1. Introduction
The globalization and the advent of new technologies creates a challenging environment for the manufacturing industry, characterized by intensifying competition, evolving consumer expectations, and reduced product margins (Reference Perona, Saccani and BacchettiPerona et al., 2017). To counteract these developments, the manufacturing industry is transforming from a pure product to a solution provider, leading to an increasing blurring of the traditional boundaries between product and service offerings (Reference Gebauer, Joncourt, Saul, Bruhn and HadwichGebauer et al., 2016; Reference Perona, Saccani and BacchettiPerona et al., 2017). The provision of integrated solutions with smart services enables companies to differentiate from their competitors, establish long-term customer relationships, and increase their profit margins (Reference Gebauer, Joncourt, Saul, Bruhn and HadwichGebauer et al., 2016; Reference Oliva and KallenbergOliva & Kallenberg, 2003; Reference TukkerTukker, 2004). This transformation is known as ‘servitization’ (Reference Vandermerwe and RadaVandermerwe & Rada, 1988) and presents a significant challenge for companies in the manufacturing industry that have traditionally focused on product-oriented activities (Reference Alghisi and SaccaniAlghisi & Saccani, 2015; Reference Zhang and BanerjiZhang & Banerji, 2017). Servitization necessitates the realignment of the organizational design within the company to facilitate the delivery of smart services to customers (Reference Heirati, Leischnig and HennebergHeirati et al., 2023; Reference Raja, Chakkol, Johnson and BeltaguiRaja et al., 2018). The technical service organization (TSO), which act as service provider to the customer, is also affected by these organizational changes (Reference Dombrowski and FochlerDombrowski & Fochler, 2017; Reference Gebauer, Pütz, Fischer and FleischGebauer et al., 2009). Given their comprehensive expertise and pivotal role as a conduit between the customer and the company, TSOs are a vital component of the support structure for product-related smart services (Reference Fellmann, Hucke, Breitschwerdt, Thomas, Blinn and SchlickerFellmann et al., 2011; Reference Herterich, Uebernickel and BrennerHerterich et al., 2015; Reference Turunen and ToivonenTurunen & Toivonen, 2011; Walter, 2010). The extant literature adopts a highly holistic perspective, encompassing the entire service organization. The impact of smart service integration on the organizational design of TSOs has been minimally addressed in the existing literature (Reference Osterrieder and FriedliOsterrieder & Friedli, 2018). Therefore, this study aims to identify and analyze the specific effects of smart services on the organizational design of TSOs in the manufacturing industry by combining a systematic literature review (SLR) with the single case study of the manufacturing company TRUMPF. Integrating the servitization theory and organizational design framework fills the research gap of TSO in the context of smart service delivery. The study derives initial approaches for a suitable organizational design for smart service delivery and proposes an operational progressive expansion model through the TRUMPF case, which is of reference significance to manufacturing companies.
2. Theoretical foundation
Organizational design as the “deliberate process of configuring structures, processes, reward systems, and people practices to create an effective organization” (Reference Kates and GalbraithKates & Galbraith, 2007, p. 1) is a prerequisite for the successful implementation of a corporate strategy and the development of organizational capabilities (Reference GalbraithGalbraith, 2002). This concept is exemplified by the star model, initially proposed by Reference GalbraithGalbraith (1973) and subsequent adapted by Kates und Galbraith (2007):
Figure 1. Star model for organizational design
The model demonstrates the necessity for alignment between structures, processes, reward systems and people to develop the required capabilities to achieve the strategic goals. The combination of these elements renders the star model a commonly used framework for authors dealing with organizational design in the context of servitization (e.g Reference Kreye and JensenKreye & Jensen, 2014; Reference Neu and BrownNeu & Brown, 2005). Organizational changes in the context of servitization, represent a significant challenge for manufacturing companies. However, they are necessary to fully leverage the potential of servitization (Reference Baines, Ziaee Bigdeli, Bustinza, Shi, Baldwin and RidgwayBaines et al., 2017) and facilitate the provision of smart services (Reference Raja, Chakkol, Johnson and BeltaguiRaja et al., 2018).
In the structural dimension the separation or integration of product and service business is discussed in the servitization literature. Reference Neu and BrownNeu and Brown (2005) are among the most influential proponents of integrating the service organization with the objective of promoting internal cooperation and strategic alignment in complex markets. They posit that the separation of product and service organizations represents a hindrance, as it engenders the formation of additional points of contact and coordination efforts. In contrast, Reference Oliva and KallenbergOliva and Kallenberg (2003) posit that a separate service organization is an appropriate organizational structure to protect the service culture and optimizing financial results. Such a structure provides organizational clarity for customers (Reference GalbraithGalbraith, 2002; Reference Oliva, Gebauer and BrannOliva et al., 2012). Also, Reference Gebauer, Fleisch and FriedliGebauer et al. (2005) argue that a separate service organization is advantageous for the purpose of exploiting the financial potential of services and avoiding the service paradox.
The debate over the separation or integration of product and service business is a recurring theme in the literature, with numerous authors aiming to further develop organizational approaches with different conceptual factors. Focusing on service orientation Reference Gebauer, Pütz, Fischer and FleischGebauer et al. (2009) describe four approaches: product strategic business unit (SBU), product-service SBU, service-product SBU and separate service SBU. While the product-SBU integrates service activities with the product itself, the separate service-SBU manages all service functions and service delivery centrally, thereby facilitating a high degree of service orientation. In a subsequent paper, Reference Gebauer and KowalkowskiGebauer and Kowalkowski (2012) investigate the relationship between customer and service orientation and propose four organizational concepts designed to foster a more customer- and service-oriented approach. The researchers identify that the transition to a service orientation is typically initiated by a service management function within the product SBU, which establishes the foundation for a more robust customer orientation. Reference Kowalkowski, Kindström and WitellKowalkowski et al. (2011) and Reference Baines, Lightfoot, Smart and FletcherBaines et al. (2013) similarly emphasize the necessity of internal service organizations for effective service and customer orientation, particularly through proximity to the customer and integration into the value chain to ensure responsive and optimized services. In contrast, Reference Gebauer, Edvardsson, Gustafsson and WitellGebauer et al. (2010) demonstrate that the organizational structure of a company is contingent upon the selected service strategy, which may encompass after-sales service, customer support, outsourcing partner or development partner. Each strategy necessitates the presence of specific characteristics, including a service orientation, a corporate culture, and a proximity to customers. It is recommended that an integration of product and service business be undertaken for development partners; however, a separation is advantageous for other strategies. Similarly, Reference Raddats and BurtonRaddats and Burton (2011) identify the service strategy as a pivotal factor in this context. They differentiate between three structural forms: combined, independent, and customer oriented. Reference Raja, Chakkol, Johnson and BeltaguiRaja et al. (2018) propose that the organizational structuring of service offerings into front-end and back-end units is a valid approach, contingent on the complexity and duration of the offering. They posit that front-end units are responsible for customer-facing activities, while back-end units are responsible for technical services. Result-oriented services, characterized by a high level of complexity, require the formation of specialized front-end groups. In contrast, less complex services, which are oriented towards users or products, are organized differently. Reference Sklyar, Kowalkowski, Tronvoll and SörhammarSklyar et al. (2019) highlight the necessity for enhanced integration between central and local organizational units for the provision of smart services. Similarly, Reference Heirati, Leischnig and HennebergHeirati et al. (2023) and Reference Ambroise, Prim-Allaz and TeyssierAmbroise et al. (2018) emphasize that the nature of the service in question impacts the organizational structure. In the case of more complex and knowledge-intensive services, a more internalized and specialized structure is required.
In addition, Reference Kowalkowski, Kindström and WitellKowalkowski et al. (2011) incorporate market factors into their analysis and posit that an internal service organization is advantageous, particularly in the context of a sizable installed machine base. Neu und Brown (2005) and Oliva und Kallenberg (2003) emphasize the importance of a market-oriented service infrastructure to meet local customer needs in a flexible and individualized manner.
In the people dimension technical service employees require a set of skills that enable them to provide smart services that are closely aligned with customer needs. These skills include flexibility, relationship and service orientation, authenticity and technical knowledge (Reference Baines, Lightfoot, Smart and FletcherBaines et al., 2013). Reference Ulaga and ReinartzUlaga and Reinartz (2011) propose that data-related skills, risk management, service-oriented design and the ability to manage hybrid offerings are also required to achieve competitive advantages through servitization. Furthermore, proficiency in digital technologies is crucial for the implementation of contemporary technologies in the context of smart services (Reference Ferreira Junior, Scur and NunesFerreira Junior et al., 2022). Also, employees should be capable of fostering relationships and assuming an advisory role (Reference Neu and BrownNeu & Brown, 2005).
In the processes dimension the proactive design and integration of service processes into customer interaction points assumes great significance in servitization to ensure the guaranteed machine availability (Reference Baines and LightfootBaines & Lightfoot, 2013). The value co-creation with customers is of paramount importance (Reference Gebauer, Edvardsson, Gustafsson and WitellGebauer et al., 2010). Furthermore, the effective delivery of smart services necessitates enhanced internal collaboration and resource sharing, facilitated by the dissemination of accurate and timely information across the global service network (Reference Neu and BrownNeu & Brown, 2005; Reference Oliva and KallenbergOliva & Kallenberg, 2003).
In the reward systems dimension financial incentive systems for management in service organizations should be designed in a way that encourages internal cooperation and the integration of responsibilities from other areas, particularly in the case of complex services such as smart services (Reference Neu and BrownNeu & Brown, 2005). The design of such incentive systems for TSOs is not discussed in this context.
In conclusion, the presented approaches demonstrate that organizational design is influenced by many factors, with the primary focus of the extant literature on the structural dimension. The examination of aspects such as people, processes and reward systems has been limited thus far, as has the investigation of the specific organizational design of TSOs for smart service delivery, despite being identified as critical success factors, which gives rise to the aims of this study.
3. Methodology
This study is based on a systematic literature review (SLR) (cf. Reference Webster and WatsonWebster & Watson, 2002; Reference Xiao and WatsonXiao & Watson, 2019) to identify general approaches for organizational design in the context of servitization. To examine the research question, a case study approach according to Reference YinYin (2009) was applied. The single case study follows a linear analytical structure. Based on the problem definition and the SLR, a data collection and analysis phase is initiated (Reference YinYin, 2009). During the data collection phase semi-structured expert interviews were conducted to gain a deeper understanding of specific effects of smart service integration on the organizational design of TSOs in four dimensions of the star model. To analyze the interview findings and derive initial approaches for a suitable organizational design for smart service delivery the qualitative content analysis following Reference MayringMayring (2015) was used. In the final step of the research process, the derived approaches were also validated within the TSO of the case study company regarding their suitability for smart service delivery.
TRUMPF SE + Co KG, one of the world’s leading companies for industrial machine tools and laser technology, serves as a case study company because it is amid a transformation from a product to a solution provider through the increased integration of smart services into its business model. The company thus provides an ideal case study for a detailed examination of a representative company in the machinery industry that is increasingly integrating smart services into its offering during servitization. Also, competitive research showed that TRUMPF is one of the innovation leader in the field of smart services with its Equipment-as-a-Service and Remote Operation Support initiative (TRUMPF SE + Co. KG, 2022, 2024). The technical service unit Remote Operation Center, which currently provides and develops smart services at TRUMPF as independent unit within the TSO is considered the unit of analysis in the case study. A comprehensive examination of this unit analyses the effects on the organizational design of the TSO with increasing integration of smart services in TRUMPFs business model. The case study should therefore provide insights for other companies facing similar challenges in their TSO during servitization.
4. Results
The case study and interview results enable more detailed insights into organizational design of TSOs during servitization in the dimensions of structure, people, processes and reward system. The results show that the focus of organizational change is mainly on the structural dimension. In line with the literature results, the reward systems are not a prioritized focus of action.
4.1. Structure
The establishment of an independent service organization, dedicated exclusively to the provision of smart services and operating independently from the existing structures of the TSO, appears to be an instrumental approach for the initial deployment of smart service delivery. This model centralizes expertise specific to smart services, facilitating a focused and efficient deployment. However, as smart service models scale to encompass additional machine technologies and enter new markets, maintaining an independent central smart service organization becomes increasingly challenging. This is related to the cost aspects of setting up a global organizational infrastructure and the necessity of recruiting and developing new personnel with specialized technological expertise and qualifications to deliver these services. In the long term, however, a centralized smart services expert unit may be advantageous to drive the further development and scaling of smart services across machine technologies. Such a unit could play a pivotal role in coordinating the transition of smart service provision to the existing global service structures of the local TSOs. Additionally, it would support the extension of smart services beyond individual machines to encompass interlinked systems or entire smart factories. The specific and advanced knowledge required for these applications often exceeds the capabilities of service technicians within the current TSO. Skills such as programming and production planning, which are not typically part of the existing TSO service profile, could be bundled within this expert unit to address highly specialized and complex issues effectively. Operationally, this organizational approach could be implemented through centralized smart service hubs in all major time zones to provide global service coverage. A smart service hub combines both front-end and back-end structures. The back-end structure would focus on the development and scaling of smart services, while front-end operations would manage customer interactions and the direct delivery of smart services.
The second organizational approach describes an integrated service organization, wherein smart service delivery is fully embedded within the existing service structures of the TSO. This allows the use of the existing global technical service infrastructure yielding significant cost advantages by obviating the need for a new management structure. Furthermore, service delivery processes and workflows are already in place and existing organizational units are close to the relevant markets and familiar with customer needs. The integration approach relies on utilizing existing human resources, which already possess expertise in the relevant machine technologies. These personnel can be further developed to meet the demands of smart service provision. The objective of this integration model is not to establish centralized or independent smart service units but to optimize and extend the use of the existing technical service infrastructures. Additionally, the model supports the creation of front-end and back-end structures, enabling a clear escalation path to back-end teams for addressing complex technical issues.
The third option entails a gradual organizational expansion of the responsible TSO, geared towards the scaling of smart services. Building on the existing TSO, this approach proposes the development of global smart service hubs across the three major time zones. This would facilitate comprehensive global coverage for both existing smart services and those planned for future development. Initially these hubs would integrate front-end and back-end structures, similar to the independent service organization model. By linking these smart service hubs to the existing technical service infrastructures, the machine-specific expertise of service technicians can be utilized and further developed to support the delivery of smart services within local markets as demand grows. In the long term, the approach envisions the consolidation of all digital and smart services within a single “expert” hub. The centralized expert hub would not only create a single, cohesive interface for customers, simplifying scalability, but also enable the co-location of smart service experts in each hub, fostering enhanced collaboration and knowledge-sharing.
Figure 2. Exemplary simplified model of the gradual organizational expansion at TRUMPF
In the first expansion stage the Remote Operation Center (ROC) combines front- and back-end structures, where smart service delivery and scaling are coordinate. By a gradual integration of smart service delivery into the existing TSO in Europe and America the National Service Centers (NSC) start to deliver smart services. The standard escalation path for machine malfunction still belongs to the Service Competence Center (SCC) and for smart services to the ROC. The ROC continues to drive the further development of smart services and scaling as a backend unit. The TSOs supervise the night shifts in the other time zone according to the follow-the-sun logic. In the last expansion stage, smart service hubs have been set up within the existing TSOs. Smart service hubs solve special cases that cannot be solved by the NSCs or SCCs and drive the further development of smart services and bundle all digital topics as an expert unit.
4.2. People
In the people dimension, product, digital and social skills are relevant in the TSO. The required skill profiles may vary depending on the complexity of the smart service being delivered and the machinery to be supported. Technical expertise and process knowledge of the respective machines remain essential for the TSO to deliver smart services due to the complexity of the machines. Furthermore, service technicians must acquire product-specific programming and production planning skills to align with the technical demands of smart service models. Digital skills are becoming increasingly significant, as service technicians must utilize advanced digital tools to enable remote machine control. Smart service models often integrate directly into a customer’s value chain, necessitating the remote management, control, and troubleshooting of customer machinery. Additionally, data analytical skills are essential for interpreting machine data, understanding data flows, and leveraging these insights for effective service delivery. For smart service delivery the TSO is integrated into the customer’s processes and value creation, which highlights the need for advanced social skills among service technicians. As they play a pivotal role in the customer’s operational success, technicians must exhibit a strong sense of ownership and responsibility. Enhanced communication and language skills are also vital, enabling technicians to provide remote guidance during machine malfunctions and to foster robust customer relationships. In the long term, as the complexity of smart service-enabled machines increases, there may be a need to establish specialized smart service experts. These experts would possess a comprehensive understanding of smart service models, including an overarching perspective on interconnected systems, automation components, and their interdependencies. This holistic knowledge would be especially critical for highly automated machines. Lastly, the findings show that development of employee competencies for smart service delivery requires extensive training before personnel can be fully operational. Given the complexity of the machinery, internal skills development through targeted training and upskilling initiatives is essential. Practical and digital learning approaches, tailored to internal staff, are effective for fostering the early acquisition of necessary skills and ensuring readiness for smart service provision.
4.3. Processes
The primary objective of smart service delivery processes is to enable prompt responses to machine failures and maintain high machine availability for customers. The smart service delivery requires digital knowledge management by systematically documenting common failures and corresponding solutions within the smart service model to support the TSO. Compared to traditional after-sales services, smart services introduce novel fault categories, causes of downtime, and resolution strategies. Failures often involve complex combinations of multiple failure cases and require specific approaches for remote troubleshooting. These complexities necessitate the integration of tailored solution strategies into a robust knowledge management system. An efficient knowledge management system is also essential for seamlessly incorporating smart service delivery into existing units or scaling it globally, as described in the hub-based organizational approach. Externally, digitized communication channels are imperative for ensuring efficient interaction with customers. Internally, enhanced cross-functional and global collaboration is necessary to facilitate consistent and effective information exchange. The internal information flow should also be digitized, enabling TSOs to respond swiftly to incidents. This includes the automated assignment of issues to the appropriate service unit or shift for resolution, which is the foundation for establishing a follow-the-sun model. The development of a follow-the-sun model marks an important element in the process dimension. This model ensures global service coverage by staggering shift transitions between day shifts in different time zones, which enhances service efficiency and reduces costs by eliminating the need to compensate highly skilled staff for working night shifts.
4.4. Reward system
The reward dimension is not yet at the forefront of organizational design. Implementing reward systems consistently and globally is difficult, due to varying national regulations, divergent collective bargaining systems, and the need for consultation with local works councils. Nevertheless, the introduction of performance-based incentives for service technicians may also be considered. For instance, commissioning systems could be adjusted to reward the prompt resolution of customer issues within the smart service model, thereby reinforcing the value proposition of rapid problem-solving and high machine availability for the customer.
5. Discussion
5.1. Theoretical contributions
The findings of this study offer foundational insights into organizational structuring, drawing on both established literature and case study analysis. Broadly, the organizational approaches identified align with two primary strategies: the separation of service organizations from existing structures (Reference GalbraithGalbraith, 2002; Reference Gebauer, Fleisch and FriedliGebauer et al., 2005; Reference Oliva, Gebauer and BrannOliva et al., 2012; Reference Oliva and KallenbergOliva & Kallenberg, 2003) and the integration of service delivery into existing organizational structures (Reference Gebauer and KowalkowskiGebauer & Kowalkowski, 2012; Reference Neu and BrownNeu & Brown, 2005). The separation strategy is exemplified by the first organizational option, which proposes the establishment of independent smart service hubs. Conversely, the integration strategy is reflected in the second approach, wherein smart service delivery is fully embedded within the existing TSO. A review of the literature reveals intermediate strategies that position themselves between these two extremes, incorporating context-specific factors (cf. chaper 2). Other approaches often emphasize the division into front-end and back-end units (Reference Raja, Chakkol, Johnson and BeltaguiRaja et al., 2018; Reference Sklyar, Kowalkowski, Tronvoll and SörhammarSklyar et al., 2019). The case study underscores the significance of service type and complexity in smart service delivery, which is addressed in the third structural approach. This approach combines elements of separation and integration, paralleling Reference Sklyar, Kowalkowski, Tronvoll and SörhammarSklyar et al. (2019), who advocate for a hybrid structure comprising centralized and local units. Centralized units focus on aggregating and advancing specialized smart service expertise. The division into front-end and back-end functions mirrors findings by Reference Raja, Chakkol, Johnson and BeltaguiRaja et al. (2018). Specifically, front-end units manage customer-facing activities, while back-end units handle technical service delivery—a structure particularly beneficial for managing product complexity in smart service models. This approach is evident in the third organizational option, where new and existing units are combined, leveraging established expertise alongside new skillsets. The literature also highlights the strategic trajectory from being a product provider to a solutions provider as a determinant of organizational structure (Reference Gebauer, Edvardsson, Gustafsson and WitellGebauer et al., 2010). The case study indicates that manufacturing firms occupy an intermediary position, balancing roles as customer support providers and development partners, which supports a hybrid model of separation and integration. The focus of this study aligns with the prevailing literature in emphasizing internal organizational design. While external service provision has been discussed (e.g., Reference Heirati, Leischnig and HennebergHeirati et al., 2023; Reference Kowalkowski, Kindström and WitellKowalkowski et al., 2011), such approaches are deemed appropriate primarily for low-complexity services. The case study confirms this perspective, illustrating that existing internal service structures can effectively support smart service delivery. Beyond structural considerations, the literature also stresses the influence of market factors, such as the size of the installed machine base (Reference Kowalkowski, Kindström and WitellKowalkowski et al., 2011) and market-specific requirements (Reference Neu and BrownNeu & Brown, 2005; Reference Oliva and KallenbergOliva & Kallenberg, 2003). The case study expands this view by identifying practical challenges, such as accommodating time zone differences and overcoming language barriers in the pursuit of global service coverage. These issues are addressed at the process level, particularly through the implementation of a follow-the-sun model.
Both the literature and case study findings highlight the growing importance of product, digital, and social skills within TSOs to support the delivery of smart services (e.g., Reference Ferreira Junior, Scur and NunesFerreira Junior et al., 2022; Reference Ulaga and ReinartzUlaga & Reinartz, 2011; Reference Baines, Lightfoot, Smart and FletcherBaines et al., 2013). The case study emphasizes that different types of smart services require varying competency profiles. As smart services increase in complexity along the product-service continuum (Reference Oliva and KallenbergOliva & Kallenberg, 2003), corresponding advancements in employee competencies across these three domains are necessary. This may be achieved through tailored roles and specialized skill development. Although the literature lacks explicit discussion of competence development, the case study demonstrates the advantages of internal training initiatives, which build on existing technical expertise while expanding professional and interpersonal capabilities.
Key process requirements for smart service delivery include proactive machine availability management and the establishment of collaborative processes with efficient information flows across global service networks (Reference Baines and LightfootBaines & Lightfoot, 2013; Reference Gebauer, Edvardsson, Gustafsson and WitellGebauer et al., 2010; Reference Neu and BrownNeu & Brown, 2005; Reference Oliva and KallenbergOliva & Kallenberg, 2003). The case study reinforces the importance of digitized information flows to enable seamless collaboration and prompt response times. Additionally, a digital knowledge management system is essential to support organizational expansion and scalability. The follow-the-sun model emerges as a critical innovation, ensuring continuous global service delivery without necessitating additional shifts.
The literature offers limited guidance in the dimension of reward systems. Reference Neu and BrownNeu and Brown (2005) address incentives for management to foster internal cooperation, but there is little discussion about broader applications. The case study corroborates this gap, while proposing preliminary incentives for TSOs to motivate the fulfillment of smart service value propositions.
Overall, the findings demonstrate substantial alignment between theoretical perspectives and empirical results. While the literature tends to provide a holistic view with a focus on the structural dimension, the case study provides valuable additions in all four dimensions specifically for TSOs.
5.2. Managerial implications
The results offer companies initial conceptual approaches for the organizational design of their TSO. While all proposed organizational approaches are theoretically feasible for implementation, the case study findings suggest that the gradual expansion model is particularly well-suited. This approach enables organizations to evolve in alignment with the progressive scaling of smart services while simultaneously leveraging the benefits associated with both separation and integration strategies. To operationalize a selected approach, the following factors have to be determined within the organization:
-
The machinery and markets for which the smart services will be offered, along with the respective time of market launch
-
The number of machines to be serviced per machine technology and market
-
The number of machines that a service technician can support at the same time, differentiated according to the individual smart services
-
Overview of support periods and shift systems
The determination of these factors significantly impacts the design of the various expansion stages within the organizational design and consequently influences the number of employees required in the respective TSOs that are responsible for the delivery of smart service support. In the case study, a comprehensive business case was established as a foundation for operationalizing the conceptual approaches. The next stages of expansion, including the factors mentioned above, can be mapped in the business case to calculate the optimal hiring and training strategy for each machine technology. As competencies are transforming it is imperative that the requisite supplementary training be initiated at the earliest opportunity, intending to inculcate the necessary product, digital, and social-related competencies within the organization. Moreover, operational measures in the areas of processes must be aligned with the structural approach. To facilitate effective collaboration between service organizations and ensure the successful delivery of smart services, it is essential to establish a digital knowledge management system for smart service error cases and solution strategies. Digital internal and external information flows are vital to foster enhanced global collaboration between TSOs. Concurrently, digital communication channels enable a follow-the-sun model, thereby ensuring the accessibility of smart services to customers across all time zones. The dimension of reward systems is not currently a primary focus of organizational design. Nevertheless, it can serve as a crucial foundation for subsequent expansion, facilitating the integration of an appropriate remuneration system for effective service delivery and motivating employees in the efficient provision of services.
5.3. Limitations and future research
In interpreting the findings of this study, it is important to consider the limitations of the research design for future research projects. First, the study employed a single case study approach, focusing on an industry innovation leader to derive initial insights into the research topic. While this approach offers valuable preliminary understanding, it inherently limits the generalizability and transferability of the findings. To enhance the robustness and applicability of the results a multiple case study approach could be employed. Second, the approaches represent a conceptual elaboration intended as a preliminary framework for operationalization and recommendations regarding the organizational development of TSOs. They are based on the results of the SLR and case study insights. However, as the field evolves, further steps and factors in organizational design may become relevant to enable TSOs in smart service delivery. Third, the study conducted an internal company analysis. Nevertheless, manufacturing companies frequently employ components from external suppliers in smart services, as the development of smart services does not necessarily fall within their core competencies. This raises important questions about the capacity of internal TSOs to support these externally sourced components and the mechanisms through which external providers can be integrated into the organizational design across the dimensions outlined in this study.
Open access
