é deixar a grama aparada,
						porém se uma empresa de cortadores de grama examina esse propósito maior,
						pode optar por desenvolver uma semente de grama geneticamente modificada que
						não precise ser aparada (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B43">SILVERSTEIN;
							SAMUEL; DECARLO, 2009</xref>). Percebe-se na ODI a importância de se
						identificar os <italic>jobs</italic> dos clientes além dos resultados
						desejados por ele. Uma vez que as empresas entendem essas demandas, elas
						ganham novos <italic>insights</italic> de mercado e podem criar estratégias
						viáveis de crescimento. Se uma boa solução não existe, tem-se a oportunidade
						de inovar (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B48">ULWICK, 2002</xref>).</p>
					<p>A metodologia de JTBD da ODI é uma forma de materializar esforços subjacentes
						à LDS, assumindo não somente a cocriação de valor, mas também colocando como
						ponto central no desenvolvimento de uma proposta de valor a identificação
						dos problemas críticos enfrentados pelos clientes, visando à busca de
						soluções conjuntas para atender a demandas em um mercado (<xref
							ref-type="bibr" rid="B29">LUSCH; VARGO, 2014</xref>). Portanto, a
							<italic>Outcome Driven Innovation</italic> e a sua lógica de
							<italic>Jobs to be done</italic> permitem entender a fundo quais são
						realmente os problemas que o cliente quer resolver e identificar onde estão
						as maiores oportunidades de ação para as organizações fornecedoras,
						aumentando o potencial de criação de valor. Podemos observar então uma
						relação entre o processo demonstrado no mapa de valor do
							<italic>job</italic> de um cliente, formado por etapas e os resultados
						esperados para cada uma delas, com o processo de criação de valor do
						cliente, que ocorre durante o uso da oferta no contexto do cliente. Desta
						forma, auxiliando na resolução de um JTBD do cliente de uma forma superior,
						a criação de valor também seria potencializada. A <xref ref-type="fig"
							rid="f4">figura 1</xref>, adaptada do trabalho de <xref ref-type="bibr"
							rid="B21">Grönroos e Voima (2013)</xref>, incorpora esse ponto de
						vista.</p>
					<p>
						<fig id="f4">
							<label>Figura 1</label>
							<caption>
								<title>Esferas de criação de valor</title>
							</caption>
							<graphic xlink:href="1808-2386-bbr-16-01-0032-gf01-pt.tif"/>
							<attrib>Fonte: Adaptado de <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B21">Grönroos e
									Voima (2013, p.136)</xref>.</attrib>
						</fig>
					</p>
					<p>Conhecer o processo de criação de valor do cliente, além de informações que
						formam o contexto em que o cliente está incluído, traz à organização uma
						oportunidade tanto de criar mais valor potencial quanto de cocriar mais
						valor com o cliente.</p>
				</sec>
			</sec>
			<sec>
				<title>3. A PESQUISA</title>
				<p>Considerando a evolução apresentada na literatura sobre criação de valor e a
					relevância de identificação de oportunidades de diferenciação da oferta advindas
					da participação do fornecedor no processo de cocriação, o estudo tem como
					objetivo responder às perguntas de pesquisa apresentadas, testando duas
					hipóteses que sustentaram a aplicação da metodologia de ODI e da técnica de JTBD
					no contexto da relação de um fornecedor de produtos químicos com seus clientes.
					Em decorrência dessas validações, a pesquisa visa também apresentar um caminho
					para aplicação dos conceitos de cocriação de valor sugeridos pela LDS e
					aprofundados por <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B21">Grönroos e Voima
					(2013)</xref>.</p>
				<p>A primeira pergunta de pesquisa questiona se os <italic>jobs</italic> definidos
					como relevantes do ponto de vista dos clientes, uma vez solucionados, geram de
					fato a criação de valor superior.</p>
				<p>Propõe-se que o valor criado seja medido pelo desempenho organizacional por meio
					de indicadores clássicos tais como produtividade, lucratividade, qualidade dos
					produtos e crescimento do faturamento (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B39">PERIN;
						SAMPAIO, 2004</xref>). Em contextos <italic>business-to-business</italic>
					pode-se sustentar que as soluções e serviços propostos aos clientes visam
					basicamente apoiar a solução de problemas que, em última instância, se ligam à
					razão de existência da organização-cliente, seja pelo aumento da produtividade,
					seja pela redução de custos (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B2">ANDERSON; NARUS; VAN
						ROSSUM, 2006</xref>). Assim, o potencial de criação de valor de uma oferta
					em um contexto <italic>business-to-business</italic> emerge da capacidade do
					fornecedor de aumentar o desempenho dos seus clientes oferecendo soluções as
					quais solucionem problemas em tarefas essenciais ao negócio - que sejam
					importantes, mas que apresentam baixo desempenho. Colocando em perspectiva
					empírica, é proposta a primeira hipótese de estudo:</p>
				<p>
					<disp-quote>
						<p><italic>H1: Existe uma relação positiva entre a solução de problemas
								considerados relevantes do ponto de vista do cliente e o desempenho
								organizacional.</italic></p>
					</disp-quote>
				</p>
				<p>A segunda pergunta da pesquisa diz respeito à relevância do contexto capacitante
					do cliente para a criação de valor superior. Essa questão deriva da premissa da
					Lógica Dominada por Serviço e das provocações de <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B21"
						>Grönroos e Voima (2013)</xref> de que a criação de valor é feita pela
					integração de recursos por parte dos atores. Se a organização cliente possui uma
					profissionalização em nível mais avançado, em tese ela teria mais e melhores
					recursos na criação do valor e por isso alcançaria um desempenho superior.</p>
				<p><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B14">Dekker <italic>et al</italic> (2015)</xref>
					realizaram um estudo sobre os efeitos da profissionalização de empresas
					familiares sobre a performance. Os autores identificam que essa questão ainda
					não está solucionada pela literatura, existindo três grupos de resultados
					encontrados. Um conjunto de estudos demonstra impacto negativo da
					profissionalização sobre performance (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B3">ANDERSON E
						REEB, 2003</xref> E <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B30">MCCONAUGBY; MATTHEWS E
						FIALKO, 2001</xref>). O segundo grupo demonstra impacto positivo sobre a
					performance. Tais resultados são justificados pelo fato de profissionais
					trazerem competências relevantes para a empresa, e o comportamento altruísta e
					de autocontrole dos acionistas permite alinhamento entre os objetivos dos
					profissionais, da empresa e da família <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B7">Barth
							<italic>et</italic> al 2005</xref>, Duréndez <italic>et</italic> al
					2007. E um terceiro grupo não encontrou relações significativas, como são os
					casos dos trabalhos de <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B12">Daily e Dalton
						(1992)</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B13">Daily e Dollinger
						(1992)</xref> e <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B27">Lin e Hu (2007)</xref>.</p>
				<p>Segundo <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B14">Dekker <italic>et al</italic>
						(2015)</xref>, essa falta de consistência dos resultados deve-se ao fato de
					que as escalas para medir profissionalização consideram apenas o fato de ter ou
					não profissionais na gestão e por isso os autores se propõem a desenvolver uma
					escala para medir o grau de profissionalização da empresa. Conforme <xref
						ref-type="bibr" rid="B14">Dekker <italic>et al</italic> (2015)</xref>, a
					escala deve considerar todos os aspectos presentes na literatura sobre gestão
					profissional, por exemplo: o envolvimento de pessoas de fora da empresa na
					administração, não familiares no quadro de diretoria, inclusive CEO
					profissional, profissionalização do conselho de administração, delegação do
					controle e descentralização da autoridade e tomada de decisões, difusão do
					controle na empresa por meio de mecanismos formais, tais como sistema formais de
					recrutamento, treinamento, incentivo e avaliação.</p>
				<p>Considerando a relevância apontada na literatura da gestão profissional sobre a
					performance da empresa, propomos a seguinte hipótese:</p>
				<p>
					<disp-quote>
						<p>H2: <italic>Existe moderação positiva do efeito da profissionalização da
								gestão no impacto entre a solução dos Jobs e o desempenho
								organizacional.</italic></p>
					</disp-quote>
				</p>
			</sec>
			<sec sec-type="methods">
				<title>4. METODOLOGIA</title>
				<p>A fim de testar as hipóteses propostas, foi realizado um estudo no
						<italic>business to business</italic> em duas etapas: uma fase qualitativa e
					uma fase quantitativa descritiva implementada por meio de um questionário que
					abordou os itens propostos na metodologia JTBD e associados ao problema de
					pesquisa. A construção do instrumento seguiu os procedimentos apresentados na
					literatura (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B49">ULWICK, 2005</xref>).</p>
				<p>Inicialmente 28 empresas-cliente e um total de 54 respondentes participaram de
					entrevistas qualitativas em profundidade com empresas do setor estudado. A
					análise de conteúdo das entrevistas foi a base para a identificação dos
						<italic>jobs,</italic> que foram incluídos na pesquisa. A definição e
					redação dos itens foram realizadas por meio de interações entre especialistas
					acadêmicos e profissionais atuantes no setor. Com base na análise das
					entrevistas, foram definidos 11 <italic>jobs</italic>, representando as
					principais tarefas/atividades que empresas clientes precisam realizar para
					alcançar seus objetivos. A lista dos <italic>jobs</italic> principais usados na
					pesquisa é:</p>
				<p>
					<list list-type="order">
						<list-item>
							<p>1. Aumentar a produtividade em todos os processos da organização;</p>
						</list-item>
						<list-item>
							<p>2. Tomar decisões mais seguras, baseadas em informações e dados
								disponíveis;</p>
						</list-item>
						<list-item>
							<p>3. Ter planejamento de produção mais assertivo e melhor alinhamento
								com outros processos internos como aquisição e comercialização;</p>
						</list-item>
						<list-item>
							<p>4. Capturar mais valor na comercialização de nossos produtos e
								serviços;</p>
						</list-item>
						<list-item>
							<p>5. Estar à frente dos meus competidores por meio de inovações em
								produtos, processos e/ou modelos de negócios;</p>
						</list-item>
						<list-item>
							<p>6. Acessar melhores condições de crédito e redução de risco
								financeiro;</p>
						</list-item>
						<list-item>
							<p>7. Crescer com segurança;</p>
						</list-item>
						<list-item>
							<p>8. Ter processos de negócio, gestão e governança definidos;</p>
						</list-item>
						<list-item>
							<p>9. Ter pessoas capacitadas e comprometidas com os resultados da
								operação;</p>
						</list-item>
						<list-item>
							<p>10. Ter soluções logísticas (<italic>inbound</italic> e
									<italic>outbound</italic>) mais eficientes, que proporcionem
								menores custos para a operação e maior satisfação aos clientes.</p>
						</list-item>
						<list-item>
							<p>11. Manter relacionamentos valiosos com os
									<italic>stakeholders</italic>: fornecedores, compradores,
								acionistas e sociedade.</p>
						</list-item>
					</list>
				</p>
				<p>Para cada <italic>job</italic> do cliente também foram definidas as atividades
					necessárias para a sua realização (<italic>os jobs steps</italic>), porém esses
					itens não serão destacados neste estudo dado que não são necessários para testar
					a hipótese da pesquisa. Conforme expresso na metodologia JTBD, cada
						<italic>job</italic> foi avaliado nas dimensões de satisfação do
						<italic>job</italic> - o quanto ele está solucionado-, e sua importância - o
					quanto o <italic>job</italic> é foco atual na gestão da organização. Para
					avaliar a solução dos <italic>jobs</italic>, os respondentes avaliaram a
					satisfação <italic>dele</italic> em uma escala de 0 (não está solucionado) a 10
					(totalmente solucionado). Para avaliar a sua importância, questionou-se quais
					atividades eram o foco prioritário para o negócio em uma escala de 0 (Nenhum
					foco) a 10 (Foco prioritário). Outra medida importante para o estudo é o Índice
					de Jobs Solucionados (IJS), na medida em que avaliaremos se os
						<italic>jobs</italic> considerados relevantes pelos clientes, uma vez
					solucionados, impactam a performance das organizações. Para calcular esse
					índice, foi realizada uma multiplicação das medidas. Desta forma, quanto mais
					satisfeitos e importantes forem os <italic>jobs</italic>, maior é o IJS e mais
					próximo de 100.</p>
				<p>A escala de performance do negócio foi concebida a partir de adaptações de
					escalas subjetivas prévias (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B26">KOHLI; JAWORSKI,
						1990</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B33">NARVER; SLATER, 1990</xref>),
					do levantamento realizado nas entrevistas qualitativas e de debates com
					especialistas no setor. O desempenho foi avaliado em uma escala de 11 pontos, em
					que o respondente comparava seu desempenho em relação a outros produtores
					conhecidos (0 muito inferior e 10 muito superior) em cinco itens (Produtividade,
					Lucratividade geral, Qualidade dos produtos e crescimento do faturamento).</p>
				<p>A população da pesquisa foi de 450 empresas clientes da indústria do setor
					químico. A amostragem foi estratificada de maneira proporcional aos segmentos de
					mercado da empresa, cuja definição se fundamenta em critérios de porte e
					organização administrativa. O método de coleta foi o questionário físico
					autopreenchido, que foi distribuído pela equipe de vendas da multinacional e
					devolvido diretamente aos pesquisadores por meio dos correios. Foram obtidas 109
					respostas ao final do período de coleta (24% de resposta e cobertura). Não foram
					detectadas diferenças significativas entre a amostra e a população com relação
					ao perfil dos segmentos, porte ou região. Isso demonstra haver relativa
					representatividade da amostra nos critérios sugeridos para o estudo. A análise
					dos dados, realizada com o uso dos softwares SPSS(r) 20.0, Smartpls(r) 2.0 e
					Excel2013(r), partiu da análise de pressupostos, aplicação do modelo e
					comparação de parâmetros, conforme será descrito em sequência.</p>
			</sec>
			<sec sec-type="results">
				<title>5. RESULTADOS</title>
				<p>As organizações participantes do estudo são de médio e grande porte segundo os
					critérios do setor (faturamento anual superior a R$ 3,6 milhões) e utilizam
					insumos e serviços da indústria química localizada em vários estados
					brasileiros. Dessas empresas, 55% são familiares e estão em estágio inicial de
					profissionalização.</p>
				<p>A análise de dados iniciou com o tratamento de dados ausentes muito dispersos
					entre respondentes e variáveis, além de terem sido encontrados em patamares
					baixos (menor que 2%), de modo que os dados foram repostos por meio do
					procedimento de regressão. A presença de <italic>outliers</italic> foi marginal
					(32 respostas univariadas), e os dados não seguiram uma distribuição normal. A
					multicolineariedade não foi considerada problemática com correlações dentro dos
					limites de &#x00b1;0,90 e valores de VIF abaixo de 10 (<xref ref-type="bibr"
						rid="B25">KLINE, 2005</xref>). Diagramas de dispersão selecionados de forma
					aleatória não revelaram desvios da linearidade aparentes.</p>
				<p>Em sequência, avaliou-se a qualidade de mensuração das escalas que medem a
					satisfação dos <italic>jobs</italic> relevantes dos clientes (IJS) e o
					desempenho, nos seguintes critérios: unidimensionalidade, validade convergente,
					discriminante, confiabilidade/consistência, e validade nomológica.</p>
				<p>A dimensionalidade foi avaliada fazendo uma Análise Fatorial Exploratória (AFE)
					para cada construto, usando a extração por componentes principais e rotação
						<italic>direct oblimin</italic>. As condições para aplicação da AFE foram
					adequadas (KMO &gt; 0,70 e variância explicada superior a 50%), e tanto as
					capacidades quanto o desempenho resultaram em soluções unidimensionais, sem
					necessidade de exclusão de itens. Todos os indicadores apresentaram cargas
					significativas com seus fatores (menor carga = 0,66) e comunalidades acima dos
					limites mínimos (maiores que 0,40).</p>
				<p>Na próxima etapa avaliou-se a validade de construto, iniciando pela validade
					convergente e discriminante, tais como termos propostos por <xref
						ref-type="bibr" rid="B18">Fornell e Larcker (1981)</xref>. Quando se
					analisou a validade convergente a partir da significância das cargas fatoriais,
					encontraram-se valores significativos para todos os indicadores (<xref
						ref-type="bibr" rid="B4">BAGOZZI; YI; PHILLIPS, 1991</xref>). As medidas de
					Alpha de Cronbach (AC), Confiabilidade Composta (CC) e Variância Média Extraída
					(VME), forma consideradas adequadas tanto para IJS (VME = 0,58; CC = 0,94; AC =
					0,93), quanto para desempenho (VME = 0,60; CC = 0,88; AC = 0,83).</p>
				<p>Para avaliar a validade discriminante, aplicou-se a abordagem de comparação do
					quadrado da correlação entre os <italic>jobs</italic> solucionados dos clientes
					(IJS) e o desempenho (<italic>r</italic> = 0,477; R<sup>2</sup> = 0,228), com a
					Variância Média Extraída (VME). Como o valor do R2 é bem inferior aos valores de
					VME dos construtos, pode-se assumir que existe validade discriminante entre os
					construtos (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B34">NETEMEYER; BEARDEN; SHARMA,
						2003</xref>).</p>
				<sec>
					<title>5.1. AVALIAÇÃO GERAL DAS HIPÓTESES DO ESTUDO</title>
					<sec>
						<title>5.1.1. HIPÓTESE 1</title>
						<p>A primeira etapa do estudo consiste em avaliar se existe relação positiva
							entre a solução de <italic>jobs</italic> relevantes dos clientes (IJS) e
							o desempenho organizacional. Essa é a premissa básica que sustenta a
							abordagem JTBD, na qual se espera que à medida que problemas
							considerados relevantes pelos clientes são solucionados, há aumento do
							seu desempenho geral. Nesse sentido, a abordagem JTBD seria uma fonte
							essencial para identificar <italic>gaps</italic> de competências dos
							clientes que poderiam ser alvo de novas soluções e serviços por parte do
							fornecedor. O teste dessa hipótese foi realizado verificando o efeito
							direto do IJS sobre o desempenho organizacional. Essa análise foi
							realizada por intermédio da avaliação da validade nomológica,
							testando-se as relações estruturais propostas no modelo. Podem-se
							visualizar os resultados na apresentação do modelo conforme se ilustra
							na <xref ref-type="fig" rid="f5">figura 2</xref>.</p>
						<p>
							<fig id="f5">
								<label>Figura 2</label>
								<caption>
									<title>Modelo estrutural de pesquisa</title>
									<p>Obs: O valor dentro da elipse representa o percentual de
										variância explicada do construto (R<sup>2</sup>). Os valores
										junto aos caminhos (setas) representam as cargas fatoriais
										ou pesos estruturais padronizados. O peso estrutural é
										significativo (p &lt; 0,01).</p>
								</caption>
								<graphic xlink:href="1808-2386-bbr-16-01-0032-gf02-pt.tif"/>
								<attrib>Fonte: dados da pesquisa.</attrib>
							</fig>
						</p>
						<p>Como expresso anteriormente, o IJS explica 22,8% da variabilidade do
							desempenho. O percentual pode ser considerado de baixo a moderado, mas é
							condizente com o reforço da hipótese de pesquisa. Como o peso estrutural
							foi significativo, pode-se sustentar a hipótese 1 do estudo.</p>
					</sec>
					<sec>
						<title>5.1.2. HIPÓTESE 2</title>
						<p>A segunda hipótese proposta refere-se ao papel da profissionalização da
							gestão como moderadora entre o nível do IJS <italic>e</italic> a
							performance organizacional. Nesse sentido, espera-se que à medida que os
							clientes tenham uma gestão mais profissional, observe-se maior impacto
							do IJS sobre o desempenho.</p>
						<p>Para testar essa hipótese, o banco de dados foi dividido em dois grupos
							de acordo com uma pergunta com 7 alternativas que representam diferentes
							graus de profissionalização da organização. O nível mais baixo de
							profissionalização é de "Empresas familiares centralizadas" e formam o
							primeiro grupo - são empresas que não possuem profissionais de mercado
							para os cargos de gerência e direção, e os proprietários/fundadores
							ainda estão muito presentes na administração do negócio centralizando
							neles. Foram classificados 54 clientes neste grupo e foram
							caracterizados como <italic>empresas familiares</italic>. As demais
							organizações variaram em termos de grau de profissionalização, indo de
							"empresa familiar em processo de profissionalização" (n=25), empresa
							familiar profissionalizada (n=13), grupo de investidores capital fechado
							(n=5) a grupo de investidores capital aberto (n=2). Esse segundo grupo
							de 45 empresas foi denominado de <italic>empresas
								profissionalizadas</italic> ou em processo de
							profissionalização.</p>
						<p>O teste de hipóteses se apoiou no Excel2013(r) para implementar fórmulas
							com base em resultados extraídos do Smartpls2.0(r). Os cálculos foram
							feitos comparando o efeito das IJS nos dois grupos, em conformidade com
							o modelo apresentado na <xref ref-type="fig" rid="f4">Figura 1</xref>.
							Para o grupo de <italic>empresas familiares,</italic> o impacto do IJS
							sobre o desempenho foi de 0,437 (R<sup>2</sup> = 0,191; p&lt;0,001). Já
							para o grupo de <italic>empresas profissionalizadas (ou em processo de
								profissionalização)</italic>, o impacto do IJS sobre o desempenho
							alcançou o valor de 0,591 (R<sup>2</sup> = 0,349; p&lt;0,001),
							demonstrando um impacto aparentemente superior no segundo grupo. Para
							avaliar as diferenças entre os grupos, aplicou-se o procedimento
							sugerido por <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B10">Chin (2000)</xref>,
							denominado de teste de Smith-Satterthwait, que basicamente consiste em
							um teste de comparação dos parâmetros e erros-padrão dos grupos em
							análise, resultando em uma estatística <italic>t</italic>. Aplicando o
							procedimento sugerido, chegou-se a uma estatística <italic>t</italic> de
							2,023 (com 107 graus de liberdade), cuja significância bicaudal é de
							0,045. Cabe destacar que não ocorreram diferenças significativas entre
							as médias dos grupos em termos de IJS, conforme demonstra a <xref
								ref-type="table" rid="t2">tabela 1</xref>:</p>
						<table-wrap id="t2">
							<label>Tabela 1</label>
							<caption>
								<title>Testes de comparação de médias entre os grupos</title>
							</caption>
							<table frame="hsides" rules="groups" style="border-color:#2465b0">
								<colgroup>
									<col width="14%"/>
									<col width="14%"/>
									<col width="14%"/>
									<col width="14%"/>
									<col width="14%"/>
									<col width="14%"/>
									<col width="14%"/>
								</colgroup>
								<thead>
									<tr>
										<th align="left" rowspan="2">Medidas</th>
										<th align="center" colspan="2" rowspan="2">Empresas
											Familiares</th>
										<th align="center" colspan="2" rowspan="2">Empresas
											Profissionalizadas</th>
										<th
											style="border-bottom-width:thin;border-bottom-style:solid"
											align="center" colspan="2">Teste T</th>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<th align="left">Desempenho</th>
										<th align="center">IJS</th>
									</tr>
								</thead>
								<tbody>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">Média</td>
										<td align="center">6,99</td>
										<td align="center">58,26</td>
										<td align="center">7,04</td>
										<td align="center">61,38</td>
										<td align="center" rowspan="2">0,800</td>
										<td align="center" rowspan="2">0,351</td>
									</tr>
									<tr>
										<td align="left">Desvio Padrão</td>
										<td align="center">1,03</td>
										<td align="center">17,09</td>
										<td align="center">1,17</td>
										<td align="center">17,18</td>
									</tr>
								</tbody>
							</table>
						</table-wrap>
						<p>Portanto, pode-se atestar que ocorreu suporte à hipótese dois do estudo,
							confirmando que o peso do IJS sobre o desempenho no grupo de empresas
							profissionalizadas é superior quando comparado ao grupo de empresas
							familiares, mesmo que, em tese, tanto o IJS quanto o desempenho sejam
							equivalentes em médias entre os grupos.</p>
						<p>
							<fig id="f6">
								<label>Figura 3</label>
								<caption>
									<title>Impacto do grau de profissionalização na
										performance</title>
									<p>Obs.: Os valores dentro das elipses representam o percentual
										de variância explicada do construto (R<sup>2</sup>). Os
										valores junto aos caminhos (setas) representam as cargas
										fatoriais ou pesos estruturais padronizados. O peso
										estrutural é significativo (p &lt; 0,01).</p>
								</caption>
								<graphic xlink:href="1808-2386-bbr-16-01-0032-gf03-pt.tif"/>
								<attrib>Fonte: Dados da pesquisa</attrib>
							</fig>
						</p>
					</sec>
				</sec>
			</sec>
			<sec sec-type="conclusions">
				<title>6. CONSIDERAÇÕES FINAIS</title>
				<p>Os resultados da pesquisa apresentam relevante contribuição tanto gerencial
					quanto acadêmica, apesar de apresentar limitações. O fato de o estudo ter sido
					aplicado em um único setor e na base de clientes de uma empresa pode limitar as
					generalizações. Portanto, sugere-se que o estudo seja também realizado em outros
					contextos em estudos futuros.</p>
				<p>Quanto às contribuições gerenciais, o estudo aponta que atuar sobre os
						<italic>jobs</italic> considerados relevantes pelos clientes de fato aumenta
					o valor cocriado. Essa evidência reforça a estratégia de serviço e
					relacionamento como de alto potencial para fidelização do cliente, pois uma vez
					atuando sob problemas considerados relevantes, é possível potencializar e
					demonstrar o valor criado decorrente da relação.</p>
				<p>Outra contribuição gerencial é quanto à escolha dos clientes aos quais direcionar
					uma abordagem relacional, que é uma tarefa desafiadora. O presente estudo sugere
					que o fornecedor deve observar variáveis do contexto de gestão do cliente que
					podem potencializar o valor cocriado. No universo pesquisado, observou-se que a
					profissionalização da gestão seria uma dessas variáveis, confirmando a sugestão
					de <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B21">Grönroos e Voima (2013)</xref> de que o valor
					cocriado decorre da integração de recursos em seu contexto. Portanto, contextos
					de negócios mais profissionais, com processos e governança mais estruturados,
					podem potencializar o valor criado; é, por conseguinte, uma variável a ser
					considerada no processo de priorização de clientes. Sugere-se, entretanto, que
					outras variáveis do contexto do cliente sejam testadas em estudos posteriores,
					tais como cultura da organização, integração de informações, entre outras.</p>
				<p>Quanto à contribuição acadêmica, cabe ressaltar novamente a contribuição gerada
					sobre a relevância da profissionalização da gestão em performance. Estudos
					referentes a essa relação ainda não apresentam consenso na literatura, mas o
					presente estudo reforça a hipótese de <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B14">Dekker et
						al. (2015)</xref> de que o envolvimento de não familiares no sistema de
					governança irá influenciar positivamente a performance da firma.</p>
				<p>O estudo também visou fortalecer a ligação entre a Lógica Dominante do Serviço
					(LDS) e teorias de médio alcance tal como a <italic>jobs to be done</italic>
					(JTBD), conforme sugerido por <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B9">Brodie et al.
						(2011)</xref> e <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B29">Lusch e Vargo (2014)</xref>.
						<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B29">Lusch e Vargo (2014)</xref> afirmam que tal
					aproximação traria grandes contribuições para o desenvolvimento dessas teorias
					na disciplina de marketing, e o presente estudo contribui para fortalecer essa
					relação. Esse esforço traz importantes benefícios uma vez que relacionando a LDS
					com ferramentas mais práticas como a de JTBI e a ODI, o entendimento da LDS se
					amplia. Pesquisadores passam a observar empiricamente os fundamentos da LDS, as
					relações com outras variáveis e seus resultados potenciais. Ainda no esforço de
					operacionalizar os conceitos da LDS, o estudo propôs que o valor cocriado seja
					mensurado pelos indicadores de desempenho facilmente observáveis no negócio,
					tais como o aumento de produtividade, lucratividade, qualidade dos produtos
					produzidos e crescimento em faturamento.</p>
				<p>Tanto a perspectiva da LDS quanto a de JTBD incentivam praticantes e acadêmicos a
					enxergarem as relações de troca e os objetivos de marketing de uma forma
					diferente. Há ainda muitas relações a serem exploradas, entretanto o esforço de
					operacionalizar a abordagem de LDS aproximando-a de ODI e JTBD apresentou novos
					caminhos e estimulou ideias para pesquisas futuras que visam ampliar
					alternativas na busca pela vantagem competitiva.</p>
			</sec>
		</body>
	</sub-article>-->
</article>
