José Manuel De Castro Oliveira Y Tr

Universidade do Minho Escola de Economia e Gestão

José Manuel de Castro Oliveira y tr

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of fice printing indus office printing industry vitization of he ser The dematerialization of information and its impact on t José Manuel de Castro Oliveira UMinho|2017 outubro de 2017 Universidade do Minho Escola de Economia e Gestão

José Manuel de Castro Oliveira

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Tese de Doutoramento em Ciências Empresariais

Trabalho realizado sob a orientação do Prof. António Joaquim Araújo Azevedo

outubro de 2017

Acknowledgements This academic research is the summit of an academic journey that has persisted for some years. Nowadays, no journey as small as it might be, will attain the finishing line without tenacious will, proper steering and an embracing supporting team.

It would be inappropriate from my side not to mention the merited appreciation for those who were willing to graciously assist me in this mission.

I would like to start to express my thankfulness to my all‐time institution, the University of Minho, in particular the School of Economics and Management, which provided me with the means and conditions to perform a capable research.

A special word of appreciation to Prof. António Azevedo, my supervisor, for his much esteemed work and support. Similarly, a warm appreciation to Prof. Ana Carvalho and Prof. Rocha Armada for their availability whenever needed, as well as to the group of dedicated professors from the PhD on Business Administration that have given all their utmost professionalism, dedication and support.

Still in the academic ground, many thanks to Prof. Tim Baines (Aston Business School) and Prof. Filippo Visintin (Firenze University) for their valuable support throughout the research.

Relationship with the market was not always easy, especially when it involves depletion of precious time from people with constricted schedules. It was an adventure, but with worthy results, predominantly due to the unrestricted cooperation of the following persons / institutions to which I would like to denote my sincere gratitude:  European executives from the Office Printing Industry;  Drª.Teresa Menezes and Drª. Perla Pinto: Informa D&B (Dun & Braadstreet);  Sonae directors from the following departments:  Marketing and Communication  Processes  Information Technologies

 Rectory and Administrators from Universidade do Minho;  Infosource CH (European market sizing data);  Marketii UK (Market Intelligence);  Portucel;  PwC;  Católica Porto Business School.

To conclude, a sincere appreciation to all my friends and colleagues, and a truthful dedication of this achievement to my family (including the ones that did not live to see this day) that believed and supported me throughout this most challenging journey.

Abstract Our research objective is to respond to the dematerialization in the office context also known as Digitation and Paperless Office Programs (Acronym DPOP) occurred or occurring in companies and how such process change affected the office printing industry with a possible reduction on demand and stimulus for a paradigm change in the industry, from the manufacturing of products to the provision of services associated to the emergence of the phenomenon of servitization.

The concept of dematerialization can be described as the act that removes any materiality (or physical support) that was formerly endowed or part of it, as a result creating a state of material absence (Fimbel et al., 2015). On the other hand, Baines et al. (2009b) explains servitization as the innovation on capabilities and processes of a manufacturer to change its paradigm from the production and sale of products to the sale of integrated products with the provision of services, generating value to the customer

Methodology of a quantitative nature was used to investigate; the six most important economic activity sectors where the dematerialization process has occurred or is occurring in Portugal (Education, Health, Trade, Government (central and local), Industry and Services), as well as all current manufacturers of the office printing industry.

With the purpose of understanding the determinants of dematerialization, and with the recourse to the questionnaire tool, questionnaires were sent to a sample of 725 companies from the six activity sectors located in Portugal mainland which had a net sales equal or greater than 10M€ in 2014, from this sample, 151 companies have responded.

To comprehend the impact of DPOP in servitization we used similar methodology to consult the office printing manufacturers by sending questionnaires to their headquarters located in Europe. In this particular case, from the universe of 15 manufacturers, only the 11 with a market above 1% in 2015 were consulted, from this sample, 5 companies have responded.

vii

To ensure proper scope on the questions contained in the questionnaire, exploratory interviews were made to the three most successful companies within the dematerialization processes in Portugal as well as to the oldest manufacturer of the industry and also the most studied by the academia.

The main conclusions on the process of dematerialization, taking into account the predictors for the overall assessment of dematerialization, namely; global image; cost reduction; reduction in paper consumption; ESS reduction spent on paper, increase profitability and overall importance of dematerialization, concluded that dematerialization has a positive impact, increases companies profitability and in most cases is a sine qua non condition to negotiate with clients. In addition, it favors the image of companies, reduces costs and paper consumption, and is seen as important in environmental performance. It was not conclusive the impact of dematerialization on servitization process in the office printing industry

viii

Resumo A investigação teve como objectivo dar resposta à forma como a desmaterialização no contexto de escritório também conhecida como Digitalização e Programas sem Papel no Escritório (em inglês “Digitation and Paperless Office Programs”) e referida nesta investigação pelo acrónimo DPOP ocorreu ou está a decorrer nas empresas, e de que forma esta alteração processual afetou a industria de impressão de escritório com a possível redução na procura e preponderância na mudança do paradigma de manufactura de produtos para a prestação de serviços associada ao aparecimento do fenómeno da servitização.

O conceito de desmaterialização pode ser descrito como um ato que elimina qualquer materialidade (ou suporte físico) de que anteriormente era dotado ou parte dele, tendo como resultado um estado de ausência material (Fimbel et al., 2015). Por outro lado, Baines et al. (2009b) explica a servitização como sendo a inovação das capacidades e processos de um fabricante ao mudar o seu paradigma de produção e venda de produtos para a venda de produtos integrados com a oferta de serviços e que proporcionam valor ao cliente.

A metodologia utilizada de natureza quantitativa, investigou; os seis sectores de atividade económica mais importantes onde o processo de desmaterialização, ocorreu ou está a ocorrer em Portugal (Educação; Saúde; Comércio; Governo (Central e local); Indústria e Serviços) , bem como todos os fabricantes atuais da indústria de impressão de escritório.

Por forma a compreender as determinantes da desmaterialização, e com o recurso à ferramenta do questionário, procedeu‐se ao envio de questionários para uma amostra de 725 empresas dos seis sectores de atividade localizadas em Portugal continental e que em 2014 tiveram um volume de vendas igual ou superior a 10M€, desta amostra, responderam 151 empresas.

De modo a entender o impacto da DPOP na servitização utilizou‐se igual metodologia na consulta aos fabricantes da industria de impressão de escritório através do envio de questionários para as suas sedes localizadas na Europa, neste caso especifico, do universo de 15 fabricantes, apenas foram consultados os 11 que em 2015 tiveram uma cota de mercado superior a 1%, desta amostra, responderam 5 empresas.

Para garantir uma correta abrangência das perguntas constantes nos questionários, formam feitas entrevistas exploratórias às três empresas de maior sucesso no processo de desmaterialização em Portugal bem como ao fabricante mais antigo e também o mais estudado pela academia.

As principais conclusões sobre o processo de desmaterialização, tendo em conta os preditores da avaliação global da desmaterialização, a saber; Imagem global; redução de custos; redução no consumo de papel; redução de FSS gastos em papel, aumento da rentabilidade e Importância geral da desmaterialização, concluíram que a mesma tem um carácter positivo, aumenta a rentabilidade das empresas e é em grande parte dos casos uma condição sine qua non para negociar com clientes. Adicionalmente, favorece a imagem das companhias, reduz os custos e o consumo de papel, e é tida como importante no desempenho ambiental. Não foi conclusivo o impacto da desmaterialização sobre o processo de servitização na industria de impressão de escritório.

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Table of Contents

Acknowledgements ...... v Abstract ...... vii Resumo ...... ix Figure index ...... xiv Table index ...... xv Annexes ...... xix List of Acronyms ...... xx CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ...... 1 1. Introduction ...... 3 1.1 The problem and its relevance...... 3 1.2 Objectives and research questions ...... 10 1.3 Working structure ...... 12 CHAPTER 2: PAPER, PRINTING, GLOBALIZATION AND DEMATERIALIZATION ...... 15 2. Paper, Printing, Globalization and Dematerialization ...... 17 2.1.1 Paper and Printing ...... 17 2.1.2 Brief Printing History ...... 25 2.1.3 Evolution after Guttenberg ...... 27 2.1.4 Document materialization ...... 29 2.1.5 Dissemination through Organizations ...... 30 2.1.6 Technological Breakthrough ...... 31 2.2 External Factors Affecting Digitation and Paperless Office Programs (DPOP) 33 2.2.1 Globalization and Commoditization ...... 33 2.2.2 Environmental aspects ...... 37 2.3 Internal Factors Influencing DPOP ...... 55 2.4 Summary ...... 57 CHAPTER 3: CONSEQUENCES OF DIGITATION AND PAPERLESS OFFICE PROGRAMS AND SERVITIZATION ...... 59 3. Consequences of Digitation and Paperless Office Programs and Servitization ...... 61 3.1 Product to Service Transition ...... 61 3.2 Marketing Path ...... 64 3.3 Service Atmosphere ...... 67

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

3.4 Service Dominant Logic ...... 83 3.5 Product Service System ...... 87 3.6 Installed Base ...... 91 3.7 Servitization ...... 94 3.8 Servitization in the office printing industry ...... 103 3.8.1 Characterizing the players and the market ...... 105 3.8.2 Office Printing Industry Key Success Factors ...... 109 3.9 Summary ...... 112 CHAPTER 4: THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK AND HYPOTHESIS DEVELOPMENT ...... 113 4.Theoretical framework and hypothesis development ...... 115 CHAPTER 5: METHODOLOGY ...... 121 5. Methodology ...... 123 5.1 Research design ...... 123 5.2 Data collection procedure ...... 129 5.3 Exploratory in depth interviews ...... 132 5.3.1 Exploratory interviews to customers ...... 132 5.4 Questionnaire applied to customers ...... 142 CHAPTER 6: DISCUSSION OF RESULTS ...... 153 6.1 Digitation and Paperless Office Program impact assessment ...... 155 6.1.1‐ Motivators for Dematerialization ...... 155 6.1.2‐ Consequences of Dematerialization ...... 161 6.1.3 Consequences regarding Sustainability / Environmental Issues ...... 164 6.1.4 Consequences regarding Financial Aspects ...... 166 6.1.5 Consequences regarding changes in Internal Processes ...... 172 6.1.6 Consequences regarding changes in Human Resources (HR) ...... 174 6.2 Hypothesis Debrief ...... 179 6.2.1 –Influence of economic industry sectors on DPOP performance ...... 179 6.2.2 Influence of net sales (position in the market) and number of employees (firm dimension) ...... 181 6.3 Servitization impact assessments: Industry survey ...... 188 6.3.1 Analysis to questionnaire applied to the industry ...... 188 CHAPTER 7: CONCLUSIONS ...... 201

xii

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

7.Conclusions ...... 203 7.1 Research conclusions ...... 203 7.1.1 Hypothesis results summary ...... 204 7.2 Conclusions, managerial implications and impact on business‐to‐business services ...... 206 7.2.1 Servitization: Conclusions And Managerial Implications ...... 209 7.3 Contributions to management ...... 211 7.4 Limitations ...... 214 7.4.1 Theoretical Nature ...... 214 7.4.2 Practical Nature ...... 215 7.5 Further research ...... 216 7.6 Concluding remarks ...... 216 References ...... 223 Annexes ...... 253

xiii

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Figure index

Figure 1: Research Framework ...... 14 Figure 2: Initial form of paper in China ...... 18 Figure 3: Paper recycling in Europe ...... 24 Figure 4: Paper Recyclingrecycling in Europe ...... 25 Figure 5: Evolution after Gutenberg ...... 28 Figure 6: Main process stages in the printing supply chain ...... 44 Figure 7: Document Life Cycle ...... 49 Figure 8: Paper reading against Digital ...... 51 Figure 9: Global demand for cut size uncoated freesheet paper (in KTon) ...... 54 Figure 10: Demand for cut size uncoated freesheet paper by region (in KTon) ...... 54 Figure 11: Evolution from product to service (Office Printing Industry) ...... 63 Figure 12: Economic Distinctions ...... 68 Figure 13: The progression of Economic Value ...... 71 Figure 14: From Products to Services ...... 79 Figure 15: The capital goods value stream ...... 80 Figure 16: PSS Continuum ...... 88 Figure 17: A practical example of PSS application ...... 89 Figure 18: Theoretical framework for evaluation of digitization and paperless office programs ...... 115 Figure 19: Average Number of Employees by Sector ...... 150 Figure 20: Net Sales (approx.) in 2014 (K €) ...... 151 Figure 21: Number of Employees ...... 152 Figure 22: Time spent on implementation ...... 160 Figure 23: If yes, what is the approximate percentage ...... 169 Figure 24: Reduction percentage of ESS spending on paper: frequencies and percentages ...... 170

xiv

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Table index Table 1 ‐ Chronology of modern paper production ...... 22 Table 2 ‐ Commodity and non‐commodity definition ...... 36 Table 3 ‐ Important differences between goods‐dominant logic and service‐dominant logic ...... 85 Table 4 ‐ IB service space ...... 93 Table 5 ‐ Common definitions for Servitization ...... 95 Table 6 ‐ Main barriers and encouraging factors to move to servitization ...... 97 Table 7 ‐ Servitization of manufacturer ...... 100 Table 8 ‐ Europe MFP sales (B2B) 2015 ...... 106 Table 9 ‐ MFP sales by manufacturer, top 10 market share evolution (Europe) ...... 107 Table 10: Brands and Manufacturers available in Europe (2015) ...... 108 Table 11 ‐ Major key success factors from the office printing industry ...... 110 Table 12 ‐ Office printing Industry competition characterization ...... 111 Table 13 ‐ Differences between the two methods ...... 125 Table 14 ‐ Basic Beliefs of Alternative Paradigms ...... 126 Table 15 ‐ Four scientific paradigms ...... 127 Table 16 ‐ Questions related to Motivation ...... 135 Table 17 ‐ Questions related to Competition ...... 135 Table 18 ‐ Questions related to Image ...... 136 Table 19 ‐ Questions related to Finance ...... 137 Table 20 ‐ Questions related to Processes ...... 138 Table 21 ‐ Questions related to Human Resources (HR) ...... 139 Table 22 ‐ Variables Operationalization Table ...... 147 Table 23 ‐ Distribution of replies by activity sector ...... 149 Table 24 ‐ Rank of Respondents by type of function ...... 150 Table 25 ‐ Motivators Regarding Dematerialization ...... 155 Table 26 ‐ Beginning Year of DPOP: frequencies and percentages ...... 155 Table 27 ‐ Relative and absolute frequencies for the level of importance on Economic Issues ...... 156

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Table 28 ‐ Relative and absolute frequencies for the level of importance on Sustainability / Environmental Issues ...... 157 Table 29 ‐ Relative and absolute frequencies for the level of importance on Need of Physical Space ...... 157 Table 30 ‐ Relative and absolute frequencies for the level of importance on Imposition of New Processes ...... 158 Table 31 ‐ Relative and absolute frequencies for the level of importance on Matters related to image or reputation ...... 158 Table 32 ‐ Relative and absolute frequencies for the level of importance on other factors for the Motivation of Dematerialization ...... 159 Table 33 ‐ End Year: frequencies and percentages ...... 160 Table 34 ‐ Importance of attributes for company’s image ...... 161 Table 35 ‐ Importance of DPOP on company’s image ...... 162 Table 36 ‐ DPOP contributed to a positive image of the company: frequencies and percentages ...... 162 Table 37 ‐ DPOP in no way interferes with the company's image: frequencies and percentages ...... 163 Table 38 ‐ DPOP is sine qua condition to be able to negotiate: frequencies and percentages ...... 163 Table 39 ‐ Global Assessment: frequencies and percentages ...... 164 Table 40 ‐ Inhibiting factors for dematerialization: frequencies and percentages ...... 164 Table 41 ‐ Weight of environmental matters: frequencies and percentages ...... 165 Table 42 ‐ Accreditations: frequencies and percentages ...... 165 Table 43 ‐ Reduction of costs with the process of dematerialization: frequencies and percentages ...... 166 Table 44 ‐ Investment on hardware / software: frequencies and percentages ...... 167 Table 45 ‐ Was there a reduction on paper consumption: frequencies and percentages ...... 167 Table 46 ‐ Reduction on paper consumption per activity sector ...... 168 Table 47 ‐ If yes, what is the approximate percentage: frequencies and percentages 168 Table 48 ‐ Reduction percentage of ESS spending on paper: frequencies and percentages ...... 169

xvi

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Table 49 ‐ Assessment of the process of dematerialization: means and std. deviations ...... 170 Table 50 ‐ The process of dematerialization was important: frequencies and percentages ...... 171 Table 51 ‐ The process of dematerialization contributed to cost reduction: frequencies and percentages ...... 171 Table 52 ‐ The process of dematerialization contributes to increase profitability: frequencies and percentages ...... 172 Table 53 ‐ Were there changes: frequencies and percentages ...... 172 Table 54 ‐ New processes have legal recognition: frequencies and percentages ...... 173 Table 55 ‐ Still continue to depend on paper: frequencies and percentages ...... 173 Table 56 ‐ Was there reduction in the headcount: frequencies and percentages ...... 174 Table 57 ‐ How many people: frequencies and percentages ...... 175 Table 58 ‐ Was there addition of new competencies: frequencies and percentages .. 175 Table 59 ‐ Was there any additional training given to the employees: frequencies and percentages ...... 175 Table 60 ‐ Training in which areas: frequencies and percentages ...... 176 Table 61 ‐ Hours / year of training per employee: frequencies and percentages ...... 176 Table 62 ‐ Was there promotion of teleworking and / or extension of the work schedule: frequencies and percentages ...... 177 Table 63 ‐ Resistance to change: frequencies and percentages ...... 177 Table 64 ‐ Degree of resistance to change: frequencies and percentages ...... 178 Table 65 ‐ Paper as an indispensable resource: frequencies and percentages ...... 178 Table 66 ‐ Age groups where the use of paper is more prominent: frequencies and percentages ...... 179 Table 67 ‐ Variables with significant differences between sectors according to Kruskal‐ Wallis Test...... 180 Table 68 ‐ Dependent variables with significant differences between sectors according to Kruskal‐Wallis Test...... 181 Table 69 ‐ Spearman correlations coefficients between net sales, number of employees and importance of dematerialization, profitability and cost reduction ...... 182

xvii

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Table 70 ‐ Spearman correlations between motivators of dematerialization and KPI’s ...... 183 Table 71 ‐ Spearman correlations between dematerialization motivators and time .. 184 Table 72 ‐ Summary results of multiple linear regression models predicting global image, paper ESS reduction, profitability and importance of dematerialization ...... 185 Table 73 ‐ Beta coefficients of the predictors of the global image, paper ESS reduction, profitability and importance of dematerialization...... 186 Table 74 ‐ Position of the respondent within the organization ...... 194 Table 75 ‐ Motivation: Mean and Std. Deviation ...... 195 Table 76 ‐ Degree of Importance: Mean and Std. Deviation ...... 195 Table 77 ‐ Motivation: Mean and Std. Deviation ...... 197 Table 78 ‐ Hypothesis Results Summary ...... 205 Table 79 ‐ Further Research ...... 216

xviii

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Annexes

Annex 1: Office Printing Manufacturers Characterization ...... 253 Annex 2: Interview script applied to customers...... 269 Annex 3: Interview script applied to the industry ...... 273 Annex 4: Transcript from the interviews to Informa D&B ...... 277 Annex 5: Transcripts from interviews to University of Minho ...... 281 Annex 6: Transcripts from interviews to Sonae ...... 285 Annex 7: Interview transcript from Xerox ...... 289 Annex 8: Mail sent to customers (Originally in Portuguese, translated to English) .... 293 Annex 9: Letter sent to the industry ...... 295 Annex 10: Questions and literature review for the questionnaire applied to customers ...... 299 Annex 11: Questionnaire applied to customers (Originally in Portuguese, translated to English by the author) ...... 301 Annex 12: Questions and literature review for the questionnaire applied to the Industry ...... 311 Annex 13: Questionnaire applied to the industry ...... 315

xix

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

List of Acronyms B2B ………………………………………………………… Business to Business

B2C ………………………………………………………. Business to Consumer

CEO ……………………………………………………….. Chief Executive Officer

CFO ………………………………………………………… Chief Finance Officer

DPOP ………………………………………………...... Digitation and Paperless Office Programs

MDS ………………………………………………………. Managed Document Services

MFD ………………………………………………………. Multi Function Device

MFP ……………………………………………………….. Multi Function Product

MPS ……………………………………………………….. Managed Printer Services

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

This page intentionally left blank

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

1. Introduction 1.1 The problem and its relevance For over nearly 500 years, since the invention of the modern printing press, the process of information and knowledge production and distribution kept stable (Chowdhury, 2010). Such information, of a material nature whereby the contents printed with ink were positioned on top of a physical support (paper) was the standard way of communicating and save information and knowledge, either throughout the society in general or closed societies such as offices. Later, in the XX century and manifestly after WWII major technological breakthroughs took place in the office printing industry (also known as photocopier industry), like the digital photocopier, printer and multifunction devices with the capacity to copy, print, scan and faxing.

With the advent of globalization by the end of the XX century not only this type of equipment became a commodity but also the necessity of materialized information started to fade, mainly due to the emergence of new information technologies, thus originating the ascending of two new phenomenon’s: 1) Dematerialization (Also known as Digitation and Paperless Office Programs or by the acronym DPOP): Information production and consumption is now done through immaterial processes (i.e. computer) subsequently reducing paper usage; 2) As a consequence, the demand of copying / printing equipment by companies to the industry was reduced, thus leading the industry to move the offer from products, to services, this movement is designated as Servitization.

Dematerialization can be described as the act that removes any materiality (or physical support) that was formerly endowed or part of it, as a result creating a state of material absence also known as demateriality (Fimbel et al., 2015). Some authors use the notion of dematerialization as synonymous of: digitization (Coreynen et al., 2017), service innovation (Heiskanen and Jalas, 2003; Barrett et al., 2015; Dacko et al., 2013), organizational technology (Venkatesh et al., 2012), servicizing (Rothenberg,

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

2007) or servitization/ deservitization (Ayres and van der Bergh, 2005; Kowalkowski et al., 2017). As such, a question arises: Being dematerialization a complex and multidisciplinary construct, what is the focus of research? Because dematerialization can take many forms, in this research we will use this term as synonymous of reduction of paper consumption as consequence of the digitization of information and the implementation of the paperless policy in organizations and firms, here designated by the acronym DPOP. The theory of a paperless society seems plausible, much of what once happened on paper has already shifted to the screen. In the near future, more promising technologies will no doubt emerge that will cut instances of wasteful and unnecessary paper use. The benefits that accrue to organizations from paper reduction remain unquestioned and must continue to be emphasized by professionals (Kreger, 1999; Carr, 2005).

What is the relevance of studying the phenomenon of paperless office movement? Which new lessons can we learn from this quest? And what is the contribution of this paper to the field of knowledge? Such questions will be answered along this section.

This research fills a gap in the literature for three reasons: 1) there are few studies about the research topic of “paperless movement”. Chao (2015) who found only 15 papers, stressed “the relevant articles were published in the year 2000; the articles that are deemed relevant are either (a) too old, (b) focused on the medical industry (Caldeira et al., 2012), or (c) did not include any references”; 2) because most of the studies uses single or multiple case‐studies approach at micro scale (eg. Caldeira et al., 2012; Coreynen et al., 2017); 3) according to our knowledge, there is not any investigation that has studied this phenomenon using a country scale approach.

Leveraged through globalization by the end of the XX century not only office printing equipment became a commodity but also the necessity of materialized information started to fade mainly due to the emergence of new information technologies.

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

As a consequence, companies’ need on equipment was disturbed, therefore, potentiating the office printing industry (also known as photocopier industry) to move its offer from products to the provision of services. The most notorious effect of the paperless office on the office printing industry can be observed as a change in the offer, manufacturers are now offering services instead of products. Vandermerwe and Rada (1988) called the movement from goods to services as Servitization. Later, Baines et al. (2009b) complemented the definition of servitization as the innovation of a manufacturer’s capabilities and processes to move from selling products, to selling integrated products‐service offerings that deliver value in use.

Although Servitization in this industry is not totally explained by the advancement of dematerialization, the correlation between these two concepts of significant potential may provide paths for manufacturers to exploit greater value in service business by stimulating proximity with customers supported by distinct environmental policies.

Servitization is a theme of interest amongst a substantial number of scholars and debated throughout specialized conferences. A considerable amount of examples are referred in the literature pointing to well known cases within the industry (i.e. pay by the hour on Rolls Royce jet engines, or, IBM move from a manufacturer to a solution provider). Such examples of extreme prominence to the literature and body of knowledge miss the uprightness of a single type of industry analysis, from its basic market integration to the real necessity to embrace Servitization. For Visintin (2014) the photocopier industry is definitely one of the most active in terms of servitization.

Our research aims to discuss the antecedents of dematerialization through the implementation of Digitation and Paperless Office Programs (DPOP) and its consequences on those firms under intervention and ultimately for the manufacturers of the office printing products and services. Nowadays there is an increasing concern that the demand for energy and raw materials will overcome the existing resources of the planet. What can we do to assure the future of the next generations? The environmental consequences of a continuously economic growth have led to

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

academic and political debates calling for a transition to a ‘‘green economy’’ and a complete change in the paradigm of growth and development which led to the notions of orientation to sustainability (Dacko et al., 2013) and the reduction of the resources exploration intensity‐ the dematerialization. Moreover, according to Davidson et al., (2014) the effort factor measured by the marginal cost of extraction of new resources will increase in the future.

Transformations in the office printing industry have been occurring at a galloping pace. It is a fact that, since the Second World War to the present day, the evolution was remarkably greater than in the five centuries that preceded Gutenberg’s press invention.

The emergence of new digital technologies and its accessibility to the business and society in general commoditize products that once were premium. On the other hand, the dematerialization of information became more and more a standard process in today’s companies, largely due to cost reduction, environmental aspects, document size, archiving, retrieval and others.

With the advent of globalization, access to new technologies conduit to a digital revolution, for Rosenbloom (2000) the so called digital revolution changed commercial processes and reshaped some industries, today’s digital technologies surfaced more than a half‐century ago, stimulating successive waves of change that repeatedly threatened the survival of well‐established firms in home entertainment, electronic components, communications services, data processing and related fields.

Whereas most innovation throughout human civilization has captured natural phenomena to invent tangible product offerings, with the separation of information from matter and the rapid growth of global communications networks, more and more innovation will be intangible and digitally enabled (Lusch and Nambisan, 2015).

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Digital revolution in the office printing was felt in companies as from the 80’s of the last century and was drastically leveraged by the accessibility to products that once were only reachable to large and mid‐size enterprises, such goods, are nowadays available to a vast majority and became commodities.

Following decades were characterized by technological breakthroughs on document handling. The massive use of Internet / Intranet resulted in a crescent volume of electronic information inside companies, thus reducing substantially the use of paper as the primary physical support for information and evidentiary the growth of digital documents. Such change of behavior had a considerable negative impact in the office printing manufacturing industry, mainly the one dedicated to production of equipment for the business to business (B2B) market.

During the last decades, the structure of the industry has been drastically changed through the implementation of new technologies and the appearance of new bonds between printing equipment and their users (Smallbone et al., 2000).

By recourse to new technologies, companies now had the opportunity to dematerialize processes allowing reduction on costs and productive capacity increment. Furthermore, the adoption of consequent business practices led to new consciences concerned with the excessive use of resources, an aspect that a significant number of companies considers critical, as such, focusing their attention into sustainable and environmentally friendly solutions. This type of conduct is expanding day‐to‐day in our society, either through individuals or corporations.

A notorious example is mentioned by Andersen (2000) that brought to our attention the policy of the Danish government to adopt guidelines for a paperless implementation both on public and private administration, reasons behind this position are; eco behavior, resources saving, security and availability of information.

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Nevertheless, and although the existing trend to reduce printing and paper usage , new technologies will still use partially this kind of physical support, which is saying that old technology is saved or maintained for the time being by new technologies. Looking as a positive achievement for companies and society in general, in theory the result for the industry should be opposed as the demand for office printing hardware will tend to diminish.

In this new context, to retain customers and markets and take advantage of large installed bases, photocopier manufacturers are now offering services, concurrently with a product or independently from the product, in practical terms this means the office printing industry is facing a dramatic change of paradigm. Reinartz and Ulaga (2008) add that in every industry products are becoming commoditized faster than ever, to stand out from rivals, many manufacturers have begun offering value‐added services (installation, training, maintenance).

This will reveal in the medium long term new business characteristics to the office printing industry. Since production businesses is running in a more hostile and competitive market, nowadays in a global scale whereby goods are easily commoditized, the innovation by adding services to their core portfolio is becoming the strategy to be followed (Kastalli and Looy, 2013).

When portraying the evolution of the western societies, Pine and Gilmore (1998) sustain them as being characterized by structural and economy changes over the time, initially focus was on agriculture, followed by the industry (manufactured goods economy) and later services. Each of these milestones led to a change in the economic value to distinguish the products from competition and allow the differentiation to act upon the market offer of a growing number of in‐differentiated products. Being products and services increasingly commoditized, companies are looking for the best succeeding value in the economic offer.

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Authors such as Ulaga and Loveland (2014) believe that although service is becoming a strategic value in competitive and commoditized markets, companies often encounter problems when orienting their industrial sales forces toward these new organizational objectives.

Taking into account the gradual loss of products importance in detriment of services, Bitner et al. (2012) share the view that companies destined to succeed in these areas are those that have a tendency to grow in their competitive position by suggesting services.

The evolution to services brought to the literature new nomenclature. Definitely one the most important is “Servitization”, the terminology advanced in 1988 by Vandermerwe and Rada (Neely, 2008; Baines et al., 2007; Spring and Araujo, 2009) to characterize the transition from a production base to the introduction of integrated solutions and new services proposal. Servitization is now widely recognized as the innovation of a manufacturer’s capabilities and processes to move from selling products, to selling integrated products‐service offerings that deliver value in use (Baines et al., 2009b).

The innovation of our research is constructed on three base pillars: 1) It is based on a single type of industry: Office Printing Industry; 2) Approaches both the market (Customers) and the actual universe of manufacturers (Industry); 3) Analyses the change of behavior in the demand (Customers) and the consequences on the supply (Industry) with further move from Product to Service and Servitization.

When looking to the office printing industry in particular, McCormack (2011) shares the testimony of Andy Jones, director of Xerox Global Services, where he declares that on the last thirty years, there has been a significant change on how people use printers and paper, as a result new behaviors occurred in people, resulting in new trends within companies. For Visintin (2014), the photocopier industry is, for sure, one of the most active in terms of servitization.

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

1.2 Objectives and research questions The formulation of the research questions comprised several logical steps which are explained in the next paragraphs. Initially, based on the literature review on chapter 2, we will demonstrate that two exogenous market drivers are pushing the paperless movement: 1) orientation for sustainability (Kestemont and Kerkhove, 2010; Dacko et al., 2013; Varadarajan, 2017); 2) digitization of information as consequence of information and communication technology (ICT) revolution (Yoo et al., 2010; Gardenal, 2013).

Having these assumptions in mind, our research, aims to investigate the following research questions: RQ1‐ What external factors are influencing the implementation of digitation and paperless office programs (DPOP’s) in today’s organizations/firms? A substantial number of organizations and firms are engaged in paperless and digitalization programs persuaded by environmental arguments such as the eco‐ labelling certification schemes (Gnoni and Elia, 2013; Chao, 2015). Therefore, it is imperative to investigate how the business‐to‐business (B2B) customers in different sectors cope with dematerialization, in particular with the paperless movement. What endogenous drivers are affecting the strategic decisions, their needs and demand towards office printing products and services; this diagnostic will be an important strategic input for office printing manufacturers industry. The dematerialization of information became more and more a standard process in today’s companies, largely due to cost reduction, environmental aspects, document size, archiving, retrieval and others. This trend led us to the second research question:

RQ2‐ What internal factors are impending companies to change processes with the advent of new technologies and adhere to a DPOP? Author selected Portugal as a convenient case‐study analysis. According to 2016 FAO statistics Portugal is the eighth world producer of wood pulp for paper (1,515 million

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

tonnes), and for Pothen and Schymura (2015) this country belongs to the group of “worst” countries as they had a higher rate of use of materials. Our research aims to analyze the B2B market in the most important economic sectors (trade, health, education, industry and services) and Public Administration. Furthermore, to Yoo et al., (2010), the new architecture of information systems resulting from digital innovation instigates profound changes in the ways that firms organize for innovation in the future;

RQ3‐ What were the consequences of paperless office dematerialization for the internal processes of the most important corporate areas (Marketing, Human Resources, Finance, Production and I&D)?

Based upon customers’ strategy assessment, we want to discuss the challenges the organizations will face in the short‐term and long‐term futures. For example, Coreynen et al., (2017) claim that digitization can boost servitization of the firms that have engaged in a DPOP. The number of emerging studies on office printing sector also demonstrates that this industry is one of the most affected by digitization and paper dematerialization. Therefore, the diagnostic of the paperless movement will provide an interesting input for the office printing manufacturers managers:

RQ4‐ How was the servitization process developed in the office printing industry? With the recourse to new technologies, companies now have the opportunity to dematerialize processes allowing reduction on costs and productive capacity increment. Furthermore, the adoption of consequent business practices led to new consciences concerned with the excessive use of resources, focusing into more sustainable and environmentally friendly solutions. In this new context, to retain customers and markets and take advantage of large installed bases1, photocopier manufacturers are now offering services, concurrently with a product or

1 This nomenclature (IB) designates the range of product or process related services required by an end‐user over the useful life of a product in order to run it effectively in the context of its operating process (Oliva and Kallemberg 2003).

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

independently from the product, in practical terms this means the office printing industry is facing a dramatic change of paradigm. Servitization, the terminology advanced in 1988 by Vandermerwe and Rada later by Baines et al. (2007) and Spring and Araujo (2009) characterizes the transition from a production base to the introduction of integrated solutions and new services proposal. Servitization is now widely recognized as the innovation of a manufacturer’s capabilities and processes to move from selling products, to selling integrated products‐service offerings that deliver value in use (Baines et al. 2009). Recently, Brax and Visintin (2016) also defined servitization as: “a change process whereby a manufacturing company deliberately or in an emergent fashion introduces service elements in its business model”. To develop the necessary response for the above research questions, we will provide explanation throughout the following arguments: 1) Clarification on the impact that such technologies had on paper based documents, new trends and customer needs; 2)Monitoring on how the downtrend on demand affected the industry; 3)Verify how the industry has reacted to overcome the loss on demand of products; 4)Identify the relevant corporate factors that significantly influenced this Process / Transition: HR, Technical Skills, Global presence; 5)Discuss the role of customers attributes: Dimension, Turnover, Type of Activity, Market Share; 6) Influence of external factors: Resources, Legislation, Eco Friendly Policies

1.3 Working structure The structure of our research is divided into seven chapters (see figure 1). In the first chapter an introduction is made to stimulate the comprehension of the major topics embracing the materialization of information, technical evolution, dematerialization, consequences on the office printing industry, appearance of servitization and finally the objectives and research questions.

The second and third chapters are engaged to the literature review focused around Dematerialization and Servitization that will support the research questions. Literature review will discuss the drivers of dematerialization with focus in orientation for sustainability and the engagement in a DPOP and will support RQ1 and RQ2.

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Moreover, the background of printing evolution over time in parallel with the appearance and maturity of the printing industry offer from products to service with further advent of servitization will be deeply examined. The literature review also provides support to the selection of the relevant factors included in the proposed theoretical framework describing the impacts of DPOP and its measurable consequences both on customers and industry, this part of the literature will support RQ3 and RQ4, second and third chapters are accomplished with a summary emphasizing the relevant aspects of each area.

Fourth chapter is dedicated to the theoretical framework and hypothesis development.

Fifth chapter embraces the Methodology, the research design and how data was collected.

The sixth chapter has been significantly organized to discuss the results giving focus to the detailed information received from the questionnaires used for customers and industry.

Our research is concluded with chapter seven where the accumulated knowledge and generated contributes are deeply analyzed, leading to general conclusions, managerial implications and further research.

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Figure 1: Research Framework

Source: Author

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

CHAPTER 2: PAPER, PRINTING, GLOBALIZATION AND DEMATERIALIZATION

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

This page intentionally left blank

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

2. Paper, Printing, Globalization and Dematerialization 2.1.1 Paper and Printing Since the genesis of mankind, history reveals that men strived to take advantage of the resources of nature to express itself. Stone carvings found in caverns and Egyptian hieroglyphics abundant in their monuments are examples of historical artifacts that determine the advent of one of the first media to communicate a message or disseminate information. Later, with higher incidence in the region of Egypt, a new support for information was discovered, papyrus, a plant abundant in the Nile delta.

In the Himalayas and Southeast Asia a similar artifact was produced through a process of fiber cooking "liber" (inner bark) of certain trees and shrubs. After being cooked these fibers were stretched with wooden hammers to form a thin layer, then mixed with water to create a paste and finally spread evenly by hand on a cloth and left to dry, after drying, the resulted sheet of paste was separated from the cloth. Final product was now ready to be used. Other techniques to support writing are also known such as copper sheets, animal skins, clay and wooden planks.

There are records from the Roman naturalist Pliny the Elder (23‐79 AD) on the introduction of animal skins in the Roman city of Pergamum to support writing, later named as parchment after the city name in Latin (Klock et al., 2013).

Most historians agree that Tsai Lun (105 AD), one of the ministers at the service of emperor Ho in China as being the creator of a new mean of writing support, paper, in the form as we know it today (see figure 2). Since then, this invention has been influencing the lives of billions of people globally; this means that contrary to the oral tradition graphic communication did not fade out with time.

Later, the writing technique was enhanced through the hands of Wei Tan (between 179AD and 253AD) with the invention of ink; it is not a coincidence that the first biggest bureaucracy, Imperial China, relied on paper (Wiseman, 2002).

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Figure 2: Initial form of paper in China

Source: Bracelpa (2016)

For more than 600 years Chinese kept secret the first papermaking system, which used crushed and boiled fibers from trees and fabric rags. The resulting slurry was spread on a sieve with bamboo frame and stretched fabric was exposed to sunshine for a natural drying process. The invention went to Korea and later introduced in Japan by the year 610 AD.

This secret was only revealed by the year 751 when the Arab army attacked the city of Samarkand dominated by the Chinese empire at the time. Technicians from a local paper mill were arrested and taken to Baghdad where they began paper manufacturing, nonetheless, without disclosing the technique. Later, in the eleventh century the novelty was introduced by the Arabs in Spain and later extended to the West. The first paper production records in Europe are from the tenth and eleventh centuries in the city of Valencia ‐ southern Spain. In the year 1260 in Italy at Fabriano, Vincona province; France has set its first paper mill in 1338 at the town of La Piell; the year 1494 is referred on the first records of papermaking in England later and around

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

1586 in the Netherlands. Paper production came to America in the late seventeenth century in Germantown, Philadelphia where the first American paper mill was founded (Klock et al., 2013).

In Portugal, paper production began in late XIV century, however, the first factories appeared later at the beginning of the XVIII century (Celpa, 2016).

Technical progress continued in Europe, the growth in paper manufacture during and after the sixteenth century under the influence of "reform" and printing with movable type, led to a severe shortage of raw material forcing the way to a regulation on rag trade.

For most of its history, paper has been manufactured by hand. In the mid‐seventeenth century, the Dutch began to apply hydraulic power in mills, this was accomplished by moving large stones against each other, creating smooth fibers for paper production, named as "Dutch", and these mills are still in use. Louis Nicholas Robert invented the first papermaking machine in 1799 in France. Shortly after, the Fourdrinier brothers perfected in England the continuous production of papermaking (Klock et al., 2013).

The systematic search for rag substitutes during and after the eighteenth century had little success, the first attempts of paper production without rags using vegetable raw material arose between 1765 and 1771. Straw was a hypothesis, but failed to impose itself due to the low quality of the paper produced. It was only through the invention of mechanical wood pulp by the German Keller (first patents in 1854) and later with chemical pulp that a viable replacement for rag was available.

Technology kept improving over time. During the second half of the nineteenth century, when wood replaced rags in paper production, "Fourdrinier" machines had a significant role in paper manufacturing.

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Advances in chemistry changed dramatically paper manufacture leading its production to an industrial scale. Machines were modernized and reached a high degree of automation and productivity. Nowadays, paper manufacture is one of the most technologically developed industries, occupying a prominent place in the industrial sector of the developed countries (Bracelpa, 2016). Taking into account all the referred facts, we are now confronted with two primary questions:

1) What is paper? Paper can be defined as a two‐dimensional product produced from an aqueous suspension of cellulosic fibers from wood or other sources that are interlaced and then artificially water free via mechanical and thermal processes (Klock et al., 2013). Friedrich Gottlob Keller began the process that would later be responsible for the production of the so‐called Mechanical Pulping, pulp produced by rubbing wood against an abrasive surface. Pulp produced this way presents some physical strength characteristics, but not sufficiently strong for certain applications, being necessary to develop modifications that allowed the release of wood fibers without damaging them. Paper is used as a ritual and an object, particularly with a transcendent sense: preserving its function of norms and values, transmitting culture, civilization and information through laws and regulations. In the offices it supports documents of various natures.

2) Paper structure. The major component found in modern paper is cellulose. It is one of the strongest materials known for the same weight to weight, and for this reason cellulose is a reinforcing material found in trees, grasses and other plants. Cellulose is a carbohydrate; a composite of carbon, hydrogen and oxygen, photosynthesis process generates large quantities of cellulose, with the action of sunlight on water and carbon dioxide. In dry conditions, cellulose may last for centuries as long as it was not produced in acidic environments. Modern documents containing calcium carbonate have a neutral pH, but documents created from manufactured paper between mid‐ nineteenth century and the middle of the twentieth century were often produced on

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

acidic conditions, cellulose decline in such papers has caused them to become brittle, causing problems to archivists (Wiseman, 2002).

As opposed to the modern office printing technology that evolved in a short period of time (major breakthroughs occurred after WWII till the end of the XX century), modern paper and its technology have been evolving for more than two centuries (see table 1).

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Table 1 ‐ Chronology of modern paper production

1750 ‐ Invention in the Netherlands of a mill type crusher. It meant a breakthrough for facilitating the refining of the fibers; this device was named as “Dutch”. 1756 ‐ Jacob Christian Schaffer, published in Germany a treaty on plant fibers for papermakers, which proposes the use of sawdust and wood cut outs for production of mechanical pulp. 1774 ‐ Karl Wilhelm Scheele discovered chlorine; it was applied with lime for bleaching the paper. 1799 ‐ The French Nicolas Louis Robert invented a continuous papermaking machine. This invention led to an immediate way the papermaking industrially, prefiguring the current process used. 1800 ‐ Due to the shortage of raw materials, Mathias Koops registers a patent for the process of using straw pulp and paper waste, which was the precursor of modern recovery and recycling systems. 1803 ‐ The English brothers Fourdrinier acquire the patent of Louis Robert and improve the paper machine, ever since the paper machine has been continuously improved. Basically it consists of a conveyor worm made of a thin bronze wire mesh mounted around a front cylinder in the feed end, and an impeller roller is about 15 meters away from the mat remain flat because it runs on small cylinders forming a table on a series of vacuum boxes. The Fourdrinier machine came to solve the problem of paper failure, but at the same time confirmed rags as raw material insufficient. 1826 ‐ Steam rollers are used to dry the paper. 1827 ‐ The first Fourdrinier machine is installed in America at Saugerties, NY, USA, alum and resin are used in paper collage. 1883 ‐ German chemist Karl Dahl invents sulphate process or Kraft, soda result of the evolution process; the cooking liquor is an aqueous solution of NaOH and Na2S. Later he developed a system of economic recovery of the reactants, and also by the quality of the fibers made the process widely used worldwide, even nowadays, Kraft (strong, in German) pulp is naturally brown in color. In unbleached form it makes good, strong brown‐paper bags, hence the name "Kraft" (Wiseman, 2002).

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

1839 ‐ The French chemist Anselme Payen treats wood with concentrate of nitric acid, isolating a fibrous material called cellulose. 1840 ‐ Experiences with wood were intensified and from this time the wood became the raw material by excellence for the manufacture of paper. Reasons for its use are: relative availability, low cost, convenience in handling and storage, obtaining good quality pulp and versatility of fiber properties. 1847 ‐ Friedrich Keller in Germany and Charles Fenerty in Nova Scotia develop the mechanical pulp process. 1852 ‐ Charles Watts and Hugh Burgess patent in England the first chemical process to obtain pulp from debarked wood ‐ the soda process. 1867 ‐ Benjamin C. Tilghman, get in the United States a patent for cooking vegetable substances with sulphurous acid, emerging as the sulphite process. 1870 ‐ First commercial use of mechanical pulp. 1874 ‐ First commercial use of sulphite pulp, Karl Ekman in Sweden and Alexander Mitscherlich in Germany. The method was improved by the use of bases such as calcium, sodium, magnesium and ammonia. 1909 ‐ The first Kraft process plant in the Americas is installed in Roanoke Rapids, North Carolina. 1925 ‐ Chemical neutral sulphite semi process (NSSC) was developed. 1930 ‐ Industrial application of chlorine in the bleaching of pulps was initiated. 1935 ‐ The liquor recovery process of the Kraft process was optimized, becoming the most important process for paper manufacture worldwide. Currently around 10% of the pulp produced in the world is sulphite pulp. 1940 ‐ Hydrogen peroxide is used as bleaching agent.

Source: Klock et al. (2013)

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Portugal was the first country to produce chemical pulp from eucalyptus: sulphite in 1923 and sulphate in 1957 (Celpa, 2016).

Modern paper uses pulp as raw material; it can be obtained either from virgin pulp, freshly produced from wood or recycled pulp from recovered paper. The prominence of this latest material has been increasing over time, consequently causing less devastation on natural resources (especially the ones related to forestry) and allowing paper to continue as one of the most used commodities by mankind.

According to the European Recovered Paper Council (ERPC) by 2014 the recovered paper ratio used in the production of new paper in Europe was 72% (see figure 3) and an average of 60% worldwide by 2013 (see figure 4).

Figure 3: Paper recycling in Europe

Source: CEPI (2015)

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Figure 4: Paper Recyclingrecycling in Europe

*EU‐28+2: EU28 + Norway and Switzerland Source: CEPI +RISI (2015)

2.1.2 Brief Printing History The invention of printing is not limited to the mechanical imagination that has evolved over time, before determining its origin we must consider the necessary conditions to nest the appearance of such technology. The existence of specific materials such as paper as an available and lasting basis to support printing was determinant to the appearance and development of printing technology.

Between 1041 and 1048, in China, Bi Sheng developed a mobile character that would later be used in the technique of woodcut. In 1313, Wang Zhenn, perfected a character box, through such, rotary types were developed. Min Qiji was in mid‐1580 and 1661 the man behind the development of a safer and more practical way to print with the addition of color possibility, the method was based on multiple wooden planks (Bacelar, 1999 ; Amaral, 2002).

Although Gutenberg can be recognized and accredited throughout various scientific sources as the main responsible for the "revolution in written culture", Amaral (2002) wrote a study which reveals that the history of printing begun well before the XV

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

century. The author refers milestones of western history in the mid of the II century, whereby some evidences and facts may confirm the existence of a history before Gutenberg, however not all scholars agree with such as the commencement of the printing era.

It was through the hands of Gutenberg that the printing press came to life as the ingenuity of his vast experience in the handling of wine presses. The availability of this device was characterized by the innovation, but to make it functional the strength of two scribes was needed, one to operate the press and another to place the ink on the characters (Heitlinger, 2006) , this historical landmark appeared around 1452 and was used to print the first 42 lines Bible (Melo, 2005). 1 The continuous improvement of typography2 techniques led to the success of the press, resulting in a change of social parameters fostered by the need of society to express itself (Sousa, 2003). Moreover, Bacelar (1999) refers the invention of printing as a method of dissemination of ideas and information, which determined the origin of mass communication.

1 2 The art and technique of printing with movable type (Oxford dictionary)

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

2.1.3 Evolution after Guttenberg To enhance the understanding of printing evolution over time, the author has created a time line that will portray advancements as from the II century AD till the current date (see figure 5). Timelines are a visual depiction of a life history, where events are displayed in chronological order. The significance and meaning attached to events may also be shown (Berends, 2011).

Evolution after Guttenberg’s press invention has five significant momentums, common to all of them is the usage (in different levels of importance) of an unchanged support, paper: 1) Document Materialization, the generalization and progression of the written word from the invention of the press till the Industrial Revolution. A slow technological evolution and scarcity of raw materials for paper production characterized this period (from the XV century till mid XlX century); 2) Dissemination Through Organizations, new inventions related to mechanized printing were now available to companies and different methods to produce paper associated to the usage of wood as the prime ingredient (this period goes from the beginning of the industrial revolution till WWII); 3) Technological Breakthrough, succeeding period (around 45 years) where the majority of technical breakthroughs in the office‐printing industry occurred (from the end of WWll till the last decade of the XX century); 4) Commoditization, with the advent of globalization and the easy access to new technologies, products that were once accessible by large and mid‐size enterprises were now available to a vast majority and perceived as mere commodities (this period can be traced from the last decade of the XX century till the end of first decade of the XXI century); 5) Dematerialization, evolution in office equipment led to a stage where digital copying equipment could be used for other purposes such as printing, scanning and faxing allowing information to be handled and stored through immaterialized means and requiring less paper, thus, initiating the era of dematerialization (from the end of the first decade of the XXI century and still going on nowadays).

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Author

Source:

Gutenberg

after

Evolution

Figure

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

2.1.4 Document materialization Oral tradition and disperse graphic communication meant confined information, thoughts and ideas to a restricted number of intervenient. Multiple sources could induce on transversal perception errors and sometimes altering the original version. In the western culture, written information was known as a privilege of Catholic Church, where monks were responsible to hand writes bibles and other religious books. Disruption with this status emerged with printing invention; such can be considered as the origin of mass communication and represents the first viable method of dissemination of information from a single source, leading to materialization of information and documents.

The scientific principle of repeatability guaranteed impartiality, thus contributing to the birth of communities and processes that functioned without geographical constraints (Bacelar, 1999).

The culture of the printed word and printing technology are milestones that long survived, and still in use by the masses centuries after Gutenberg’s invention. The history of printing is long and complex. It would be excessive to proclaim the invention of printing as the cause behind social, political and psychological changes to which it is associated. Nevertheless, it left an indelible mark on every aspect of European culture and can be quoted as an instrument of change that allowed the emergence of science; religion, culture, politics and ways of thinking commonly associated with the western culture of the modern era (Bacelar, 1999).

Materialization of information and systemization became a standard process in science, culture, being the ancestors of modern offices. It is known the early usage of accounting books in Italy and other European countries, especially the ones involved in the discoveries of the new world to register incomes and outcomes.

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

2.1.5 Dissemination through Organizations Subsequent to Guttenberg, new printing solutions to reproduce and organize information emerged leading the way to the appearance of the first offices, thus, creating more effective companies. The first device to revolutionize the business environment was the typewriter; this invention came in 1714 through the hands of Henri Mill. Over time the original model suffered innumerous changes, improved models allowed companies to have more efficient administrative procedures and with a certain independency in terms of printing.

Nevertheless, for some time enhancements on the basic Guttenberg machine remained stagnant until the Industrial Revolution when further improvements to the wood press were made allowing mechanical printing processes to be introduced, an invention by the British Earl Stanhope. Such process had the ability to compress the paper, allowing the sheet to be printed with greater precision (Heitlinger, 2006).

Office machines such as the duplicator emerged. This apparatus used a simple technology based on a revolving drum containing a master image soaked with ink. When pressed against paper, its contents were transferred to paper. Such machine, released around 1880 was used for reproduction of small and large quantities, but saw its usefulness valued only in the XX century. Furthermore, such equipment was restricted in use, as it appealed only to a selected group of companies that could afford it. Still in the nineteenth century and almost as an upgrade to duplicators the first copiers (incorrectly named as photocopiers) emerged using various type of technologies based on liquids or coated paper later improved throughout the twentieth century.

On the evolution of the material information stream amongst organizations, it is worth to register the appearance of postal services whereby written documents (manually or mechanically) were delivered between transmitter and receiver, being them corporate or private individuals.

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Printing pervaded in the western culture with principles of standardization and dissemination of new thoughts, ideas and corporative necessities.

2.1.6 Technological Breakthrough The first half of the twentieth century was marked by two global wars; WWl (1914‐ 1918) and WWll (1939‐1945). Second World War served as a cradle for the greatest technological advances in the office printing area. In October 1938, the American Chester Carlson developed the first dry process photocopier using regular paper and a powder for the copying process (this technology is known as xerography) and was commercialized by Haloid Company later known as Xerox. The process of xerography evolved continuously. By 1978, it was applied to what was to be the world’s first laser printer; the conceived technology continues to be used at the present day by the majority of manufacturers of the office printing industry.

The photocopier finally allowed printed document access to a vast number of users. Word processors transformed the editing tasks and brought new features and flexibility to writing processes (Bacelar, 1999). A computerized printer has toured several evolutionary steps, from the first disc printers and daisy wheels up to the current and common printing processes: ink jet, laser and thermal transfer.

The first printing equipment connected to a computer was launched in 1954 by NCR (National Cash Register) and was the foremost printer using impact technology.

Another printing technology still in use was launched in 1976 by IBM, one of the leading companies in this industry, it was the inkjet printer, this machine offers many advantages for home use or small business units, enabling more performance, speed, better print quality and quieter operation (Palmer, 2008).

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Till the early nineties, copiers were stand‐alone analogue products satisfying basic customers’ needs. Later, with digital developments, this type of equipment was designed with several new functions and consequently became part of a system that enabled several document‐related processes such as printing, scanning, faxing, archiving, mailing, etc. (Visintin, 2012). We have seen constant market changes that have been reflected in the printing solutions industry.

Baray et al. (2008) justify that although this sector is declining, printing may not be fully replaced. The future of printing solutions is meant to take full advantage of the technological evolution and replace the actual physical support (paper) by another or a digital nature (Smallbone et al., 2000).

The emergent amount of mechanical writing using printing machinery either for the corporative or private information led to the appearance of size standardization. In the past, each culture, country of group of countries had their own formats. Nowadays, only two major formats are used worldwide; ISO 216 for the majority of the countries (where A4 size: 210 x 297 mm is the most commonly used) and ANSI (American National Standards Institute) for USA, Canada and Mexico (where letter size: 8,5 x 11 in. is the most used) (papersizes.org, 2016).

The manner how offices functioned commenced to be of a standard form regardless the amount of mechanical aid to produced documents (Sellen and Harper, 2002) and a standard flow could be observed: 1) Necessity of a document; 2) Author of the document; 3) Production on a physical support (paper); 4) Review; 5) Authorization; 6) Internal expedition; 7) External expedition; 9) Receiving; 10) Reading; 11) Recording; 12) Filling.

This flow encompasses manual or mechanized means inside companies to produce, read and file documents, but also the usage of external means such as post to deliver documents from one point to another.

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

2.2 External Factors Affecting Digitation and Paperless Office Programs (DPOP) Since our first research question is pointing towards the external factors that are influencing the implementation of digitation and paperless office programs (DPOP’s) in today’s organizations/firms, in this section we will analyze some of those factors such as globalization and commoditization (see 2.2.1), environmental aspects (see 2.2.2) and dematerialization (see 2.2.3).

2.2.1 Globalization and Commoditization Globalization can be described as a process of adopting country and target market‐ dictated product standards, with tangible and/or intangible attributes (Medina and Duffy, 1998) from disperse environments around the world to achieve a uniform product.

Moreover, Harris (2012) added to the definition that globalization is a new era with an inherent tendency toward creating world markets and production. This process has been greatly enhanced by the new technological tools of financial production.

As for commoditization, it can be define as a vigorous process that diminishes the competitive differentiation potential of any organization deteriorating its financial position (Matthyssens and Vandenbempt, 2008).

Furthermore, commoditization can also be characterized by the homogeneity of products, higher price sensitivity among customers and lower switching costs (Reimann et al., 2010).

Although globalization endures a nomenclature for a recent occurred phenomenon, it was discoursed earlier by scholars when referring to examples of the contiguity of east and west upon the discovery period initiated on the XV century in Iberian Peninsula and followed by the Dutch, French and British. The first use of the global adjective

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

appeared in 1892 in the pages of Harper's Magazine (September issue), by 1961 the English term globalization entered Webster dictionary, eventually dethrone in the 1970’s the French term “Mondialisation” (Rodrigues and Devezas, 2007). Furthermore, these authors withstand that modern globalization was initiated 600 years ago when Portugal begin the search for commodities in the west part of the globe.

Substantial difference from the earlier occurrence to the one we are facing nowadays relies on shorter cycle, cultural effects, impact of proximity and decline of barriers and restraints to commerce.

Additionally, Burgh‐Woodman (2014) complements that with globalization and the creation of a global market; markets and trade will drive global activities; movement of goods and commodities as well as people will be both ways (east / west) with the unavoidable impact of national identities obscureness. Still, this author sustains that a fully developed global economy has supplanted the earlier forms of the international economy. Such economy is compelled by uncontrollable market forces, which led to transnational networks of interdependency with unprecedented integration. National boundaries were dissolved forcing national economies to redundancy.

The technologic sector has been evolving towards globalization since the early years of the XX century. Initial impulse to this movement was through American companies IBM and NCR followed by Xerox after WWII. Japanese companies such as Canon and Ricoh followed the trend during the late 60’s, initially by a process of internationalization at strategic cities in Europe and America followed by a global spread on the last decades of the XX century and early XXI century, other manufacturers in the office printing industry also followed this path.

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Tendency towards globalization has increased in the last decade and as borders continue to open and the world continues to get smaller through communication and ease of transportation (Appelbaum et al. 2011). Viljakainen and Toivonen (2014), complement that after 1980 the expectedness of development has been decreased due to digitalization and globalization.

The turning point in this sector occurred by the end of the XX century, around this point in time, office printing technologies were manifestly relegated from premium goods to “commodities”. Motivated by technological evolution and the diminish paths between producer and end user, products were now affordable, but no longer making the differentiation as a standalone equipment. As so, it was necessary to complement the offer with added features to the base product with functionalities such as of printing, faxing and scanning. These multifunction machines known by the acronyms of MFP (Multi Function Product) or MFD (Multi Function Device) could now be integrated and connected to the offices networks.

Later, and already as commodities, a paradox could be observed in this sector; at first, affordability and profusely offer of products with various functions, as opposed, a second and new characteristic, the declining in usage of part of such functionalities, mainly the ones related to the use of paper (printing), in practice a “paperless” or dematerialized behavior.

The future of printing solutions is scheduled to take full advantage of the technologies and replace the physical printing by digital technology, nowadays becoming a commodity (Baray et al., 2008). Many goods, including capital, are rapidly becoming “commoditized”, by adding services to support products may provide a way to differentiate goods offerings to prevent or delay the margin erosion characteristic of “commoditization” (Corrêa et al., 2007).

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

A commodity can be defined by the absence of any further added value, being the basis for competition the price, delivery terms and timing of the product (Neufville and Pirnar, 1996). Commoditization can also be described as the transition of a product or industry segments or even a niche to the status of commodity.

Overall, Neufville and Pirnar (1996) defend that commoditization of the copier industry by digital is a threat. Such threat is very similar to the commoditization of the computer industry by personal computers, leading to the great difficulties amongst the industry (i.e. IBM). Dominant companies in the copier industry, i.e. Xerox, failed into the risk of losing its existing advantages and competencies on technology and market share (see table 2 for the major differences from commodities and non‐ commodities).

Table 2 ‐ Commodity and non‐commodity definition

Characteristic Commodity Definition Non‐commodity definition Industry structure Competitive Few competitors Gross Margin Low High Volume High Low Growth (units) High initially Max. 10% Market Mass Niche Supply Chain Outsourced Vertically integrated Distribution Indirect Direct Service Low High Product Differentiation Low High Product Brand Unimportant Important Product Standards Industry wide Proprietary Interdependence (Network High Low Externality) Source: Adapted from Neufville and Pirnar (1996)

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Commoditization decreases the differentiation of companies in the market. Customers perceive products and services as being more or less the same and their bargaining power increases. Salonen (2011), adds that manufacturers are increasingly adopting service based strategies to maintain competitiveness in the face of commoditization, slower growth, and declining profitability in core product markets. At the same time, firms should understand that shifting to a solution orientation is slow and resource intensive as new mindsets, capabilities, and structures must be built.

When looking at the photocopier industry, Kawatoko (2004) argues that copiers have two special features as commodities. Generally copiers break down more often when compared to other machines. The first characteristic is related to the nature of copiers, as they are very unstable machines without service and maintenance. The second endures the fact that in most of their life time copiers are products frequently leased and associated with repair and maintenance services.

In the photocopier industry, the pursuit for scale benefits and the need to develop basic product platforms that serve as a basis to bring new products to market as fast as possible is evidenced by the fast rotation within manufacturers in the form of merge and acquisitions during the last decades (i.e. Ricoh acquired Infoprint, Gestetner, Lanier, Rex‐Rotary, Infotec, Nashuatec and IKON Office Solutions; similarly, Canon acquired Océ, Konica Minolta acquired Develop and Kyocera acquired Utax and Triumph Adler , amongst others) (Visintin 2012).

2.2.2 Environmental aspects Nowadays there is an increasing concern that the demand for energy and raw materials will overcome the existing resources of the planet. Taking into account that current printing and photocopying activities are not environmentally sustainable (Chowdhury, 2010) what can we do to assure the future of the next generations? The environmental consequences of a continuously economic growth have led to

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

academic and political debates calling for a transition to a ‘‘green economy’’ and a complete change in the paradigm of growth and development, which led to the notions of orientation to sustainability (Dacko et al., 2013) and the reduction of the resources exploration intensity‐ the dematerialization. Moreover, according to Davidson et al., (2014) the effort factor measured by the marginal cost of extraction of new resources will increase in the future.

For the manufacturers, bringing new technology into the marketplace is also considered to be a benefit for the environment and perhaps the opportunity with highest environmental potential. Focusing on lowering the life cycle cost by optimizing product efficiency is a robust promoter for product development; this will facilitate maintenance and later refurbishment. From sustainability point of view and cost wise is proven to be valuable (Sakao et al., 2009).

On the other hand, paper manufacturers, an important stakeholder in the copying / printing process, share the same concern and have been revising continuously the process of forestry products used on new paper production. By 2014, in Europe, 72% of the fibers used in the pulp production for new paper were consequent from recycled paper (CEPI, 2015), this figure will grow within the next decades.

From the sustainability perspective, the wood pulp and paper industries have stabilized their rate of extraction of new materials (Pothen and Schymura, 2015). Bais et al., (2015) investigated the trends of wood harvest and use in 2010 and verified that from the Total Biomass Appropriation (TBA) of 1936 thousands of tonnes of Carbon (MtC)/year extracted, 273 MtC/year were used to produced paper, while from these 169 MtC/year were recycled. Recovered fiber pulp from recycled paper, is assumed to be utilized for 62% of paper and paperboard product production.

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

However, environmentalists claim that 1ton of uncoated virgin (non‐recycled) printing and office paper uses 24 trees. Therefore, the pressure to reduce wood pulp exploration are impelling organizations to reduce paper consumption and communicate this social responsibility endeavor to their stakeholders in order to improve their environmental reputation.

As conceptualized by Pine and Gilmore (1998), a linear type of economy whereby the evolution of the western societies was characterized by changes over the time, initially focus was on agriculture, followed by the manufactured goods and then services. In this type of economy no formal inception is known for products after the end of their lifetime (i.e. as occurring with paper). Environmental advantages can be obtained by utilizing circular supply chains rather than linear (Genovese et al., 2015).

Green and sustainable supply chain management practices emerged to integrate environmental concerns into organizations by reducing unintended negative consequences derived from the processes of production and consumption (Genovese et al., 2015).

Moreover, with the unescapably necessity to save energy and reduce the usage of natural resources, a new type of economy based on sustainable models was needed for the industry. Several concepts, along with their different terminologies have emerged. Two of the most common are “environmental sciences “and “sustainable development”, more recently the term “Circular Economy” (CE) came into circulation. (Sauvé et al., 2016).

Circular Economy (CE) can be defined as industrial processes that drives the boundaries of environmental sustainability by emphasizing the idea of transforming products in a way to ensure workable relationships between ecological systems and economic growth (Genovese et al., 2015), this (CE) looks to environment as an example to emulate for redesigning the production activities, in particular industrial

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

design and the development of patterns. Circular Economy aims to deliver a better alternative to the actual economic model, the so‐called “take, make and dispose” (Ness, 2008).

Lately, Circular Economy is receiving increasing attention as a way to overcome the current production and consumption model based on continuous growth and new resources utilization. While the implementation of Circular Economy (CE) is still at an early stage of development, it offers a reliable framework to improve the present business model towards preventive and regenerative eco‐industrial development as well as increased wellbeing based on recovered environmental uprightness (Ghisellini et al., 2016).

Circular Economy idea cannot be appointed to a specific author or a precise commencing date. Its practical applications to modern economic systems and industrial processes, however, have gained momentum since the late 1970s, led by a small number of academics, thought‐leaders and businesses (Ellen MacArthur foundation, 2016). On the extensive analysis of literature, Circular Economy (CE) concept shows to be rooted in very diverse theoretical backgrounds: ecological economics, environmental economics and industrial ecology (Ghisellini et al., 2016).

Despite some limitations, primarily due to physical constraints, Circular Economy seeks to continually sustain the circulation of recovered resources and energy within a closed system (the planet) thus reducing the need to feed production systems with new raw materials (Genovese et al., 2015).

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

1 2 As customers need to increase the environmental sustainability of their business they need to define and implement responsible printing polices, assess and certify the

3 benefits of such policies (e.g. in terms of carbon footprint 45) (Visintin, 2012However, the question remains whether digital content will help us to reduce the carbon footprint and thereby make the office printing more environmentally friendly?

A digital content will be environmentally beneficial compared with the current print‐ based model. This does not however mean that the current print‐based model should be completely replaced by the digital content service model; rather it should be complementary (Chowdhury, 2010). As we could face earlier, digital standards are of short life cycle. Being so, the complement of a physical support used in a sustainable manner will always be necessary.

2.2.3 Dematerialization

Dematerialization can be described as the act that removes any materiality (or physical support) that was formerly endowed or part of it as a result creating a state of material absence also known as demateriality (Fimbel et al., 2015). Nonetheless, some authors use the notion of dematerialization as synonymous of digitization (Coreynen et al., 2017). Furthermore, if we look to the Economic ground theory ignited by Malenbaum (1978) and Bernardini and Galli (1993), dematerialization is usually described “as the reduction of the quantity of stuff and or energy needed to produce something useful and is then often assessed by a measure of intensity of use or throughput (consumption/production of energy and/or goods per GDP)” (Magee and Devezas, 2017). This ratio DMC/GDP (Domestic Material Consumption/ Gross Domestic Product), also designated as resource or material intensity. Kestmont and Kerkhove (2010) claim that the main objective of dematerialization is to improve the wellbeing of society through more efficient and sustainable development

1 2 3 A carbon footprint can be defined as: The total amount of greenhouse gases produced to directly and indirectly support human activities, usually expressed in equivalent tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) (see www.time forchange.org) 4 5

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Since dematerialization can take many forms, in our research we will use this term as synonymous of reduction of paper consumption as consequence of the digitization of information and the implementation of the paperless policy in organizations and firms. The theory of a paperless society seems plausible, much of what once happened on paper has already shifted to the screen. In the near future, more promising technologies will no doubt emerge that will cut instances of wasteful, unnecessary paper use. The benefits that accrue to organizations from paper reduction remain unquestioned and must continue to be emphasized by professionals (Kreger, 1999; Carr, 2005).

While Steinberger et al. (2013) demonstrated that absolute dematerialization limits economic growth rates, while the successful industrialization of developing countries inevitably requires a strong material component, others like Schandl et al. (2016) claim that dematerialization is possible with well‐designed policy settings and would not contradict efforts to raise human wellbeing and standards of living. OECD economies have significant potential to reduce their material throughput and carbon emissions with little impact on economic growth.

According to several studies of Material Flow Analysis (MFA) the amount of biomass (including wood pulp) extracted is stable. Based on the work of Pothen and Schymura (2015) who investigate the amount of materials used worldwide in production and consumption that increased by 56% from 1995 to 2008. Using an index decomposition analysis (IDA) these authors investigate the drivers of material use in a panel dataset of 40 countries, accounting for 75% of worldwide material extraction and 88% of GDP. They use the World Input–Output Database‐ WIOD (http://www.wiod.org/home; Dietzenbacher et al., 2013), containing harmonized input–output tables and data on material extraction for 40 major economies and 34 sectors. Two conclusions emerged: 1) in the period 1995‐2008 the average rate of growth of extracted material of pulp, paper, paper products, printing and publishing (NACE Code 21t22) is about 2%; 2) Portugal belongs to the group of the “worst” countries because its rate of extraction is one of greatest among the 40 countries.

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

However, Ayres and van den Bergh (2005) and Magee and Devezas (2017) claim that dematerialization has an implicit growth mechanism, and can be counteracted by a demand rebound ‐ increases in usage because of increased value (or decreased cost) that also results from increasing technical performance and innovation (Varadarajan, 2017). This rebound is also known as Jevons Paradox since 1865, when he warned that gains in the use of any resource tend to be followed by increases, rather than decreases in consumption (Jevons, 1865 quoted by Davidson et al., 2014). For example, York (2006) identified this paradox in paper industry because there was an increase of paper consumption following the move towards ‘‘paperless offices’’. Against all odds and what would be the logic consequence of dematerialization, office paper demand (technically named as cut size free sheet), did not suffer a reduction, instead, the rebound effect occurred and the trend is an increase on demand till 2023 (RISI, 2015). Possible explanations may rely on a growing demand in new market areas such as B2C, production printing and emerging countries.

Looking to the demand by areas, we can see a decay in Europe and USA, steady on Oceania, but increasing in the rest of the world. Concurrently, two scenarios will co‐ exist: is a decrease on technology prices, as well, due to the use of less natural resources for paper production. The preliminary statistics of the Confederation of European Paper Industries (CEPI‐ www.cepi.org) shows an increase in of paper and board production from 80 million tonnes in 1996 to 91 million in 2016. The, world paper and board production will be up by 0.8% in 2016 to reach 410 million tonnes. Gnoni and Elia (2013) suggested a conceptual framework of printing supply chain that give us the big picture of paper flows and the related consumptions of energy and materials. Our research is focused in the last stage of this supply chain‐ the B2B customer, and in the next section we will discuss all the antecedents and consequences of digitization and paperless offices inside those customers (see figure 6).

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Figure 6: Main process stages in the printing supply chain

Source: Gnoni and Elia (2013)

Chao (2015) Greenwood (2012) and Sellen and Harper (2002), pointed out several reasons which diminished paper documents usage against the value of a new paperless type: 1) Paper must be used on site not being able to be reached from a distance; 2) Being a physical support, paper occupies space. This can be a problem for archiving and storage; 3) To be delivered, paper documents require an external action (i.e. post); 4) A paper document can only be used by one reader at a time; 5) Due to the definitive displacement of the information on top of the paper, paper documents cannot be easily revised, reformatted and merged with other documents; 6) To replicate paper a document, external technology is needed (i.e. photocopiers, scanners, etc.); 7) Paper documents, can only retain static information (wording or images); 8) Paper based systems are less safe because they are exposed to several risks of destruction. However, Cumming and Findlay (2010) adds that digital records are also vulnerable to cybernetic attacks. To be relied for business legal and other purposes digital records need to be meaningful and trustworthy.

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Furthermore, according to Jones (2012) corporate electronic document management systems (EDMS) have several benefits: (a) customer service representatives have access to the information needed to provide a complete service; (b) staff can access information needed to perform their duties from anywhere; (c) the creation of electronic documents means that paper originals can be destroyed, reducing filing space; (e) reduction in printing and printers due to electronic documents; (f) reduction in staff due to improved efficiency; (g) the provision of an audit trail of electronic information updates; and (h) the improvement of information management.

Although it is notorious that a transition to dematerialization is occurring in today’s offices, there is nothing sacrosanct that establishes that it is occurring in all offices and at similar levels. Other studies have shown that despite the widespread deployment of digital technologies, paper and material artifacts remain pervasive and critical resources in the accomplishment of workplace activities, and in various ways underpin communication and collaboration (Luff et al., 2006; Murrell, 2017).

When comparing the reaction of our brain upon the usage of a paper document and a digital document (viewed on a screen), the attitude is remarkable different. For a paper document our brain is looking to a passive source of light (reflective), whereby four of the five senses are use. Our eyes will read and easily scroll the document. By touching and feeling a document (loose pages or book) the brain has perception of deepness of the document, age and type of subtract. On other hand, when viewing a digital document through a screen, our brain is always looking at an active source of light, adjusting only one sense‐ our vision‐ accordingly. Studies in the past two decades indicate that people often understand and remember text on paper better than on a screen (Jabr, 2013). Screens may inhibit comprehension by preventing people from intuitively navigating and mentally mapping long texts. Furthermore, McCormack (2011) argues that the human mind and its habitual ways of operating are, as always, most important and probably there is a profound psychological and physiological need that would make a completely paperless workplace much less efficient than we might expect, paperless office continues to elude us, probably the major reason for paper usage has to do with how we read, think and work.

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

The emergence of new digital technologies and its accessibility to the vast majority dictated transformations to ancient processes based on physical supports such as paper, thus, enabling potential users to rethink the hardware usage towards a more sustainable process through the conversation to dematerialized information. Digital equipment is becoming more sophisticated, costs are dropping, much more information is now digital or being digitalized. Unlike paper documents, digital documents are easier to handle, share and store. Whitehead (2001) defends that in today’s offices the paradigm shift is not on the type of media that supports documents, but its conversion to an immaterial logic value (bit or byte).

Moreover, Carr (2005) approaches the concept of dematerialization in the offices under the term of “paperless office”. For this author the nomenclature dates back to the 1970’s when Xerox Corporation promoted the concept through the combined usage of dedicated technology, such as computers, electronic mail and online information. Today, conversion tools are widely available and together they are able to offer a dematerialized office or as early mentioned a “paperless office”.

Organizations are different from each other, as so, the process of dematerialization or “paperless” implementation will differ. Nevertheless, the degree of transformation will depend on the organization’s willingness to adapt to change (Carr, 2005). Nowadays, a document can be created through immaterialized means such as computer in a matter of seconds and be delivered to recipients nearby or across the world, having the possibility to share de document, store it, or if needed print it, this dematerialized process can be designated as a “Digital Office” (Whitehead, 2001). The dematerialized office (paperless) has been committed over the years by a number of technological developments, especially the desktop and the Internet (Sellen and Harper, 2002).

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

When compared with paper based documents, Dehlez et al. (2005) argue that the transition to electronic document delivery and perpetual access are vital, such will be effective with the implementation of data repositories to track and store electronic documents.

The dematerialization of information resulted from the implementation of paperless practices in today’s companies associated with functional document management considered as more ecofriendly that saves resources, secures information for longer periods in less space and is available anytime, as well, more communicative between the users.

According to the market research company IDC, by 2011, the total estimated number of printed pages (3.09 trillion pages A4) decreased by 1 % when compared to IDC figures from 2010. Another similar source, Gartner, estimates a reduction in printed, copied and faxed pages of approximately 50 % during the past six to seven years in the B2B market; this decrease is certainly due to the digitization of document management workflows (Weilerstein and Mitani, 2015).

With the evolution of technology and its low cost, dematerialized processes emerged and the importance of paper began to be questioned. Sellen and Harper (2002) pointed out seven reasons that diminished paper documents usage against the value of a new paperless type: 1) Paper must be used on site not being able to be reached from a distance; 2) Being a physical support, paper occupies space. This can be a problem for archiving and storage; 3) To be delivered, paper documents requires an external action (i.e. post); 4) A paper document can only be used by one reader at a time; 5) Due to the definitive displacement of the information on top of the paper, paper documents cannot be easily revised, reformatted and merged with other documents; 6) To replicate paper a document, external technology is needed (i.e. photocopiers, scanners, etc.); 7) Paper documents, can only retain static information (wording or images).

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

The egocentric usage of paper documents in organizations may lead to an isolated type of work; studies on the use of technologies in a broad range of organizational environments pointed out a long‐standing recognition that documents do provide a foundation to collaborative work (Luff et al., 2006). Technology has reshaped today’s documents, from a two‐dimensional physical piece of information to a three‐ dimensional block of information, with video and audio possibilities, main properties of dematerialized documents are: 1) Three dimension availability; 2) Possibility to multiple viewing, sound, video; 3) Easy to search and track; 4) Easy to modify and merge with other documents; 5) Easy to archive in minimalist spaces independently from the size; 6) Cheap to maintain.

Furthermore, Sellen and Harper (2002) have developed a very interesting scheme (seef) that reflects the life cycle of todays dematerialized (digital) document life cycle (see figure 7 ), based on the following attributes: 1) Marshaling and Extracting Information, digital applications are abundant in tools to extracting information to for the viewer to read, annotate, extract parts or whole and organizing accordingly to preferences and needs; 2) Creating and Authoring Documents, consequently and using the array of available tools, the user can create, edit and analyze consistency; 3) Finalizing Documents, further on the user can now check the document and apply the final touching, such as pre available formats, company standards, review for grammar and syntax errors; 4) Distribution and Work flow, using standardized workflows the user can distribute the final document, either internally or externally; 5) Reading/Consuming Information, standard online tools allow the document to be viewed, read, and translated. This can be a simple text, images or even video; 6) Collaborative Activity, through the use of digital tools it is possible for the user to have real time collaboration, sharing either on real time or asynchronous. The collaboration may extend to face‐to‐face meetings (i.e. using video conferencing); 7) Filing and Archiving, final information can now be organized and filled according to coding in use, this can be locally or remotely (either with physical HW or (will all the readers understand that HW stands for Hardware? Or cloud).

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

)

2002 (

er p Har

and

Sellen

Source

Cycle

Life

Document

Figure

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Complementing the information gathered from the previous chapters, a possible logic syntax could be established by the following statement “Subsequently to Gutenberg’s invention and further to the technological breakthroughs, globalization and commoditization of the office printing products, offices entered into a cycle of document dematerialization, thus, impacting the demand on the office printing manufacturing industry as well as the paper industry”.

Although it is notorious that a transition to dematerialization is occurring in today’s offices, there is nothing revered which establishes that it is occurring in all offices and at similar levels. Studies have shown that despite the widespread deployment of digital technologies, paper and material artifacts remain pervasive and critical resources in the accomplishment of workplace activities, and in various ways underpin communication and collaboration (Luff et al., 2006).

The cognitive experience mankind share with paper is a long‐lasting relationship. Started on II century AD and emphasized on the XV century through the hands of Gutenberg. Being so, we can define the human being as of a paper centric nature.

When comparing the reaction of our brain upon the usage of a paper document and a digital document (viewed on a screen), the attitude is remarkable different: 1) For a paper document our brain is looking to a passive source of light (reflective), whereby four of the five senses are use; 2) By touching and feeling a document (loose pages or book) the brain has perception of deepness of the document and type of subtract; 3) Through smell we may assume the age of the document and its storing conditions; 4) Our eyes will read and easily scroll the document, standard paper formats will make the task easier; 5) Hearing will help mapping how deep is the document and type of subtract; 6) When viewing a digital document through a screen, our brain is always looking at an active source of light, adjusting our vision accordingly. When comparing with a physical document, our brain will use only one sense “Vision” in some cases hearing may complement depending on the nature of the document.

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Studies in the past two decades indicate that people often understand and remember text on paper better than on a screen (Jabr, 2013). Screens may inhibit comprehension by preventing people from intuitively navigating and mentally mapping long texts. Furthermore, this author complements his conclusions on how brain interprets both types of documents through a scheme (see figure 8).

Figure 8: Paper reading against Digital

Source: Jabr (2013)

On one hand, technology will eliminate many paper records, but on the other hand it also create more information (Carr, 2005) and a large amount of individuals will still want to have it on paper. Cumming and Findlay (2010) adds that digital records are vulnerable. To be relied for business legal and other purposes digital records need to be meaningful and trustworthy.

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

The above contradictory interpretations brings a dilemma into the context, let us take into appreciation two different specimens in nature: 1) The 42 lines paper Bible printed by Gutenberg on the XV century; 2) The latest EU treaty available in digital format.

The first example, is undoubtedly readable nowadays as long as one can access the physical document or a facsimile, little has changed since then. Physical support (paper) is similar; format may be out of today’s standards, but nothing our bare eyes cannot cope with.

As for the second document we may ask, will it be possible to read this example in the next five centuries with the digital tools and formats we have as of today (when the original document was produced)? The reasonable answer will be no as the longevity of digital formats is ephemeral, nevertheless, this will not be a problem as long as a hard copy is available.

We can therefore conclude that the biggest strength of paper relies on its simplicity, improved over the centuries. For Samuelson (1997), the ones proclaimed a beforehand obituary for paper are most certainly wrong, for two reasons related to technology and economics. First, over the years paper is easier to use and more versatile, second paper has become cheaper; therefore, people will use more of it. Nowadays, a third reason may be associated; paper is becoming more environmentally friendly as it is produced using a substantial part of recycled fibers.

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

1 23 As we may conclude, dematerialization and transition to immaterial documents will not be a peaceful and rapid process by nature. Paper still plays an important role. Bacelar (1999), wrote a very interesting commentary on the subject of paper subsistence entitled “Elegy to Paper”4:

“On paper, however, it seems we have reached an apotheotic grand finale: one can put any amount of pixels, somewhere on a page, the way you want, when you feel like it, with arbitrary levels of accuracy…

But paper will not stop being used, because it contains and will remain to encompass a huge amount of information, knowledge, which can last for centuries without upgrades, backups, or batteries. We may well live to see the day where we will confront ourselves with new creative challenges on paper, with a design technologically advanced ‐ which does not necessarily need to be assisted by computer”.

Against all odds and what would be the logic consequence of dematerialization, office paper demand (technically named as cut size free sheet), did not suffer a reduction, instead, the trend is an increase on demand till 2023 (see figures 9 and 10). Possible explanations may rely on a growing demand in new market areas such as business to consumer (B2C), production printing and emerging countries.

321 4 Free translation by the author

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Figure 9: Global demand for cut size uncoated freesheet paper (in KTon)

Source: RISI (2015)

Figure 10: Demand for cut size uncoated freesheet paper by region (in KTon)

Source: RISI (2015)

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

2.3 Internal Factors Influencing DPOP Aiming to respond to the second research question, in this section we will describe the factors that motivate companies to join DPOP with the arrival of new technologies. Some of the advantages of working with electronic documents rather than printed files in paper are: less paper consumption; less forest destruction; easier document handling; easier information backup and retrieval when needed; cost savings on paper costs and less storage space; (Velte et al. 2008). Internal factors affecting companies decision to adhere to DPOP can be grouped as:

1) Cost reduction, major factors in this area are: a) Material cost, one of the key ingredients for DPOP is the reduction or elimination of paper that an organization uses for document production (Khan and Aftab, 2015; Orantes‐Jiménez et al., 2015; Webber et al., 2009; Miller, 2016) b) A second cost associated to DPOP is energy saving as production of documents is heavily reduced (Mendoza‐Fermin, 2012 ) c) A third factor related to cost reduction is space saving as the need for large storing areas used for paper documents archiving will decrease or cease (Orantes‐Jiménez et al., 2015; Hattingh, 2001);

2) Sustainability, is another internal factor preferred by companies based on good environmental practices and resource saving policies (Orantes‐Jiménez et al., 2015; Khan and Aftab, 2015; Webber et al. 2009), the adoption of such factors, will improve companies’ image towards the market, saves forest resources by using less trees (Orantes‐Jiménez et al., 2015; Webber et al. 2009) contributes to make the planet more sustainable for years to come (Khan and Aftab, 2015) and reduces footprint (Mendoza‐Fermin, 2012 ) ;

3) Process efficiency, Miller (2016), arguments that working collaboration through the sharing of documents and data “just in time” improves efficiency, and quality Baines (1997), encourages collaborative business processes and functional integration Hattingh (2001) thus, benefiting the internal functioning of the organizations Orantes‐ Jiménez et al. (2015). Moreover, by eliminating the distress of distance, as users do

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

not have to travel to locations where paper documents are available (Khan and Aftab, 2015), will grant ready access to numerous documents at one time (York, 2006).

Electronic documents can be stored and delivered and accessed when and how required (Hattingh, 2001). Furthermore, for Mullin (2001) a program that handles paper documents better than the electronic ones, on storage, archiving and retrieving are key ingredients for success;

4) Company image, this last factor is of extreme importance, as it will exhibit honorable internal processes to the market. Companies that adopt sustainable and environmental practices are seen by customers as good examples to follow (Gosnell, 2017) and will influence others by being an opinion leader (Mendoza‐Fermin, 2012), furthermore, it also improves customer's perceptions of the organization, transforming this attitude onto a competitive advantage (Hattingh, 2001).

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

2.4 Summary As we could observe earlier in the previous chapters, two inventions in different timelines drastically changed mankind behavior in terms of information and knowledge sharing, thus creating the roots of a system that still prevails nowadays. Basic contributions rely on paper invention in China (II century AD) associated to mechanical printing invented in Germany through the hands of Gutenberg (XV century). Not only a new way of mass communication was devised, but, the materialization of documents either for personal or corporate use, was born.

Although Gutenberg’s invention suffered small progresses till the dawn of Industrial Revolution (1760‐1840), advancement on paper production kept as an evolutionary process (initial manual produced from rags and later mechanically from wood pulp), leveraged by and increasing demand from the market. In the office area, new inventions such as the typewriter emerged (XVIII century).

New printing technologies have created an environment of dissemination of the written word throughout organizations and individuals alike, pushing further on the boundaries of continuous improving and inventions of the equipment and inventions.

Constant need of supplementary supply of paper was solved thanks to new processes and raw materials (wood pulp), creating also the conditions for new printing equipment development. In the office area, we can establish two milestones. The first, as from Industrial Revolution till WWII, whereby new machinery such as copiers and duplicators emerged. The second, from the WWII till the last decade of the XX century were the major advancements in the office printing industry took place. Equipment such as printers (using technologies such as matrix, laser and ink jet) were developed, photocopiers and multi‐function products with the ability to copy, print, scan and fax were invented and largely promoted, initially amongst large companies and later with the advent of Globalization throughout all B2B market. Associated to Globalization a paradox phenomenon occurred, at first the commoditization of office printing

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

products (now cheaper, undifferentiated and with added functions). The second, printing reduction due to the incremental processes of immaterial documents creation and transmission between companies and individuals using Internet and intranets. Such new behaviors led to the beginning of dematerialization programs in companies to decrease paper usage, also known as DPOP (Digitation and Paperless Office Programs). The theory of a paperless society seems plausible, much of what once happened on paper has already shifted to the screen. In the near future, more promising technologies will no doubt emerge that will cut instances of wasteful and unnecessary paper use. The benefits that accrue to organizations from paper reduction remain unquestioned and must continue to be emphasized by professionals (Kreger, 1999; Carr, 2005). By studying the phenomenon of paperless office we fill a gap in the literature, as according to our knowledge there are no research’s that has analyzed this phenomenon using a country scale approach.

The literature review in chapter 2 supports our research questions RQ1 and RQ2 related to DPOP.

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

CHAPTER 3: CONSEQUENCES OF DIGITATION AND PAPERLESS OFFICE PROGRAMS AND SERVITIZATION

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

This page intentionally left blank

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

3. Consequences of Digitation and Paperless Office Programs and Servitization 3.1 Product to Service Transition In this section we will respond to research question three on the consequences of paperless office dematerialization. By the 1960’s when Xerox (the oldest player in office printing industry) launched the first plain‐paper copying machine, it kept responsible for its maintenance, while customers just paid for the usage (i.e. pay‐per‐ copy). As so, Xerox’s service model converted new copying technologies into a business opportunity (Cusumano et al. 2015). A decade later when the Japanese manufacturing companies internationalized, the business model changed and was built exclusively around the sales of product. By the end of the XX century with the advent of globalization, such premium products became commodities. Product commoditization, removes differentiation, leading to stagnation on product sales and the declining of product margins forcing product‐oriented companies to search for new opportunities to attain competitive advantages and differentiation (Gebauer et al., 2016), inducing manufacturers to switch towards services (Wilkinson et al., 2009) and integrated solutions (Davies et al., 2007)

Complementing the initial timeline, we added supplementary facts; Product, transition from Product to Service and later Servitization (see figure 11). If one looks to this change with respect to printing and office printing industries on the limit such period can be established at around six centuries. Nevertheless, and since it is more precise to support the evolution of the industry with the advent of the Industrial Revolution (between 1760 and 1830), it is more accurate to set this transition on two centuries, which, nonetheless is a great period of time.

The transition from Product to Service has three important momentums (see figure 11): 1) Product, at this stage, manufacturers were mainly focused on the revenue generated through the sales of products. Pine and Gilmore (1998) contend that

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

evolution of the western societies is characterized by changes over the time; initially focus was on agriculture, followed by the manufactured goods and later services. Furthermore, Åkesson and Skålén (2011) suggest that goods dominant logic value is embedded in an organization’s offering of products. This period can be traced as from the beginning of the printing industry (or later the Industrial Revolution) till the last decade of the XX century; 2) Product to Service, as a consequence of commoditization amongst office printing products, the demand for equipment to the industry decreased. Moving from product manufacturer to service provider constitutes a major managerial challenge to current structures and processes, a completely new scenario for the product manufacturer (Knecht et al., 1993). Profoundly affected by market conditions, at this point in time, manufacturers started to include services with the produced products, or independently from the products. The evolutionary process, whereby manufacturing companies responded to customers and competition with service offerings at the equipment, created positive impact on company’s performance (Gebauer et al., 2012). This period can be outlined as from the end of the XX century to first decade of the XXI century; 3) Service and Servitization, to struggle against the consequences of the dematerialization process occurring in companies, and, in order to maintain customers, installed bases and revenues streams, most of the manufacturers were now offering services (in some type of offerings the product is just an add‐on). For a substantial number of manufacturing companies, services represent the single largest opportunity for revenue and profit growth (Brechbuhl, 2004). Most of the manufacturing firms changed the paradigm by gradually providing services in addition to their traditional product offer; such a process is named as servitization (Vandermerwe and Rada, 1988). The commencement of servitization process in the office printing industry can be estimated as of the first decade of the XXI century and still being implemented to the present day.

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Author

Source:

Industry)

Printing

(Office

service

product

from

Evolution

11:

Figure

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

3.2 Marketing Path To understand the transition from product to service, we should establish an historic route based on the reality of both. Kotler et al., (2010) in his book Marketing 3.0: From Products to Customers to the Human Spirit forms a timeline that begins in 1950. At this point in time, it was noticeable that there was a science in place we now call marketing. It may not have been the same name since its inception, but has always assumed a force of evolution, which contributes to its constant change.

By 1950, Neil Borden introduced the marketing mix, but it was McCarthy who in 1960 appointed them as the "4 P's "; P (for product), P (for price), P (for placement, distribution) and P (for promotion) (Kotler et al., 2010).

1960 was determined by the post‐war environment, the marketing concept comes with the manufacturing sector in this period the business point of view did not required great strategy and the only function of marketing was to motivate the search for products (Kotler et al., 2010). This author noted that the economy suffered its setback by 1970 at the oil crisis maintaining its inconstancy until 1980. New facts changed the role of management, the offer was scarce and the demand for consumer product was nothing more than a commodity. This period also marked the origin of a different competition in order to stimulate the launch of products to compete. By this time, marketing functions and its compounds were no longer sufficient to support new strategies, for this reason new factors such as the Process, People, and Physical Evidence were added.

During these two decades, the evolution trend was noticeable in almost all aspects, especially in management parameters, the product became the center of attention and marketers have realized the importance of implementing strategies such as segmentation, positioning and the targeting able to stand before all others and to foster an active customer demand. Time awarded new experiences and consumers demanded changes.

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

As so, leading marketers had to explore new alternatives, the product moved to background and consumer became the center of attention in the market.

By 1989, a new era emerged, globalization, this was and is a vital tool for businesses to promote its products, becoming also the medium of choice between supply and demand. It creates an environment of greater interaction with the consumer, generating a new stream in the performance of marketing professionals, now looking to the more emotional side of the audience (Kotler et al., 2010).

One of the most important trends in marketing business (B2B) is the abandonment of sale of individual products in favor of solutions, customized packages of goods, services and intellectual property (Bonney and Williams, 2009). These authors argue that over time we see a change in the forms of "delivery" of value to the market, technology and the constant change of information systems give new meaning to the market.

Technological developments as from the second half of the XX century profoundly changed marketing practices; vast changes also incurred at the level of marketing management. The "modus operandi" of marketing has undergone major changes, originally built on a goods‐centered architecture. Manufacturing based model of economic exchange developed during the Industrial Revolution whose dominant logic was based on the transaction value of tangible goods (Vargo and Lusch, 2004). Throughout time, a new logic focused on service emerged and changed the whole marketing perspective, increasingly focused on co‐creation of value and market relations. Furthermore, Vargo and Lusch (2004) refer the work of Marshall (1927); Shaw (1912) and Smith (1904) pioneers in the formal introduction of marketing as a discipline and argued that the manifestation of the act of distributing and exchanging goods from own production could result on savings.

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Later, in the mid 50’s; Drucker , Levitt and McKitterick added value to the human definition of marketing management, the concern was not just the result of the interaction during an exchange but in its destination, the customer (Vargo and Lusch, 2004).

Work from McCarthy and Kotler (1967) added emphasis to the important role of the client, as well, as the need to satisfy it (Vargo and Lusch, 2004), only then, can resources be assigned and profit be aspired. By the mid 70’s, Kotler (1972) accentuates the usefulness of marketing management, valuing its intention to maximize business objectives and considering observation on customer behaviors. Up around 1980, came to life marketing terms such as: relationship marketing, quality management, market orientation, value chain, amongst others.

From all the discussed aspects, the most valued one by Shostack (1977) and Vargo & Lusch (2004) are services, in recognition to the principles that mobilizes them as well as the power they have gained.

Transformation from a goods‐based economy to a services‐based economy suggests that firms need to redirect the production and marketing strategy that they have adopted for manufactured goods (Yan et al., 2010). Gebauer and Friedli (2005) argue that a product manufacturer can use services as one of the main differentiating factors in its product marketing strategy. When considering service potential marketing opportunities can be understood as "better services for selling more products" (Mathe and Shapiro, 1993).

The sub discipline of service marketing has emerged to address a more broadened perspective, but, it is built on the same goods and manufacturing‐based model (Vargo and Lusch, 2004).

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

3.3 Service Atmosphere The concept of services is not entirely consistent amongst operations and service management scholars; there are a number of attributes of services that need to be agreed by most of the academic community (Oliveira and Roth, 2012).

When defining service through the eyes of manufacturers, in the literature we can find several designations such as: industrial services, service strategy in manufacturing, product‐related services, product‐services or after‐sales services (Oliva and Kallenberg, 2003).

To organize this large and growing body of literature, it was necessary to clarify the definition. The problem to define services as intangible products is that intangible products can have a wide coverage; from technical service to education to financial services and from health to sports (Bowen and Ford, 2002).

One of the most common definitions used for service is: “An act or performance offered by one party to another” (Lovelock, 2000). While the process may be linked to a physical product, performance is basically intangible and will not result in ownership of any of the factors of production; these may include intangibility, inseparability of production and consumption, heterogeneity, perishability, and inability to be stored in inventory (Oliveira and Roth, 2012).

An alternative definition, was suggested earlier by Pine and Gilmore (1998) in the book “The Experience Economy”, proposing that an intangible service includes all the elements that come together to create a memorable experience for a customer at a point in time. In the transition from the agrarian society to industrial and later services these authors characterized in a substantial manner the economic distinctions each of the phases (see figure 12).

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Additionally, Zeithaml et al. (2008) proposed that intangibility and its outcome create key differences between the manner an organization producing services is managed and the way one producing tangible products is ran.

Whereas tangible goods (products) are already in a pre‐prepared stage, services (intangibles) are performed in a process in which customers interact with the

production resources of the service firm (Grönroos, 2008). 123

Figure 12: Economic Distinctions

Funible Economic Distinctions

Economic Offering Commodities Goods Services EconomyAgrarian Industrial Service

Economic Function Extract Make Deliver

Nature of Offering Fungible5 Tangible Intangible 4 Key Attribute Natural Standardized Customized

Method of Supply Stored to Bulk Inventoried after Production Delivered on Demand Seller Trader Manufacturer Provider Buyer Market User Client

Factors of Demand Characteristics Features Benefits

Source: Adapted from the model of Pine and Gilmore (1998)

When looking to the economic performance, in general services have higher margins than products (Anderson et al., 1995), the potential of service revenue and higher margins are in fact a more stable source of revenue, being at the end a valuable financial benefit (VDMA, 1998). Studies suggest that the role of services has increased in importance as product manufacturing firms and solution providers have struggled with price erosion and a decreasing competitive edge with respect to their products (Kohtamäki and Helo, 2015).

1 2 3 4 5 Fungible: Being of such a nature that one part or quantity may be replaced by another equal part of quantity in the satisfaction of an obligation (oil, wheat, and lumber are fungible commodities) (Merriam‐Webster dictionary)

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

In difficult economic times, services provide companies the possibility to new business areas, help them to increase turnover and even absorb some losses, innovative services enable these companies to ensure their market positions and to achieve economic success (Aurich et al., 2010), for the office printing industry this may reveal as the new way of doing business in the near future, as well, as defining who will survive in the long term, there are already some examples in the literature that may help us to understand such evolution.

Since a few years now, services have been seen as both an opportunity and a potential countermeasure for manufacturers whose revenues from product sales are decreasing. Service businesses typically have higher margins and they can provide firmer revenue streams than product businesses (Nordin, 2006).

Nevertheless, and despite the potential profit that services represent, by the last quarter of the XX century the list of manufacturing organizations with strong service strategies was not as extended as the literature would expect (Knecht et al., 1993).

Together with globalization and sustainability, service‐driven manufacturing will continue to be among the most significant advances in contemporary industrial business management. While the idea has been around for quite a long time, the understanding of the phenomenon is still relatively limited (Gebauer et al., 2012).

Win‐win situations for suppliers and customers should be established on comparative advantages. New service based business focused on superiority, creates added value and offers not only the absence of additional risks, but also creates additional profits (Lay et al., 2009). In the last couple of years, service business became a growth area of extreme importance in the manufacturing industry due to the fact that the majority of manufacturers have already reached a stage of competitive maturity regarding their products and are now focusing on their global service operations (Kucza and Gebauer, 2011).

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

It was now necessary to focus the attention on the marketing of tangibles and intangibles as the boundaries of the traditional difference between products and services that, by this time, was already identified (Levitt, 1981). For this author, interactions with customers in the case of intangibles need to be managed more carefully and continuously than in the case of tangibles, particularly in the case of new and complex goods such technology products. Findings increasingly indicate that the implementation of service‐based business concepts in the technology business is becoming a global business trend (Lay et al. 2010).

Manufacturers are increasingly focusing on services in order to boost customer relationships and develop new sources of revenue as a form to resist to product commoditization (Oliva and Kallenberg, 2003). Moreover, Johnstone et al. (2009) contend that the expansion of services is one of the major trends of recent years. This is mirrored in the moving structures of contemporary economies in the developed world where services now account for the majority of employment, as well, as the substance of national output.

Prior to the 70s of the XX century, production of physical assets and equipment has been a trademark of manufacturing since the start of the industrial era (Neely and Austin, 2002). When looking into the inevitabilities behind the migration from product to service, Pine and Gilmore (1998) anticipate that unless companies want to stay in a commoditized business such as goods, they will be compelled to upgrade their offerings to the next stage of economic value such as services (see figure 13).

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Figure 13: The progression of Economic Value

Source: Adapted from the model of Pine and Gilmore (1998)

Current economic recession and the global economy competitiveness are pushing many sectors of the manufacturing industry to adapt to an ever‐changing business environment looking for new ways to diversify their business (Takata et al., 2004). To respond to the increasing competition and satisfy growing demanding customers, manufacturing firms are changing the positioning of their product concepts, from being product‐based into service‐based (Cassia et al., 2015).

Manufacturers are accustomed to stable and controllable production processes (Reinartz and Ulaga, 2008), the acute competition strengthened by global trends such and rapid evolution of technologies led to outsourcing, and product/service commoditization. Profit margins of manufacturing companies are shrinking every day (Matthyssens et al., 2008), well‐designed products are no longer found to be the

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

criteria for distinct competitive advantage in manufacturing industries. As so, customer oriented industrial services offerings are increasingly gaining an important role (Datta and Roy, 2011).

Moving from product to service implies profound changes especially in the industry, manufacturers are solicited to respond to new requirements and features of the market and society, which are becoming more related to services than products. This will imply that companies within capital goods sector will be constrained by declining margins in their sales of new equipment and by a growing competition on spare parts (Leoni, 2015). As so, the need to add services and supply of integrated solutions (Windahl and Lakemond, 2010) is by far a strong possibility to follow.

During the last decades, the prominence of the manufacturing sector has been diminishing in most of the developed economies. Consequently profound changes in the economic structure of developed countries moved the added value away from manufacturing towards services (Crozet and Milet, 2014). Such, can also be regarded as a mean to secure long‐term growth and remain competitive in the marketplace (Jacob and Ulaga, 2008).

Moreover, physical products no longer provide guaranties for competitive advantage, financial performance and market opportunities (Oliva and Kallenberg, 2003; Brax and Jonsson, 2009), as a result, manufacturers increasingly seek new value in services and integrated solutions, either willingly or unwillingly from their traditional way of business models based on product sales (Kindstrom, 2010). To compete for customers, a substantial number of manufacturing companies are complementing their traditional goods offer by offering service with their physical products (Bjurklo et al., 2009).

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Most of the time, service development is more complex to implement in manufacturing companies than in pure service firms (Kindström and Kowalkowski, 2009). Goods manufacturers have their value and culture embedded around its core products, furthermore, their brand awareness is a product related one. To secure the benefits from services, manufacturing companies find themselves in a challenging process of capability and organizational transformation (Gebauer et al., 2012). From the managerial point of view the transition may encounter problems, Holmlund et al.

(2016) add that as such, seizing of service‐related business opportunities may occur. Companies such as IBM, General Electric, Xerox, Cannon and Parkersell have had a significant share of revenues and profits from services; this is attributed to the paradigm change from product to service (Quinn et al., 1990; Gebauer et al., 2012). IBM and General Electric (GE) have deliberately adopted service differentiation strategies in order to redefine the industry structure. These companies use service differentiation to create resources that are difficult to imitate and are less sensitive to the complexity of customer needs. IBM and GE exemplify the managerial implications of the balance between product and service innovation (Gebauer et al., 2011). Additionally, IBM’s success on the transition from products to services relies on the internal mutation from a pure mainframe manufacturer towards an IT service provider, commenced in the early 1990’s. This change enabled IBM to sustain its profitable margin leading to a strong increase in the earnings.

A paradox of losses and gains can be observed in this example, on one hand IBM was devastated by commoditization of some of its products (i.e. personal computers and hard disk businesses) (Bjurklo et al., 2009), on the other side, IBM reinforced its position through capability development in high value service oriented areas. Manufacturers of capital goods depend on services for much of their business profits and revenues; this fact applies for well‐known firms such as IBM and General Electric (Gebauer et al., 2010). Combining products with services permits differentiation and reduces the possibility of commoditization, with the associated loss of profit margins (Corrêa et al., 2007).

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Driven by market changes associated to strategic and financial opportunities, manufacturing companies have increasingly extended their service offerings over the last decade (Kucza and Gebauer, 2011). Product‐centered companies are pursuing service strategies for a number of reasons. Of particular interest among them are three drivers of growth in B2B services: outsourcing trends; saturation of an installed base; commoditization in product markets.

Price erosion is exacerbated by a growing trend toward commoditization (Reinartz and Ulaga, 2008), even in emerging economies most suppliers cannot satisfy required product standards. As so, manufacturers turn to services to set themselves apart from the competition. In the office printing industry, Xerox has been very successful in establishing a solutions business in which the focus is not on providing office equipment but, rather, on helping clients manage their document flow.

Additionally, Chesbrough (2010) mentions that by 1980s Xerox was known as ‘the copier company’, they made industry leading copiers and also office printers. While these products were profitable in their own right, the real revenue maker came through aftersales consumables (mainly toner and paper). Being so, the higher the printed volume, the greater were the returns. So Xerox’s business model searched widely (and effectively) for technologies that would enable more and faster copies and prints. This resulted in a strong cognitive bias within Xerox whose business model discouraged the development of low‐speed personal copiers. Like Xerox, most of office printing manufacturers followed the same trend. However, companies have many more processes and a much stronger shared sense of how to innovate technology, than they have about business models innovation.

The role of services has increased in importance as product manufacturing oriented companies moved towards industrial services and integrated solutions (Kohtamäki and Helo, 2015). Manufacturing companies are now redirecting their efforts towards customer centricity and innovativeness, and also from goods to services. Instead of

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

only innovating products, companies are investing in service differentiation. Consequently, instead of services being added to the product, they become the center of the total offering, with products as add‐ons to the services (Gebauer et al. 2011).

Recent literature, argue that competitive advantage is not simply about providing services, but how services are combined with products to provide high‐value ‘integrated solutions’ that address a customer’s business or operational need (Davies 2004), this is the output of organizations who want to explore opportunities and create value for the market (Windahl and Lakemond, 2006). Companies involved in the implementation of integrated solutions should hold extensive knowledge on the needs of their clients, which may often assume a logic shift from product to complementary services. With this new position towards the market, companies have created another awareness of new business different from its "traditional" way of doing things. Nonetheless, for many companies drawing a guideline to create integrated solutions will not be an easy task (Oliva and Kallenberg, 2003).

With the development of markets and the constantly changing demands of consumers, companies had to rethink their business model. It is with transition and adaptation to an increasingly interactive marketplace that comes the need for services integration in management practices, mainly because economic benefits are increased in this new model (Quinn et al., 1990; Wise and Baumgartner, 1999). Companies that stake on this managerial model should create conditions for a stable growth (Hays and Riggs, 2002), generating opportunities for profit and to whom the main objectives should be the specific needs of their customers (Oliva and Kallenberg, 2003; Windahl and Lakemond, 2006).

Nevertheless, Hays and Riggs (2002) argue that this change should be implemented gradually, for such, it must comply with certain steps. First, companies should clearly define their goals and the needs for change, then, establish the objectives and practices that will lead to the desired level. Throughout the process companies should be aware of the value to be delivered to the market and develop aggressive strategies

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

to envisage success. Although the implementation of new a management model is likely to offer more and better business opportunities, establishing it is quite unpredictable, complex and risky. For Lusch et al. (2007), service is a tool that allows one to maximize the value of products and even designate it as the fifth “P “of marketing.

Once a manufacturer is decided to cease working on a product whereby the delivery of value is merely the result of a physical building, and, move to the implementation of improved versions comprising integrated solutions, such, will assume the form of services (Carassus et al., 2006). Windahl and Lakemond (2006) also stress the importance of network management for the development of integrated solutions, such change requires the organization capacity, competence and a solid architecture for the integration of products and services (Shepherd and Ahmed, 2000).

Gebauer and Friedli (2005) add their contribution affirming that a manufacturer should use services as a differentiating factor, this will act as a complement to its value proposition. Research of various authors within the literature recognize that in general services are originated in marketing products, It is the same to say that trading tangible goods, presently give way to translate into intangible resources to provide services (Vargo and Lusch, 2004). Nevertheless, to succeed in the process of change it will be necessary to combine synergies with suppliers, business partners and customers (Windahl and Lakemond, 2006), together, they will all play their role as actors oriented to the creation of value.

Moreover, It is not possible to differentiate between products and services themselves, only with the discretion of tangibility (Corrêa et al., 2007). Consequently, three distinguishing characteristics were added to explain services: heterogeneity, characterized by difficulty to standardize the service; the inseparability of the production and the consumption and decay, described by the difficulty of measuring an inventory or service (Lovelock and Gummesson, 2004; Spring and Araujo, 2009).

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

New trends in marketing where the abandonment of the sale of products in favor of customized goods and services solutions becomes increasingly an important aspect for businesses (Bonney and Williams, 2009). Surprisingly, most manufacturers have focused only on the products themselves, they have largely ignored another element that plays a crucial role in differentiating a company's offerings and has a huge impact on costs and profits: services, as being more than technical problem solving, equipment installation, training, and maintenance (Anderson and Narus, 1995).

Competition will increase with the growth of service markets (Jacob and Ulaga, 2008), while a service orientation, today, helps a company to differentiate from competitors that remain goods oriented, the future will bring competition between service companies. The adoption of a new product‐service strategy requires investments on capacity building such as the acquisition of new peoples’ skills, capabilities and technologies (Reinartz and Ulaga, 2008). In addition to the physical products traditionally offered, many manufacturing companies are now recognizing that they must compete for customers by offering service with their physical products (Bjurklo et al., 2009).

Management literature is almost unanimous in suggesting to manufacturers that they should integrate services into their core product offering (Oliva and Kallemberg, 2003). However, the literature is surprisingly sparse in describing to what extent services should be integrated, how this integration should be carried out, or in detailing the challenges inherent in the transition to services.

Jacob and Ulaga (2008) add the argument that despite the growing body of service research, the literature on the transition from product to service in business‐to‐ business markets is still at an early stage. New business models bring inherent unpredictability and complexity to companies that add them to their core businesses (Hays and Riggs, 2002).

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

In this age of the ever‐expanding service economy it's precisely such new models that offer the greatest opportunity for renewal and growth. Transformation from pure‐ play manufacturing into product‐service hybrids helps position technology‐based companies to capture significantly larger market opportunities.

Nowadays, of all the aspects appreciated by customers, services are increasingly the most valued one. Parvatiyar and Sheth (2000) ; Vargo and Lusch (2004) claim that such preferences induce to the change of the marketing paradigm, from product to service. Investment in products and services leads to increased differentiation and thus to a strengthening of the company's competitive position (Oliva and Kallenberg, 2003).

The transition for services takes several steps, for Gebauer and Friedli (2005), in order to convert a product manufacturer into a service provider, it is necessary to increase the service contribution. Services require organizational principles, structures and processes new to the product manufacturer. Oliva and Kallenberg (2003) propose a model (see figure 14) to illustrate a more standard approach to the transition from products to services. Furthermore Davies (2004) uses another perspective for the product to service transition (see figure 15).

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

(2003)

Kallemberg

and

Oliva

model

Services

the

from

Products

Adapted

From

14:

Source:

Figure

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Figure 15: The capital goods value stream

Source: Adapted from a model of Davies (2004)

Each of the steps from Davies (2004) model is described as follows: 1) Manufacture: The first stage is responsible for taking raw materials and sub‐assemblies and transforming them into physical components and subsystems that are manufactured to meet an overall system design; 2) Systems integration: The second stage adds value through the design and integration of physical components—product hardware, software and embedded services—that have to work together as a whole in a finished product or system; 3) Operational services: In the next stage, an operator or business user runs and maintains a system to provide services, such as a corporate telecom network, baggage handling, flight simulation training and train services; 4) Service provision: In some industries services are provided to the final consumer through intermediary organizations, called service providers. Such type of firms are used frequently by IT and Office Printing Industry for geographical coverage or to complement the offer of manufacturers in large contracts.

If tangibility is enough to characterize goods at this stage, is that the same for intangible items such as services? As mentioned earlier, in the literature we can find several attributes that can define the nature of services: intangibility, heterogeneity, inseparability and perishability : 1) Intangibility: Out of any physical nature (Zeithaml et al., 2008); Lacking the palpable or tactile quality of good (Vargo and Lusch, 2004);

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

2) Heterogeneity:, A result of the service typically being co‐produced by employees and customers (Zeithaml et al., 2008); The relative inability to standardize the output of services in comparison to goods (Vargo and Lusch, 2004); 3) Inseparability: Inseparability of production and consumption (Zeithaml et al., 2008); The simultaneous nature of service production and consumption compared with the sequential nature of production, purchase, and consumption that characterizes physical products (Vargo and Lusch, 2004); 4) Perishability: Services cannot be stored, because there is nothing to store, thus, production is often simultaneous with consumption (Zeithaml et al., 2008); The relative inability to inventory services as compared to goods (Vargo and Lusch, 2004).

Most certainly, the forces driving the new economy have intensified the discussions about services and goods. These forces include the combination of globalization and high technology where the key outputs and productive assets are more intellectual (information and knowledge) than physical (Hays and Riggs, 2002). Fundamentally reshaping the present operations management to balance between the impacts of the old and the new economies

Clearly, the increased economic impact of the service sector is an integral part of the new economy on a global scale. Within the globalization and the merging of the international markets, the competitive environment for companies has been changed (Aurich et al. 2010). Markets used to be lethargic and have to transform themselves and new players have come onto the market, which enhance a dynamic market behavior.

Over the past several decades, we have witnessed a transformation from an industrial economy to a service economy (Vargo and Lusch, 2008). The service industry now account for 55% of economic activity in the US, and numerous initiatives for transforming firms from a goods orientation to a service orientation can be found in both business‐to‐business (e.g. IBM, GE) and business‐to‐consumer enterprises (e.g.

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Lowe’s, Kodak, Apple). For the established companies with mature product based business models, moving towards services can be considered as an evolutionary change (Kindström 2010).

An important example that illustrates the transition from product to services is given by Rosenbloom (2000) whereby NCR (National Cash Register), a company that has ever since lead the market with products and survived in the new market environment by transitioning to services. Initially, they came to the market as a manufacturer of mechanical cash registers followed by computer, printers and semi‐conductors production. During the last quarter of the XX century, they shift to services and complete solutions in the banking sector, either by selling complementary services to their products or complete solutions from third parties.

Furthermore, Vargo and Lusch (2004) complement that competing effectively through service has to do with the entire organization through the view and approach of both itself and the market with a service‐dominant logic. Later, Lusch et al. (2007) add that competing through service is more than adding value to products; it is also the collective roles of marketing, strategic business, human resource, information‐ systems, financial, and operations management to produce and distribute better products. Entirely new products and services are other ways of strengthening the company's competitive position (Gebauer and Friedli, 2005).

In terms of business practice, it means that managers should not wait until they lose competitive advantage in the product business, before moving from products to services. As soon as managers recognize that customers pay more attention to service‐ related needs, they should start to increase the service orientation of the business strategy and implement factors in organizational design (Gebauer et al. 2008).

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

3.4 Service Dominant Logic Service Dominant Logic (SDL) concept can be described as an evolving logic in marketing which advocates that the value proposition of the tangible goods is dominated (or motivated) by the intangible services value, added to the consumer and created by the acquisition, consumption and disposition of a tangible product (Vargo and Lusch, 2004).

Later, and to support more explicitly the transition from goods to services, Vargo and Lusch (2008) developed a bi‐logic concept. The first, a logic centered on goods, G‐D logic, where services are a continuum of goods, the second, (of a service dominant nature) S‐D logic, considers service as a process, rather than a unit of output (as goods). These authors argue that S‐D logic represents the intersection of service marketing and business marketing. Emerge of both logics was driven by the inadequacies of G‐D logic more related to the traditional marketing and business markets. Such circumstances, led the way for a transition in firm offering strategies from products to services followed by services as promoted by the S‐D logic (see table 3 for the differences between the two logics). This transition raises a number of challenges more specifically when offerings are bundled as solutions, which is very often the case around the year 2000’s (Cova and Salle, 2008).

The issue of S‐D logic adoption has motivated some confront between the usage of the terminology “Service” and “Services”. For Lusch et al. (2014), services (plural), like products (goods) can be defined as units of output. On the other hand, service (singular), can be considered as application of resources (e.g. knowledge and skills) by one in the benefit of another.

Although being of consistent logic construction, not all scholars follow this interpretation, as such; within our research we may find both nomenclatures (singular and plural) with the same significance.

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

In practical terms, the assumption of an S‐D logic sustains that all activities and processes of a provider that are pertinent to its customer’s business are coordinated with the customer’s matching activities and processes into one integrated flow of actions, with the commitment to support the customer’s processes, and ultimately the business results (Grönroos and Helle, 2010). Moreover, Edvardsson et al. (2011) complement that S‐D logic delivers an important basis for customer‐centered service design and provision. S‐D logic accentuates the dynamic utilization of operant resources – primarily the utility of employees’ knowledge and skills resulted from the co‐creation of value with customers. Possibly a surprise that research into S‐D logic has thus far been largely conceptual in nature and that few empirical studies have examined the practical question of how S‐D logic is actually established in an organization (Åkesson and Skålén, 2011).

The transition from a goods dominant logic (GDL) to a service dominant logic (SDL) lately became topical and has changed marketing’s focus from the company’s internal processes to the points of interaction between the company and customer. For Heinonen et al. (2010), both logics are examples of a provider‐dominant logic. In parallel with the product‐to‐service transition in the manufacturing industries, service‐dominant logic has emerged as arguably the most challenging recent scholarly marketing debate. Service‐dominant logic (SDL) takes a wider and more comprehensive view of exchange. Its emphasis is on the intangible, often information that can now be transmitted across national boundaries instantly, as well as higher‐ order skills that can be exported in addition to, or increasingly in lieu of, tangible goods (Lusch and Vargo, 2008) (see table 3).

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Table 3 ‐ Important differences between goods‐dominant logic and service‐ dominant logic

Source: Lusch and Vargo (2008)

For a supplier, adopting a service dominant logic means that it should gear its activities and processes towards supporting the customer’s practices, so that value is created for both parties in those practices and ultimately in the customer’s business process (Grönroos, 2008).

An example of the above is given by Grönroos and Helle (2010), the printing paper, as a basic condition to support customer’s printing core processes, a lack of this support will affect other relevant processes and may have a negative effect on the business process and the customer’s possibilities to do good business.

Thus, the real challenge is not to transform manufacturing organizations into service‐ oriented firms that have abandoned the goods‐centered logic completely, but to balance service‐oriented and goods‐oriented business logics, and investigate how they can co‐exist (Windahl and Lakemond, 2010). Yan et al. (2010) enhance that fundamental shift in worldview from goods‐dominant (G‐D) logic to service‐dominant (S‐D) logic has been proposed to match the analogous shift in the economy.

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Furthermore, for Vargo and Lusch (2004), (S‐D) logic arises from the complementary relationship between the product and the service. For these authors what really matters is what the consumer values, and to satisfy them, companies should not be confined to tangible product characteristics but to the benefits generated by them (i.e. services).

Manufacturers in many industries seek service‐led growth beyond their product core, yet research on the link between service revenue growth and firm profitability is still at an early stage (Eggert et al., 2011). Once there is a commitment to change, the work on products ceases, the former output (the result of a physical building) shifts to the implementation of integrated solutions based on the principles of globalization, aiming for socially responsible improved versions in the form of service (Carassus et al. , 2006).

The understanding of service dominant logic (S‐D) supports the distinction between production and value creation (Brambilla and Damacena, 2012). These authors have developed a concept of production, which state that it is a process where customers acquire, use or consume resources.

IBM is a typical example of a company that invested on the transition from G‐D logic to a S‐D logic. The example advanced by Bjurklo et al. (2009) shows that the company after investing in the transition of the business model, managed to get growth five times higher than normal. For these authors, the main challenge is the definition of a service concept that is to create conditions that create value for customers through it. Value creation is understood as an interactive process that relates the implicit value in using these resources, translated into a process of use.

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

3.5 Product Service System Product Service System (also know by the acronym PSS) can be defined as a system of products, services, network partners and supporting infrastructure that is economically feasible, competitive and satisfies customer needs (Baines et al., 2007).

A further contribution to the definition of (PSS) can be portrayed as a process whereby capital goods customers are provided with complete solutions, consisting of both tangible products and intangible services. Services offer may include possible alternatives on product usage (Beuren et al., 2013).

Operations issues that arise from the exploration of service or services and products may not be new (Spring and Araujo, 2009). Academic and business interests in the product‐service system have grown significantly in recent years. The product‐service system represents a competitive opportunity for many companies as they seek to reduce consumption by changing the way products are used, whereby, providing services. However, the success in such transformation is linked to the presence of structured routines and innovation capabilities (Wallin et al., 2015). Baines et al. (2007) complement that PSS offers dematerialized solutions that minimize the environmental impact of consumption. Likewise, Beuren et al. (2013) agree that PSS also benefits the environment through dematerialization of products, as well planning for the life cycle of the system.

To offer PSS, companies have to accomplish a change on their product design and conception that can be achieved by developing specific business model by offering function‐oriented and life cycle‐oriented products. A function‐oriented PSS is the most promising PSS in terms environmental functioning (Tucker et al., 2014). PSS offers the opportunity to lower the pollution and damage of the environment in a significant way. Being so, future research activities have to consider these ecological aspects and should concentrate on developing eco or green PSS (Aurich et al., 2013).

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Saccani et al. (2014) ensure that it is possible to outline four different service categories that may be included in PSS offer: 1) The first one encompasses services that aim at ensuring product functionality overtime, such as preventive and corrective maintenance; 2) A second category includes services that aim at training a product's end users and/or facilitating the interaction with the product. These services are mostly based upon interactions between individuals from the customer and service provider organizations; 3) The third category focuses on customer processes and encompasses services that aim at supporting customers to (re)design, manage and optimize the processes enabled by a product. This category includes professional and consultancy services such as process engineering, testing and simulation; 4) Fourth category includes services that go even further into the customer value chain, up to taking over the responsibility for operating a product and/or a business process on behalf of the customer, these type of services are referred to as operational services.

Existing literature is not committed to support the actual decision making process regarding the transition to a PSS, rather, it is basically focused on the PSS continuum and the categorization of each step that endures the migration (Dimache and Roche, 2013) (see figure 16)

Figure 16: PSS Continuum

Source: Dimache and Roche (2013)

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

When considering the application of PSS to specific sectors, Baines et al. (2007) provide a very interesting example of a photocopier buying vs usage (see figure 17).

Figure 17: A practical example of PSS application

Source: Baines et al., (2007)

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

When analyzing the above figure, we can observe that on example (a) the manufacturer provides the product and eventually service plus consumables to maintain the equipment in good operation and produce copies. On return, the customer rewards financially the manufacturer on all supplied goods and services. By this point in time; the ownership and all associated running costs (service, consumables and disposal) are fully supported by the customer. On the other hand, example (b) exhibits a typical scenario of a PSS, whereby photocopier ownership is not transferred to the customer. All running costs such as service, consumables and disposal are bared by the manufacturer. On return, financially, the customer merely rewards the manufacturer on the usage of the product (produced copies) not being liable for any other costs whatsoever.

Additional conclusions can be withdrawn from this example of a PSS application; implementation of this type of strategy may require financial investments and the capacity to build peoples’ skills and capabilities on technologies (Reinatz and Ulaga, 2008). In the shorter term PSS transformation might be challenging for organizations as initially it will be associated with investment, only in the longer term that PSS strategy delivers on its promises (Martinez et al., 2010). On the marketing side, it is possible to notice two major changes with the PSS model; from “product oriented” to “end‐user’s process oriented”, and from “transactional” to “relational” on regards to customer interactions (Oliva and Kallenberg, 2003).

To align the proposition with the relational aspects of the market demand, office printing industry has standardized its offer trough packages encompassing the basic elements within the PSS descriptions. Such offer, known as MDS (Managed Document Services) or MPS (Managed Print Services) contains the essentials for customer to produce copies, prints or usage other functionalities such as scanning or faxing. The holistic approach from the producer guarantees to the customer all the relevant aspects such as: solution design, hardware supply, implementation, support (in situ or remote), supplies delivery and collection at the end of contract. Supported by financial

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

operations, like leasing or renting, this type of offer diminishes the overall costs to customers, creates satisfaction with the elimination of time needed to deal with numerous vendors and reduces the environmental impact through a more economical and environmentally‐friendly document output, relegating to the customer the sole responsibility to bear the costs of the produced copies or prints and transferring all the operation costs and duties to the producer.

Key points of PSS can be summarized as: 1) The producer assumes the full responsibility with the product (acquisition, taxes (or duties), service, consumables and disposal) through its life cycle; 2) Product ownership (The product belongs to the manufacturer/producer); 3) Producer provides a full solution (including installation, customer support and training to assure customer takes the utmost out the product); 4) Producer provides a value proposition, (i.e. a business model showing on how customer can reduce costs and increase efficiency); 5) Customer utilizes the product fully supported by the producer throughout the contract.

3.6 Installed Base Installed base (IB) can be defined as the total number of products currently under use, as for IB services, they designate the range of product or process related services required by an end‐user over the useful life of a product in order to run it effectively in the context of its operating process (Oliva and Kallemberg, 2003).

Being the equipment a capital good with a long life cycle, substantial revenue can be generated from an installed base (Knecht et al., 1993). One of the first steps the majority of the manufacturing companies in the sector take to start the transition to services in a more secure form is to acquire installed bases. Capital goods manufacturers are in a good position to take advantage of the possibilities of increased service content, in most of the cases due to a long life cycle installed base together in conjunction with in‐depth product knowledge (Oliva and Kallenberg, 2003).

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

However, product‐related services are not only a necessary element in strategies of manufacturing industries; they also offer a lot of opportunities. As in many cases, the investment on goods and new installations exceeds the one on installed bases (Bikfalvi et al., 2013).

Besides being safer, and since a long relation with the customer already exists, economies of scale arise as the manufacturer provides services for its entire installed base, while a single customer would need to invest in service resources and capabilities for a much smaller number of machines (Kastalli and Looy, 2013).

Moreover, Oliva and Kallenberg (2003) argue that entering the IB services market implies identifying a profit opportunity within the service arena and setting up the structures and processes to exploit it and support this idea based on three major points: 1) Lower acquisition costs; 2) Lower knowledge acquisition cost; 3) Less capital requirements.

By leveraging these unique resources, successful firms build unique capabilities, such as service related data processing and interpretation, execution risk assessment and mitigation, design to service, hybrid offering sales and deployment capabilities in a thriving defined space (see table 4).

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Table 4 ‐ IB service space

Source: Oliva and Kallenberg (2003) Furthermore, by entering the service market through an installed base means to attempt maximizing financial potential by providing services to support the running operations, such as consumables spare parts, repair, inspections and remote support for the total number of products currently used by local customers.

Since the majority of technology companies are now global, a service infrastructure enables companies to respond anywhere to the requirements of customers (Kucza and Gebauer, 2011). A strategy normally followed by manufacturers that are moving from Product to Service is to acquire existing Installed base. The corporate attractiveness for IB relies in three major points; Lower acquisition costs; Lower knowledge acquisition cost and less capital requirements. Besides being safer, and since a long relation with the customer already exists, economies of scale arise as the manufacturer provides services for its entire installed base, while a single customer would need to invest in service resources and capabilities for a much smaller number of machines (Kastalli and Looy, 2013). Being the equipment a capital good with a long life cycle, substantial revenue can be generated from an installed base (Knecht et al.,

1993).

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

3.7 Servitization According to Coreynen et al., (2017), digitation can lead to three servitization pathways (industrial, commercial and value). Servitization, the terminology advanced in 1988 by Vandermerwe and Rada and later by Baines et al. (2007), Spring and Araujo (2009) or Brax and Visintin (2016), characterizes the transition from a production base to the introduction of integrated solutions and new services proposal. Servitization is now widely recognized as the innovation of a manufacturer’s capabilities and processes to move from selling products, to selling integrated products‐service offerings that deliver value in use (Baines et al., 2009). (see table 5 for additional servitization definitions), servitization is also recognized as an increasingly relevant strategy for western manufacturers to improve their competitive advantage in the market (Martinez et al., 2010). The phenomenon of servitization that infused manufacturing has resulted in organizations to offer complex packages (Smith et al., 2014), covering product and service to generate high customer exchange value thus augmenting competitive edge.

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Table 5 ‐ Common definitions for Servitization

Author Definition Vandermerwe and Rada (1988) Movement from goods to services in businesses and whereby services dominated Desmet et al., (1998) a trend in which manufacturing firms adopt more and more service components in their offerings’ Tellus Institute, (1999) the emergence of product‐based services which blur the distinction between manufacturing and traditional service sector activities’ Verstrepen et al., (1999) adding extra service components to core products’ Robinson et al., (2002) ‘an integrated bundle of both goods and services’ Lewis et al., (2004) ‘any strategy that seeks to change the way in which a product functionality is delivered to its markets’ Ward and Graves, (2005) ‘increasing the range of services offered by a manufacturer’ Slack, (2005) … is a way to increase sales revenues for the producer, reducing risks and decreasing uncertainty and making predictable maintenance and support costs for the customer.. Baines et al., (2007) Term given to a transformation where manufacturers increasingly offer services that are tightly coupled to their products Ren & Gregory, (2007) A change process wherein manufacturing companies embrace service orientation and/or develop more and better services, with the aim to satisfy customer’s needs, achieve competitive advantages and enhance firm performance’ Neely, (2008) A business model innovation whereby existing product offerings are extended through the provision of related services Baines et al., (2009) Innovation of a manufacturer’s capabilities and processes to move from selling products, to selling integrated products‐service offerings that deliver value in use. Baines et al., (2009a) Innovation of an organization’s capabilities and processes to better create mutual value through a shift from selling products to selling product service systems

Source: Adapted and revised from Baines et al., (2009) 95

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

For the manufacturer desiring to move to servitization, several encouraging factors, as well as barriers were found in the literature (see table 6). There are several reasons that incite manufacturing firms to engage in service activities (Gebauer and Friedli, 2005; Gebauer et al., 2012): 1) by producing both goods and services, firms can expect marketing advantages; 2) the provision of services may increase the consumer's loyalty and provide a faster and more appropriate response to the consumer's needs; 3) the service provision can also improve the firm's corporate image; 4) the production of services may offer a strategic benefit since the firm is making a product‐service bundle which is harder to imitate, and perceived as less substitutable by consumers; 5) firms may expect financial benefits because services make up an additional source of revenue, and may generate higher profit margins.

On other hand, Oliva and Kallenberg (2003) identified some barriers for those companies wishing to adhere to servitization: 1) firms are not adequately able to recognize the economic potential of the service component; 2) providing services is beyond the scope of their competencies; 3) firms fail to successfully deploy a service strategy during the transitioning into services phase.

Furthermore, since products no longer provide guaranties for competitive advantage (Oliva and Kallenberg, 2003), manufacturers are looking for new value in services and integrated solutions, either willingly or unwillingly from their traditional way of business models based on product sales (Kohtamäki and Helo, 2015). To secure the benefits from services, manufacturing companies find themselves in a challenging process of capability and organizational transformation (Gebauer et al., 2012).

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Table 6 ‐ Main barriers and encouraging factors to move to servitization

Three Identified barriers for Three key reasons which encourage manufacturing firms pretending to manufacturing firms to engage in service servitize (Oliva and Kallenberg, activities (Gebauer et al., 2005) 2003)

1 Firms are not adequately able to By producing both goods and services, firms recognize the economic potential can expect marketing advantages. The of the service component provision of services may increase the consumer's loyalty and provide a faster and more appropriate response to the consumer's needs. The service provision can also improve the firm's corporate image. 2 Providing services is beyond the The production of services may offer a scope of their competencies strategic benefit since the firm is making a product‐service bundle which is harder to imitate, and perceived as less substitutable by consumers 3 Firms fail to successfully deploy a Firms may expect financial benefits because service strategy during the services make up an additional source of transitioning into services phase revenue, and may generate higher profit margins

Source: Model adapted by author from Oliva and Kallenberg (2003) and Gebauer et al.,

(2005) The intense and competitive global market environment led many manufacturers to move to a service‐oriented business strategy to differentiate themselves from contenders (Toossi et al., 2013), in order to remain competitive over time, manufacturing companies are moving to the world of services by activating a servitization process which leads to a new type of value creation that is no longer based on product sales (Leoni, 2015). Known examples of companies that move to servitization are: Rolls‐Royce jet engine manufacturer that offers contracts to airplane constructors based on engine usage, known as power by the hour (Cohen et al., 2006; Baines et al., 2009) and IBM that moved from selling hardware to provide information management solutions (Chase and Apte, 2007) servicing their customers through the whole product life cycle and business related problems (Neely, 2008).

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Other worthy examples found in the literature of goods‐services transition whereby firms increased their provision of services (Kowalkowski et al., 2011) refer to companies such as Caterpillar, Ericsson, Huawei, Siemens and Tata. Undoubtedly, as these traditional manufacturing firms servitize, the models used by the operations management may need to be modified and enhanced (Wilkinson et al., 2009).

One of the characteristics of servitization is the augmented level of customer orientation whereby product‐oriented services give place to user process oriented services. This is a shift from a goods emphasis to a focus on the customer and the assurance of a proper functioning of a product (Bastl et al., 2012). It is also a strategy that encompasses the innovation of an organization’s capabilities and processes to shift from selling products to selling integrated product and service offerings (or “solutions”) which delivers value‐in‐use (Baines et al., 2007). Manufactures producing and selling durable products are now attracted to sell the usage of the product (e.g. renting, pay per use) or even selling the product performance (e.g. pay per performance) (Arnaiz et al., 2014), as a result, firms are under pressure to “servitize” their businesses (Hallavo et al., 2015).

Moreover, servitization strategy adoption requires the acquisition of new knowledge. Such, should be performed in two extents; internal (by expanding the knowledge of the employees within the company) and external (by acquiring companies that already have incorporated the necessary knowledge on services) (Leoni, 2015). Manufacturers, undergoing servitization, may recourse to an increased number of suppliers to deliver services (Saccani et al., 2014) to fulfill commitments to their customers. Leiringer and Bröchner (2010) emphasize on the consequences of servitization as they transform almost every aspect of the way business is conducted, especially positions in the value stream, capabilities, organizational structures and management, as well, as culture and beliefs at all organizational workers levels. Raddats et al. (2015) believe that corporate leaders driving this transformation in the organizations by developing a service‐focused culture can create differentiation on the offerings.

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

For the manufacturers, infusion of services poses a unique challenge. To be successful in competitive markets, suppliers of industrial products have fit their critical resources to the specific requirements customers (Eggert et al., 2011).

As technology matures and manufacturing cost tend to fall, customers are not willing to spend the same amount of time and effort in procuring, installing, and upgrading a particular type of system (Finne and Holmström, 2013).

In complex cases, a further technical analysis precede solution design maybe required (Visintin, 2012), primarily because the majority of customers is not aware of the requirements for the new system and its infrastructure and implementation.

Manufacturing firms servitization also implies the innovation of an organization’s capabilities and processes to better create mutual value through a shift from selling products to selling product service systems (Baines et al., 2009), such offer of product and service will deliver value‐in‐use (Baines et al., 2007), the transition into more service‐like entities, i.e. the servitization process requires manufacturing firms to adopt new and alternative practices and technologies (Baines et al., 2009, 2011).The role of manufacturing companies in service delivery has been increasingly discussed in the literature. A move to service business can be regarded as a beneficial way to generate new business, increase profitability and differentiate from competition (Wise and Baumgartner, 1999; Oliva and Kallenberg, 2003).

Additionally, and as preparation for the manufacturer pretending to enter servitization Baines et al., (2007, 2009 and 2009a) advises on the need of supportive skill set. Each of these skills has a unique description to match the desired behavior (see table 7)

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Table 7 ‐ Servitization of manufacturer

Source: Baines et al., (2007, 2009, 2009a)

Nowadays, we are so used to manufacturing companies that have integrated the market and the customer, that we often forget the manufacturing companies that did not start out this way (Schmenner, 2009). As a matter of fact most customers move from a concept of buying a product to a concept of buying the capability to carry out operations. (Bandinelli and Gamberi, 2011). Actual societies are progressively becoming service economies, as so, the challenge to business is to find ways to gain economy of scale in services similar to a production‐line, this transition, preserves a differentiation among competing services that creates loyal customers and economic profits (Goldhar and Berg, 2010). In reality, the majority of manufacturers have always provided some form of basic service with their product (e.g. warranty, maintenance, etc.) (Childe, 2007), however, these services have traditionally been seen as add‐ons (Clayton et al., 2012a). When referring to basic service, Neely (2008) advocates that in the literature there is unanimous consensus that going downstream to provide, for example, break fix and help‐desk services represents the most basic form of servitization.

100

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

In industries such as the office printing, decreasing margins on product sales was a common practice in the past as substantial revenue and profits would arise from the sales of consumables and break fix services. Visintin (2012), adds that office printing is indisputably one of the precursors of servitization. Original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) of photocopiers, such as Xerox, pioneered the implementation of servitized business models. In recent years, this industry developed considerable system‐integration, application‐development and consulting capabilities. Furthermore, they have responded to the hardware market crisis by consolidating services and solutions and by integrating print and scanning needs along ICT offering (Visintin, 2012).

Additional motives to increase servitization in this type of industry (Office printing industry) rely on the necessity to response to the following factors: 1) New and untapped customer needs (basic to complex solutions); 2) A flat hardware market; 3) Decreasing print/copy volumes; 4) Margin erosion.

A major challenge that manufacturers encompassing, servitization need to overcome concerns the definition of their market offering. Rapaccini and Visintin (2015) epitomize the example of the office printing industry. A typical model, most of manufacturers in the office printing industry are offering (i.e. Canon, Kyocera, Ricoh, Xerox) to secure customers and revenue streams within a PSS strategy, is to suggest customers a pay‐per‐page solution. With this offer, customer only pays the usage measured by the number of printed pages within a contract framework agreed upon, the pay‐per‐page solution is technically easy to implement and turns out to be particularly effective (Rapaccini and Visintin, 2015).

101

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Opting for this solution, the provider does not offer a product nor a service but a combination of both, translated into the usage of an asset by the customer, proprietary of the producer. By doing so, and, supported by a contract, manufacturers are able to secure the profits coming from maintenance services and sales of spares and consumables. Furthermore, manufacturers are able to protect their customers and keep out competitors.

Oliva and Kallenberg (2003) believe that the introduction of more comprehensive and customer‐oriented services such as full maintenance contracts will promote business solutions managing of some customers' operations.

Following this context, Rapaccini and Visintin (2015) point out another example from this industry, but of a different nature. Further to photocopiers, Océ (A Canon group company) provides their customers with customer support activities (CS) (i.e. helpdesk support, on‐line and remote services) and Product + Software. PS services are provided under conditions that are clearly described in service contracts in which Océ takes on the responsibility of the customer’s document process efficiency and include product service, software maintenance, data migration, backup plus disaster recovery. From an engineering point of view, remote services and online monitoring provide new opportunities for industrial service businesses (Brax and Jonsson, 2009). For Takata et al. (2004), over time, this new business will lead to a more distributed and stable revenues coming from a wider after‐sales services portfolio related to the operation and maintenance of the equipment's as the continuously reducing value created by the production phase of manufacturing will require further activities generated in the pre and post implementation phase, normally in the form of services, hence the increasing importance of servitization (Roos and O'Connor, 2015).

102

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

In this new business, services provide more stable revenues over time. While the sale of a product can be a one‐time operation, the sales of related services can be spread over a large period in time (Gebauer et al., 2005). However, these new business and concepts, even though with a low level of maturity (i.e. renting lacking a more comprehensive perspective), completely change the manufacturer’s financial perspective over the costs and revenues related to product cost and life time running costs which are relevant to the Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) (Takata et al., 2004). TCO is used to refer to value‐in‐use in buying decisions and focuses on the whole cost over the longer‐term (Ellram and Siferd, 1998; Ferrin and Plank, 2002).

3.8 Servitization in the office printing industry In this section we will reply to research question four on the servitization process developed in the office printing industry. Digital technologies, as with other disruptive technologies, open new business opportunities (Christensen, 1997), the impact of dematerialization on manufacturing has been reflected in the office printing industry (Visintin, 2012), nevertheless, for Baray et al. (2008) although this sector is declining, printing may not be fully replaced.

The office printing , as we know it today, started after WWII. Initially with copiers using older technologies based on liquids and sensitized paper which prevailed till 70’s of the XX century and later with dry toner copiers based on the xerographic process commercialized as from 1959 by Rank Xerox later known as Xerox.

Japanese companies associated to paper and optical goods manufacturing also entered the office printing industry, initially in Japan in the 60’s (primarily with equipment’s using sensitized paper or liquid technology) and later in 70’s expanding to Europe and USA using modern technology, mainly after the patent from Xerox expired. Consequently, initiating competition on analogue copiers using xerographic based technology. Industry focus was of a goods dominant logic as corporates emphasis was to sell equipment, consumables and spares.

103

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Differentiation from market dominant companies such as Xerox and IBM was also instigated during this decade (70’s), initially with world’s first laser printer launched by Xerox in 1976 and later with the inkjet printer launched by IBM in 1978. Both printing technologies were soon to be adopted by the majority of the manufacturers of the office printing industry.

By the 90’s, technological evolution led to the appearance of digital products, which could perform multi‐tasks such as copying, printing, scanning and faxing. At this stage, the office printing market was already suffering from the emergence of one of the most influential factors after Guttenberg’s invention: Globalization era, followed by the commoditization of photocopier equipment.

In the office printing industry, the pursuit for scale benefits and the need to develop basic product platforms serve as a basis to bring new products to market as fast as possible and is evidenced by the rapid rotation within manufacturers in the form of merge and acquisitions during the last decades: On the first two decades of the XXI century, the focus of the industry was market share growing and installed base acquisition. To achieve this, the industry was reshaped through processes of merging and acquisition, most known examples are: a) Canon acquired Dutch manufacturer Ocê; b) Konica initially merged with Minolta Corporation becoming known as Konica Minolta and in later stage acquired the German manufacturer Develop; c) Kyocera also known as Kyocera‐Mita, acquired two German operations: Triumph Adler and Utax (already belonged to Triumph Adler); d) Ricoh, acquired the following companies: Infotec, Gestetner, Lanier, Nashuatec and Rex Rotary and InfoPrint (Infosource, 2016).

On the offering side to the market, initially the manufacturing industries started by selling photocopiers and then add printers, later followed by fax and scanners as individual units. Upon the technological evolution multifunction products (MFP’s) emerged with functionalities such as copying, printing, scanning and faxing performed by a single unit.

104

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Nowadays, the gross of production of Office Printing Industry (B2C) are MFP’s also designated by MFD’s (Multi‐Function Devices). Nevertheless, the manufactured products may also include: Single Function Printer (Inkjet or Toner) and small Multifunctional Products (B2C) plus niche products such as Production Devices and Facsimile (Either for B2B and B2C). Our research is based solely on the most important product of this industry: MFP / MFD.

3.8.1 Characterizing the players and the market According to InfoSource (2016), by 2015 MFP manufacturers of the office printing industry (B2B) were: 1) Brother; 2) Canon; 3) Epson; 4) Konica Minolta; 5) Kyocera; 6) Lexmark; 6) Muratec; 7) Oki; 8) Panasonic; 9) Pantum; 10) Ricoh; 11) Samsung; 12) Sharp; 13) Toshiba; 14) Xerox Some of these players, like Brother and Samsung, also have a large manufacturing portion of printers and small MFP’s for the consumer market (B2C). The individual characterization of all be above manufacturers can be corroborated on Annex 1. In 2015 the fifteen manufacturers sold in Europe 1.491.681 MFP units for the B2C market (see table 8).

105

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Table 8 ‐ Europe MFP sales (B2B) 2015

Manufacturer Units ShareRank RICOH 294 943 19,8% 1 KYOCERA 292 731 19,6% 2 CANON 264 547 17,7% 3 KONICA MINOLTA 218 769 14,7% 4

FUJI‐XEROX 126 506 8,5% 5 LEXMARK 84 506 5,7% 6 SHARP 73 980 5,0% 7 TOSHIBA 58 663 3,9% 8 SAMSUNG 36 579 2,5% 9 Others *40 457 2,7% 10 1 491 681 100,0% Source: Infosource (2016)

*Others: BROTHER, EPSON, MURATEC, OKI, PANASONIC and PANTUM

Analysis by market share reflects that top 5 manufacturers (Ricoh, Kyocera, Canon, Konica Minolta and Fuji‐Xerox) sold 80,28% of the units corresponding to 1.197.496 MFP’s. The other four brands (Lexmark, Sharp, Toshiba and Samsung) sold 253.728 equivalent to 17,01% relegating the remaining manufacturers to 2,7% of market share, which corresponds to 40.457 units.

Taking the historical data from the last five years (see table 9), we can corroborate that top five manufacturers remained stable on the quantities they have sold under their own brand, but the relevant aspect is that between 2011 and 2015 production rose by 13,9% which corresponds to increase of 208.706 units. Some of these manufacturers also sell segregated quantities to other companies in the office printing and IT businesses that will rebrand and place in the market under their own brand (see table 10). When looking to the European sales by manufacturer we can conclude that in terms of unit sales, the process of dematerialization in companies did not affect these players of the office printing industry.

106

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Rank

(2016)

2015 Full year Units Shar e Infosource

Source: Rank

(Europe)

Units Shar e evolution

Rank market

top

Units Shar e

Rank

manufacturer, by

sales

Units Shar e MFP ‐

Rank Table

Total Total Total Total Total 2011year Full 2012Full year 2013year Full 2014year Full Units Shar e

92 74545 811 7,2%77 853 3,6% 557 844 6,1% 954 353 4,5% 669 324 89 167 4,2% 7 19 108 5,4% 8 7,1% 72 526 1,5% 5 55 482 10 5,8% 42 862 4,4% 6 110 648 67 024 3,4% 7 46 649 8 8,3% 5,3% 72 186 3,5% 5 56 993 8 5,4% 41 264 4,3% 6 120 638 61 709 3,1% 7 76 506 8,2% 9 4,6% 73 678 5 5,2% 60 681 6 5,0% 52 902 126 506 4,1% 7 3,6% 8 50 301 84 506 8,5% 9 5 73 980 3,4% 5,7% 58 663 6 5,0% 36 579 3,9% 7 2,5% 8 40 457 9 2,7% 258 950201 330 20,2%245 304 15,7% 1179 461 19,1% 3 14,0% 2 281 762 4 211 747 22,4% 231 445 16,8% 1 187 772 18,4% 3 14,9% 2 285 761 4 217 358 21,5% 238 657 16,3% 1 199 258 17,9% 3 15,0% 2 273 516 4 292 662 18,7% 250 149 20,0% 2 214 724 17,1% 1 14,6% 3 294 943 4 292 731 19,8% 264 547 19,6% 1 218 769 17,7% 2 14,7% 3 4 1 282 9751 282 100,0% 1 258 895 100,0%330 483 1 100,0%757 1 465 100,0%681 1 491 100,0%

107 KYOCERA CA NON KONICA MINOLTA FUJI-XEROX LEXMARK SHARP TOSHIBA SAMSUNG Others Manufacturer RICOH The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Table 10: Brands and Manufacturers available in Europe (2015)

Brand Manufacturer

HP SEVERAL

SAMSUNG SAMSUNG

BROTHER BROTHER

RICOH RICOH

CANON CANON

KYOCERA KYOCERA

KONICA MINOLTA KONICA MINOLTA

XEROX XEROX

LEXMARK LEXMARK

TOSHIBA TOSHIBA

SHARP SHARP

OKI OKI

DELL SEVERAL

TRIUMPH‐ADLER KYOCERA

OLIVETTI SEVERAL

DEVELOP KONICA MINOLTA

UTAX KYOCERA

PANASONIC PANASONIC

EPSON EPSON

NASHUATEC RICOH

REX ROTARY RICOH

MURATEC MURATEC

GESTETNER RICOH

OCE CANON

PHILIPS SEVERAL

PANTUM PANTUM

SAGEMCOM SEVERAL

Source: Infosource (2016)

108

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

3.8.2 Office Printing Industry Key Success Factors Major key success factors of the office printing industry that grants market recognition are: 1) Portfolio of products, a range of products that can cover customer’s necessities; 2) SW offer in line with actual demand; products that can be connected within the actual industry standards; 3) Competitive pricing on HW, a low price tag and payment conditions (if buying is the option); 4) Low after sales pricing (price per copy / print) being the after sales the most expensive part of the investment, a low click price (term that encompasses the physical machine output, being it a copy or a print); 4) Pay per Page, PSS concept, whereby the customer only pays for the produced volume of copies / prints not having to make any HW investment (which is relegated to the manufacturer or supplier); 5) Global companies, global companies are major a advantage as most of the times there is a direct connection between producer and customer; 6) Brand awareness companies with enlarged brand awareness are decisive in most of the markets biding; 7) Direct sales approach or with a large dealer networking, direct sales represents the proximity to customer, nonetheless there are also effective distribution policies such as indirect sales or a mix of direct and indirect depending on geographical coverage; 8) Environmentally friendly, environmental and sustainable practices are mandatory in most of today’s customers demand list, besides the economy side it contributes to resource savings; 9) Providing own service, providing direct service is a an appreciated factor within this market, nonetheless third party maintenance outsourced and controlled by manufacturer is also acceptable; 10) Technicians certified in industry standards, having service supplied by technicians with industry accreditations is a differentiator factor, in some cases it is becoming a demand from customer.

The following tables elucidate on the key success factors of the actual manufacturers of the office printing industry (see table 11) as well as the characterization of such manufacturers while competitors (see table 12).

109

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Certified Technicians Author

‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐‐ Own Service

Source: + Policies Environmental

‐

Brand Awareness

industry

+ ++ + ++ + ++ + ++ + ++ + Network

Distribution printing

Sales

‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ office

Direct

the

Local Global from

per

+++++ + ++ +++++ + ++ +++++ + ++ +++++ + ++ factors

Page Pay

success

print ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐

prices key Low

Major ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ‐ prices

HW Competitive

Table SW

Using Industry

date

‐‐ ‐ ‐ ‐‐‐‐‐ ‐ ‐‐ ++ +++ + ++ + ++ +++ + ++ + ++ +++ + + +++++ + + ++ ++ +++ + ++ +++ + ++ ++ + ++ +++ + ++ +++ + +++++ +++ + + + ++ +++++ + ++ to

products Up present

present not

KSF

MINOLTA

Legend ‐ +

Company BROTHER CANON EPSON KONICA KYOCERA LEXMARK MURATEC OKI PANASONIC PANTUM RICOH SAMSUNG SHARP TOSHIBA XEROX

110

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Table 12 ‐ Office printing Industry competition characterization

Brand awareness from B2C, Global company, Environmental policies, Low BROTHER HW price, Low cost on price per page, large dealer network Large brand awareness on office products and cameras, Global company, CANON Sponsorship of worldwide sports events, Environmental policies, Direct sales force and service operation, Portfolio on office printing products Brand awareness on image products, Global company, Large indirect sales EPSON operation, Low cost on HW, Low cost on price per page Large brand awareness on office products, Global company, Sponsorship KONICA MINOLTA of worldwide events, Environmental policies, Direct sales force and service operation, portfolio on office printing products Large brand awareness on office products and ceramic products, Global KYOCERA company, Environmental policies, Direct sales force, Portfolio on office printing products, Low cost per page Large Brand Awareness due to ancient association with IBM, Global LEXMARK company, Large indirect operation, low HW price, Low cost on price per page MURATEC Basically on Industrial machinery Brand awareness on printers, Global Company, Environmental policies, OKI Low HW price, Low cost on price per page, large dealer network Huge brand awareness due to consumer electronics, Global company, PANASONIC Environmental policies, Low HW price, Low cost price per page, large dealer network PANTUM Not known (Recent manufacturer) Large Brand Awareness on office products, Global company, sponsorship RICOH of some elitist worldwide sports, Environmental policies, Direct sales force and service operation, Portfolio on office printing products Huge brand awareness due to consumer electronics and industrial SAMSUNG products, Global company, Environmental policies, Low HW price, Low cost on price per page, Large dealer network Large brand awareness due to consumer electronics, Global company, SHARP Environmental policies, Low HW price, Low cost on price per page, Large dealer network Huge brand awareness due to consumer electronics and computers, TOSHIBA Global company, Environmental policies, Low HW price, Low cost on price per page, Large dealer network Large Brand Awareness on office products, The reference manufacturer in photocopy industry, Global company, Sponsorship of some notorious XEROX motorsports events, Environmental policies, Large direct sales force and service operation, Portfolio on office printing products Source: Author

111

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

3.9 Summary As noticed beforehand, on a first stage due to materialization of knowledge and information, the focus of manufacturers was to deliver products and supplies. Service was not part of the equation as revenue and profit were assured through sales of material goods. In the case of printing and office printing industry, such modus operandi started from its very basic beginnings on the XV century and kept such assumptions till the beginning of XXI century.

With the advent of Globalization and further appearance of commoditization and dematerialization, differentiations amongst products started to fade. Market start to lose interest in the product itself, giving special attention on its usage, such trend, promoted the paradigm change from pay to use towards buy to use.

This new competitive and global environment posed a threat to production companies pushing them to move from a production base with constant declining profits to a service‐oriented strategy with more attractive profits and arguments to differentiate themselves from competitors. Concepts such as Servitization arose to describe the movement from goods to services (Vandermerwe and Rada, 1988). Although the notion of servitization is dynamic, that are recognized barriers for companies aiming to embrace this paradigm change (Oliva and Kallenberg, 2003; Gebauer et al., 2005).

Capital goods companies like Rolls Royce, IBM and Xerox are known examples of corporates that took advantage of servitization to maintain customers and assure revenue streams. In a later stage it was possible to notice that such companies not only promoted its survival on the mid to long term, but increased their gains and conquered new customers and markets. In the Office printing industry, the main reasons that led manufacturers to servitize, are: 1) New and untapped customer needs (basic to complex solutions); 2) A flat hardware market; 3) Decreasing print/copy volumes; 4) Margin erosion.

The literature review in chapter 3 supports our research questions RQ3 and RQ4 related to the consequences of DPOP and Servitization.

112

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

CHAPTER 4: THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK AND HYPOTHESIS DEVELOPMENT

113

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

114

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

4.Theoretical framework and hypothesis development

Author

Source:

image

costs

paper usage

analysis

dematerialization DPOP

paper ESS overall

of of

profitability

of of of

programs of

hypothesis assessment

KPI’s the

office in

Importance Reduction Reduction Increase )Global )Reduction (Q4) (Q11.1) 6) (Q11.3) 1) (Q9) 2) (Q10) 3 (Q7) 4)

the

them paperless and include

not

choose digitization of

author

but evaluation

research, H2b

H1 H5 H3 5 for

this

H2a, in

measured framework

were

that

activity

Theoretical

processes

space indicators

Issue

18: new

(Importance) implementation Employees

reputation

Issues others economic

of physical on

of and Q4)

are

Figure

Dimension

sales Q3

spent

(Q1.4) Image Economic Net Sector (QA2.1) Number Motivators Need Q2, (Q1.5, (QA1) Firm (Q1.3) Imposition (QA2.2) Environmental (Q1.1) (Q1.2) *There Time

115

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Our research proposes a theoretical framework, which aims to describe the impact of DPOP in B2B customers (see figure 18). Some research hypothesis about the relationships between dependent and independent measures is advanced as well. On the other hand it was necessary to build a set of key performance indicators (KPI’s) for measuring the impact of the paperless programs, which will be considered as dependent measures in the theoretical framework: a) Reduction of paper usage (Cleveland and Ruth, 1999 ; Gardenal 2013; b) Reduction of spending in External Supplies and Services (ESS) in paper (et al., 2008); c) Reduction of overall costs (Davis, Hadley et al., 2015); d) Perceived increase of Profitability (Alsyouf, 2007; Caldeira et al., 2012; Davis and Davis, 2004); e) Improvement of the Corporate Image/Reputation‐ there several studies providing evidence from the adoption of paperless programs mainly in banking sector (Bednarska‐Olejniczak, 2016; Smith, 2013; Meena, 2013); f) Overall importance of dematerialization‐ Coroama et al. (2014) argue that when expecting to collect environmental benefits from electronic media with dematerialization potential, care should be taken as electronic media may not be a straightforward solution for dematerialization, however, it can be facilitated it if its potential is actively used.

One important factor is the role of the different (external or internal) motivators for the paperless dematerialization. In the literature, five types of motivators were also identified: 1) Economic issues‐ in section 6.3 we realize that firms and organizations expect to gain economic benefits from the implementation of paperless office such as reduction of costs in paper and energy and increase of profitability due to gains in work efficiency (Caldeira et al., 2012); 2) Sustainability and Environmental issues‐ As pointed out in the previous sections, several authors highlight the need for orientation for sustainability: for example Schütz & Welfens (2000) point out the importance on the elaboration of sustainability key indicators connecting the perception of dematerialization and the environment‐ related valuation of products and services; others stressed more specific motivations,

116

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

like Chowdhury (2010) argue that current printing and photocopying activities are not environmentally sustainable; 3) Reduction of filling space ‐ A considerable number of today’s offices are concerned on the price of the occupied space, besides the staff a substantial portion is occupied with IT infrastructure and archive. Since the square meter is more expensive than the Byte, a new way of thinking about office space has started to emerge (Gibson et al., 2000; Davis et al., 2015); 4) Imposition of new processes / Legal issues‐ From the managerial point of view, the transition may encounter problems (Holmlund et al., 2016). Windahl and Lakemond (2006, 2010) also stressed the importance of network management for the development of integrated solutions such change requires the organization capacity, competence and a solid architecture for the integration of products and services. Immaterial supported information constitutes today a gray area as legislation is not clear, most of companies want to advance with dematerialization process, nevertheless they are confronted with the legal necessity of paper supported information (Smith and Crotty, 2008). Some of these changes may affect the human resources management in terms of: efficiency of the production activity and working conditions. Downsizing and consequently reductions in personnel costs are expected as well (Caldeira et al.2012); 5) Image and reputation issues‐ the implementation of a DPOP has positive impacts on the brand identity (Kjærgaard, Morsing and Ravasi, 2011), the brand reputation in terms of social responsibility (Wong and Wong, 2015) and brand image (Bednarska‐ Olejniczak, 2016).

As mentioned before (see figure18), there are others indicators that were measured in this research, but author choose not to include them in the hypothesis analysis such as: investment in ICT (hardware/software) resulting directly from implementation of paperless office although Jones (2012) expected a decrease of the number of prints and printers; downsizing/ reduction of the number of employees and personnel costs (Caldeira et al., 2012); increase of hours of training; and resistance to change.

117

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Afterwards, it was necessary to identify all the relevant factors/ independent variables that affect the dematerialization process.

Activity sector: although the impact of digitization was assessed only in few sectors such as health (Caldeira, et al., 2012; Scott et al., 2016), Certified Public Accounts (Davis et al., 2015), higher education (Jones, 2012; Isaeva and Yoon, 2016), or banking (Meena, 2013), we think that the paperless office program Implementation is influenced by the characteristics of the different business models of each activity sector, as postulated in the first hypotheses:

H1. The benefits and barriers from DPOP measured by KPI’s are influenced by the type of economic activity sector.

The firm dimension, usually defined by the number of employees or sales volume, is also an important independent variable as claimed by Chao (2015). While technology supports the move to paperless business practices, not all organizations can afford the IT infrastructure necessary to make the transition and implement a service oriented business strategy (Coreynen et al., 2017). A small and medium‐sized business (SMB) often lacks the resources and IT infrastructure to quickly increase server performance and/or expand storage capacity (Wang, 2013), both of which are required for the in‐ house computing infrastructure needed for effective digital storage and retrieval of documents. Therefore, the following hypothesis are proposed:

H2a. The sales volume is positively correlated with the KPI’s measuring the impact of paperless office programs.

H2b. Bigger firms (in terms of number of employees) have a more favorable evaluation of the impact of paperless office program.

The relative importance of the motivators for DPOP, discussed at the beginning of this section, may also influence the results, so a third hypothesis is developed:

H3. KPI’s predicted the motivators of Digitation and Paperless Office Programs (DPOP)

118

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

We may also expect that if a firms perceives paper dematerialization with a higher importance degree, this will fuel the reduction of paper consumption which will decrease the ESS costs and increase profitability, thus impacting positively in the environmental reputation of the firm.

This led us to the following hypothesis:

H4. KPI’s measuring the impact of Digitation and Paperless Office Programs (DPOP) are positively correlated between each other

As for the time needed to implement DPOP, Velte et al., (2008), Dykman and Davis (2012) and Stratton (2013) reported that during the transition to paperless, employee need some adaption period as often they respond negatively showing resistance to change. When dealing with radical processes implementation, time is the part of equation that is most vulnerable in the plan, and affects all related components. Therefore, the length of the process may influence the DPOP process and consequently its KPI’s, as postulated in the fifth hypothesis, because we expect the visible results of DPOP may need a time delay to fully impact on KPI’s.

H5. KPI’s are predicted by the duration of implementation of the Digitation and Paperless Office Programs (DPOP)

119

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

120

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

CHAPTER 5: METHODOLOGY

121

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

This page intentionally left blank

122

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

5. Methodology 5.1 Research design Succeeding to an extensive literature review followed by a conceptual framework, the next stage, research design, is of substantial importance to our research. Choices made in this area are apprehensive as they can influence the scientific continuum and incorrect adoptions may lead to erratic conclusions.

The pronouncement between quantitative and qualitative methodology is an area of concern for many researchers. Basically, quantitative research is made of numbers and large samples to test theories, as for qualitative research, it uses descriptions, words and significances in smaller samples to build theories (Easterby et al., 2002). Supplementing this thought, Sale et al. (2002) add that for the quantitative researcher, a label refers to an external referent; to a qualitative researcher, a label refers to a personal interpretation or meaning attached to phenomena.

Being related to hefty samples, numerical data and statistical analysis, our research methodology is of quantitative nature instead of a qualitative one. Sampieri et al. (2006), complement that a design of a quantitative approach aims to make use of data collection methods with numerical measurement and is normally associated to the reality based on events to produce theory.

Historically, there has been a heavy emphasis on the quantification in science. Mathematics and other sciences such as physics and chemistry prone to quantification and were generally known as "hard." Less quantifiable areas, such as biology and particularly social sciences, are referred as "soft" (Guba and Lincoln, 1994). The predominance of quantitative research methods is related to the attention given in the past for describing, coding and counting events frequently as a way to understand why things were happening. Quantitative methods of analysis and model building still dominate the curricula of many business schools (Easterby et al., 2002).

123

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

As opposed, qualitative research involves the collection, analysis, and interpretation of data that is not easily reduced to numbers and is useful to both practitioners and academics that are involved in researching, teaching and learning (Anderson, 2010).

Moreover, quantitative research often uses what might be called a “narrow‐view” because the focus is reduced to few causal factors at the same time. Quantitative researchers attempt to hold constant the factors that are not being studied, while qualitative research uses a wide and deep‐angle lens, examining human choice and behavior as it occurs naturally in all of its detail. Qualitative researchers do not want to intervene in the natural flow of behavior (Antwi and Hamza, 2015). Although quantitative research presents statistical results represented by numerical data, qualitative research presents data as descriptive a narration with words and attempts to understand phenomena in “natural settings” (Denzin and Lincoln, 2000) in a natural and holistic manner (see table 13 for differences between the two methods).

124

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Table 13 ‐ Differences between the two methods Orientation Quantitative Approach Qualitative Approach Paradigm Positivism / Realism Interpretivism/Idealism Research Purpose Numerical description Subjective description Causal explanation Empathetic understanding Prediction Exploration

Ontology ......

Dualist/Objectivist Subjectivist Epistemology Experimental/Manipulative Hermeneutical/Dialectical Methodology Research Methods Empirical examination Ethnographies Measurement Case studies Hypothesis testing Narrative research Randomization Interviews Blinding Focus group discussion Structured protocols Observations Questionnaires Field notes Recordings & Filmings Scientific Method Deductive approach, Inductive approach, testing of theory generation of theory Nature of Data Variables Words, images, categories Instruments Structured and Validated‐data In‐depth interviews, participant Collection instruments observation, field notes, and openended questions Data Analysis Identify statistical relationships Use descriptive data, search for among variables patterns, themes ad holistic features and appreciate variations Results Generalizable findings Particularistic findings; provision of insider viewpoint Final Report Formal statistical report with: Informal narrative report • Correlations • Comparisons of means • Reporting of statistical significance of findings

Source: Adapted from Antwi and Hamza (2015)

125

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Each of these methods is based on a particular paradigm. A paradigm can be referred as a set of basic beliefs (or metaphysics) that deals with ultimate or first principles. It represents a worldview that defines, for its holder, the nature of the "world," the individual's place in it, and the range of possible relationships to that world and its parts (Guba and Lincoln, 1994; Guba, 1990).

These relationships respond to three basic questions; 1)The ontological question (ontology is the reality). What is the form and nature of reality, and, what is there that can be known about it?; 2) The epistemological question (epistemology, the relationship between reality and the researcher). What is the nature of the relationship between the knower and reality, or what can be known by the one that inquires?; 3) The methodological question (methodology, techniques used by the researcher to discover that reality). How can the inquirer find out whatever he or she believes, that maybe known? These set of questions assist to emphasize each of the four paradigms to be considered (see table 14).

Table 14 ‐ Basic Beliefs of Alternative Paradigms

Item Positivism Postpositivism Critical Theory Constructivism Ontology naive realism‐"real" critical realism‐"real" reality but historical realism ‐ virtual Relativism ‐ local and reality but only imperfectly and reality shaped by social, specific constructed apprehenlable probabilistically apprehendable political, cultural, realities economic, ethnic, and gender values; crystalized over time Epistemology dualist/objectivist; modified dualist/objectivist; transactional/ transactional/subjectivist; findings true critical tradition/community; subjectivist; value created findings findings probably true mediated findings Methodology experimental/manip modified experimental dialogic/dialectical hermeneutical/dialectical ulative; verification /manipulative; critical multiplism; of hypotheses; falsification of hypotheses; may chiefly quantitative include qualitative methods Source: Guba and Licoln (1994)

126

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Furthermore, Sale et al. (2002) complement that the quantitative research is based on positivism paradigm, where science is characterized by empirical research; all phenomena can be reduced to empirical indicators, which represent the truth. The ontological position of the quantitative paradigm is that there is only one truth, an objective reality that exists independent of human perception. Epistemologically, the investigator and investigated are independent entities. Sobh and Perry (2006), enhanced the philosophical assumptions that support the four different paradigms of science, this will precise the choice of the paradigm that best suits the research (see table 15).

Table 15 ‐ Four scientific paradigms

Paradigm Element Positivism Constructivism Critical theory Realism

Ontology Reality is real and Multiple local and specific “Virtual“ reality shaped by Reality is “real” but only apprehensible “constructed” realities social, economic, ethnic, imperfectly and “Virtual” reality political, cultural, and probabilistically gender values, crystalized apprehensible and so over time triangulation from many sources is required to try to know it

Epistemology Findings true – Created findings – Value mediated findings – Findings probably true – researcher is researcher is a “passionate researcher is a researcher is value‐ objective by viewing participant” within the “transformative aware and needs to reality through a world being investigated intellectual” who changes triangulate any “one‐way mirror” the social world within perceptions he or she is which participants live collecting

Common Mostly concerns In‐depth unstructured Action research and Mainly qualitative methodologies with a testing of interviews, participant participant observation methods such as case theory. Thus mainly observation, action studies and convergent quantitative research, and grounded interviews methods such as: theory research survey, experiments, and verification of hypotheses Source: Adapted from Sobh and Perry (2006)

127

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

However, the core issue for researchers may not be the one related to the choice of methodologies, but the one related to acknowledgement of the research paradigm. This should always substance the three basic elements; Ontology, Epistemology and Methodology (Sobh and Perry, 2006).

Taking into account the characteristics of our research, of the four paradigms, our research will be nested by the positivism paradigm. Positivism is pointed out when the investigator interacts with reality, here it is imperative the use of statistical analysis to test a particular phenomenon amongst the population (Sobh and Perry, 2006). The positivist aims to link the legitimacy of the approach through deduction. In a deductive approach the process unfolds (Malhotra and Birks, 2006). Positivism paradigm is the most widely used paradigm for business school research and assumes implicitly or explicitly that reality can be measured. For example, the assumptions of positivism are appropriate for physical science (Sobh and Perry, 2006), but may not be appropriated when dealing with a complex social science phenomenon, that involves responsive human behavior, such as marketing.

Once established the research paradigm that best suits the research, Bogdan and Biklen (1994) argue that this is the time when the researcher should look around and identify what is relevant for its research.

Due to the youngness of the subject covered by our research, we could not trace literature to support all type of economic activities prone to dematerialization as well as which departments inside the organizations where DPOP is more important. To overcome this significant obstacle, together with InformaD&B (also referred as Dun & Bradstreet or by the acronym D&B) we have devised a sample covering the most important sectors (or vertical markets) whereby dematerialization may have occurred or is currently occurring, such sectors are: 1) Education (Universities and Institutes; Public and Private); 2) Government (Central and Local); 3) Health (Hospitals and Clinics; Public and Private); 4) Industry; 5) Services; 6) Trade.

128

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

As for departments, and since the sample is very wide in this respect, we could not trace a pattern in terms of departmental incidence of dematerialization, being so we have used the most common departments that composes the offices and industry.

5.2 Data collection procedure Nowadays, three main methods are used to collect data: 1) Face‐to‐face interviews; 2) Telephone interviews; 3) Questionnaires (postal or online).

Due to the quantitative nature of our research, the primary method of data collection used was through the use of questionnaires. Nevertheless, and as elucidated ahead , face‐to‐face interviews and telephone interviews were also used, but in smaller proportion. For exploratory purpose, owing to technological advancements, it is now easier to submit questionnaires and surveys, making it a popular way to collect data. A survey is a type of research design, in contrast with an interview or a questionnaire that is a method of data collection (Mathers et al., 2007). In general, a survey involves the collection of information from individuals about themselves or about the units to which they belong to (Forza, 2002). Consequently there is an increment on the usage of questionnaires and in‐depth interviews in commercial usability and academic research contexts. Former paper based questionnaires are now replaced by online questionnaires and consist of a set of questions which all participants are asked to complete with little effort (Adams and Cox, 2008).

A questionnaire is a tool that the reader should understand, interpret and complete easily. It is commonly accepted that a questionnaire should not be over long. People’s short attention spans mean that long questionnaires are completed less accurately as people rush to finish them (Adams and Cox, 2008).

Researchers studying organizational behavior rely mostly on the use of questionnaires as the primary source of data collection (Stone, 1978), it is crucial that the measures on these survey instruments adequately represent the concepts under examination

129

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

(Hinkin, 1998). In general, the term questionnaire includes all techniques of data collection in which individuals are asked to respond to the same set of questions in a pre‐determined order Saunders et al. (2009). This instrument provides an efficient way of collecting responses from a large sample.

Coutinho (2013), complements that a questionnaire can cover individual attitudes, feelings, values, opinions or factual information depending on its purpose, being a fact that all inquiries always involve the action of administering questions to individuals.

Surveys and questionnaires may be administered by telephone interviews, personal interviews or by mail questionnaires (Malhotra and Birks, 2006), and nowadays additional means are available such as online or computer based. Moreover, a questionnaire is a well‐established instrument within social science research to obtain information, knowledge, attitude perception and experience on the participant, when acquired information is combined through a mixed methods approach, robust results can be obtained (Bird, 2009). Questionnaires tend to be used for descriptive or explanatory research.

A descriptive research, as the one performed with questionnaires, will enable the researcher to identify and describe the variability of the different phenomena under investigation. By contrast, the explanatory or analytical research allows researcher to analyze and explain the relationship between variables, in particular the relations of cause and effect.

One of the key points in questionnaires is scaling the items, it is important that the scale used generate sufficient variance among respondents for subsequent statistical analyses (Stone, 1978). Although there are a several different scaling techniques available, Likert type scales are the most frequently used in survey questionnaire research. Likert (1932) developed a type of scales to be composed of five equal appearing intervals with a neutral midpoint, bearing descriptions such as strongly

130

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

disagree, disagree, neither agree nor disagree, agree, strongly agree, nevertheless, nowadays, there are researchers that still use this methodology but with more point scales. The most used tool for data collection throughout our research was the questionnaire. Such tool was used 730 times, as for the remaining tools; telephone interviews were used 2 times and face‐to‐face interviews eight times. (see annexes from 2 to 13 interview scripts and questionnaires).

In our research he have used the following methodology: a) Qualitative nature through In‐depth interviews to managers / directors from 4 companies; 3 from customers and 1 from the industry (see chapter 6.1.2 and 6.1.3); b) On‐line questionnaire sent to a sample 725 companies from which 151 have responded (see chapter 6.2); c) Email interviews to the universe of manufacturers (11) (see chapter 6.5.1).

131

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

5.3 Exploratory in depth interviews 5.3.1 Exploratory interviews to customers Although the adequate paradigm for our research is of a quantitative nature whereby the use of questionnaires and surveys is a common practice, at a certain point in time, it was important to use a combined methodology (involving some qualitative research). Such was necessary due to the inevitability to grasp the opinion and feelings of some of the intervenient (customers and industry) in order to conceive the questionnaires four in depth‐interviews were accomplished (this was the only time a qualitative methodology was used) both to customers and industry.

In‐depth or unstructured interviews are one of the foremost methods used for data collection in qualitative research. Sometimes described as a conversation, personal dialogues are seen as having central importance in social research because of the power of language to illuminate the meaning. Although a good in‐depth interview will appear naturalistic, it will look differently from everyday conversation (Legard et al., 2003), the intention of In‐depth interviews is to produce stories of experience, generating authentic accounts that are the product of the empathetic relationship derived from the inter‐action between interviewee and interviewer (Silverman, 2001). Main feature of the in‐depth interview is the intention to combine structure with flexibility, a second key feature of the interview is being interactive in nature (Legard et al. 2003).

Mixed method studies often use structured questionnaires and semi‐structured interviews to generate confirmatory results despite the differences in methods of data collection, analysis, and interpretation (Harris and Brown, 2010). Although questionnaires may provide evidence of patterns amongst large populations, interview data often gather more in‐depth participant attitudes insights, thoughts, and actions (Kendall, 2008).

132

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

5.3.2 Interviews to reference customers Three institutions of distinctive background and referenced as examples on the adoption of DPOP in Portugal were interviewed in face‐to‐face manner (see annexes 4,5,6) to collect information, thoughts and company views on dematerialization processes, institutions were:

1) INFORMA D&B: Operating in Portugal since 1906 under the name of Dun & Bradstreet until 2004, when acquired by the Spanish company INFORMA. Nonetheless maintaining a strategic alliance with Dun & Bradstreet. This alliance allowed INFORMA D&B to be part of the largest enterprise information network in the world, Dun & Bradstreet Worldwide Network, with access to information on more than 253 million economic agents in 221 countries. INFORMA D&B started the process of dematerialization of information by 1980. Later, by 2009 through the launch of "eInforma," platform, all essential services for customers were moved to the internet. INFORMA D&B has a customer base of more than 13,000 national companies. With net sales of 13.8 million euros in 2015, it employs 120 people;

2) SONAE GROUP: The biggest group in Portugal has its origin in 1959 with “Sociedade Nacional de Estratificados”, which would eventually evolve into a group that includes today areas as diverse as modern distribution, specialized retail, telecommunications, tourism, media, insurance, new technologies, amongst others and spread in 72 countries. The group head office is located in “Lugar do Espido, Maia” near Oporto, and has offices spread around Portugal and other continents. Sonae started the process of dematerialization by 1998, by 2015 they have achieved 75% of their target. With a net sales of 5224,5 M€ in 2015, it employees 40.738 people located in 72 countries; 3) University of Minho: Located in the northern city of Portugal, Braga, Minho University was founded in 1973 and started the first academic year of 1975/76. Presently with more than 20.000 students over two campus (Braga and Guimarães) it has Schools of Architecture, Sciences, Health Sciences, Law, Economics and Management, Engineering, Psychology, Nursing, and the Institutes of Social Sciences, Education and Arts and Human Sciences, for undergraduate, master and PhD titles.

133

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

The dematerialization started by 2014 as large scale process and by this time is still being implemented.

Face‐to‐face interviews occurred as follows: 1) Informa D&B (Dun & Bradstreet): Two interviews were performed to CEO and Director of Operations at the head office in Lisbon (1) 10/03/2015 and 2) 20/03/2015); 2) Sonae three interviews were performed, to: a) Systems and Information director on 03/06/2015 at Senhora da Hora office; b) Processes Director on 08/06/2015 at Vila Nova de Gaia office; c) Marketing and Communication Director on 15/06/2015 at the head office in Lugar do Espido, Maia; 3) Universidade do Minho Rectory three interviews were performed, to: a) Administrator on 27/11/2014; b) Administrator plus the key member of dematerialization team on 20/02/2015; c) Administrator plus the key member of dematerialization team on 12/06/2015.

Replies were recorded and transcribed. Although, no formal disavowal on transcribing the replies to our research was mentioned, it was clear that due to delicacy of the items it would be convenient to ask permission to mention the companies name, should this research be of a public nature. Both interview scripts (customers and industry) were divided into five chapters, each one allocated to specific topic, as follows: 1) Motivation; 2) Competition; 3) Image; 4) Finance; 5) Processes; 6) HR (see annexes 2 and 3).

Most significant excerpts from the interviews were grouped and described as follows (see tables 16, 17, 18, 19,20, 21):

134

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Table 16 ‐ Questions related to Motivation

What has motivated de‐materialization in your company? D&B SONAE UM Copy Tax (one to many), Life Time 3Millon invoices year (2,5 core Part of the university strategic Cycle (6 months), Heavy System, business), Heavy paper processes plan (2009‐2013, 2013‐2017), Need for technological evolution, in retail, Need for more efficient Improve on efficiency, Cost Higher efficiency, Arquive in line processes, Lack of physical space reduction, Carbon foot print, with business (market demand), (65 Km in paper Arquive by 2015) Processes Efficiency, Green image Better flow of the business

When did it started? D&B SONAE UM Company started in 1906, Arquive 1998~1999 with OCR (Optical 2012 : QREN candidacy in Portugal with 76 years of Character Recognition), 2001 2014 : Project started market information, Migration to Ready to Start , 2007 New de‐materialized system (IT) Platform, 2012 Fully operational started in 1980's, implementation occurred between 1987 ‐ 1989

Duration? D&B SONAE UM Between 8~9 years (from 2005 External invoice Still ongoing planning to implementation) implemented , 2015 75% of internal only, external launching internal target achieved , Target on the 1990's for 2016 80% of de‐ materialization

Table 16 summarizes the replies from the interviews applied to the three reference companies on questions related to the motivation to adopt DPOP, and its timing. Regarding motivation, improve efficiency is mentioned as a common aspect by the three companies, space necessity was evidenced by D&B and SONAE, cost reduction and environmental aspects was pointed out by UM. As for timing, D&B started the migration process the 1980’s, SONAE by 1998 and UM on 2014. D&B took between 8 to 9 years to implement the DPOP, SONAE achieved around 75% of the target by 2015 and 80% on 2016 as for UM the implementation is still ongoing.

Table 17 ‐ Questions related to Competition

Do you know if your competitors followed this process ? (Sector de‐materialization) D&B SONAE UM Yes, Biggest competitor MOP with At invoice level (very superficial) UTAD, U.Aveiro, U.Algarve, SQL (IBM AS400) but information one known (Jerónimo Martins) ISCTE, Politécnico do Porto stored in word processors

135

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Looking to the question related to known competitors adopting DPOP in table 17, D&B and SONAE had only one known competitor, UM mentioned the existence of five competitors.

Table 18 ‐ Questions related to Image

Did environmental issues posed on your decision ? D&B SONAE UM No Yes, one of the starting points Yes (Dean's internal order) was an internal partnership with Sonae's environmental department aiming green marketing

Do you have any social responsibility implemented (GRI / ISO 26000) D&B SONAE UM NoInternal environmental forum, No ISO 26000 :No

As for the two questions related to companies’ image exhibited on table 18, decision based on environmental aspects is only mentioned by SONAE and UM (D&B had no influence on this matter). Certification on social responsibility (GRI/ISO 2600) was only granted to SONAE.

136

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Table 19 ‐ Questions related to Finance

Were there any cost reduction? D&B SONAE UM Yes (due to head count reduction) Yes Yes

Is it possible to quantify? D&B SONAE UM No (Confidential) 49.000.000 escudos on the Estimated 1M€ second year (244.411€) , 3,85€ per de‐materialized invoice , Currently 1,35M€ per year

Was there any investment on HW / SW D&B SONAE UM Yes, a fee to be paid to the head Yes Yes, on HW / SW / Infra Structure office

Is it possible to quantify? D&B SONAE UM Around 20% of the sales 43.076.250 escudos (214.863€)2,7M€ (Financed)

Regarding the questions related to the financial aspects on table 19, D&B, SONAE and UM mentioned that there was cost reduction with the adoption of DPOP, SONAE quantified the reduction around 1,35M€ per year and UM estimated a total of 1M€, due to confidentiality D&B could not disclose the amount. When considering the investment on HW or SW related to the implementation of DPOP, all three companies stated that there was investment, on the question related to investment quantification, D&B mentioned 20% of sales, SONAE around 215K€ and UM 2,7M€ (financed by external programs).

137

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Table 20 ‐ Questions related to Processes

Were there any proccesses change? D&B SONAE UM Yes Yes Yes

Which ones? D&B SONAE UM Data collection, Data maintenance, Invoice emission, Processes. Open, Close, Financial, data access, data disclosure Invoice reception, HR., on total between 15~20 Matching (now automatic), processes Newsletters, New areasto be impemented; l Internal Comunication, Arquive , De‐materialized Letters meetings

The new proccesses have legal value? D&B SONAE UM Yes Yes Yes, supported by login and password plus "Citizen Card" with electronic signature

If not, do you still depend on paper? D&B SONAE UM Paperbackup(printscreens)for Nevertheless authorities still NA court (if requested) demand paper documents as proofing in court actions (for customers that need paper invoices, 5€ is charged per paper invoice)

Concerning the questions related to processes on table 20, all three companies had changes in their processes. As companies are diverse in their activities there were different replies. D&B focused the processes change on data collection and handling, SONAE concentrated the process change on communication and invoicing while UM concentrated the changes on the opening and closing of all processes as well as on Financial and HR processes on a total of 20 processes. All companies referred that new processes had legal value, additionally UM mentioned the need of a used login backed by “Citizen Card” signature to access processes. When the companies were asked if they still depend on paper, UM replied no, as for D&B and SONAE they replied that a paper back‐up was necessary due to legal reasons, furthermore SONAE mentioned a 5€ charge per paper invoice for their customer’s outside DPOP.

138

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Table 21 ‐ Questions related to Human Resources (HR)

Was there any head count reduction? D&B SONAE UM Yes No No

How many? D&B SONAE UM Circa 40 in a time span of 10 Years NA NA (from 150 to 110)

Were there any new competencies entering? D&B SONAE UM Yes, IT related Yes, IT / Systems Classic profile reduction , newHR hire for more qualified staff (higher level)

Was there dedicated training for the transition? (Number of hours / worker) D&B SONAE UM Yes, 150 training hours for the Yes, more than 35h / year per Yes, 600 staff , >7hours , implementation , all workers had employee 1000h for non teaching staff, 100h training, later training for 2500h for teaching staff, specific teams that handle data ongoing process

Was there Tele Working promotion and / or working hours extension period? D&B SONAE UM No, only presential due to the No No nature of the business

Was there resistance to change? D&B SONAE UM No, Natural flow to new No Yes, but not much and mainly technologies as part of company from technical ar eas that mindset questioned project choices

If yes, how was it override? D&B SONAE UM NA NA With training Manuals and FAQ's helped to overcome resistance

When considering the questions related to HR on table 21, it is noticeable that D&B was the only company to reduce their headcount by 40 during a 10 years span with the adoption of DPOP. All companies mentioned the entrance of new competencies mainly with IT skills. As for dedicated training to workers during the transition period, all companies have administrated training, D&B 150 hours during implementation phase and 100 hours after. SONAE gave 35 hours per employee per year and UM between 7 and 2500 hours depending on the activity of the worker. None of the companies shift to remote working, all remained in persona. When asked if there was any resistance to change, only UM replied positively, but referred that such resistance was not on the workflows but on the technical choices, furthermore UM mentioned that resistance was override with a dedicated portal with FAQ’s and training manuals.

139

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Following the interviews to the reference customers and after an extensive reflection, the final layout of the questionnaires was prepared (see annexes 10 and 11). The quantitative research makes use of questionnaires and surveys to collect data to be revised and presented in numbers, permitting the data to be characterized by the use of statistical analysis (Hittleman and Simon, 1997). Furthermore and regarding the quantitative approach, Carey (1993) adds that sample sizes are larger than those used in qualitative research so that statistical methods can be used to ensure that samples are representative.

5.3.3 Interviews to the Industry Two telephone interviews were executed to the oldest and most studied manufacturer within the office manufacturing industry: Xerox. The interviews were performed to the President of Xerox Technology on 28th September 2015 and on the 24th February 2016. The interview script (see annex 3) was divided into six chapters (Motivation, Competition, Image, Finance, Processes and HR). Most significant excerpts from the interviews (see annex 7) were grouped and described as follows: 1) Motivation ‐ “Due to market changes (reduction on equipment demand) and to avoid losses inherent to commodity; Still an ongoing process that we forecast to be dilated in time as it involves a structured change within todays’ market”; 2) Competition “Yes, definitely all our competition followed this trend (process of migration from Product to Service). Not only the traditional competition as well as newcomers; 3) Image (Is this change supported by marketing activities?) “Yes, as much as possible and transversally to all the company activities”; “Social responsibility, environmental and sustainability aspects are part of our culture, furthermore our customers give attention to this areas” 4) Finance (Was there an investment in this process?) “Yes, there was, and substantial investments are still being made to adequate the current structure from a world class manufacturer to a future reference service provider, (especially in knowledge and software companies acquisition)”;

140

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

5) Processes (Was there a change in internal processes?) “The ones related to elimination of some manufacturing processes and the implementation of new service areas” 6) HR “Yes, unfortunately (downsizing) it is one of the necessary measures to take in order to compete in the services market”; “new competences were acquired in software and IT”; The staff received training in IT and Customer Support, (on average 20 hours per year); Some remote activities or telework was implemented for helpdesk or support activities; (was there resistance to change?) “Especially for senior staff or when unions were involved…and it was contoured with training and meetings involving senior management to explain the change”.

Following the interview, a final questionnaire was prepared and sent to the valid universe of the manufacturers (MFP, B2B) as informed by Infosource. Although fifteen manufacturers compose the universe (MFP and B2B), only eleven were contacted. The reason behind this discrimination is correlated to market share significance. From the universe of manufacturers, nine of them: Canon, Konica Minolta, Kyocera, Lexmark, Ricoh, Samsung, Sharp, Toshiba, Xerox aggregate 97,3% of the market share in Europe (2015), the remaining 2,7%, market share is distributed by six manufacturers. Out of this six, two, had a relative market share (slightly above 0,8%) and four had a non‐ significant market share.

141

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

5.4 Questionnaire applied to customers As mentioned previously, the sample from customers was sourced through Informa D&B and public institutions that covered a selection of sectors, whereby, according to D&B, a process of dematerialization already occurred, or, is probably occurring, such sectors / vertical markets are: 1) Education (Universities and Institutes; Public and Private); 2) Government (Central and Local); 3) Health (Hospital and Clinics; Public and Private); 4) Industry; 5) Services; 6) Trade.

The supplied information package from D&B (of confidential nature) reflected the universe of companies and institutions located in Portugal (mainland) where net sales in 2014 was equal or greater than 10M€.

1 23 4 5 Information supplied included items such as: Company name, Address, Postal Code, District, CAE6, Number of employees (2014), Name of Contact, Email and Telephone plus Net Sales (2014), for the following sectors / vertical markets: a) Health (Hospital

and Clinics; Public and Private); b) Industry; c) Services; d) Trade.

As for Government and Education, necessary information was sourced as follows: 1) Education, Universities and compared Institutes or Polytechnics, from the site of DGES – Direcção Geral do Ensino Superior (www.dges.mctes.pt); 2) Central Government, from the Portuguese government site (www.portugal.gov.pt); 3) Local Government (Municipalities), from the site of Associação Nacional de Municípios (ANMP), (www.anmp.pt), the three biggest municipalities per district where chose.

Collected information from these sectors included: Name of institution, Category, Address, General contact (Telephone and email).

1 2 3 4 5 6 CAE (Classificação das Atividades Económicas) refers to the Classification of Economic Activities in Portugal

142

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Due to the extensiveness of the available information and to assure a workable and representative sample, together with D&B a proportional sample for a group of sectors was established. Consequently, it was possible to access a sample for the sectors of Health, Industry, Services and Trade. Nonetheless, and maintaining the early assumptions of a workable and representative sample, it was necessary to select another path for the sectors of Education and Government, being so, we have followed the subsequent assumptions: 1) Education, taking into account that in Portugal at the present time only the Higher Education sector has the necessary autonomy to embrace a dematerialization process, we have chosen for this sector all the Universities (private and public), as well, as all legal comparable organizations such as Institutes and Polytechnics (total 124); 2) Government: 1) Central: All ministries that composed the government by January 2015 were used (17); 2) Local: Since Portugal has a large number of municipalities (280) in the 18 mainland districts and being difficult to reach the universe, we have chosen the 3 most prominent municipalities in terms of population per district (total of 54).

Customers sample was composed by 725 companies / institutions, being the dispersion per sector / vertical market as follows: 1) Education: 124 recipients, corresponding to the total number of Universities, Institutes, Polytechnics or compared institutions (public and private), as described in the site of DGES – Direcção Geral do Ensino Superior (www.dges.mctes.pt); 2) Government (Central and Local): 71 recipients, divided as follows: a) Central Government, 17 ministries as described in the Portuguese government official site (www.portugal.gov.pt); b) Local Government, 54 municipalities. Corresponding to the three biggest most important municipalities in terms of population per district in the 18 mainland Portuguese districts, information sourced in the site of Associação Nacional de Municípios (ANMP), (www.anmp.pt); 3) Health (Hospital and Clinics; Public and Private): 75 recipients as supplied by D&B; 4) Industry: 165 recipients as supplied by D&B; 5) Services: 165 recipients as supplied by D&B; 6) Trade: 125 recipients as supplied by D&B.

143

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Bearing in mind the inherent characteristics from customers sample, a questionnaire was prepared, taking into consideration the feedback from the previous exploratory interviews performed to companies in Portugal quoted as being the reference on dematerialization process. As identified earlier, the objective of the questionnaire, was to gather information on the dematerialization process that once occurred or is likely to be occurring at the recipient’s company / institution.

Questionnaire applied to customers was composed by 28 questions divided into six groups; Company Characterization, Motivation for Dematerialization, Overall Image, Financial Aspects, Internal Processes, Human Resources.

Questions had the following characteristics; a) 15 closed questions using a Likert scale with 7 steps, whereby 1 is Not Important and 7 Very Important or 1 is Diminished and 7 is Very High; b) 1 Dipolar question whereby ‐2 is worsened a lot and +2 is Improved a lot; c) 27 closed questions where the respondents could choose an option from a group; d) 2 Open box for additional information or comments. The questionnaire was written and replied in Portuguese, collected replies were later translated by the author to English (see annexes 10 and 11).

The questionnaire structure was devised following the interviews to customers and supported by the literature. As mentioned earlier, the 28 questions were grouped according to six areas of importance: a) First group, questions: A1.1, A.1.3, A1.4, A1.5, A.6, define respondent importance of activity sector, for Inforsource (2016), the sectors described are the most prominent in terms of dematerialization processes, questions A2.1 and A.2 characterize the company in terms size, associated to the net sales in 2014 and the number of employees, Brodbeck et al. (2004) argues that numerous industry interactions are influenced by its size, question A.3 defines the rank of respondent within the company; b) Second group portrays the motivation that led companies to DPOP. Questions 1.1,1.2,1.3,1.4.,1.5, 1.6 describe the most common motives for dematerialization

144

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

(economic Issues, environmental issues, in need of physical space, imposition of new processes by suppliers / customers, matters related to image or reputation of the institution towards the customers and others); c) Third group takes an overview on the impact that dematerialization had on companies’ image (questions 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 4.4, 4.5), legal constraints (5, 5.1) and existing accreditations. Wang et al. (2013) share the view that the adoption environmental policies will lead to the adoption of a proactive market orientation well as environmental sustainability on digital information systems (Chowdhury, 2013), on the other hand, by opting for environmental practices will disclosure an image that will extend the perceived benefits to the customers (Gosnell, 2017), thus contributing to sustainable development and environmental protection (Moser 2015), mandatory legal constraints that push the user of paper documents is still an actual problem in Portugal. As for accreditations, Carr (1997) believes that companies with ISO accreditations will be more competitive as they exhibit important quality attributes preferred by customers over companies that have no accreditation; d) Fourth group, is focused on financial aspects resulted from the DPOP and on equipment or SW investment (questions 7.1, 7.2, 7.3, 7.4, 7.5; 8.1, 8.2, 8.3, 8.4, 8.5, 8.6; 9; 10; 11.1, 11.2, 11.3). The adoption of DPOP and may increase productivity and reduce costs (Bhuiyan and Baghel, 2005) leading to new processes and opportunities leading to quality increase and reducing assets and costs (Chesbroug, 2010 ; Karaszewski, 2010); e) Fifth group, looks into companies’ internal processes that were affected by dematerialization process (questions 12, 13, 14, 15.1, 15.2 and 15.3). Through the adoption of new processes and characteristics companies may reinforce the bonds between stakeholders (O'Boyle et al., 2011), adoption of environmental related processes and practices affects in a positive manner organizations (Cantor et al., 2013), for Tucker et al. (2014) as new processes become more complex, they will certainly lead to a change management whereby the infrastructure will adjust to new work practices;

145

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

f) Sixth group is dedicated to the impact on human resources with the advent of dematerialization such as: downsizing, skills, training, resistance will be tackled in this group (questions 16; 17.1, 17.2, 17.3, 17.4;18, 18.1;19, 19.1, 19.1.1, 19.1.2, 19.1.3, 19.1,4, 19.1.5; 20.1, 20.2, 20.3, 20.4; 21; 22; 23; 24; 25.1, 25.1.1, 25.1.2, 25.1.3, 25.1.4, 25.1.5, 25.1.6). Nowadays, organizational or processes changes may end in downsizing (Erickson and Roloff, 2008), such, can occur due to new process being automatized, or simple extinguished. Whereas possible to retain staff, organizations may perform the transition to the new reality by developing and promoting learning accordingly (Savolainen, 2000), this will reduce resistance to change and facilitate the integration with new processes (Doherty, 2010; Anonymous, 2015), nonetheless, and although the efforts to retain talents and human capital, it is important that employers need to understand what contributes to the organization objectives (Wallace et al., 2014), which sometimes can not be achievable due reasons such as cognitive resistance. The questionnaire ends with a box where respondent can express free comments (see annexes 10 and 11). Questions were also used to build the variables operationalization table that establish the relationship between research questions and hypothesis (see table 22)

146

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

H3 H4 H4 H4 H3 H2b

Hypothesis Hypothesis

(2013) H1 Author

Maena

Source: (2016),

Yoon

(2016) H3

and

(2013) H5

Isaeva

Olejniczak ‐ Stratton

(2012),

(2013) H4

Bednarska

(2012), Jones

Meena

(2004) H4

(2015), Davis

(2015),

and (2013),

Davis

Wong

Davis (2015) H3

Table and

and Smith

and

Dykman

Davis

(2010) H3 Wong

and (2016),

(2013) H2a Hadley

(2015) H4

(2008),

(2012),

(2011),

Wang Hadley al. Davis Davis,

Chowdhury Olejniczak

‐ and

Ravasi Elsenpeter Davis,

(2017), (2016),

and and (2000), al.

Caldeira

Hadley

(2012)

et (2000),

Bednarska

al. Operationalization

Velte

al.

at Davis,

(2007), Morsing Scott et

Welfens

Brockhaven

2010)

(2014), Velte, (2013)

and Van

(2010),

(2012), Caldeira Gibson Alsyouf et

(2006,

al.

(2013),

Schutz Kjaergaard,

et Gardenal Variables

Tucker (2001), (2001), (2001),

‐ (2011), (2015), Karaszewski Lakemond

(2010) 22 (1999),

Caldeira Matthyssensand

(2013), Chowdhury

and

Meel al

Ruth Moser

Whitehead Whitehead Whitehead

(2015) (2010),

et (2008)

(2016),

and (2011), Table

Coreynen, Chao (2011), Windahl Chesbrough

(2015), (1997), (1997), (1997), Cantor

Golds

Elsenpeter Chesbrough

(2004), (2004), (2016), Infosource (2014), Clevelend

Baines Baines Baines

Wilburn (2011),

al. al. McMullen al. al. and

(2013), al

et et et

al (2005),

(2008), (2015),

(1996), (1996), (1996), Velte et (2011,

(2005),

Wilson

Q3 Wang 2.1 Brodbeck

type Questions Literature type Questions Literature

Variable Variable Nominal Q4 O'Boyle

sector Nominal QA.1 Palmer reputation Nominal Q1.5 Bejou sustainability Scale Q1.2 Carr

implementation Nominal Q2, dematerialization Nominal Q11.1 Coroama

variables and and

space Nominal Q1.3 Oliver

increase Scale Q11.3 Oliver of

variables on

activity Issues Scale Q1.1 Oliver of

Image image reduction Scale Q9

reduction Scale Q7 Bhuiyan

spent

proccesses Nominal Q1.4 Holmund dimension Scale QA2.2 Brodbeck

Sales Scale QA reduction Scale Q10 Velte,

Dependent RQ2 Net RQ1 Customer RQ3 Paper RQ4 Time RQ3 Profitability RQ3 Importance RQ3 Environment RQ2 Firm RQ3 Globe RQ3 New RQ3 Costs RQ3 ESS RQ3 Oveall RQ3 Necessity RQ3 Economic RQ Independent 147

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

The questionnaire was intended to be replied by the following hierarchal positions within the companies / Institutions: 1) CEO, President, Director; 2) First line director: Financial; 3) First line director: Commercial; 4) First line director: Technical / IT; 5) First line director: Production; 6) First line director: Marketing; 7) First line director: Legal; 8) Others, with management or administration delegation.

To verify the questionnaire robustness and consistency, a pre‐test questionnaire was sent by email to four respondents chosen randomly. Two days after sending the questionnaire, the recipients were contacted by telephone to elucidate on the project or remove any doubts on the questionnaire, a face‐to‐face interview was offered if necessary. Subsequently, and after receiving the replies, results were analyzed. Again, respondents were contacted by telephone, so researchers could receive feedback on the consistency and easiness to reply to the questionnaire. No interview was requested, nor any changes were necessary to perform in any of the questions composing the questionnaire. Being so, we could use the current version of the questionnaire as the final version for launching.

The method of questionnaire delivery to the population enumerated beforehand was through the usage of email. An email containing an introduction and a hyperlink to the questionnaires were sent between 13/02/2016 and 06/05/2016 using an online survey software; Qualtrics. All received replies were anonymous and untraceable. The results of questionnaire administration are revealed in table 23.

Moreover, and, considering telephone communication as being an effective mean of communication and to obtain a maximum number of replies, we have contacted all recipients by telephone three times using the following methodology: a) First time: Before the questionnaire was sent. Substantiating the research taking place at University of Minho, its motivation and appealing to the recipient to reply to questionnaire that he/she was about receive by email;

148

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

b) Second time: One week after survey was sent. Reminding that the survey was already sent, again appealing for reply to those who have mentioned that no reply was done, yet; c) Third time: One month after the second contact. Data received from Qualtrics application was exported to a data mining application for later analysis.

151 recipients completed costumer’s questionnaire in full (see table 23). The items selected to characterize the costumers and companies were: activity sector, and rank of respondents, for costumers; net sales, and number of employees, for companies

Table 23 ‐ Distribution of replies by activity sector

Sent Received

Sector Amount %

Education 124 9 1%

Government 71 9 6%

Health 75 15 10%

Industry 165 41 27%

Services 165 28 19%

Trade 125 49 32%

Total 725 151 21%

The first information collected from the costumer’s sample was the activity sector of the respondents. As illustrated in Table 23, 32% of respondents are from the Trade Sector, 27% from the Industry Sector, and 19% from the Services Sector. These three sectors alone represent 78% of the costumer’s sample.

149

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Table 24 ‐ Rank of Respondents by type of function

Valid Cumulated Frequency Percentage percentage percentage CEO, President, Administrator 18 11.9 11.9 11.9 Financial Director 62 41.1 41.1 53 Commercial Director 6 4 4 57 Technical / lT Director 11 7.3 7.3 64.2 Production Director 4 2.6 2.6 66.9 Marketing Director 5 3.3 3.3 70.2 Other 45 29.8 29.8 100 Total 151 100 100

On the respondent function in Table 24, top three functions of respondents were: financial director 41,1%; 29,8% other (appointed by the board) and 11,9% CEO’s president or administrator, remaining functions represents 17,2% .

Figure 19: Average Number of Employees by Sector

Average Number of Employees by Sector

1600,00

1400,00

1200,00

1000,00

800,00

600,00

400,00

200,00

0,00 Trade Educa on Governement Industry Health Services Total

Figure 19 evidences that the highest number of employees is located in the sectors of Health, Education and Government (circa 87%, being this sectors mostly Public).

150

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

One of the collected information in customers’ investigation was net sales (approx.) in 2014 (K €) of the companies. As illustrated in Figure 20, 86% reply with an estimate under 100 000 k€. (N=129). The mean was 57883.83 and the standard deviation was 113743.052 (N=150), (see figure 20).

Figure 20: Net Sales (approx.) in 2014 (K €)

151

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Other information gathered from customers was the number of employees per company, 82% reply with an estimate under 600 employees. (N=123). The mean was 462.01 and the standard deviation was 894.326 (N=150) (see figure 21).

Figure 21: Number of Employees

Collected data was exported to a data mining application named SPSS for later analysis. Coutinho (2013) describes this application as a powerful software tool to perform complex statistical calculations and display consistent results very quickly. The author also notes that this tool helps the researcher to analyze collected quantitative data.

152

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

CHAPTER 6: DISCUSSION OF RESULTS

153

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

This page intentionally left blank

154

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

6.1 Digitation and Paperless Office Program impact assessment 6.1.1‐ Motivators for Dematerialization The items selected to characterize motivation for dematerialization were: economic issues, sustainability / environment issues, need of physical space, imposition of new processes, and matters related to image or reputation. Considering a scale from 1 to 7 (1 not important and 7 very important), Table 25 illustrates how the need of physical space was the item with a higher mean, followed by economic issues and sustainability / environmental issues.

Table 25 ‐ Motivators Regarding Dematerialization

Motivators N Mean Std. Deviation Economic Issues 151 5.30 0.864 Sustainability / Environment Issues 151 5.02 0.941 Need of physical space 151 5.75 0.954 Imposition of new processes 151 4.48 0.908 Matters related to image or reputation 151 4.70 0.945

Table 26 ‐ Beginning Year of DPOP: frequencies and percentages

Frequency Percentage Valid percentage Cumulated percentage 1997 1 0.7 0.7 0.7 2001 2 1.3 1.3 2 2002 1 0.7 0.7 2.6 2003 1 0.7 0.7 3.3 2004 2 1.3 1.3 4.6 2006 1 0.7 0.7 5.3 2007 6 4 4 9.3 2008 1 0.7 0.7 9.9 2009 3 2 2 11.9 2010 16 10.6 10.6 22.5 2011 21 13.9 13.9 36.4 2012 25 16.6 16.6 53 2013 26 17.2 17.2 70.2 2014 32 21.2 21.2 91.4 2015 12 7.9 7.9 99.3 Hasn't began 1 0.7 0.7 100 Total 151 100 100

155

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

From the total respondents, 99.3% has already begun the process of dematerialization. 87.4% (N=132) started the process between 2010 and 2015, and 21.2% (N=32) reported the process has started in 2014. Only one reported not to have started. 58.9% (N=89) report the process hasn’t ended, 41.1% report the opposite where the process has already ended (see table 26).

Table 27, shows how respondents answered to the item “Economic Issues” (whereby 1 not important and 7 very important). For the respondents, economic issues are a very important issue in terms of dematerialization (86.1% above 5).

Table 27 ‐ Relative and absolute frequencies for the level of importance on Economic Issues

Frequency Percentage Valid percentage Cumulated percentage 1 Not important 1 0.7 0.7 0.7 3 1 0.7 0.7 1.3 4 19 12.6 12.6 13.9 5 67 44.4 44.4 58.3 6 55 36.4 36.4 94.7 7 Very important 8 5.3 5.3 100 Total 151 100 100

Table 28 illustrates how respondents answered to the item “Sustainability / Environmental Issues” (whereby 1 not important and 7 very important). 41.7% (N=63). For the respondents, sustainability is a very important issue in terms of dematerialization (71.5% above 5).

156

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Table 28 ‐ Relative and absolute frequencies for the level of importance on Sustainability / Environmental Issues

Frequency Percentage Valid percentage Cumulated percentage 3 7 4.6 4.6 4.6 4 36 23.8 23.8 28.5 5 63 41.7 41.7 70.2 6 37 24.5 24.5 94.7 7 Very important 8 5.3 5.3 100 Total 151 100 100

Table 29 elucidates how respondents answered to the item “Need of physical space” (whereby 1 not important and 7 very important). “Need of physical space” is a very important issue to respondents in terms of dematerialization (92.1% above 5).

Table 29 ‐ Relative and absolute frequencies for the level of importance on Need of Physical Space

Frequency Percentage Valid percentage Cumulated percentage 2 2 1.3 1.3 1.3 3 4 2.6 2.6 4 4 6 4 4 7.9 5 30 19.9 19.9 27.8 6 85 56.3 56.3 84.1 7 Very important 24 15.9 15.9 100 Total 151 100 100

Table 30 illustrates how respondents answered to the item “Imposition of new processes” (whereby 1 not important and 7 very important). For the respondents, imposition of new processes is a very important issue in terms of dematerialization (92.1% above 5).

157

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Table 30 ‐ Relative and absolute frequencies for the level of importance on Imposition of New Processes

Frequency Percentage Valid percentage Cumulated percentage 1 Not important 1 0.7 0.7 0.7 2 1 0.7 0.7 1.3 3 10 6.6 6.6 7.9 4 70 46.4 46.4 54.3 5 55 36.4 36.4 90.7 6 9 6 6 96.7 7 Very important 5 3.3 3.3 100 Total 151 100 100

Table 31 demonstrates how respondents answered to the item “Matters related to image or reputation” (whereby 1 not important and 7 very important). For the respondents, matters related to image or reputation is a very important issue in terms of dematerialization (93.3% above 4).

Table 31 ‐ Relative and absolute frequencies for the level of importance on Matters related to image or reputation

Frequency Percentage Valid percentage Cumulated percentage 1 Not important 1 0.7 0.7 0.7 3 9 6 6 6.6 4 56 37.1 37.1 43.7 5 57 37.7 37.7 81.5 6 24 15.9 15.9 97.4 7 Very important 4 2.6 2.6 100 Total 151 100 100

54 respondents chose last option “Others” included in the motivation items. 21 respondents (13.9% of the total sample) answered “acquisition of new software”, 6 respondents (4% of the total sample) answered “workflows optimization”, and 5 respondents (3.3% of the total sample) answered “Reduction of Warehouse area/weight” (see table 32)

158

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Table 32 ‐ Relative and absolute frequencies for the level of importance on other factors for the Motivation of Dematerialization

Valid Cumulated Frequency Percentage percentage percentage Digital Archive/security 3 2 5.6 5.6 Workflows optimization 6 4 11.1 16.7 Productivity 1 0.7 1.9 18.5 Simplification/Debureaucratization 2 1.3 3.7 22.2 Efficiency 4 2.6 7.4 29.6 Organization/Rationalization 2 1.3 3.7 33.3 Paper Costs reduction 1 0.7 1.9 35.2 Environmental concerns 1 0.7 1.9 37 Top management directive 2 1.3 3.7 40.7 Strategic motives 1 0.7 1.9 42.6 Copy taxes 1 0.7 1.9 44.4 Reduction of Warehouse area/weight 5 3.3 9.3 53.7 Reduction of paper handling work 2 1.3 3.7 57.4 Acquisition of new software 21 13.9 38.9 96.3 Customer/Market requirements 2 1.3 3.7 100 Total 54 35.8 100 Missing 97 64.2 Total 151 100

In Table 33, frequencies and percentages for end year are presented. 58.9% (N=89) report the process hasn’t ended, 41.1% report the opposite, the process has ended already. More specifically, 30.5% (N=46) of respondents reported the process has ended in 2015.

159

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Table 33 ‐ End Year: frequencies and percentages

Frequency Percentage Valid percentage Cumulated percentage 1999 1 0.7 0.7 0.7 2006 1 0.7 0.7 1.3 2010 1 0.7 0.7 2 2011 1 0.7 0.7 2.6 2012 1 0.7 0.7 3.3 2013 3 2 2 5.3 2014 8 5.3 5.3 10.6 2015 46 30.5 30.5 41.1 Hasn't ended 89 58.9 58.9 100 Total 151 100 100

65.6% of respondents reported the time spent on the implementation process of dematerialization was between 2 and 4 years (N=99). The mean was 3.5 and the standard deviation was 2.675 (N=151) (see figure 22).

Figure 22: Time spent on implementation

160

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

6.1.2‐ Consequences of Dematerialization The items selected to study image of dematerialization were: 1) Favors the company's image towards its customers / competitors; 2) It’s a sine qua condition to be able to negotiate with some of the suppliers and customers; 3) In no way interferes with the company's image; 4) Contributed to a positive image of the company towards customers in the area of sustainability and ecology; 5) The company’s image worsened a lot or improved a lot after the dematerialization process (global assessment); 6) There are inhibiting factors / blockers for dematerialization.

Table 34 illustrates that “favors the company’s image” was the item with a higher mean (5.32 ‐ 54.3% answered 5) followed by the item “contributed to a positive image of the company” (mean 4.95% ‐ 47.7% answered 5). Also, the mean of item “in no way interferes with company’s image” is 4.3 (39.1% answered 4, N=59; 35.1% answered 5, N=53). Item “Global Assessment” had a different scale, from “‐2 worsened a lot” to “2 improved a lot”, so the mean 0.91 and the minimum of 0 (neither worsen nor improved) are good predictors and translate an overall assessment of improvement (86.1% of respondents selected “1 – improved”, N=130) Tables 40 to 45 illustrate the results per item.

Table 34 ‐ Importance of attributes for company’s image

KPI’s N Mean Std. Deviation Favors the company's image 151 5.32 0.734 Contributed to a positive image of the company 151 4.95 0.893 In no way interferes with the company's image 151 4.30 0.980 Sine qua condition to be able to negotiate 151 3.68 1.067 Global Assessment (‐2 to 2 dipolar scale) 151 0.91 0.364

161

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Table 35 illustrates how respondents answered to the item “Favors the company’s image” (whereby 1 not important and 7 very important). For the respondents, dematerialization favors the company’s image towards its customers / competitors (90.1% above 5)

Table 35 ‐ Importance of DPOP on company’s image

Frequency Percentage Valid percentage Cumulated percentage 4 15 9.9 9.9 9.9 5 82 54.3 54.3 64.2 6 45 29.8 29.8 94 7 Very important 9 6 6 100 Total 151 100 100

Table 36 shows how respondents answered to the item “Contributed to a positive image of the company” (whereby 1 not important and 7 very important). For the respondents, dematerialization contributed to a positive image of the company towards customers in the area of sustainability and ecology (90.1% above 5).

Table 36 ‐ DPOP contributed to a positive image of the company: frequencies and percentages

Frequency Percentage Valid percentage Cumulated percentage 2 1 0.7 0.7 0.7 3 3 2 2 2.6 4 41 27.2 27.2 29.8 5 72 47.7 47.7 77.5 6 26 17.2 17.2 94.7 7 Very important 8 5.3 5.3 100 Total 151 100 100

162

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Table 37 elucidates how respondents answered to the item “In no way interferes with the company's image” (whereby 1 not important and 7 very important). For the respondents, dematerialization in no way interferes with the company's image (82.1% above 4).

Table 37 ‐ DPOP in no way interferes with the company's image: frequencies and percentages

Frequency Percentage Valid percentage Cumulated percentage 1 Not important 1 0.7 0.7 0.7 2 4 2.6 2.6 3.3 3 22 14.6 14.6 17.9 4 59 39.1 39.1 57 5 53 35.1 35.1 92.1 6 10 6.6 6.6 98.7 7 Very important 2 1.3 1.3 100 Total 151 100 100

Table 38 exhibits how respondents answered to the item “Sine qua condition to be able to negotiate” (whereby 1 not important and 7 very important). For the respondents, dematerialization is a sine qua condition to be able to negotiate with some of the suppliers and customers (88% above 3).

Table 38 ‐ DPOP is sine qua condition to be able to negotiate: frequencies and percentages

Frequency Percentage Valid percentage Cumulated percentage 1 Not important 3 2 2 2 2 15 9.9 9.9 11.9 3 47 31.1 31.1 43 4 55 36.4 36.4 79.5 5 24 15.9 15.9 95.4 6 7 4.6 4.6 100 Total 151 100 100

163

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Global Assessment (see table 39) had a different scale, from “‐2 worsened a lot” to “2 improved a lot”, so the mean 0.91 and the minimum of 0 (neither worsen nor improved) are good predictors and translate an overall assessment of improvement (86.1% of respondents selected “1 – improved”, N=130).

Table 39 ‐ Global Assessment: frequencies and percentages

Frequency Percentage Valid percentage Cumulated percentage 0 No change 17 11.3 11.3 11.3 1 Improved 130 86.1 86.1 97.4 2 Improved a lot 4 2.6 2.6 100 Total 151 100 100

The item “Are there are inhibiting factors / blockers for dematerialization” was an open answer type of question. After analyzing the different valid answers given by respondents (N=139) 5 categories emerged: complexity in procedures, legal demands, resistance to change, compatible technology, and imposition from clients. Legal demands, was the category chosen by 126 respondents (90.65%), (see table 40).

Table 40 ‐ Inhibiting factors for dematerialization: frequencies and percentages

Cumulated Frequency Percentage Valid percentage percentage Complexity in procedures 6 3.97 4.32 4.32 Legal demands 126 83.44 90.65 94.97 Resistance to change 3 1.99 2.16 97.13 Compatible technology 1 0.66 0.71 97.84 Imposition from clients 3 1.99 2.16 100 Total 139 92.05 100 Missing 12 7.95 Total 151 100

6.1.3 Consequences regarding Sustainability / Environmental Issues The items selected to characterize sustainability / environmental Issues were: environmental matters weighed in decision for dematerialization; and the following accreditations: 1) ISO 9001; 2) ISO 14001; 3) ISO 26000; 4) Others.

164

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Table 41 illustrates the frequencies and percentages of the weight of environmental matters in the decision for dematerialization (whereby 1 not important and 7 very important). For the respondents, environmental matters weighed in the decision for the dematerialization of information (67.4% above 5).

Table 41 ‐ Weight of environmental matters: frequencies and percentages

Frequency Percentage Valid percentage Cumulated percentage 1 Not important 1 0.7 0.7 0.7 2 2 1.3 1.3 2 3 5 3.3 3.3 5.3 4 41 27.2 27.3 32.7 5 76 50.3 50.7 83.3 6 19 12.6 12.7 96 7 Very important 6 4 4 100 Total Valid 150 99.3 100 Missing 1 0.7 Total 151 100

Table 42 shows the frequencies and percentages of the accreditations, 69.5% (N=105) answered “Yes” to ISO 9001, 17.9% (N=27) answered “Yes” to ISO 14001, and 2% (N=3) answered “Yes” to “Others” (1.4%, N=2, answered ISO 17025; and 0.7%, N=1, answered OHSAS 18001). ISO 26000 is not being used by the respondents’ companies. Also, 28.5% (N=43) answered they have no accreditation at all.

Table 42 ‐ Accreditations: frequencies and percentages

Total Frequency Percentage ISO 9001 151 105 69.5 ISO 14001 151 27 17.9 ISO 26000 151 0 0 Others: ISO 17025 151 2 1.4 Others: OHSAS 18001 151 1 0.7 None 151 43 28.5

165

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

6.1.4 Consequences regarding Financial Aspects The items selected to characterize the economic / financial aspects of dematerialization were: 1) What was the reduction of costs with the process of dematerialization?; 2) What was the investment on hardware / software?; 3) Was there a reduction on paper consumption? And, if yes, what is the approximate percentage?; 4) What was the estimated reduction percentage of ESS (External Supplies and Services) spending on paper?; 5) In general, you consider that the process of dematerialization was important?; 6) In general, you consider that the process of dematerialization contributed to cost reduction in your company/institution?; 7) In general, you consider that the process of dematerialization contributes to increase profitability of the company/institution?

Regarding the first two items – “reduction of costs” and “investment on hardware/software” – Tables 43 and 44 show how the majority of respondents chose the first option “Less than 1% of the company net sales” followed by the second option “Less than 2.5% of the company net sales”. In regards to reduction of costs.75.5% (N=114) answered “Less than 1% of the company net sales”, and 13.9% (N=21) answered “Less than 2.5% of the company net sales”.

Table 43 ‐ Reduction of costs with the process of dematerialization: frequencies and percentages

Valid Cumulated Frequency Percentage percentage percentage Less than 1% of the company net sales 114 75.5 75.5 75.5 Less than 2.5% of the company net sales 21 13.9 13.9 89.4 More than 2.5% of the company net sales 3 2 2 91.4 More than 5% of the company net sales 5 3.3 3.3 94.7 There was no cost reduction 8 5.3 5.3 100 Total 151 100 100

166

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Considering investment on hardware/software, 64.2% (N=97) answered “Less than 1% of the company net sales”, and 21.2% (N=32) answered “Less than 2.5% of the company net sales” (see table 44).

Table 44 ‐ Investment on hardware / software: frequencies and percentages

Valid Cumulated Frequency Percentage percentage percentage Less than 1% of the company net sales; 97 64.2 64.2 64.2 Less than 2.5% of the company net sales; 32 21.2 21.2 85.4 More than 2.5% of the company net sales; 5 3.3 3.3 88.7 More than 5% of the company net sales; 2 1.3 1.3 90.1 Not quantifiable 15 9.9 9.9 100 Total 151 100 100

As Table 45 explains, 85.4% (N=129) of the costumers answered, “Yes” to the question: Was there a reduction on paper consumption?

Table 45 ‐ Was there a reduction on paper consumption: frequencies and percentages

Frequency Percentage Valid percentage Cumulated percentage Yes 129 85.4 85.4 85.4 No 22 14.6 14.6 100 Total 151 100 100

Table 46 demonstrates how different answers were given according to the activity sector. The health sector had the higher percentage of “Yes” answers with 93.3% (N=14) followed by the services sector with 92.6% (N=25) and the industry sector with 90.2% (N=37). Higher education was the only sector with a more distributed percentage between the two options with 55.6% (N=5) respondents answering “No” and 44.4% (N=4) of respondent answering “Yes” to the question: Was there a reduction on paper consumption?

167

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Table 46 ‐ Reduction on paper consumption per activity sector

Yes (N/%) No (N/%) Total (N/%) Trade 41/83.7% 8/16.3% 49/100% Higher Education 4/44.4% 5/55.6% 9/100% Public Administration 8/80% 2/20% 10/100% Industry 37/90.2% 4/9.8% 41/100% Health 14/93.3% 1/6.7% 15/100% Services 25/92.6% 2/7.4% 27/100% Total 129/85.4% 22/14.6% 151/100%

Table 47 and Figure 23 show the approximate percentage given by respondent who answered “Yes” to the question: Was there a reduction on paper consumption? (68.2%, N=103, answered 1 and 2%). The mean was 5.54 and the standard deviation was 12.297 (N=129).

Table 47 ‐ If yes, what is the approximate percentage: frequencies and percentages

Frequency Percentage Valid percentage Cumulated percentage 0 2 1.3 1.6 1.6 1 65 43 50.4 51.9 2 38 25.2 29.5 81.4 3 3 2 2.3 83.7 5 4 2.6 3.1 86.8 10 3 2 2.3 89.1 15 1 0.7 0.8 89.9 20 3 2 2.3 92.2 25 1 0.7 0.8 93 30 2 1.3 1.6 94.6 40 2 1.3 1.6 96.1 50 4 2.6 3.1 99.2 75 1 0.7 0.8 100 Total Valid 129 85.4 100 Missing 22 14.6 Total 151 100

168

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Figure 23: If yes, what is the approximate percentage

Table 48 and Figure 24 illustrate the estimated reduction percentage of ESS (External Supplies and Services) spending on paper: 70.2% (N=106) of the customer’s sample answered 1 and 2%. The mean was 3.16 and the standard deviation was 6.886 (N=127).

Table 48 ‐ Reduction percentage of ESS spending on paper: frequencies and percentages

Frequency Percentage Valid percentage Cumulated percentage 0 4 2.6 3.1 3.1 1 73 48.3 57.5 60.6 2 33 21.9 26 86.6 3 4 2.6 3.1 89.8 5 1 0.7 0.8 90.6 10 5 3.3 3.9 94.5 15 2 1.3 1.6 96.1 20 1 0.7 0.8 96.9 25 1 0.7 0.8 97.6 30 1 0.7 0.8 98.4 40 1 0.7 0.8 99.2 50 1 0.7 0.8 100 Total Valid 127 84.1 100 Missing 24 15.9 Total 151 100

169

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Figure 24: Reduction percentage of ESS spending on paper: frequencies and percentages

Table 49 shows that “The process of dematerialization was important” (whereby 1 not important and 7 very important) was the item with a higher mean (5.18 ‐ 52.3% answered 5) followed by the item “The process of dematerialization contributes to increase profitability” (mean 4.94 ‐ 47.7% answered 5). The item “The process of dematerialization contributed to cost reduction” was close to the first two with a mean of 4.89 (46.4% answered 5) Tables 48 to 49 illustrate the results per item.

Table 49 ‐ Assessment of the process of dematerialization: means and std. deviations

N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation The process of dematerialization was important 151 4 7 5.18 0.841 The process of dematerialization contributed to cost reduction 151 2 7 4.89 0.896 The process of dematerialization contributes to increase profitability 151 2 7 4.94 0.889

170

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

For the question, on the importance of dematerialization process (whereby 1 not important and 7 very important), 80.8% replied above 5 (see table 50).

Table 50 ‐ The process of dematerialization was important: frequencies and percentages

Frequency Percentage Valid percentage Cumulated percentage 4 29 19.2 19.2 19.2 5 79 52.3 52.3 71.5 6 30 19.9 19.9 91.4 7 Very important 13 8.6 8.6 100 Total 151 100 100

Table 51 illustrates the results on the question, if the process of dematerialization contributed to cost reduction (whereby 1 not important and 7 very important). 68.9% replied above 5.

Table 51 ‐ The process of dematerialization contributed to cost reduction: frequencies and percentages

Frequency Percentage Valid percentage Cumulated percentage 2 2 1.3 1.3 1.3 3 3 2 2 3.3 4 42 27.8 27.8 31.1 5 72 47.7 47.7 78.8 6 26 17.2 17.2 96 7 Very important 6 4 4 100 Total 151 100 100

Table 52 illustrates the results on the question; the process of dematerialization contributes to increase profitability (whereby 1 not important and 7 very important). 68.5% replied above 5.

171

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Table 52 ‐ The process of dematerialization contributes to increase profitability: frequencies and percentages

Frequency Percentage Valid percentage Cumulated percentage 2 1 0.7 0.7 0.7 3 3 2 2 2.6 4 42 27.8 27.8 30.5 5 70 46.4 46.4 76.8 6 28 18.5 18.5 95.4 7 Very important 7 4.6 4.6 100 Total 151 100 100

6.1.5 Consequences regarding changes in Internal Processes The items selected to characterize the processes of dematerialization were: 1) With the dematerialization of information, were there changes in your company/institution’s processes?; 2) The new processes have legal recognition?; 3) However, they still continue to depend on paper?

Tables 53 to 55, illustrates how the majority of respondents replied “Yes” to the three questions. Regarding changes in the processes, 95.4% (N=144) consider there were changes in the company/institution’s processes (see table 53).

Table 53 ‐ Were there changes: frequencies and percentages

Frequency Percentage Valid percentage Cumulated percentage Yes 144 95.4 95.4 95.4 No 7 4.6 4.6 100 Total 151 100 100

Regarding legal recognition, 95.4% (N=144) refer the new processes have legal recognition (see table 54).

172

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Table 54 ‐ New processes have legal recognition: frequencies and percentages

Frequency Percentage Valid percentage Cumulated percentage Yes 144 95.4 96 96 No 6 4 4 100 Total Valid 150 99.3 100 Missing 1 0.7 Total 151 100

Concerning dependency on paper, 97.3% (N=147) say the processes still continue to depend on paper. From this group, 78.1%, N=118, says the dependency on paper is due to tax/legal motives, and 19.2%, N=29, due to the design of internal processes (see table 55).

Table 55 ‐ Still continue to depend on paper: frequencies and percentages

Valid Cumulated Frequency Percentage percentage percentage No 3 2 2 2 Yes, due to the design of internal processes (workflow) 29 19.2 19.3 21.3 Yes, because of tax / legal motives (availability of a physical document) 118 78.1 78.7 100 Total Valid 150 99.3 100 Missing 1 0.7 Total 151 100

173

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

6.1.6 Consequences regarding changes in Human Resources (HR) The items selected to characterize the impact of dematerialization on Human Resources were: 1) Was there a reduction in the headcount? And, if yes, how many people?; 2) Was there addition of new competencies? And, if yes, in which areas?; 3) With the new processes, was there any additional training given to the employees? And, if yes, in which areas? And, hours / year per employee?; 4) With the implementation of dematerialization, were there promotion of teleworking and / or extension of the work schedule?; 5) Was there resistance to change? And, if yes, degree of resistance?; 6) In your belief, in your company / institution the normal user's role still maintains paper as an indispensable resource? And, if yes, in which age groups is more perceptible?

Tables 55 to 61 elucidate on the impact of dematerialization on Human Resources. 84.1% (N=127), against 15.2% (N=23) that answered “Yes”, refer that there was not a reduction of the headcount with the process of dematerialization (see table 56).

Table 56 ‐ Was there reduction in the headcount: frequencies and percentages

Frequency Percentage Valid percentage Cumulated percentage Yes 23 15.2 15.3 15.3 No 127 84.1 84.7 100 Total Valid 150 99.3 100 Missing 1 0.7 Total 151 100

For the respondents that answered, “Yes”, 91.3% (N=21; Total Valid=23) mentioned the headcount reduction was till 5 employees (see table 57)

174

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Table 57 ‐ How many people: frequencies and percentages

Frequency Percentage Valid percentage Cumulated percentage Till 5 21 13.9 91.3 91.3 Till 10 1 0.7 4.3 95.7 More than 20 1 0.7 4.3 100 Total Valid 23 15.2 100 Missing 128 84.8 Total 151 100

Regarding the addition of new competences, the majority of respondents answered “Yes” 64.9% (N=98), against 34.4% (N=52) that replied no (see table 58).

Table 58 ‐ Was there addition of new competencies: frequencies and percentages

Frequency Percentage Valid percentage Cumulated percentage Yes 98 64.9 64.9 64.9 No 52 34.4 34.7 100 Total Valid 150 99.3 100 Missing 1 0.7 Total 151 100

Considering additional training given to employees, the majority of the respondents answered “Yes”. 92.7% (N=140), against 6.6% (N=10) that answered “No” (see table 59).

Table 59 ‐ Was there any additional training given to the employees: frequencies and percentages

Frequency Percentage Valid percentage Cumulated percentage Yes 140 92.7 93.3 93.3 No 10 6.6 6.7 100 Total Valid 150 99.3 100 Missing 1 0.7 Total 151 100

According to respondents, training was focused mainly in two areas: Processes (84.1%, N); and IT (58.9%, N=89) (see table 60).

175

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Table 60 ‐ Training in which areas: frequencies and percentages

Total Frequency Percentage IT 151 89 58.9 Languages 151 4 2.6 Human Resources 151 9 6 Processes 151 127 84.1 Others 151 13 8.6

Also on the subject of training, 25.2% (N=38) executed training up to 10 hours / year per employee, and 21.9% (N=33) executed training of more than 20 hours / year per employee (see table 61)

Table 61 ‐ Hours / year of training per employee: frequencies and percentages

Valid Cumulated Frequency Percentage percentage percentage Up to 10 hours / year per employee 38 25.2 27.1 27.1 More than 10 hours / year per employee 65 43 46.4 73.6 More than 20 hours / year per employee 33 21.9 23.6 97.1 More than 30 hours / year per employee 4 2.6 2.9 100 Total Valid 140 92.7 100 Missing 11 7.3 Total 151 100

Similarly, the majority of the sample declared there were no promotion of teleworking and / or extension of the work schedule. 59.6% (N=90), against 39.7% (N=60) that answered, “Yes”, referred there was no promotion of teleworking and / or extension of the work schedule (see table 62).

176

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Table 62 ‐ Was there promotion of teleworking and / or extension of the work schedule: frequencies and percentages

Frequency Percentage Valid percentage Cumulated percentage Yes 60 39.7 40 40 No 90 59.6 60 100 Total Valid 150 99.3 100 Missing 1 0.7 Total 151 100

Tables 63 and 66 explain the item “resistance to change”. 55.3% (N=83; Total Valid=150) refer that there was not resistance to change, while 44.7% (N=67; Total Valid=150) refer that there was resistance (see table 63).

Table 63 ‐ Resistance to change: frequencies and percentages

Frequency Percentage Valid percentage Cumulated percentage Yes 67 44.4 44.7 44.7 No 83 55 55.3 100 Total Valid 150 99.3 100 Missing 1 0.7 Total 151 100

Concerning the degree of resistance to the change, for the cases where the answer to the previous question was “Yes” (whereby 1 is Not relevant and 7 is Very high), 56.1% (N=37; Total Valid=66) answered 3 (see table 64).

177

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Table 64 ‐ Degree of resistance to change: frequencies and percentages

Frequency Percentage Valid percentage Cumulated percentage 2 9 6 13.6 13.6 3 37 24.5 56.1 69.7 4 14 9.3 21.2 90.9 5 5 3.3 7.6 98.5 6 1 0.7 1.5 100 Total Valid 66 43.7 100 Missing 85 56.3 Total 151 100

Tables 65 and 66 exhibit the replies to the question “paper as an indispensable resource”. 96% of the respondents replied “Yes” (N=144, Total Valid=150), against 4% (N=6) that answered “No” (see table 65).

Table 65 ‐ Paper as an indispensable resource: frequencies and percentages

Frequency Percentage Valid percentage Cumulated percentage Yes 144 95.4 96 96 No 6 4 4 100 Total Valid 150 99.3 100 Missing 1 0.7 Total 151 100

Likewise, according to the respondents who answered “Yes” to the previous question, all age groups, are more prominent on the answer “paper is an indispensable resource” (51%, N=77, Total Valid=144) (see table 66).

178

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Table 66 ‐ Age groups where the use of paper is more prominent: frequencies and percentages

Frequency Percentage Valid percentage Cumulated percentage From 30 to 40 years 6 4 4.2 4.2 From 40 to 50 years 23 15.2 16 20.1 From 50 to 60 years 24 15.9 16.7 36.8 More than 60 years 14 9.3 9.7 46.5 All age groups 77 51 53.5 100 Total Valid 144 95.4 100 Missing 7 4.6 Total 151 100

6.2 Hypothesis Debrief

6.2.1 –Influence of economic industry sectors on DPOP performance Due to the non‐parametric characteristics of the measures tested by K‐S test, the Kruskal‐Wallis test was used to analyze the influence of the sector (postulated by H1) on the other variables namely: net sales, number of employees, perceived importance of economic, sustainability and environmental issues, need of physical space, imposition of new processes by suppliers / customers, matters related to the image or reputation of the institution towards customers, and time of dematerialization. Table 67 illustrates the results of the Kruskal‐Wallis Test. The results showed there are only significant differences between activity sector and number of employees, activity sector and image/reputation and imposition of new processes.

179

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Table 67 ‐ Variables with significant differences between sectors according to Kruskal‐Wallis Test.

Number of employees Imposition of new Image/reputation processes

N Rank M SD Rank M SD Rank M SD

Trade 49 46.86 214.7 503.4 77.96 4.53 0.767 78.38 4.73 0.785

Higher Education 9 117.44 1149.2 1537.6 68.22 4.44 1.13 83.78 5,00 1.581

Government 10 110.75 480.6 218.8 72.40 4.50 1.08 85.75 5.10 1.287

Industry 41 75.72 346.3 469.1 61.56 4.12 1.005 61.78 4.32 0.934

Health 15 119.83 1504.6 1927.0 75.10 4.53 0.834 71.33 4.60 0.632

Services 27 74.41 262.2 277.5 98.80 4.93 0.73 89.67 5,00 0.832

N 150 151 151

Median 155.50 4.00 5.00

Chi‐Square 50.093 12.907 17.585

Df 5 5 5

Asymp. Sig. .000 .024 .004

When looking at the importance of dematerialization on the impact of image / reputation the maximum can be seen at government (M=5,10) and the minimum on the industry (M=4,32). After the analysis of the independent variables, we analyzed the influence of the activity sector (independent variable) and the dependent variables, namely: 1) reduction of paper usage; 2) ESS reduction spending on paper; 3) reduction of overall costs; 4) improvement of corporate image and reputation; 5) perceived increase of profitability; 6) perceived importance of dematerialization. These results showed that there are only significant differences between activity sector and reduction on paper consumption, and ESS reduction of spending on paper (see Table 68). Taking these results into account, we partially confirm H1.

180

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Table 68 ‐ Dependent variables with significant differences between sectors according to Kruskal‐Wallis Test.

Reduction on paper usage Dematerialization was important

N Rank M SD Rank M SD

Trade 49 68.23 5.02 .854 65.07 4.39 12.326

Higher Education 9 80.00 5.33 1.225 118.13 23.75 20.565

Government 10 84.35 5.40 1.174 75.31 14.12 19.672

Industry 41 82.60 5.29 .782 70.81 4.08 8.861

Health 15 63.27 4.93 .704 58.43 5.71 11.730

Services 27 82.72 5.30 .669 48.16 3.84 10.335

Sample 151 68.23 5.18 .841 65.07 5.54 12.297

N 129 151

Median 1.0000 5.00

Chi‐Square 16.535 17.823

Df 5 5

Asymp. Sig. .005 .003

6.2.2 Influence of net sales (position in the market) and number of employees (firm dimension)

Table 69 shows that net sales are only positively correlated with the importance of dematerialization, cost reduction. Taking these results into account, we confirm partially H2a.

181

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

However, there is only a significant correlation between number of employees” and the importance of dematerialization (R2=0,238, p=0.003). This suggests that companies with more employees may give more importance to the process of dematerialization. Taking these results into account, we do not confirm H2b (see table 69).

Table 69 ‐ Spearman correlations coefficients between net sales, number of employees and importance of dematerialization, profitability and cost reduction

Number of Sales Contribution Overall Global Costs Paper %ESS employees Volume of DPOP image Assessment Reduction reduction reduction (QA2.1) (QA2.2) (Q11.1) impact (Q5) (Q7) (Q9) (Q10) (Q4)

Number of 1,000 ,375** ,203* ,237** ,229** employees (QA2.1)

Sales Volume 1,000 ,238** 0,083 (QA2.2)

Contribution 1,000 ,741** ,430** ,290** ,307** ,225* of DPOP (Q11.1)

Overall image 1,000 ,481** ,364** ,310** ,217* impact (Q4)

Global 1,000 ,261** ,204* Assessment (Q5)

Costs 1,000 ,453** ,432** Reduction (Q7)

Paper 1,000 ,778** reduction (Q9)

%ESS 1,000 reduction (Q10)

** Correlation is significant at the 0,01 level (2‐tailed) * Correlation is significant at the 0,05 level (2‐tailed)

182

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

6.2.3 Correlations between motivators and KPI’s

There are five motivators which impacts the DPOP’s KPIs: economic issues, sustainability/environmental issues, need of physical space, imposition of new processes by suppliers/customers, and matters related to the image or reputation of the institution towards customers. The results showed that the Spearman’s correlations are all significant at 0.01 level, which suggests these five moderators are all related positively between each other in a weak to moderate way (correlations coefficients between 0.239 and 0.475). Taking these results into account, we confirm H3 (see table 70).

Table 70 ‐ Spearman correlations between motivators of dematerialization and KPI’s

Contrib Environ In need New Image or Overall Global Demater. Profit Approx. % %ESS ution of mental of processes reputation image Assessmen (Q11) increase (Q9.1) reduction DPOP issues physica by (Q1.5) impact t (Q5) (Q11.3) (Q10) (Q11.1) (Q1.2) l space suppliers / (Q4) (Q1.3) customers (Q1.4)

Contribution of 1,000 ,309** ,456** ,239** ,241** ,337* ,164* DPOP (Q11.1)

Environmental 1,000 ,345** ,407** ,225** ,461** ,415** issues (Q1.2)

In need of physical 1,000 ,402** ,294** ,236** ,195* space (Q1.3)

New processes by 1,000 ,475** ,240** suppliers / customers (Q1.4)

Image or 1,000 ,164* ,377** ,371** reputation (Q1.5)

Overall image 1,000 ,261** ,364** ,290** ,453** ,432** impact (Q4)

Global Assessment 1,000 ,481** ,430** ,204* (Q5)

Dematerialization 1,000 ,741** ,310** ,217* was (Q11)

Profit increase 1,000 ,307** ,225* (Q11.3)

Approx. % (Q9.1) 1,000 ,778**

%ESS reduction ** Correlation is significant at the 0,01 level (2‐tailed) 1,000 (Q10) * Correlation is significant at the 0,05 level (2‐tailed)

** Correlation is significant at the 0,01 level (2‐tailed) * Correlation is significant at the 0,05 level (2‐tailed) 183

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Moreover, the Spearman correlation coefficients between the six measures of the consequences of dematerialization are all positive and significant except for the correlation between ESS reduction on paper and the global image improvement. Therefore, the hypothesis H4 is partially confirmed.

The influence of time (length of dematerialization process) was also analyzed. Time has a positive significant weak correlation at 0.01 level with importance of dematerialization (R2=0.237), cost reduction (R2=0.251), and paper consumption (R2=0.229). There is also a positive significant weak correlation at 0.05 level with ESS reduction spending on paper (p=0.219). Global image and perceived profitability increase are not correlated with Time. Taking these results into account, we partially confirm H5 (see table 71).

Table 71 ‐ Spearman correlations between dematerialization motivators and time

Time Overall Global Contribution of Profit increase Approx. %ESS image Assessment DPOP (Q11.1) (Q11.3) Percentage reduction

impact (Q4) (Q5) (Q9.1) (Q10)

Time 1,000 ,251** ,229** ,219*

Overall image 1,000 ,261** ,364** ,290** ,453** ,432** impact (Q4)

Global 1,000 Assessment (Q5)

Contribution 1,000 ,741** ,310** ,217* of DPOP (Q11.1)

Profit increase 1,000 ,307** ,225* (Q11.3)

Approx. 1,000 ,778**

Percentage (Q9.1)

%ESS 1,000 reduction (Q10)

**. Correlation is significant at the 0,01 level (2‐tailed) * Correlation is significant at the 0,05 level (2‐tailed).

184

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

6.2.4 Predictors of KPI’s of Digitation Paperless Office Programs In order to complement hypothesis analysis, four multiple linear regression models were calculated (see Table 72 and Table 73) aiming to identify the predictors of: contribution of dematerialization for global image, ESS spending on paper, overall importance of dematerialization, and perceived profitability increase. For example, in the stepwise multiple linear regressions with global image as dependent variable, three predictors were identified that explain 25% of the variance of the dependent

variable “Global Image” (F3,122=13,680; p<0,001).

Table 72 ‐ Summary results of multiple linear regression models predicting global image, paper ESS reduction, profitability and importance of dematerialization

Std. Change Statistics Error of Adjuste the R Durbin‐ R d R Estimat Square F df Sig. F Watso Model R square Square e Change Change 1 df2 Change n Global Image ,502 .252 .233 .206 .077 12.564 1 122 .001 1.796 Paper ESS ,663 .440 .422 5.236 .050 10.852 1 121 .001 2.062 reduction Profitability ,638 .408 .393 .619 .029 5.925 1 122 .016 1.870 Dematerialization ,847 .717 .705 .407 .020 8.573 1 120 .004 1.590 importance

185

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Table 73 ‐ Beta coefficients of the predictors of the global image, paper ESS reduction, profitability and importance of dematerialization.

Model Unstandardized Standar t Sig. Correlation Collinearity Coefficients dized Statistics Coefficie nts B Std. Error Beta Zero Partia Part Tolera VIF order l nce (Constant) .441 .139 3.164 .002 Dematerialization .105 .026 .353 4.016 .000 .341 .342 .314 .793 1.261 contributes to profitability increase Global Image Matters related to ‐.086 .022 ‐.349 ‐3.964 .000 ‐.096 ‐.338 ‐.310 .789 1.267 reputation Contributed to a positive .085 .024 .313 3.545 .001 .313 .306 .278 .786 1.272 image in the area of sustainability and ecology (Constant) 21.647 3.942 5.492 .000 Need of physical space ‐3.902 .537 ‐.521 ‐7.263 .000 ‐.487 ‐.551 ‐.494 .901 1.110 Reduction of costs 2.656 .582 .314 4.565 .000 .381 .383 .311 .981 1.020 Paper ESS reduction Matters related to the 2.009 .551 .279 3.650 .000 .055 .315 .248 .791 1.264 image or reputation ‐1.842 .559 ‐.241 ‐3.294 .001 ‐.217 ‐.287 ‐.224 .864 1.157 Environmental Matters (Constant) 1.051 .471 2.231 .028 Environmental matters .381 .067 .432 5.669 .000 .535 .457 .395 .837 1.194 Profitability Favors the company's .345 .092 .291 3.762 .000 .487 .322 .262 .814 1.229 image towards its customers / competitors Costs reduction .170 .070 .174 2.434 .016 .202 .215 .170 .953 1.049 (Constant) ‐.419 .382 ‐1.097 .275 Costs reduction .537 .055 .580 9.845 .000 .771 .668 .478 .680 1.470 Favors the company's .305 .067 .272 4.530 .000 .640 .382 .220 .654 1.529 Dematerializat image towards its ion customers importance /competitors Economic Issues .148 .052 .144 2.824 .006 .344 .250 .137 .902 1.109 Time of .047 .016 .147 2.976 .004 .088 .262 .145 .960 1.041 dematerialization Sine qua non condition .104 .036 .147 2.928 .004 .227 .258 .142 .933 1.072

to negotiate

The predictor “matters related to image or reputation of the institution towards customers” has a negative beta coefficient, which means that the higher the score in this item the lower the score in the item “dematerialization contributed to a positive image in the area of sustainability and ecology”.

186

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

In the second stepwise multiple linear regression, four predictors were identified that explain 44% of the variance on the variable “estimated reduction percentage of ESS spending on paper” (F4,121=23,789; p<0,001). The four predictors identified are the following: need of physical space; reduction of costs; Matters related to the image or reputation; environmental issues. The predictors “need of physical space”, and “environmental issues” have a negative beta coefficient, which means that the higher the score in these items the lower the score in the estimated reduction percentage of ESS spending on paper”.

In the third stepwise multiple linear regression, three predictors were identified that explain 41% of the variance of the variable “the process of dematerialization contributes to increase profitability” (F3,122=27,979; p<0,001). The three predictors identified are the following: environmental matters weighed in the decision; favors the company's image towards its customers / competitors; reduction of costs with the process.

In the last stepwise multiple linear regression, three predictors were identified that explain 72% of the variance of the variable “the process of dematerialization was important” (F5,120=60,811; p<0,001). The five predictors identified are the following: reduction of costs; favors the company's image towards its customers/competitors; economic issues; time of dematerialization; “it is a sine qua condition to be able to negotiate with some of the suppliers and customers”.

187

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

6.3 Servitization impact assessments: Industry survey 6.3.1 Analysis to questionnaire applied to the industry The questionnaire applied to the industry was intended to cover the universe of the office printing industry (MFP and B2B) with the purpose to collect information on the consequences arose in the industry instigated by dematerialization processes in companies.

Information on the names and market performance of the manufacturers that composed this industry by January 2016, was sourced through the Swiss company, InforSource.

Other relevant information, such as; European Headquarter Address, Financial performance, Board Composition, Company History, Email and Telephone number was sourced from public disclosed information at the manufacturer’s official websites.

Although fifteen manufacturers compose the universe (MFP and B2B), only eleven were contacted. The reason behind this discrimination is correlated to market share significance. From the universe of manufacturers, nine of them: Canon, Konica Minolta, Kyocera, Lexmark, Ricoh, Samsung, Sharp, Toshiba, Xerox were responsible for 97,3% of the market share in Europe (2015), the remaining 2,7%, market share was distributed by six manufacturers. Out of this six, two, had a relative market share (slightly above 0,8%) and four had a non‐significant market share.

Bearing in mind the specificities of the “Industry” sample, a questionnaire was prepared, taking into consideration the feedback from the previous interviews performed to Xerox, a reference manufacturer in the office printing industry. As quoted earlier, the objective of the questionnaire was to collect information on the consequences arose in the industry due to the decline in demand of equipment by companies instigated by dematerialization processes.

188

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

The quantitative methodology used for customers was also used for the industry sample, whereby data collection was mainly through the usage of a questionnaire sent by email, but with a small difference. Before sending the email with the hyperlink to the questionnaire, a letter with the introduction to the project was sent by UM to the CEO/MD of the manufacturer. The intention behind this effort was to captivate manufacturer’s attention and guarantee as much as possible the participation on questionnaire reply.

Questionnaire applied to the industry was composed by 24 questions divided into six groups; Respondent Characterization, Motivation to move from Product to Service, Overall Image, Financial Aspects, Internal Processes, Human Resources.

Questions had the following characteristics; a) 22 closed questions using a Likert scale with 7 steps, whereby 1 is Not Important and 7 is Very Important, or, 1 is Barely and 7 is Substantially; 2) 1 Dipolar question whereby ‐2 is worsened a lot and +2 is Improved a lot; 3) 1 Dipolar question whereby ‐5 is Worsened Drastically and +5 is Outstanding Improvement; 4) 20 closed questions where the respondents could choose an option from a group; 5) 8 Open questions; 6) 1 box for comments. The questionnaire was written and replied in English (see annex 11).

The questionnaire structure was devised following the interviews to customers and supported by the literature. As mentioned earlier, the 24 questions were grouped according to six areas of importance: a) First group, question: A.1 define respondent category inside the company;

b) Second group portrays the motivation that led companies to move from product to service. Questions 1.1,1.2,1.3,1.4,1.5,1.6 describe the most common motives for the migration (Economic, Sustainability, Adapting to new market conditions, Merge or Acquisition, Business opportunity and others), Taking into account that current printing and photocopying activities are not environmentally sustainable (Chowdhury, 2010) manufacturers are solicited to respond to new requirements and features of the market and society, which are becoming more related to services than products.

189

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

This will imply that companies within capital goods sector will be constrained by declining margins in their sales of new equipment (Leoni, 2015). Pine and Gilmore (1998) anticipate that unless companies want to stay goods business, they will be compelled to upgrade their offerings to services, To respond to the increasing competition and satisfy growing demanding customers, manufacturing firms are changing the positioning of their product concepts, from being product‐based into service‐based (Cassia et al., 2015), as so, the need to add services and supply of integrated solutions (Windahl and Lakemond, 2010. Further questions 2.1, 2.2, 2.3 identify the step of the migration (P‐>S), questions 3 and 4 are chronological questions to situate the beginning and ending of the migration process (P‐>S), Hays and Riggs (2002) argue that this change should be implemented gradually, for such, it must comply with certain steps, questions 5 and 6 identify the most important areas of the company impacted by the migration process (P‐>S) Nowadays, of all the aspects appreciated by customers, services are increasingly the most valued one. Parvatiyar and Sheth (2000) and Vargo and Lusch (2004) claim that such preferences induce to the change of the marketing paradigm, from product to service;

c) Third group takes an overview on companies’ overall image after migration process (P‐>S) (questions 7, 7.1) Taking into account that current printing and photocopying activities are not environmentally sustainable (Chowdhury, 2010), Wang et al. (2013) share the view that the adoption environmental policies will lead to the adoption of a proactive market orientation well as environmental sustainability on digital information systems (Chowdhury, 2013), on the other hand, choosing environmental practices will disclosure an image that will extend the perceived benefits to the customers (Gosnell, 2017) , thus contributing to sustainable development and environmental protection (Moser 2015), From the time when sustainability got into consumer mind more than 20 years ago, customer demand has been focused on products and services that are environmentally friendly which are and are created through processes that do not harm the environment (Han et al., 2009). Question 8 is related to company performance on sustainability after migration(P‐>S) The environmental consequences of a continuously economic growth have led to

190

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

academic and political debates calling for a transition to a ‘‘green economy’’ and a complete change in the paradigm of growth and development which led to the notions of orientation to sustainability (Dacko et al., 2013), organizations that engage all members of staff in environmental learning and development will be able to institute a change in the company culture (Golds, 2011), As companies need to increase environmental sustainability on their business they need to define, implement, and certify the benefits of such policies (Visintin, 2012). Group three ends with question 9 on companies’ accreditations. Carr (1997) believes that companies with ISO accreditations will be more competitive as they exhibit important quality attributes preferred by customers over companies that have no accreditation;

d) Fourth group is focused on financial aspects. Primarily the investment area and amount are questioned (questions 10, 10.1) further on company performance and financial results are requested (questions 11, 12) Moving from product to service is a relevant strategy for manufacturers to improve their competitive advantage (Martinez et al., 2010), in many cases, the investment on goods and new installations exceeds the one on installed bases (Bikfalvi et al., 2013), since a relation with the customer may already exist, economies of scale arise. Actual societies are progressively becoming service economies, as so, the challenge to business is to find ways to gain economy of scale in services similar to a production‐line, this transition, preserves a differentiation among competing services that creates loyal customers and economic profits (Kastalli and Looy, 2013 ; Goldhar and Berg, 2010).;

e) Fifth group, looks into companies’ internal processes affected with the migration process (P‐>S). Questions 13 and 13.1 refer to the existence and identification of the internal processes that have changed, company benchmarking, data acquisition and customer satisfaction surveys are handled with following questions (14, 15.1, 15.2, 15.3, 16, 16.1, 17.1, 17.2, 17.3, 18.1, 18.2, 18.3). Adoption of environmental related processes and practices affects in a positive manner organizations (Cantor et al., 2013), for Tucker et al. (2014) as new processes become more complex, they will certainly lead to a change management whereby the infrastructure will adjust to new

191

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

work practices; questions will end with the. Since services require organizational principles, structures and processes new to the product manufacturer, Oliva and Kallenberg (2003) proposed a model to such understanding. Necessity to measure and compare is not a linear process of collecting and storing information, it is a process to make information available faster to management and relevant external entities (Gomes et al., 2004), Seeking for efficiency on the products and services firms sell (Knox et al., 2003) leads to benchmarking that contemplates how others perform similar activities or functions (Hanman, 1997). Moreover, the quality of service and customer satisfaction is important for companies to understand how they are seen by customers, that is, if they want to stay competitive and grow (Angelova and Zekiri, 2011) ;

f) Sixth group is dedicated to the impact that human resources had with the advent of the migration from product to service. First questions tackles headcount (19, 19.1, 19.2), further questions handle skills, training, remote working and resistance to change (questions, 20.1, 20.1.1, 20.1.2, 20.1.3, 20.1.4, 20.1.5; 21, 21.1, 22, 23, 23.1, 24). Nowadays, organizational or processes changes may end in downsizing (Erickson and Roloff, 2008), such, can occur due to new processes being automatized, or simple extinguished. Whereas possible to retain staff, organizations may perform the transition to the new reality by developing and promoting learning accordingly (Savolainen, 2000), best innovators invest in two group of competencies: knowledge and talent (Engel et al., 2015), training can reflect changes, nevertheless, maintaining an appropriate organizational culture (Dimitrov, 2015), this, will reduce resistance to change and facilitates the integration within the new processes (Doherty, 2010; Anonymous, 2015). Nonetheless, and although the efforts to retain talents and human capital, it is important that employers understand what contributes to the organization objectives (Wallace et al., 2014), which sometimes can not be achievable due reasons such as resistance to change. Such, can be attributed to some work environment factors (Aronsson and Blom, 2010), practices like team networking and ecosystems enhance and magnify the value of what employees want to do (Denning, 2015). Questionnaire ends with box where respondent can express free comments

192

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

(see annexes 12 and 13). Furthermore, the questionnaire was destined to be replied by the following hierarchal positions within the companies / Institutions: 1) CEO, President, Director; 2) First line director: Financial; 3) First line director: Commercial; 4) First line director: Technical / IT; 5) First line director: Production; 6) First line director: Marketing; 7) First line director: Legal; 8) Others, with Management / Administration authority.

To verify the questionnaire robustness and consistency, a pre‐test questionnaire was sent to Xerox (Europe). One week after sending the questionnaire, the recipient was contacted by telephone to remove any doubts on the questionnaire. A face‐to‐face interview was offered if necessary. No interview was requested, nor were any changes necessary to perform in any of the questions composing the questionnaire. Being so, we could use the current version of the questionnaire as the final version for launching.

Moreover, and to receive the maximum number of replies, bearing the sensibleness of some of the questions, it was requested to the respondents to communicate with University of Minho (to the supervisor of the project); in case of doubt, necessity of a face‐to‐face interview and most of all to notify UM that the questionnaire was fulfilled. Another option given to the manufacturer for the above request was to communicate such information through Marketii (A British market intelligence company that helped in this part of the research).

Manufacturers were contacted at their European headquarter as follows: 1) First, through a letter sent by University of Minho informing on the nature of the research, importance of the project and appealing to respond to the questionnaire and information on the link to the questionnaire; 2) Two weeks after, a reminder sent by email; 3) One month after the letter was sent, letter contents were resent, this time by email.

193

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

The letter, and an email containing an introduction and a hyperlink to respond to the questionnaires were sent between 13/02/2016 and 06/05/2016 using an online survey software; Qualtrics, received replies were anonymous and untraceable.

6.3.2 Results Discussion (Industry)

The purpose of this section is to preset the main results for the industry sample. 5 recipients completed the industry survey in full. The item selected to characterize the respondents was: position of the respondent within the organization. As illustrated in table 74, 60% of the respondents are CEOs, Presidents and/or Directors.

Table 74 ‐ Position of the respondent within the organization

Valid Cumulated Frequency Percentage percentage percentage CEO, President, Director 3 60.0 60.0 60.0 First Line Director: Technical/IT 1 20.0 20.0 80.0 Others (appointed by the board) 1 20.0 20.0 100.0 Total 5 100 100

Regarding the motivations for migration from producer of goods to service provider, economic reasons are the item with a higher importance (all firms answered “high” or “very high” in 1 to 7 Likert scale) followed by business opportunity (all answered 5 or more) and adapting to new market conditions (all answered 5 or more). Merge or acquisition had the lowest importance (60% answered “not important”). Sustainability (60.0% above 6) and “adapting to new market conditions” (all above 5) are also very important issues (see table 75).

194

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Table 75 ‐ Motivation: Mean and Std. Deviation

Std. N Minimum Maximum Mean Deviation Economic reasons 5 6 7 6.80 .447 Sustainability reasons 5 2 7 5.20 2.168 Adapting to new market conditions 5 5 7 6.00 1.000 Merge or acquisition 5 1 6 2.60 2.302 Business opportunity 5 5 7 6.20 1.095

Three moments were included in the questionnaire to know the moment of the process of transition: 80% said that the process is in the implementation phase, 80% started the process between 2012 and 2015, and all firms reported the process hasn’t ended yet. In terms of degree of importance of areas affected by the change of paradigm from product to service and considering a scale from 1 to 7 (1 not important and 7 very important), R&D was the item with a higher mean (all answered 6 or more) followed by marketing (all answered 5 or more) and production (60% answered 5 or more). Finance had the lowest mean of 3.40 (60% answered 4 or more) (see table 76).

Table 76 ‐ Degree of Importance: Mean and Std. Deviation

Std. N Minimum Maximum Mean Deviation Marketing 5 5 7 6.20 1.095 Production 5 3 6 4.60 1.517 Finance 5 1 6 3.40 1.817 R&D 5 6 7 6.60 .548 Others: Sales Organization 5 7 7 7.00 .000

195

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

With an open answer type of question, respondents were asked to write about the major consequences occurred in the company, by area, with the change of paradigm from Product to Service. The answers are listed below, according to each area:

Marketing “Customers are looking for a solution to their process requirements. They are looking for a model that they can pay as they use”; “We moved to digital marketing and solution positioning”; “Promoting new value of software and making hardware became more a commodity business and a piece of challenge”; “The away to promote is different because we need to explain a service”; “We only had to change the communication way, because to sell services mean to show they are savings of money and time”; Production “It is too early in our transition, but for sure it will have an impact linked to a decline in production and a consolidation of customers' equipment”; “Less focus on the box, more on the applications; we can provide a change from hardware to software”; “Our factories begin to produce products with more autonomy, because it's very important to reduce the handling and printing costs”; “The products characteristics are different”; Finance “Additional cost collector considerations to differentiate”; “Everything is changing because all sales are indirect”; “Need to provide more leasing finance and also the revenue streams have changed. Less upfront revenue, more over a period of time”; “The service has a financial component and risk”; R&D “Design products with services in mind”; “Focus in produce equipment more resistant and to reduce the printing costs”; “Integrate embedded solutions on hardware. Make the hardware compatible with Software new solutions”;

Concerning the items selected to characterize image/sustainability, “embedded within company’s philosophy” was the item with a higher importance (all answered 5 or more) followed by “enhances company’s image” (80% answered 5 or more) and “is important for the business” (all answered 5 or more). All of respondents answered that the image “improved” (80%) or “improved a lot” (20%) (see table 77).

196

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Table 77 ‐ Motivation: Mean and Std. Deviation

Std. N Minimum Maximum Mean Deviation Enhances Company’s Image 5 4 7 5.80 1.304 Is Important for the Business 5 5 6 5.40 .548 Embedded within Company’s Philosophy 5 5 7 6.20 .837 Doesn’t Interfere with Policies 5 3 6 4.80 1.304 Image worsened/improved 5 4 5 4.20 .447

In order to characterize the economic/financial aspects of the migration from product to services respondents produced the following results: a) The financial investment made to promote the process from Product to Service was made in the following areas: Software (60%), Hardware (60%), “Acquisition” (60%), Communication (60%), and Human Resources (20%). b) The investment (% of Sales) in the various areas was: on software (from 2% to 5%), on hardware (3% and 5%), on acquisition (1% and 5%.), communication (4% and 5%) and human resources (2%). c) Generally the global performance of the company was improved (80% answered above 7 in 1‐11 scale). d) EBITA increased from 1% to 7% while total sales also increased from 4% to 15%.

In terms of internal processes change, the migration from product to services respondents produced the following results: 80% acknowledged changes on the internal processes of the company; a) When asked to talk about the changes felt in an open answer type of question, respondents gave the following answers: “The control of the consumables purchase with hardware contract”; “we had to be able to bill on time”; “The sales methodology changed from box to solution”; “We change our billing to be able to bill for new lines of business”; “Marketing methodology changed from brochure to digital”; “The tracking of fixed assets had to be improved”;

197

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

b) 60.0% of respondents benchmark their performance against the office printing industry and only 20% benchmark it against other industries, namely referred IT Industry, Solution Development Industry, and Document Workflow Industry. c) 60.0% of respondents acquired data from their competitors using external companies. d) All respondent firms perform regular surveys on customers’ satisfaction both for products and services;

The impacts on human resources as consequence of the migration from product to services were:

a) 40.0% of firms stated that there was a downsizing on the headcount ranging from 5% to 15%. Moreover, the others firms stated that it is likely to occur in a near future. b) All the firms acquired new competences, and for 80.0% of respondents specific training was given to their staff during the transition period ranging from 40 to 4000 hours per year per employee. c) Only 20.0% of respondents acknowledged a change on working hours, or a promotion of home based work (telework). d) For 20% of firms, there was some kind of resistance to change within the company which was handled through training, company meetings where top management provided information about examples, consequences impacting the firm, and competitor transformations.

At the end of the survey, a comments section was added for respondents to share their ideas and thoughts: “The change from P to S is a gradual change that will be done over a period of time. The old hardware business is still important aspect of our business and we still have an opportunity to grow by gaining market share. We also need to consider printing in the wider sense, not just on paper, but other materials. Printing and office printing is not dead it is just moving into new areas.”

198

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

“This is a good and needed survey. We have found that many say they have transitioned, however normally it is found mistakenly construed as this or in a very minor way. We have had difficulty to change, as I am sure many have, in certain cases as personnel find it difficult to shift the paradigm. If you have a "family" philosophy as we do, many are long term employees, and therefore difficult to shift.”

199

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

200

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

CHAPTER 7: CONCLUSIONS

201

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

This page intentionally left blank

202

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

7.Conclusions 7.1 Research conclusions Our research, was divided into two parts; 1) Dematerialization, 2) Impact of dematerialization in the office industry and servitization

The first part tackles the subject of dematerialization of information in today’s offices, commencing with the materialization of information with the emergence of paper and the invention of the printer.

Later we studied the diffusion of printing, technological growth both on printing and paper advancements together with dissemination throughout organizations till the industrial revolution.

In the XX century we have investigated the technological breakthroughs occurred after WWII than lead to the beginning of the Digital Revolution occurred by the 1980’s with the emergence of globalization.

Further to globalization and with wide diffusion of office printing products, the first major event occurred within the office printing industry, Commoditization. Products that once were premium are now commodities without any further differential besides price.

Such sequence of events leads us to the second part of our research, Servitization. In order to maintain profitability, customers and market share, industry moved from selling products to provide services (Vandermerwe and Rada, 1988).

The change of paradigm from product to service interfered with the mind shift of manufacturers that started to change their offer to the provision of services concurrently with their products of independently. Other type of offer such as PSS (Product Service System) emerged, allowing the customer to exclusively for the usage

203

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

(copies or prints) leaving all the investment related to HW, Implementation, Service, Consumables and Disposal to the manufacturer. Currently the offer in the industry encompasses the provision of solutions.

7.1.1 Hypothesis results summary Looking to the hypothesis outcome (see table 78) we can see that H1 and H3 were confirmed, H2a, H4 and H5 are partially confirmed and H2b was not confirmed. According to our results, the activity sector and time have a significant influence in dematerialization. Also, the moderators of dematerialization (economic issues, sustainability / environment issues, need of physical space, imposition of new processes, and matters related to image or reputation) have significant correlations amongst each other. On the other hand, net sales and the number of employees do not have a correlation with dematerialization. Concerning the predictors of dematerialization, the results suggest that increase of profitability, image or reputation, and a positive image explain 25% of the variance of global image. Results also suggest that importance of the process of dematerialization, increase of profitability, a positive image, sine qua condition to be able to negotiate, and time of dematerialization explain 82% of the variance of cost reduction. Additionally, the results suggest that reduction of ESS (External Supplies and Services) spending on paper, economic Issues, not interfering with company’s image, a positive image, and time of dematerialization explain 70% of the variance of paper consumption reduction. Moreover, the results suggest that the need of physical space, reduction of costs, image or reputation, and environmental issues explain 44% of the variance of the estimated reduction percentage of ESS (External Supplies and Services) spending on paper. Also, the results suggest that environmental issues, favors the company’s image, and reduction of costs, explain 41% of the variance of increase profitability. Finally, the results suggest that reduction of costs, favors the company's image, economic Issues, time of dematerialization, and sine qua condition to be able to negotiate explain 72% of the variance of the importance of the process of dematerialization (see table 78).

204

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Table 78 ‐ Hypothesis Results Summary

Hypothesis Result

H1. The benefits and barriers from DPOP measured by KPI’s are influenced by the type of economic Confirmed activity sector

H2a. The sales volume is positively correlated with the KPI’s measuring the impact of paperless office Partially Confirmed programs

H2b. Bigger firms (in terms of number of employees) have a more favorable evaluation of Not Confirmed the impact of paperless office program

H3. KPI’s predicted the motivators of Digitation and Confirmed Paperless Office Programs (DPOP)

H4. KPI’s measuring the impact of Digitation and Paperless Office Programs (DPOP) are positively Partially Confirmed correlated between each other

H5. KPI’s are predicted by the duration of implementation of the Digitation and Paperless Partially Confirmed Office Programs (DPOP)

When looking to the importance of dematerialization on the impact of image / reputation results showed that there are only significant differences between activity sector and reduction on paper consumption, and ESS reduction of spending on paper, taking these results into account, therefore H1 was confirmed. Net sales are only positively correlated with the importance of dematerialization, cost reduction, and also with perceived profitability, as such, we partially confirm H2a. The correlation between the number of employees and the importance of dematerialization is significant, this can suggest that companies with more employees may give more importance to the process of dematerialization, due to such, H2b was not confirmed.

205

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Regarding the five motivators which impacts the DPOP’s, KPIs results showed that the Spearman’s correlations are all significant, which suggests that all moderators are all positively related between each other in a weak to moderate way, due to this, we confirm H3. Spearman correlation on the coefficients between the six measures of the consequences of dematerialization are all positive and significant, except for the correlation between ESS reduction on paper and overall image improvement, therefore, the H4 is partially confirmed. The influence of time (length of dematerialization process) was also analyzed. Time has a positive significant weak correlation on the importance of dematerialization, cost reduction and paper consumption. There is also a positive significant weak correlation with ESS reduction spending on paper. Overall image and perceived profitability increase are not correlated with time. Taking these results into account, we partially confirm H5.

7.2 Conclusions, managerial implications and impact on business‐to‐ business services As mentioned earlier, our research is aimed to discuss the antecedents and consequences of dematerialization through DPOP. During more than five centuries our brain was formatted to paper usage since the early days of our lives. With the advent of new technologies, companies started to gradually change their internal processes from manually centered to automate based. Besides ease of use, cost reductions and environmental friendliness, the main objective of dematerialization is to improve the wellbeing of society through more efficient and sustainable development (Kestmont & Kerkhove, 2010).

Results obtained from our research can motivate the following recommendations: a) Sector Influence‐ As the importance of the sector plays a specific role in the process of dematerialization, companies should motivate their internal process upgrading taking into account aspects that may facilitate non‐material exchange with influential sectors (i.e. distribution sector, find cheaper and efficient dematerialized means to exchange information and documents with

206

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

legal value). As shown in the discussion of the results the sector influences the importance of the impact on the image, the imposition of new processes, reduce paper consumption and the importance of dematerialization. We have found that this process is being seen with greater strategic importance in Central and local Government (Government) and education (where the reduction of paper consumption is higher) when compared with the industry. It follows that the intangible nature of services favors the implementation process; b) Image /Marketing‐ Seen as an ecofriendly behavior, companies may gain in terms of image on the exchange with suppliers and customers by adopting dematerialized policies. Impact on reputation was a validated area with the outcome of dematerialization, environmental policies revert in to gains society and companies and should be put in place by companies that have concluded or about to conclude dematerialization processes; c) Economic/ Financial‐ Since physical space is a costly area of concern, investment on correct configuration of document flow allowing immaterial filling and storage may be advisable for future advancement on dematerialization allowing reduction of costs and increasing profitability; d) Processes‐ Simplified and standardized document workflows may be recommended as such may motivate the adhesion of staff to DPOP’s; e) Human Resources‐ Dematerialization consequences on HR are prone to investment and long‐term policies to overcome resistance to change, necessary downsizing and adequate training. Firms must slowly reduce the cognitive aspect of paper usage against the benefits of dematerialization, motivate continuous training allowing all ages groups to participate focusing on the time to reduce dematerialization.

207

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

As such, we recommend that companies should establish procedures to monitor reduction on costs and paper consumption as well as monitoring the evolution of companies’ image and reputation towards customers. Positive evidence of such indicators will motivate the implementation amongst all stakeholders.

Having concluded the short‐term impact of dematerialization in companies, it is important to infer the consequences of such process in the long‐term period. In the long term DPOP’s will reduce significantly paper‐based processes in companies resulting in printing volume decay , which will be translated on less demand for paper and office printing hardware. To overcome such consequences, office printing industry has been evolving its offer from products to services. Clearly, servitization is being a much‐discussed topic in the academia. Throughout this research it was possible to identify and predict the consequences that paperless processes in companies will bring to all sectors.

On other hand, the diagnostic of the B2B market in Portugal also provide some insights about the opportunities and threats impacting the office printing industry: there is a positive trend to invest in hardware but weaker than expected; and the paper manufacturing industry must expect a reduction on paper consumption specially in the health and services sectors which may result in a pressure for a reduction of the average level of prices of graphic paper. However, for legal reasons, firms still depend on paper although the rebound effect was not fully revealed in this research.

Since the data collected is based on the perceptions of corporate managers, which may be influenced by society pressure towards an orientation for sustainability, results may be biased. Further research will use more objective and tangible indicators in order to mitigate these systematic sources of errors in the KPI’s assessment. Our research has some limitations

208

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

7.2.1 Servitization: Conclusions And Managerial Implications

For manufacturers, having premium products relegated to commodities conduits to consequences, especially profit margins that shrunk every day. To maintain revenue streams, market share and assure survival in the long term, office printing industry reacted in two forms: 1)‐ Invest in merge and acquisitions and installed bases (IB) to access already installed equipment from other players and gain extra competencies. Besides being safer, and since a long relation with the customer already exists, economies of scale arise as the manufacturer provides services for its entire installed base with possibility to replace assets as existing contracts end; 2)‐Gradually change the offer from products to services either on own produced goods or manufactured by others.

Other type of offer, such as PSS (Product Service System) emerged, allowing the customer to pay exclusively for the usage (copies or prints) leaving all the investment related to HW, Implementation, Service, Consumables and Disposal to the manufacturer, thus attracting more customers to use products and functionalities.

A number of managerial implications can be derived from our research. First, to manufacturers of the office printing equipment oriented to a transition from products to services or in a servitization process, we have suggested the need of strategic changes, common topics from succeeding the change towards services.

Secondly, to anticipate customer’s necessities resulting from dematerialization process, substantial information was given on each of the steps to facilitate the focus on service business transformation. Information gathering and filtering activities should be in place to create the awareness for service business opportunities. Managers should create an alignment between customers internal processes evolution and market environment offer.

209

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Opportunities generated with the paradigm change may provide assistance for managers looking for new strategic opportunities. By debating the differences, we guide managers to find the adequate approach more suitable for their companies. Besides the will for the paradigm change, companies need to develop new operational service competencies. Nonetheless, the possible rigidity in some of the actual processes may retard management to explore the service opportunities in the adjacent customer activity and divert them to achieve success.

Managers in need to move from an after‐sales service strategy to a customer‐support service strategy, should take into consideration aspects such as, dedicated training programs, staff alignment within industry standards, added proximity with customers, distinct environmental policies. Nevertheless, manufacturers focused on solely on customer service strategies can miss the potential to differentiate their product through services. As so, managers should understand that most of the after‐sales service strategies are at an evolutionary stage, as such facing possible instability. Other arrangement on service strategy change may focus into organizational design foundations. These organizational basics can include customer participation in the service development process. Investing in service business, may not create the expected corresponding returns on a short term. For manufacturers new to servitization or who are still developing their offer should consider the implications on their resources and staff’s competences related to specific skills and service orientation to encompass customer corporate values and orientation for staff recruitment to be prepared for the new service offer.

It is important to understand that moving to new service business may generate initial momentum especially when dealing with more integrated solutions in the service business. Besides the will for the paradigm change, companies need to develop new operational service competencies. Nonetheless, the possible rigidity in some of the actual processes may retard management to explore the service opportunities in the adjacent customer activity and divert them to achieve success.

210

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

In terms of its practical contributions, our research also pointed out the complexity of dematerialization and the transition from product to service.

Taking into account all the inceptions and contributions from the literature discussed throughout this paper on the theme of servitization, to complement the existing nomenclatures, we pretend to give a contribution to the theory by adding our definition for servitization:

“An evolutionary process in today’s industry whereby manufacturing companies evolved to the provision of services to products they produce or manufactured by others, aiming a full offer to the market within respect for environmental and sustainable practices, as such, generating value in use to customers and creating well‐being for society in general”.

7.3 Contributions to management Our research contributes to management in two different ways: a) DPOP; As Jevons paradox (1865) points out, efficiency of new methods does not necessarily lead to a reduction resource consumption, such is the case of the paperless office paradox whereby the development of electronic paperless alternatives did not reduce paper consumption (York, 2006). The evident technological advantages of paperless devices stressed out by Sellen and Harper (2002) were not potentiated. On the contrary, more than a decade later (2016) in terms of paper consumption, forecasts point out a growth on the usage of cut sheet paper. Was their assumption incorrect? No, what was not accounted at the time was the exponential grow of information derived from multiple sources that floods offices daily. Even if only a small portion of the available information is printed on paper and the remaining one handled and stored through electronic methods, this may suggest that paper consumption does not decrease, on the contrary, it may increase. Whilst the abundance of information and social campaigns on the impact of paper on the environment (usage of resources) the consequences of information and subsequent

211

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

behavior may be insufficient (Gosnell, 2017). In a more reductive view, one can say that by using paper we are contributing for the environment as continuously fewer trees are necessary to produce paper due to highest portion of recycled paper (actually circa 72% and growing) used to produce new paper associated to more efficient production methods. Paperless office shall be seen as an evolving process, whereby mankind slowly changes behaviors, some of which aging more than five centuries. Mankind lives in differentiated office means either technologically or in terms of behavior, whereby not all‐essential information is in electronic format and not all‐electronic information is needed (Orantes‐Jiménez, 2015) leading paper to play an important role in business. Although Internet and other electronic technologies are available to distribute immaterial information and documents, a mindset of producing paper output still prevails (Hattingh, 2001). Being so, some relevant questions should be addressed; will paper continue to play an important role in everyday life and business? Is paper a commodity related to the older generations? Will a paperless office be really possible? Definitely, we will keep depending on paper for the up coming generations. Cognitively, when looking to paper (a passive surface) our brain is not in a defensive mode thus, using most of the senses, making it easy to handle information, (Jabr, 2013). As we could see from our sample, paper is not something older generations use, 51% of all age groups use paper and 97,3% depend on paper. Ultimately, paperless office is a step‐by‐step process, whereby behaviors and technologies will be slowly adopted in a collaborative manner.

Our contributions to management point out the support for long period of adaptation to a paperless atmosphere, taking care for the external environment (mainly the ones related legal issues and technology standards) and the internal one focused on process and collaboration. Technology by itself does not solve problems, rather in some cases creates additional difficulties, our research evidenced that technology evolves more rapidly than processes which often turns paper into the a safety feature, demonstrating the need for top management to ensure that practices should be completed and aligned with the organization’s strategic plan (Mendoza‐Fermin, 2012).

212

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

b) DPOP impact in the Industry and servitization; with the advent of globalization by the end of the XX century products that once were premium became commodities. In order revenue streams, manufacturers changer their offer to services, either with products they manufacture or complementary with products fabricated by others. The paradigm change from product to service, later named as servitization, was first devised by Vandermerwe and Rada (1988). From it’s origins to this date, servitization has been adopted by academics and practitioners from the most diverse areas such as; operations, production, services, business management and marketing fields (Baines et al., 2009). In the office printing industry, some types of discretional services were already known (i.e. after sales services), but the major change in this industry was carried out with the advent of servitization mainly in the form of product‐service‐ system (PSS). Matsumoto and Kamigaki (2012), advocate that, with the digitization of photocopier in last decade of the XX century followed by the deployment of network devices, the necessity of photocopier PSS emerged. To strengthen the PSS, photocopier manufacturers actively engaged in achieving efficiency through the provision of services and service technician training.

Nevertheless, success is also possible by surpassing at product leadership or operational excellence (Baines et al., 2009), for those manufacturers that understand services as key to their subsistence, there are still important challenges to be faced. Conclusively, new value offered to customers will change the core offering that firms need to consider, such will implicate internal resources development, new competences and specific skills to be able deliver the new value propositions (Smith 2014). New proposed value is not entirely built around products and services, but as solution covering all customers’ needs and whereby customer has no ownership, but, merely pays for usage. This will demand substantial financial, logistic and skills from the provider to understand and fulfill customer requirement and meet customer’s satisfaction. The example of the photocopier industry suggest that by prospering as a solution relies not only on the provision of goods, but also on the delivery of related support services, thus, providing highly integrated and customized solutions (Visintin, 2012), such solutions can be provided by the manufacturer or by outsourced

213

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

companies (third party company) acting on behalf of the manufacturer. This can an important option for geographical or disperse areas that manufacturer is limited to cover or is financially not adequate. On the management side, service concept can be beneficial when communicating the importance of services and the interrelatedness between the service organization and the rest of the firm (Kowalkowski, 2011). Our research contributed to management on the update of office printing industry, suggesting that although servitization is being applied for sometime, the sales of HW have been growing for last five years, giving the companies the necessary space to perform the transition in a careful way, as in the case of Xerox, that although being a servitized company, the transactional sale of products, supplies and maintenance services still signify a substantial source of revenues and profits (Visintin, 2012).The handling of human resources, competences and skills are other topics which our research have contributed to management.

7.4 Limitations Any research is a synopsis of several decisions that researchers had to take within specific contexts. When comparing the achieved results with the initial requests and demands, we are confronted with limitations that may provide clues for future research.

We expect to continue such work in the future ahead in order to further achieve objectives, contribute to theory and its renewal. Basically, our research entails limitations in the following areas:

7.4.1 Theoretical Nature Although the literature supported widely and accurately the methodology, in the basic areas of Dematerialization and Servitization, plenty of authors were available, nonetheless it was difficult to find support in the literature that encompasses the objects of this research; DPOP and office printing industry.

214

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

When formulating the timelines that generated the conductor line over time, we encounter some obstacles of empirical nature, due to scarcity of literature in some areas related to historical events after Guttenberg’s invention.

Since the theme was novice to the academia in some respect, knowledge provided by literature and other sources was of generalist approach and sometimes off centered from the research objectives.

7.4.2 Practical Nature Being of a quantitative approach, our research relied on data collected through questionnaires, nonetheless we were compelled some qualitative methodology by performing exploratory interviews to gather knowledge to support on the build questionnaire as well as hypothesis definition. When the empirical work is subjected to market validation, it was adverse to work with an industry that shrank around 30% since the research started. A core model can profit future researchers to avoid such limitations.

215

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

7.5 Further research As previously mentioned, the subject of our research was novice in some areas to the academia, which limited some of its contributions. In order to give added contributes to theory, we suggest further enhancing this research in some of its key areas (see Table 79).

Table 79 ‐ Further Research

Research Area Future Research Companies Internal Processes Investigate behavioral aspects of companies having in mind the Human ‐> Technology interaction within routine processes and analyze the internal and external interaction of such processes.

Dematerialization Further investigate the effect of dematerialization process within companies by expanding the sample in terms of sectors and cross border extent.

Servitization Broaden the scope of servitization within industry take into account the specificity of a single industry, for the case, Office Printing Industry. Nonetheless including important key adjacent industries such as Paper Manufacturing.

Source: Author

7.6 Concluding remarks The evolution defined earlier through the timelines associated with the initial research questions can allure us to important conclusions. As we could perceive, history of mankind with regards to technology and cognitive aspects is not linear. During more than five centuries our brain was formatted to paper usage since the early days of our lives. It is not a coincidence the emergence of specific paper standards, as an example A4 is the format that our brain can capture all its printed contents at a glimpse.

216

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Nonetheless, such behavior was about to change. By the last decades of the XX century with the advent of globalization, a new era with an intrinsic tendency to create world markets and production, greatly enhanced by the new technological tools (Harris, 2012), threatening five centuries of materialized information organized around printed matter on paper.

Office printing equipment was already available in the offices around the world, as from the beginning of the XX century, but only to those who could afford it, since the apparatus were expensive. With the arrival of globalization such products, once considered, as premium became commodities. Such can be described as the absence of any added value, being the basis for competition the price, delivery terms and timing of the product (Neufville and Pirnar, 1996), in practical terms allowing a substantial number of companies as well as individuals to gain access to the office printing equipment.

In companies, such factors have contributed to the following effects: a) With the advent of new technologies, companies started to gradually change their internal processes from manually centered to automate based. Initially using copying machines, printers and fax as standalone units and later multi‐function products with aggregated functions such as copiers, printers, scanners and fax, allowing documents to be produced, replicated and sent rapidly to internal and external recipients; b) The new processes had a collateral effect on the internal behavior of companies. It was now possible to create documents, send them to a third party and file it promptly and cheap without using a single sheet of paper, more precisely in a dematerialized form, at such, dematerialization emerged.

Besides ease of use, cost reductions and environmental friendliness, the main objective of dematerialization is to improve the wellbeing of society through more efficient and sustainable development (Kestmont and Kerkhove, 2010). Although the thought of dematerialization is being widely discussed nowadays, the base idea dates from the 1970’s when Xerox Corporation promoted the concept of a combined usage

217

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

of dedicated technology, such as computers, electronic mail and online information together they were able to offer a dematerialized office or as early mentioned a “paperless office”, (Carr, 2005).

Theoretically, the increase of dematerialization will decrease paper consumption over time, this decrease is certainly due to the digitization of document management workflows (Weilerstein and Mitani, 2015). As our reseach could point out, it was the inverse, due to the large amount of available information, paper consumption increase. When compared with paper based documents, Dehlez et al. (2005) argue that the transition to electronic document delivery and perpetual access are vital, such will be effective with the implementation of data repositories to track and store electronic documents.

Having aligned our conductor line with the questions related to the introduction of dematerialization, we were faced with the consequences on the office printing industry. This actual industry, also known as the photocopier industry, has been in the market since the late 50’s of the XX century when the American company Rank Xerox later known as Xerox launched in the United States and then worldwide the first dry process photocopier using regular paper and a powder to produce image. Being a market leader in the area for some decades, since the production patent expired new competitors entered the market with the same technology. Through successful internalization processes they have covered most areas of the globe gaining important market share.

Nevertheless, with the advent of globalization and commoditization, office printing industry had their premium products relegated to commodities with the inherent consequences, especially profit margins that shrunk every day (Matthyssens et al., 2008). To maintain revenue streams, market share and assure survival in the long term, office printing industry reacted in two forms: 1) Invest in merge and acquisitions (discussed before in chapter 3.1) and installed bases (IB) to access already installed equipment from other players and gain extra competencies. This nomenclature (IB) designates the range of product or process related services required by an end‐user over the useful life of a product in order to run it effectively in the context of its

218

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

operating process (Oliva and Kallemberg, 2003). Besides being safer, and since a long relation with the customer already exists, economies of scale arise as the manufacturer provides services for its entire installed base with possibility to replace assets as existing contracts end; 2) Gradually change the offer from products to services (see chapter 3.3.3) either on own produced goods or manufactured by others. Vandermerwe and Rada defined this change as “Servitization” early in 1988.

Servitization is being a much discussed topic in the academia and the definition has been evolving since 1988. Baines et al. (2009) define servitization “as the innovation of a manufacturer’s competences to move from selling products, to sell integrated products‐service offerings that deliver value in use”, lately Brax and Visintin (2016) defined servitization as: “a change process whereby a manufacturing company deliberately or in an emergent fashion introduces service elements in its business model” Nevertheless, and our research concludes, although servitization and PSS are emerging in the office printing industry, sales of HW are still growing and still a very important revenue source for the manufacturers.

219

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Further to Servitization and to complement the manufacturers offer to secure profits and customer retention over time, new offers emerged such as PSS (Product Service System). This offer brings ease of use to customers as no investment on HW, Implementation, Service, Consumables and Environmental policies associated with disposal are required, the only financial accountability relegated to customer is the payment for usage (in the case of the office printing industry, copies or prints). For Baines et al. (2009), PSS is an integrated product and service offer that conveys value in use to customers.

When discussing the true nature of these concepts, Baines et al. (2007) argue that both PSS and servitization are concepts of potential value for manufacturers and is far more than the change from selling products to sell product service systems. Further evolution on the concepts will for sure include advanced, financial, support and environmental aspects.

After the above explanations on the servitization process developed in the office printing industry it is important to go deeper on the consequences of dematerialization on this industry. As mentioned before, in theory less paper usage means less printing which should result on less machine usage consequently less need for equipment as such less demand for the industry.

The general perception indicates such logic, as we could see earlier, the industry consultancy company Gartner, estimates a reduction in printed, copied and faxed pages of approximately 50 % during the past six to seven years in the B2B market. For Brewer (2009), the printing hardware market is characterized by decreasing sales, falling prices and shrinking margins. The figures shown previously on the evolution of unit sales for the B2B in Europe shows the opposite, they show a growth of around 13%, for the last five years. Being so, effectively what are the consequences of dematerialization on the office printing industry?

220

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

For Infosource (2016), the substantial change on the office printing industry was not seen on production figures, rather on the price drop and margin erosion. Such occurred on the HW, but, most notoriously on the average price per unit of copy/print price (i.e. by 2000 average street price for a color copy was 1€ and BW 0,07 as by 2015 the prices were in average 0,45€ for a color copy/print and 0,05 for a BW copy/print).

Assuming the production and distribution costs were stable over this period, in fact the margin erosion seems to be one of the most visible effects of dematerialization on the office printing industry. Concurrently the office paper manufacturing tends to follow the rising trend, estimating a steady growth till 2023. Such trends, may suggest that although of rapid assimilation, organizations are different from each other, as so, the process of dematerialization or “paperless” implementation will differ. Nevertheless, the degree of transformation will depend on the organization’s willingness to adapt to change (Carr, 2005).

221

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

This page intentionally left blank

222

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

References Adams, A., Cox, A.L. (2008), “Questionnaires, in‐depth interviews and focus groups”, In: Cairns, Paul and Cox, Anna L. eds. Research Methods for Human Computer Interaction, 17–34. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Åkesson, M., Skålén, P. (2011), “Towards a service‐dominant professional identity: An organisational socialisation perspective”. Journal of Service Management, 22(1), 23– 38. http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/abs/10.1108/09564231111106901.

Alsyouf, I. (2007), “The role of maintenance in improving companies’ productivity and profitability”, International Journal of Production Economics, 105(1), 70 – 78.

Amaral, A.E.M. (2002), “1000 anos antes de Gutenberg”. Cadernos de Biblioteconomia Arquivística e Documentação Cadernos BAD, 2, 84–95

Andersen, M.B. (2000), “The evidentiary weight of digital documents”. Computer Law & Security Report, 16.

Anderson, C. (2010), “Presenting and Evaluating Qualitative Research”. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 74(8), 141.

Anderson, J.C., Narus, J.A. (1995), “Capturing the Value of Supplementary Service, Harvard Business Review”, 73(1), 75–83. https://hbr.org/1995/01/capturing‐the‐ value‐of‐supplementary‐services.

Angelova, B., Zekiri, J. (2011), “Measuring Customer Satisfaction with Service Quality Using American Customer Satisfaction Model (ACSI Model)”, International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 1(3).

Anonymous (2015),"Engagement in the workplace", Development and Learning in Organizations: An International Journal, 2(3), 24 – 26.

Antwi, S., K., Hamza, K. (2015), “Qualitative and Quantitative Research Paradigms in Business Research: A Philosophical Reflection”. European Journal of Business and Management 7(3), 217‐225.

223

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Appelbaum, S.H., Roy, M. and Gilliland, T. (2011), “Globalization of performance appraisals: theory and applications”. Management Decision, 49(4), 570–585. http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/abs/10.1108/00251741111126495

Aronsson, G., Blom, V. (2010), "Work conditions for workers with good long‐term health", International Journal of Workplace Health Management, 3(2), 160‐172. Arnaiz , A., Revilla, O., Saccani, N. (2014), “Extending manufacturing towards service‐ oriented business models: the t‐rex technological levers that support this extension”. Conference Paper at the 3rd International Business Servitization Conference, Bilbao, Spain.

Aurich, J.C., Mannweiler, C., Schweitzer, E., (2010), “How to design and offer services successfully”. Journal of Manufacturing Science and Technology, 2(3), 136–143. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S175558171000009X

Ayres, R., van den Bergh, J. C. (2005), “A theory of economic growth with material/energy resources and dematerialization: Interaction of three growth mechanisms”, Ecological Economics, 55(1), 96‐118.

Bacelar, J. (1999), “Apontamentos sobre a história e desenvolvimento da impressão”. Universidade da Beira Interior, 1–6. http://www.bocc.uff.br/pag/bacelar_apontamentos.pdf.

Baines, A., (1997), End the paper chase. Work Study, 46(1), pp.25–26.

Baines, T., Lightfoot, H., Smart, P. (2011), “Servitization within manufacturing”. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 22(7), 947–954. http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/abs/10.1108/17410381111160988

Baines, T.S., Lightfoot, H., W., Benedettini, O., Kay, J., M. (2009), “The servitization of manufacturing: A review of literature and reflection on future challenges”, Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 20(5), 547–567. http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/abs/10.1108/17410380910960984

224

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Baines, T.S., Lightfoot, H., Benedettini, O., Whitney, D. and Kay, J.M. (2009a), “The adoption of servitization strategies by UK based manufacturers”, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture Part B, 224(5), 815‐829. https://doi.org/10.1243/09544054JEM1567

Baines,T., Lightfoot, H., Peppard,J., Johnson, M., Tiwari, A., Shehab, E., Swink, M. (2009b), “Towards an operations strategy for product‐centric servitization”, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 29(5), 494–519. www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/abs/10.1108/01443570910953603

Baines,T.,S., Lightfoot, H., Evans.,S, E., Neely, A., Greenough, R., Peppard, J., Roy, R.,Shehab,E.,Braganza, A., Tiwari, A.,Alcock, J.,Angus,J., Bastl, M.,Cousens, A.,Irving, P.,Johnson,M., Kingston,J., Lockett, H.,Martinez,V., Michele, P., Tranfield, D., Walton, I, Wilson, H. (2007), “State‐of‐the‐art in product service‐systems”, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers. Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture, 221, 1543‐1552.

Bais, A. L. S., Lauk, C., Kastner, T., Erb, K. (2015), “Global patterns and trends of wood harvest and use between 1990 and 2010”, Ecological Economics, 119, 326‐337.

Bandinelli, R., Gamberi, V.,(2011), “Servitization in oil and gas sector: outcomes of a case study research”. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 23(1), 87– 102. http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/abs/10.1108/17410381211196302

Baray, S., Hameed, S., Badii, A. (2008), “Analysing the factors responsible for effectiveness of implementation and integration of enterprise resource planning systems in the printing industry”. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 21(2), 139–161. http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/abs/10.1108/17410390810851390

Barrett, M., Davidson, E., Prabhu, J., Vargo, S. L. (2015), “Service innovation in the digital age: key contributions and future directions”, MIS Quarterly, 39 (1), 135‐154.

225

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Bastl, M., Johnson, M., Lightfoot, H., Evans, S. (2012), “Buyer‐supplier relationships in a servitized environment: An examination with Cannon and Perreault's framework”. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 32(6), 650‐675.

Bednarska‐Olejniczak, D. (2016), "Corporate Social Responsibility as Part of Company Image Management in Banking Institutions", Acta Scientiarum Polonorum. Oeconomia, 2, 5‐14.

Bejou,D. (2011), “Compassion as the New Philosophy of Business”, Journal of Relationship Marketing, 10 (1), pp.1‐6.

Berends, L. (2011), Embracing the visual: Using timelines with in‐depth interviews on substance use and treatment. The Qualitative Report, 16(1), 1‐9. http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR16‐1/berends.pdf

Bernardini, O., Galli, R. (1993), “Dematerialization: long‐term trends in the intensity of use of materials and energy”, Futures, 4, 431‐448.

Beuren, F.H., Gomes Ferreira, M.G., Cauchick Miguel, P.A. (2013), Product‐service systems: a literature review on integrated products and services, Journal of Cleaner Production, 47 ,222–231. http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0959652612006841

Bhuiyan, N., Baghel, A. (2005) "An overview of continuous improvement: from the past to the present", Management Decision, 5, 761‐771.

Bikfalvi, A., Lay, G., Maloca, S., Waser , B.,R. (2013), “Servitization and networking: large‐scale survey findings on product‐related services”, Service Business, 7(1), 61–82. doi:10.1007/s11628‐012‐0145‐y

Bird, D., K. (2009), “The use of questionnaires for acquiring information on public perception of natural hazards and risk mitigation – a review of current knowledge and practice”, Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci., 9, 1307–1325.

226

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Bitner, M., J., Ostrom, A., L., Burkhard, K., A. (2012), “Service Blueprinting: Transforming the Student Experience” , Educause Review, 38 – 50.

Bjurklo, M., Edvardsson, B., Gebauer, H. (2009), “The role of competence in initiating the transition from products to service”. Managing Service Quality, 19(5), 493–510. http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/09604520910984346

Bogdan, R., C., Biklen, S., K. (1994), Investigação qualitativa em educação: Fundamentos, métodos e técnicas, Porto Editora, Colecção Ciências da Educação, Porto.

Bonney, F.,L., Williams, B.,C. (2009), “From products to solutions: the role of salesperson opportunity recognition”. European Journal of Marketing, 43(7/8), 1032– 1052. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/03090560910961506

Bowen, J., Ford, R.C. (2002), “Managing Service Organizations: Does Having a Thing Make a Difference”, Journal of Management, 28(3), 447–469. http://jom.sagepub.com/content/28/3/447.abstract

Bracelpa – Associação Brasileira de Celulose e Papel. www.bracelpa.org.br (accessed on 17/01/2016 at 10h23)

Brambilla, F., R., Damacena, C. (2012), “Lógica Dominante Do Serviço Em Marketing: Estudo Dos Conceitos E Premissas Aplicados À Educação Superior Privada Na Perspectiva Docente”, Revista Brasileira de Marketing, 10(3), 151‐176.

Brax S.,A., Jonsson, K. (2009), “Developing integrated solution offerings for remote diagnostics: A comparative case study of two manufacturers” International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 29(5), 539‐560.

Brax, S., A., Visintin, F. (2016), “Meta‐model of servitization: The integrative profiling approach”, Industrial Marketing Management, 60, 17‐32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2016.04.014

227

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Brechbuhl, H. (2004), “Best Practices for Service Organisations”, Business Strategy Review, 15, 68‐70.

Brewer, C. (2009),” Printers vs. Copiers: The Saga Continues “, ENX Magazine.

Brodbeck, F. C., Hanges, P. J., Dickson., M. W., Gupta, V., Dorfman, P. W. (2004), “Societal Culture and Industrial Sector Influences on Organizational Culture”. In R. J. House, P. J. Hanges, M. Javidan, P. Dorfman, & V. Gupta (Eds.), Leadership, culture, and organizations: The GLOBE study of 62 societies, 654‐668.

Burgh‐Woodman, H.,C. (2014), “Homogeneity, “glocalism” or somewhere in between?”, European Journal of Marketing, 48(1‐2), 288–313.

Caldeira, M., Serrano, A., Quaresma, R., Pedron, C. , Romão, M. (2012), “Information and communication technology adoption for business benefits: A case analysis of an integrated paperless system”, International Journal of Information Management, 32 (2), 196‐202.

Cantor, D., E., Morrow, P., C., McElroy, J., C., Montabon, F. (2013), "The role of individual and organizational factors in promoting firm environmental practices", International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 43(5/6), 407 – 427.

Carassus, J.; Andersen, N.; Lopes, J.; Manseau, A.; Ruddock, L.; de Valence, G. (2006), “Moving from production to services: a built environment cluster framework”, International journal of strategic property management, 10(3), 169‐184. http://dspace.vgtu.lt/handle/1/125

Carr, M.,R. (2005), “An analysis of the feasibility of a paperless environment – the case of the Mona School of Business”, Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, 16(4), 286‐290.

228

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Carr S., Mak, Y., T., Needham, J., E. (1997), “Differences in strategy, quality management practices and performance reporting systems between ISO accredited and non‐ISO accredited companies”, Management Accounting Research, 8(4), 383‐ 403.

Cassia, F., Ugolini, M.,A.,Cobelli, N., Gill, L. (2015), “Service‐based vs. goods‐based positioning of the product concept: Effects on customer perceived value”, The TQM Journal, 27(2), 247‐255.

Celpa 2016 ‐ Celpa ‐ Associação da Indústria Papeleira. www.celpa.pt/ (accessed 17/01/2016, 17h00)

CEPI‐Confederation of European Paper Industries, accessed during 2015 and 2016 at http://www.cepi.org

Chao, C. (2015), “Implementing a Paperless System for Small and Medium‐Sized Businesses (SMBs)”. Dissertation for graduation in Applied Information Management and the Graduate School of the University of Oregon

Chase, R., B., Apte, U., M. (2007), “A history of research in service operations: What's the big idea?”, Journal of Operations Management, 25 (2), 375‐386.

Chesbrough, H. (2010), “Business Model Inovation: Opportunities and Barriers”, Long Range Planning, 43(2‐3), 354‐363.

Childe, S., J. (2007), “Products, services and value”, Production Planning and Control, 18(7), pp.537.

Chowdhury, G. (2010), “Carbon footprint of the knowledge sector: what’s the future?, Journal of Documentation, 66(6), 934–946. http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/abs/10.1108/00220411011087878 Chowdhury, G. (2013), Sustainability of digital information services, Journal of Documentation, 69(5), 602–622.

Christensen, C. (1997), “The innovators dilemma”. New York, NY: HarperCollins

229

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Clayton, R.J., Backhouse, C.J. Dani, S. (2012a), “Evaluating existing approaches to product‐service system design: A comparison with industrial practice”, Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 23(3), 272–298. http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/abs/10.1108/17410381211217371

Cleveland, C., Ruth, M. (1998), “Indicators of Dematerialization and the Materials Intensity of Use”, Journal of Industrial Ecology, 2(3), 15‐50.

Cohen, M., Agruwal, N., Agruwal, V. (2006), “Winning in the aftermarket”, Harvard Business Review, May, 131‐138.

Coreynen, W., Matthyssens, P., Van Bockhaven, W. (2017), “Boosting servitization through digitization: Pathways and dynamic resource configurations for manufacturers”, Industrial Marketing Management, 60, 42‐53.

Coroama, V.,C., Moberg, Å., Hilty, L.,M. (2004), “Dematerialization through Electronic Media?”, In: Hilty, L.M., Aebischer, B. (eds.) ICT Innovations for Sustainability. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing 310. Springer International Publishing

Corrêa, H., L., Ellram, L., M., Scavarda, A., J., Cooper, M., C. (2007), “An operations management view of the services and goods offering mix”, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 27(5), 444–463. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/01443570710742357

Coutinho, C. (2013), “Metodologia de Investigação em Ciências Sociais e Humanas: Teoria e Prática (2ª Edição)”, Coimbra: Edições Almedina, S.A.

Cova, B., Salle, R. (2008), “Marketing solutions in accordance with the S‐D logic: Co‐ creating value with customer network actors”, Industrial Marketing Management, 37(3), 270–277. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2007.07.005

Crozet, M., Milet, E. (2014), “The Servitization of French Manufacturing Firms”, CEPII Working Paper.

230

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Cumming, K., Findlay, C. (2010), “Digital recordkeeping: are we at the tipping point?, Records Management Journal, 20(3), 265‐278.

Cusumano, M., A., Kahl, S. J., Suarez, F., F. (2015), “Services, industry evolution, and the competitive strategies of product firms”, Strategic Management Journal, 36(4), 559‐575.

Dacko, S. G., Claudy, M., Garcia, R., Wilner, S., J. (2013), “Sustainability orientation as a driver of innovation within firms”, ISPIM Conference Proceedings. The International Society for Professional Innovation Management.

Datta, P.,P., Roy, R. (2011), “Operations strategy for the effective delivery of integrated industrial product‐service offerings: Two exploratory defence industry case studies”, Journal of Operations & Production Management, 31(5), 579–603. https://doi.org/10.1108/01443571111126337

Davidson, D. J., Andrews, J., Pauly, D. (2014), “The effort factor: Evaluating the increasing marginal impact of resource extraction over time”, Global Environmental Change, 25, 63‐68.

Davies, A. (2004), “Moving base into high‐value integrated solutions: a value stream approach”, Industrial and Corporate Change, 13(5), 727–756. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/dth029

Davies, A., Brady, T., Hobday, M. (2007), “Organizing for solutions: Systems seller vs. systems integrator”. Industrial Marketing Management, 36(2), 183‐193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2006.04.009

Davis, J., T., and Davis, H. (2004), “Less is More—Paper and Profitability”, Journal of Accounting and Finance Research, 12 (1), 33‐38.

Davis, J., T., Hadley, J., Davis, H. (2015), “Paperless processes: Survey of CPA firms in a smaller market regarding obstacles, challenges and benefits of implementation”, International Journal of the Academic Business World, 9(1), 49‐59.

231

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Dehlez, P., de Leeuwe, J., Dekker, R. (2005), “Beyond the photocopy machine revisited: document delivery in a digital library environment”, Interlending & Document Supply, 33(3), 140–144.

Denning, S. (2015),"Does management innovation need a new change model?", Strategy & Leadership, 43(2), 33 – 40.

Denzin, N.K., Lincoln, Y.S. (2000), “Introduction: The Discipline and Practice of Qualitative Research”. In HanD&Book of Qualitative Research Thousand Oaks: Sage. 1‐29.

Dietzenbacher, E., Los, B., Stehrer, R., Timmer,M.P., de Vries, G.J. (2013), “The construction of world input–output tables in the WIOD project”, Ecologic System Research, 25 (1), 71–98.

Dimache, A., Roche, T. (2013), “A decision methodology to support servitisation of manufacturing,” International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 33(11/12), 1435–1457. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM‐07‐2010‐0186

Dimitrov, D. (2015), "Leadership in a humane organization", European Journal of Training and Development, 39 (2), 122 – 142.

Doherty, R. (2010), "Making employee engagement an end‐to‐end practice", Strategic HR Review, 9 (3), 32 – 37.

Dykman, C., A., Davis, C., K. (2012), “Addressing resistance to workflow automation, Journal of Leadership, Accountability & Ethics, 9(3), 115‐123.

Easterby‐Smith, M., Thorpe, R., Lowe, A. (2002), “Management Research: An Introduction”, Second edition, Sage, London.

Edvardsson, B., Ng, G., Min, C., Z., Firth, R., Yi, D. (2011), “Does service‐dominant design result in a better service system?, Journal of Service Management, 22(4), 540 ‐ 556. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09564231111155114

232

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Eggert, A., Hogreveb, J., Ulaga, W., Muenkhoff, E., (2011.), Industrial services, product innovations, and firm profitability: A multiple‐group latent growth curve analysis, Industrial Marketing Management, (40) 5, pp.661–670. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2011.05.007

Ellen MacArthur foundation, (2016) http://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org (accessed 05/03/2016, 09h15)

Ellram, L. M., Siferd, S., P. (1998), “Total Cost of Ownership: A key concept in strategic cost management decisions”, Journal of Business Logistics, 19, 55‐84.

Engel,K., Dirlea,V., Dyer,S., Graff,J. (2015),"Best innovators develop a point of view on the future and a roadmap on how to get there", Strategy & Leadership, 43(2), 15 – 22.

Erickson, A., R., Roloff, R., M. (2008), "Reducing attrition after downsizing", International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 15 (1), 35 – 55.

European Recovered Paper Council (ERPC), http://www.paperrecovery.org, Accessed between 2015 and 2016.

Ferrin, B. G., Plank, R., E. (2002), “Total Cost of Ownership Models: An Exploratory Study”, Journal of Supply Chain Management, 38 (2), 18‐29.

Fimbel, E., Binninger, A.‐S., Karyotis, C. (2015), "Demateriality: A key factor in the embedding of society within commodification and financialization", 10(1), 76–90. http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/abs/10.1108/SBR‐03‐2014‐0011

Finne, M., Holmström, J. (2013), “A manufacturer moving upstream: triadic collaboration for service delivery”, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 18(1), 21–33. https://doi.org/10.1108/13598541311293159

Forza, C. (2002), “Survey research in operations management: a process‐based perspective”, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 22(2), 152–194. https://doi.org/10.1108/01443570210414310

233

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Gardenal, F. (2013), “A model to measure e‐procurement impacts on organizational performance”, Journal of Public Procurement, 13(2), 215‐242.

Gebauer, H., Fischer, T., Fleisch, E. (2010), “Exploring the interrelationship among patterns of service strategy changes and organizational design elements”, Journal of Service Management, 21(1), 103–129. https://doi.org/10.1108/09564231011025137

Gebauer, H., Friedli, T. (2005), “Behavioral implications of the transition process from products to services”, Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 20(2), 70–78. https://doi.org/10.1108/08858620510583669

Gebauer, H., Gustafsson, A, Witell, L. (2011), “Competitive advantage through service differentiation by manufacturing companies”, Journal of Business Research, 64(12), 1270–1280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.01.015

Gebauer. H., Joncourt, S., Saul, C. (2016), “Services In Product‐Oriented Companies: Past, Present, And Future”, Universia Business Review, First Quarter

Gebauer, H., Krempl, R., Fleisch, E., Friedli, T. (2008), “Innovation of product‐related services”, Managing Service Quality, 18(4), 387–404. https://doi.org/10.1108/09604520810885626

Gebauer, H., Ren, G., Valtakoski, A., Reynoso, J. (2012), “Service‐driven manufacturing: Provision, evolution and financial impact of services in industrial firms”, Journal of Service Management, 23(1), 120 – 136.

Genovese, A., Acquaye, A., A., Figueroa, A., Koh, S., C., L. (2015), “Sustainable supply chain management and the transition towards a circular economy: Evidence and some applications”, Omega, 66, Part B, 344–357. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2015.05.015

Ghisellini ,P., Cialani ,C., Ulgiati , S. (2016), “A review on circular economy: the expected transition to a balanced interplay of environmental and economic systems”, Journal of Cleaner Production, 114, 11‐32.

234

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Gibson, V., Hedley, C., Procter, A., Fennel, B. (2000), “Evaluating office space needs & choices”, University of Reading

Gnoni, M. G., Elia, V. (2013), “An environmental sustainability analysis in the printing sector, International Journal of Sustainable Engineering”, 6 (3), 188‐197.

Golds, C. (2011), "Reaping the benefits of environmental awareness: how organizations are engaging their employees", Development and Learning in Organizations: An International Journal, 25 (2), 18 – 20.

Gomes C.,F, Yasin, M.,M, Lisboa, J.,V. (2004), “A literature review of manufacturing performance measures and measurement in an organizational context: a framework and direction for future research”. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management 15(6), 511–530

Goldhar, J., Berg, D. (2010), “Blurring the boundary: convergence of factory and service processes”, Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 21(3), 341– 354. https://doi.org/10.1108/17410381011024322

Gosnell, G., K. (2017), “Be Who You Ought or Be Who You Are? Environmental Framing and Cognitive Dissonance in Going Paperless”, Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment Working Paper No. 269.

Greenwood, P. (2012), “Securing information in a paper‐efficient environment”, Computer Fraud & Security, 3, 18‐20.

Grönroos, C. (2008), Service logic revisited: who creates value? And who co‐creates?, European Business Review, 20(4), 298–314. https://doi.org/10.1108/09555340810886585

Grönroos, C., Helle, P. (2010), “Adopting a service logic in manufacturing: Conceptual foundation and metrics for mutual value creation”, Journal of Service Management, 21(5), 564–590. https://doi.org/10.1108/09564231011079057

235

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Guba, E. G. (1990), “The alternative paradigm dialog”, In Guba, E. G., (Ed.), The Paradigm Dialog: Sage, 17‐27.

Guba, E., G., Lincoln, Y., S. (1994), “Competing paradigms in qualitative research”, In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), HanD&Book of qualitative research Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. 105‐117.

Hallavo, V., Kuula, M., Putkiranta, A. (2015), “Strategic roles of service sites: application of Ferdows’s model”, Benchmarking: An International Journal, 22(2), 186– 200. https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ‐12‐2012‐0083

Han, H., Hsu, L.,T., Lee, J., S. (2009), “Empirical investigation of the roles of attitudes toward green behaviors, overall image, gender, and age in hotel customers’ eco‐ friendly decision‐making process”, International Journal of Hospitality Management, 28 (4), 519‐528.

Hanman, S. (1997) "Benchmarking Your Firm's Performance With Best Practice", The International Journal of Logistics Management, 8(2), pp.1‐ 18, https://doi.org/10.1108/09574099710805637

Harris, J. (2012), “Global monopolies and the transnational capitalist class”, International Critical Thought, 2(1), 1–6.

Harris, L.,R., Brown, G.,T.,L. (2010), “Mixing interview and questionnaire methods: Practical problems in aligning data, Practical Assessment”, Research & Evaluation, 15(1). 1‐19. http://pareonline.net/getvn.asp?v=15&n=1

Hattingh, M. (2001), “The features and impact of the paperless office, with specific reference to the City of Johannesburg”, The South African Journal of Information Management, 3 (3/4).

Hays, D., Riggs, J. (2002), “New beginnings : Moving From Products to Services”, Marketing Management, 11(4), 38–42.

236

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Heinonen, K., Strandvik, T.,Mickelsson, K‐J., Edvardsson, B., Sundstrom, E., Andersson, P. (2010), “A customer‐dominant logic of service”, Journal of Service Management, 21 (4), 531‐548. https://doi.org/10.1108/09564231011066088

Heiskanen, E., Jalas, M. (2003), “Can services lead to radical eco‐efficiency improvements? A review of the debate and evidence”, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 10(4), pp. 186‐198.

Heitlinger, P. (2006), “Tipografia: Origens, formas e uso das letras,” 1.ª edição, Novembro de 2006, Brasil.

Hinkin, T., R. (1998), “A brief tutorial on the development of measures for use in survey questionnaires”, Organizational Research Methods, 2(1), 104‐121. http://scholarship.sha.cornell.edu/articles/521

Hittleman, D. R., & Simon, A. J. (1997), “Interpreting educational research (2nd ed.)”. New York: Merrill.

Holmlund, M., Kowalkowski, C., Biggemann, S. (2016), “Organizational behavior in innovation, marketing, and purchasing in business service contexts—An agenda for academic inquiry”, Journal of Business Research, 69(7), 2457–2462.

Infosource (2016), Accessed between 2015 and 2016 at http://www.Infosource.ch

Isaeva, M., Yoon, H.,Y. (2016), “Paperless university—How we can make it work?”, Information Technology Based Higher Education and Training (ITHET), 15th International Conference. DOI: 10.1109/ITHET.2016.7760717

Jabr, F. (2013), “Why the Brain Prefers Paper”, Scientific American, 309, 48–53.

Jacob, F., Ulaga, W. (2008), “The transition from product to service in business markets: An agenda for academic inquiry”, Industrial Marketing Management, 37(3), 247–253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2007.09.009

Jevons, W.S. (1865), “The Coal Question”, London: MacMillan and Co.

237

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Johnstone, S., Dainty, A., Wilkinson, A. (2009), “Integrating products and services through life: an aerospace experience”, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 29(5), 520–538. https://doi.org/10.1108/01443570910953612

Jones, S. (2012), “eGovernment document management system: A case analysis of risk and reward”, International Journal of Information Management, 32(4), 396‐400.

Karaszewski, R. (2010), "Leadership in global business environment through a vision creation process", The TQM Journal, 22(4), 399 – 409.

Kastalli, I.V, Van Looy, B. (2013), “Servitization: Disentangling the impact of service business model innovation on manufacturing firm performance”, Journal of Operations Management, 31(4), 169–180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2013.02.001

Kawatoko, Y. (2004), “Machines as a social system”, Journal of The Center for Information Studies,5, 20‐24.

Kendall, L. (2008), “The conduct of qualitative interview: Research questions, methodological issues, and researching online”. In J. Coiro, M. Knobel, C. Lankshear & D. Leu (Eds.), HanD&Book of research on new literacies, 133‐149.

Kestemont, B., Kerkhove, M. (2010), “Material flow accounting of an Indian village, Biomass and Bioenergy”, Elsevier, 34 (8), pp.1175.

Khan, S., Aftab, M. (2015), “Digitization and its impact on economy”, International Journal of Digital Library Services, 5 (2), 138‐149.

Kindström, D. (2010), “Towards a service‐based business model – Key aspects for future competitive advantage”, European Management Journal, 28(6), 479–490. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2010.07.002

Kindström, D., and Kowalkowski, C. (2009), “Development of industrial service offerings: a process framework”, Journal of Service Management, 20 (2), 156–172.

238

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Kjærgaard, A., Morsing, M., Ravasi, D. (2011), “Mediating identity: A study of media influence on organizational identity construction in a celebrity firm”, Journal of Management Studies, 48(3), 514‐543.

Klock, U., Andrade, A.S., Hernandez, J.A. (2013), “Polpa e Papel” (3ª Edição revisada) Curitiba, Brasil.

Knecht, T., Leszinski, R., Weber, F.A. (1993), “Making profits after the sale”, The McKinsey Quarterly, 4.

Knox, S. (2003), “Customer Relationship Management”, Butterwirth‐ Heinemann, New York, ISBN 0750656778

Kohtamäki, M.,Helo, P. (2015) “Industrial services – the solution provider’s stairway to heaven or highway to hell?”, Benchmarking: An International Journal, 22(2), 170– 185.

Kotler, P. (1967), “Marketing management : analysis, planning, and control”, Prentice‐ Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.

Kotler, P. (1972), “A Generic Concept of Marketing”, Journal of Marketing, 36, 46‐54.

Kotler, P., Kartajaya, H., Setiawan, I. (2010), “Marketing 3.0: From Products to Customers to the Human Spirit”, Hoboken, New Jersey, ISBN: 978‐0‐470‐59882‐5.

Kowalkowski, C., Gebauer, H., Kamp, B., Parry, G. (2017), “Servitization and deservitization: Overview, concepts, and definitions”, Industrial Marketing Management, 60, pp. 4–10.

Kowalkowski, C., Kindström, D., Brehmer, P. (2011), “Managing industrial service offerings in global business markets”, Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 26(3), 181–192. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/08858621111115903

Kreger, L. (1999), “Paper and the Information Age”, Information Management Journal, 33, 1–4.

239

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Kucza, G., Gebauer, H. (2011), “Global approaches to the service business in manufacturing companies”, Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 26(7), p472– 483. https://doi.org/10.1108/08858621111162271

Lay, G., Copani, G., Jäger, A., Biege, S. (2010), “The relevance of service in European manufacturing industries, Journal of Service Management”, 21(5), 715‐726. https://doi.org/10.1108/09564231011092908

Lay, G., Schroeter, M., Biege, S. (2009), “Service‐based business concepts: A typology for business‐to‐business markets”, European Management Journal, 27(6), 442–455. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2009.04.002

Legard, R., Keegan,J., Ward, K. (2003), “In‐depth Interviews”, In: Qualitative Research Practice ‐ A Guide for Social Science Students and Researchers, Sage, 139‐165.

Leiringer, R., Bröchner, J. (2010), “Service‐led construction projects”, Construction Management and Economics, 28(11), 1123‐1129.

Leoni, L. (2015), “Adding service means adding knowledge: an inductive single‐case study”, Business Process Management Journal”, 21(3), 610–627. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ‐07‐2014‐0063

Levitt, T. (1981), “Marketing intangible products and product intangibles”, Harvard Business Review (May‐June), pp. 92‐104.

Likert, R., (1932), A technique for the measurement of attitude scales”, Archives of Psychology, 22, 5‐55.

Lovelock, C. H. (2000), “Services Marketing: People, Technology, Strategy (4th Edition)” NJ: Prentice Hall International. ISBN 10: 0130173924.

Lovelock, C., Gummesson, E. (2004), “Whither services marketing? In search of a new paradigm and fresh perspectives”, Journal of Service Research, 7 (1), 20‐42.

240

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Luff, P., Heath, C., Kuzuoka, H., Yamazaki, K., Yamashita, J. (2006), “Handling documents and discriminating objects in hybrid spaces”, Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems ‐ Proceedings, 1, 561–570.

Lusch, R.F., Nambisan, S. (2015), “Service Innovation: A Service‐Dominant‐Logic perspective”, MIS Quarterly, 39(1), 155–175. http://misq.org/service‐innovation‐a‐ service‐dominant‐logic‐perspective.html

Lusch, R.F., Vargo, S.L. (2008), “The Service‐Dominant Mindset”, In B.Hefley and W.Murphy, (Eds.), Service Science, Management and Engineering Education for the 21st Century. New York: Springer.

Lusch, R.F., Vargo, S.L., Fisher, R. (2014), “Drawing on service‐dominant logic to expand the frontier of physical distribution and logistics management”, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 44(1‐2). http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJPDLM‐07‐2013‐0209

Lusch, R.F., Vargo, S.L., O’Brien, M. (2007), “Competing through service: Insights from service‐dominant logic”, Journal of Retailing, 83(1), 5–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2006.10.002

Magee, C. L., Devezas, T. C. (2017), “A simple extension of dematerialization theory: Incorporation of technical progress and the rebound effect”, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 117, 196‐205.

Malenbaum, W. (1978), “World Demand for Raw Materials in 1985 and 2000”, McGraw Hill, New York.

Malhotra, N., K., Birks, D.F. (2006), “Marketing Research: An Applied Orientation”, Updated Second European Edition. Pearson Education Limited.

Martinez, V., Bastl, M., Kingston, J., Evans, S. (2010), “Challenges in transforming manufacturing organisations into product‐service providers”, Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 21(4), 449–469. https://doi.org/10.1108/17410381011046571

241

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Mathe, H., Shapiro, R.D. (1993), “Integrating Service Strategy in the Manufacturing Company”, London, New York: Chapman & Hall

Mathers, N., Fox, N., Hunn, A. (2007), “Surveys and Questionnaires”, The NIHR RDS for the East Midlands / Yorkshire & the Humber, 1‐48.

Matsumoto, M. ,Kamigaki, K.( 2012), “Development and changes in the industrial product service systems – A case study of the photocopier PSS”, CIRP IPS2 Conference

Matthyssens, P., Vandenbempt, K. (2008), “Moving from basic offerings to value‐ added solutions: Strategies, barriers and alignment”, Industrial Marketing Management, 37(3), 316–328. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2007.07.008

Matthyssens, P., Kirca, A.H., Pace, S. (2008), “Business‐to‐business marketing and globalization: two of a kind”, International Marketing Review, 25(5),481‐486.

McCormack, N. (2011), “Mission impossible? The future of “paperless” library operations”, Library Management, 32(4‐5), 279–289. https://doi.org/10.1108/01435121111132284

McMullen, A. (2011), "Paperless society? What a load of scrap", The Bottom Line, 24(1), 58 – 60.

Medina, J.F., Duffy, M.F. (1998), “Standardization vs globalization: a new perspective of brand strategies”, Journal of Product & Brand Management, 7(3), 223–243.

Meena, R. (2013), “Green Banking: As Initiative for Sustainable Development”, Global Journal of Management and Business Studies, 3(10), 1181‐1186.

Meel, V.J. (2011), "The origins of new ways of working", Facilities, 29 (9/10), 357 – 367.

Melo, P.B. (2005), “Um passeio pela História da Imprensa”, Revista Comunicação & Informação, 8(1).

242

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Mendoza‐Fermin, Y. (2012), “Factors driving the implementation of green IT initiatives: an empirical investigation”, CUNY. http://academicworks.cuny.edu/bb_etds/41

Miller, S. (2016), “Go Paperless: Reduce Costs, Improve Collaboration and Efficiency, and Help Save the Planet” in School Administrators Association of New York State, Vanguard‐Spring, 45(2), 33‐35.

Moser, A. K. (2015), "Thinking green, buying green? Drivers of pro‐environmental purchasing behavior", Journal of Consumer Marketing, 32(3), 167 – 175.

Mullin, T. J. (2001), “The paper chase: deploying enterprise information management in today' print‐oriented world”. Enterprise Systems Journal.

Murrell, M. (2017), “Out of print: the orphans of mass digitization”, Current Anthropology, 58(15), 149‐S159.

Neely, A. (2008), “Exploring the financial consequences of the servitization of manufacturing”, Operations Management Research, 1(2), 103–118

Neely, A., Austin, R. (2002), “Measuring performance: The operations perspective. In A. Neely (Ed.), Business Performance Measurement: Theory and Practice, 41‐50. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511753695.004

Ness, D. (2008), “Sustainable urban infrastructure in China: Towards a Factor 10 improvement in resource productivity through integrated infrastructure systems”, International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology, 15(4), 288‐301.

Neufville, R., Pirnar, A. (1996), “A dynamic technology strategy for Xerox to respond to the treat of high‐tech commoditization”, Dynamic technology strategies, 1–29. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.163.9180&rep=rep1&typ e=pdf

243

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Nordin, F. (2006), “Outsourcing services in turbulent contexts”, Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 27(4), 296–315. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/01437730610666046

O'Boyle, J.E., Solari, S., Marangoni, D.G. (2011), "The good company", Corporate Governance: The international journal of business in society, 11(1), 64 – 76.

Oliva, R., Kallenberg, R. (2003), “Managing the transition from products to services”, International Journal of Service Industry Management, 14 (2), 160–172.

Oliveira, P., Roth, A.V. (2012), “Service orientation: the derivation of underlying constructs and measures”, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 32(2), 156–190. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/01443571211208614

Oliver,B.F. (1996), "End‐user document access, retrieval and delivery systems ‐ a developer’s tale", Interlending & Document Supply, 4 (3), 17 ‐ 22

Orantes‐Jiménez, S.D., Zavala‐Galindo, A., Vázquez‐Álvarez, G. (2015), “Paperless Office: a new proposal for organizations”, Systemics, Cybernetics And Informatics, 13 (3).

Palmer, R. (2008), “Emerging Marking Technologies : A Review and Comparison of Xerographic and Ink‐ Based Imaging”, http://www.office.xerox.com/latest/OPBWP‐ 05U.PDF

PaperSizes. Org (2016), http://www.papersizes.org (accessed 18/01/2016, 10h00)

Parvatiyar, A., Sheth, J.N. (2000), “The Domain and Conceptual Foundations of Relationship Marketing”, In J. N. Sheth & A. Parvatiyar (Eds.), HanD&Book of Relationship Marketing, 3‐38. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Pine, B., J., Gilmore, J. H. (1998), “Welcome To the Experience Economy”, Harvard Business Review, 76(4), 97–105. https://hbr.org/1998/07/welcome‐to‐the‐ experience‐economy

244

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Pothen, F., Schymura, M. (2015), “Bigger cakes with fewer ingredients? A comparison of material use of the world economy”, Ecological Economics, 109, 109‐121.

Quinn, J.B., Doorley, T.L., Paquette, P.C. (1990), “Beyond, products: service‐based strategies”, Harvard Business Review (March‐April).

Raddats, C., Burton, J., Ashman, R. (2015), “Resource configurations for services success in manufacturing companies”, Journal of Service Management, 26(1), 97–116. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOSM‐12‐2012‐0278

Rapaccini, M., Visintin, F. (2015), “Devising hybrid solutions: an exploratory framework”, Production Planning & Control, 26 (8), 654–672.

Reimann, M., Schilke, O., Thomas, J.S. (2010), “Customer relationship management and firm performance: the mediating role of business strategy”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 38(3), 326–346.

Reinartz, W., Ulaga, W. (2008), “How to sell services more profitably”, Harvard Business Review, 86(5), 90–96. https://hbr.org/2008/05/how‐to‐sell‐services‐more‐ profitably

RISI‐ Accessed between 2015 and 2016 at www.risiinfo.com

Rodrigues, J. N., Devezas, T. (2007), “Portugal, O Pioneiro da Globalização”, Centro Atlântico, ISBN: 978‐989‐615‐042‐6

Roos, G., O’Connor, A. (2015), “Government policy implications of intellectual capital: an Australian manufacturing case study”, Journal of Intellectual Capital, 16(2), 364– 389. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC‐02‐2015‐0016

Rosenbloom, R.S., (2000), “Leadership, Capabilities, and Technological Change: the Transformation of NCR in the Electronic Era”, Strategic Management Journal, 21 (10/11), 1083–1103

Rothenberg, S., (2007), Sustainability through servicizing, Sloan Management Rev, (48) 2, pp. 82‐90.

245

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Saccani, N., Visintin, F., Rapaccini, M. (2014), “Investigating the linkages between service types and supplier relationships in servitized environments”, International Journal of Production Economics, 149, 226–238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2013.10.001

Sakao, T., Sandström, G., O., Matzen, D, (2009), “Framing research for service orientation of manufacturers through PSS approaches”, Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 20(5), 754–778. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17410380910961082

Sale, J.E.M., Lohfeld, L.H., Brazil, K. (2002), “Revisiting the Quantitative‐Qualitative Debate: Implications for Mixed‐Methods Research”, Quality & Quantity 36(1) , 43–53. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1014301607592

Salonen, A. (2011), “Service transition strategies of industrial manufacturers”, Industrial Marketing Management, 40(5), 683–690. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2011.05.005

Sampieri, R., Collado, C., Lucio, P. (2006), “Metodologia de Pesquisa”, 3ª Ed. São Paulo: MacGraw‐Hill

Samuelson, R.J. (1997), “The Endless Paper Chase”, The Newsweek, 1–2. http://europe.newsweek.com/endless‐paper‐chase‐170976?rm=eu

Saunders, M., Lewis, P., Thornhill, A. (2009), “Research methods for business students”, (5th ed.), Harlow, Essex, UK: Pearson Education Ltd.

Sauvé, S., Bernard, S., Sloan, P. (2016), “Environmental sciences, sustainable development and circular economy: Alternative concepts for trans‐disciplinary research”, Environmental Development, 17, 48–56.

Savolainen,T. (2000),"How organizations promote and avoid learning: development of positive and negative learning cycles", Journal of Workplace Learning, 12(5), 195 – 204.

246

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Schandl, H., Hatfield‐Dodds, S., Wiedmann, T., Geschke, A., Cai, Y., West, J., ... and Owen, A. (2016), “Decoupling global environmental pressure and economic growth: Scenarios for energy use, materials use and carbon emissions”, Journal of Cleaner Production, 132, 45‐56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.06.100

Schmenner, R.W. (2009), “Manufacturing, service, and their integration: some history and theory”, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 29(5), 431‐443, https://doi.org/10.1108/01443570910953577

Schütz, H., Welfens, M. (2000), “Sustainable Development by Dematerialization in Production and Consumption”, Strategy for the new Environmental Policy in Poland, 103. https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/49113/1/332359662.pdf

Scott, P.J., Curley, P. J., Williams, P.B., Linehan, I.P., Shaha, S.H. (2016), “Measuring the operational impact of digitized hospital records: a mixed methods study”, BMC medical informatics and decision making, 143. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911‐016‐ 0380‐6

Sellen, A., Harper, R. (2002), “The Myth of the Paperless Office”, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachussets.

Shepherd, C., Ahmed, P.K. (2000), “From product innovation to solutions innovation: a new paradigm for competitive advantage”, European Journal of Innovation Management, 3(2), 100‐106. https://doi.org/10.1108/14601060010322293

Shostack ,L.G. (1977), “Breaking free from product marketing”, Journal of Marketing, 41, 73‐80.

Silverman, D. (2001), “Interpreting qualitative data: Methods for analysing talk, text, and interaction”, (2nd ed.), London: Sage.

Smallbone, D., Supri, S., Baldock, R. (2000), “The implications of new technology for the skill and training needs of small‐ and medium‐sized printing firms", Education + Training, 42 (4/5), 299‐308,.https://doi.org/10.1108/00400910010347768

247

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Smith M., Crotty J. (2008), “Innovative Responses to the EU End‐of‐Life Vehicle Directive: A UK Perspective”, Business Strategy and the Environment, 17(6), pp. 467‐ 488.

Smith, A. (2013), “Successful green‐based initiatives among large corporate entities: a case study from a stakeholder perspective”, International Journal of Services and Operations Management, 14(1), 95‐114.

Smith, L., Maull, R., Ng, I.C.L. (2014), “Servitization and Operations Management: a Service Dominant‐logic Approach”, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 34(2), 242–269. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM‐02‐2011‐0053

Sobh, R., Perry, C. (2006), “Research design and data analysis in realism research”, European Journal of Marketing, 40 (11/12), 1194‐1209. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/03090560610702777

Sousa, J.P. (2003), “Elementos de Teoria e Pesquisa da Comunicação e dos Media”, Edições Universidade Fernando Pessoa, Porto. ISBN: 9789728184964.

Spring, M., Araujo, L. (2009), “Service, services and products: rethinking operations strategy”, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 29(5), 444– 467.

Steinberger J.K., Krausmann F., Getzner, M., Schandl, H., West, J. (2013) “Development and Dematerialization: An International Study”, PLoS ONE 8(10): e70385. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0070385

Stone, E. (1978), “Research methods in organizational behavior”, Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.

Stratton, A. (2013), “Pursuing the possibility of a paperless office”, Information Management Journal, 47 (5), 44‐46.

Supri, S. (2000), “The implications of new technology for the skill and training needs of small‐and medium‐sized”, Education & Training, 42(4/5), 299‐307.

248

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Takata, S., Kirnura, F., Van Houten, F.J.A.M., Westkamper, E., Shpitalni, M., Ceglarek, D., Lee, J. (2004), “Maintenance: Changing Role in Life Cycle Management”, CIRP Annals ‐ Manufacturing Technology, 53(2), 643‐655.

Toossi A., Lockett, H.L., Raja, J.Z., Martinez, V. (2013), “Assessing the value dimensions of outsourced maintenance services”, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, 19(4), 348‐363. https://doi.org/10.1108/JQME‐04‐2013‐0021

Tucker, D.A., Hendy, J., Barlow, J. (2014), “When infrastructure transition and work practice redesign collide”, Journal of Organizational Change Management, 27(6), 955–972. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOCM‐09‐2013‐0173

Ulaga, W., Loveland, J.M. (2014), “Transitioning from product to service‐led growth in manufacturing firms: Emergent challenges in selecting and managing the industrial sales force”, Industrial Marketing Management, 43(1), 113–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2013.08.006

Vandermerwe, S., Rada, J. (1988), “Servitization of business: adding value by adding services”, European Management Journal, 6(4), 314‐324.

Varadarajan, R. (2017), “Innovating for sustainability: a framework for sustainable innovations and a model of sustainable innovations orientation”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 45(1), 14‐36.

Vargo, S.L., Lusch, R.F. (2004), “The Four Service Marketing Myths: Remnants of a Goods‐Based, Manufacturing Model, Journal of Service Research”, 6(4), 324–335. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094670503262946

Vargo, S.L., Lusch, R.F. (2008), “From goods to service(s): Divergences and convergences logics”, Industrial Marketing Management, 37(3), 254–259. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2007.07.004

VDMA (1998) , Association of German Equipment Manufacturer, accessed between 2015 and 2016 at www.vdma.org

249

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Velte, T., Velte, A., Elsenpeter, R.C. (2008), “Going paperless”, in B. Reed (Ed.), Green it: Reduce your information system’s environmental impact while adding to the bottom line, 103‐126. New York, NY: McGraw‐Hill, Inc.

Venkatesh, V., Thong, J.Y., Xu, X. (2012), “Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology”, MIS Quarterly, 36(1), 157‐178.

Viljakainen, A., Toivonen, M. (2014), “The futures of magazine publishing: Servitization and co‐creation of customer value”, Futures, 64, 19–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2014.10.004

Visintin, F. (2012), “Providing integrated solutions in the professional printing industry: The case of Océ”, Computers in Industry, 63(4), 379–388. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2012.02.010

Visintin, F. (2014), “Photocopier industry: at the forefront of servitization”, in G. Lay (ed), Servitization in Industry, 1–29. Springer International Publishing.

Wallin, J., Parida, V., Isaksson, O. (2015), “Understanding product‐service system innovation capabilities development for manufacturing companies”, Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 26(5), 763–787. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMTM‐05‐2013‐0055

Wang,Y., Zeng, D., Di Benedetto, C., Song, M. (2013),"Environmental determinants of responsive and proactive market orientations", Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 28 (7), 565 – 576.

Webber, L., Wallace, M., (2009), “Green Tech: How to Plan and Implement Sustainable IT Solutions”, AMACOM: New York. ISBN‐13: 978‐0814414460

Weilerstein, K., Mitani, T. (2015), “Magic Quadrant for Managed Print and Content Services”, Gartner Inc., https://www.gartner.com/doc/3180325/magic‐quadrant‐ managed‐print‐content.

250

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Whitehead, E. (2001), “Paper chase Work Study”, 50(6), 241–244. https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000006036

Wilkinson, A., Dainty, A., Neely, A. (2009), “Changing times and changing timescales: The servitization of manufacturing”, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 29(5). https://doi.org/10.1108/ijopm.2009.02429eaa.001

Windahl, C., Lakemond, N. (2006), “Developing integrated solutions: The importance of relationships within the network”, Industrial Marketing Management, 35(7), 806– 818. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2006.05.010

Windahl, C., Lakemond, N. (2010), “Integrated solutions from a service‐centered perspective: Applicability and limitations in the capital goods industry”, Industrial Marketing Management, 39 (8), 1278–1290. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2010.03.001

Wise, R., Baumgartner, P. (1999), “Go downstream: the new profit imperative in manufacturing”, Harvard Business Review (September‐October), 133‐141.

Wiseman, N. (2002), “Paper as a Communications Medium”, Library Hi Tech News, 19(3). https://doi.org/10.1108/lhtn.2002.23919caf.002

Wong, H., Wong, R. (2015), “Corporate Social Responsibility Practices in Banking Industry”, Journal of Management Research, 7(4), pp. 205‐221.

Yan, J., Ye, K., Wang, H., Hua, Z. (2010), “Ontology of collaborative manufacturing: Alignment of service‐oriented framework with service‐dominant logic”, Expert Systems with Applications, 37 (3), 2222–2231. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2009.07.051

Yoo, Y., Henfridsson, O., Lyytinen, K. (2010), “Research commentary—the new organizing logic of digital innovation: an agenda for information systems research”, Information systems research, 21(4), 724‐735.

251

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

York, R. (2006), “Ecological paradoxes: William Stanley Jevons and the paperless office”, Research in Human Ecology, 13(2), 143–147.

Zeithaml, A.V. (2008), “Services Marketing: Integrating Customer Focus across the Firm (5th edition)”, McGraw‐Hill Higher Education, ISBN 9780071263931.

252

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Annexes

Annex 1: Office Printing Manufacturers Characterization

253

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

254

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

255

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

256

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

257

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

258

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

259

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

260

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

261

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

262

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

263

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

264

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

265

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

266

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

267

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

This page intentionally left blank

268

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

123 4 5 6 Annex 2: Interview script applied to customers7

I ‐ Preamble

A light conversation will anticipate the interview, to motivate the following areas:

a) Show my appreciation to the Company / Institution to take some of their precious time and take part on very a important research to the academia; b) Present myself and the University of Minho; c) Point out the relevant points of the research; d) The main motives and objectives behind this research; e) The confidentiality of the answers if requested.

II – Motivation for dematerialization

In this section we will pose questions related to the reasons behind the dematerialization process, the reduction of material processes and paper and the increment of immaterial information and documents.

a) When was the dematerialization process initiated in your company; b) When was the dematerialization process terminated in your company; c) Internal technological needs to evolve either from the local company or its headquarter; d) Internal processes related to environment and sustainability; e) Reduce physical space used for paper based archiving; f) Cost reduction through the use of cheaper technology for document handling and archiving; g) New imposed processes from customers or suppliers; h) Company’s / Institution’s reputation towards the public, its customers and suppliers. i) Competition position towards dematerialization

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Performed face‐to‐face in Portuguese and later translated to English.

269

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

III – Overall Image

In this part of the interview I will raise a number of questions related to the perception on the importance of company’s / institution’s image upon the implementation of the dematerialization process.

a) Did the company’s / institution’s improve within the implementation of the dematerialization process; b) Has it contributed to a positive image of the company’s / institution’s; c) Is an advantage when negotiating with customers or suppliers; d) If the process did not occurred it was not possible to handle businesses with some customers or suppliers; e) Did not leverage any dividends towards the company’s / institution’s image; f) On the other hand, the company’s / institution’s image was deteriorated;

IV – Sustainability

In this part of the interview I will advance some questions related to environment and sustainability to understand if this matters were behind the dematerialization process.

a) Did environmental or sustainability motivated the dematerialization process in your company’s / institution’s; b) Does your company hold any certification; c) Is your company involved in any environmental or social responsibility activities related to reduction on resources usage such as paper.

V – Financial Aspects

In this part of the interview I will raise some questions related to economic and financial matters leveraged by the dematerialization process.

a) Were there any cost reductions upon the implementation of the dematerialization process in your company’s / institution’s; b) Was there any investment on HW or SW;

270

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

c) Was there any paper consumption reduction upon the implementation of the

dematerialization process in your company’s / institution’s; d) In general terms the dematerialization process contributed to your company’s / institution’s profitability increase; e) In general terms the dematerialization process contributed to your company’s / institution’s profitability decrease; f) Inhibitor factors (i.e. mandatory paper documents) contribute to costs with paper.

VI – Internal Processes

In this part of the interview I will advance some questions related to internal process changes upon the implementation of the dematerialization process.

a) Were there any process changes with the upcoming of the dematerialization process; b) Are they related to the way you behave internally or towards your customers or suppliers; c) Does the new processes have any legal recognition; d) Even so, you still use paper.

VII – Human Resources

In this section we will pose some questions related to the impact on Human Resources upon the implementation of the dematerialization process.

a) Was there any downsize with the advent of the dematerialization process; b) Was there any recruitment of staff with new competencies and skills; c) Was there new or additional training given the existing staff to cope with dematerialized processes; d) If so, can you please tell us in which areas of knowledge; e) Were new ways of working such as remote of telework implemented;

271

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

f) Was there any resistance to change from the staff or management; g) If so, how did you handle with it; h) In your opinion, paper is still used in your company / institution as an indispensable resource by most of your staff;

i) If so, can you please tell us by which age groups. Once again let me thank you for most kind attention and cooperation for our research, should there be any question or doubt regarding any of the contents discussed, please do not hesitate to contact us, trough the following means:

Email: [email protected]

Telephone: 937106025

272

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Annex 3: Interview script applied to the industry8

I ‐ Preamble

A light conversation will anticipate the interview, to motivate the following areas:

a) Show my appreciation to the Xerox to spend some of their precious time and take part on a very important research to the academia; b) Present myself and the University of Minho; c) Point out the relevant points of the research; d) The main motives and objectives behind this research; e) The confidentiality of the answers if requested.

II – Motivation to move from Product to Service In this section we will pose some questions related to the reasons behind the passage from Product to Service at Xerox.

a) When was the process of migration from Product to Service initiated; b) Is the process of migration from Product to Service already concluded; c) If not, in which is it a the moment; d) Due to a business opportunity; e) Economic motives; f) Merging or acquisition; g) Sustainability reasons; h) Adapting to new market conditions; i) For which of following areas in your company is Product to Service more relevant: Production, R&D, Marketing or Finance; j) What were the areas in your company most impacted with the transition from Product to Service; k) How is your competition facing the transition from Product to Service.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Performed by telephone in English

273

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

III – Overall Image and Sustainability In this part of the interview we will raise a number of questions related to the perception of Xerox’s image upon the transition from Product to Service.

a) Substantially improves company’s image towards its customers, suppliers and competitors; b) Improves company’s image towards society; c) Makes the company a reference in terms of environment and sustainable practices; d) Improves the business in general; e) The company is certified in the industry standards; f) If so, which ones. g) By adopting sustainable and ecological policies, the company; worsened a lot or improved a lot.

III – Financial Aspects In this part of the interview we will raise some questions related to the economic and financial matters related to the Product to Service transition. a) On which areas was investment made; HW, SW, Knowledge or Human Resources; b) Within Product to Service transition, financial results; worsened a lot or improved a lot; c) Generally, do have expectations of future financial cost evolution in the short term. d) If so, on, Human Resources, Communication, Merging and Acquisition, R&D or costs to downsize company’s resources.

274

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

IV – Internal Processes In this part of the interview we will advance with some questions related to internal process changes upon the transition from Product to Service. a) Were there any major process changes with the upcoming transition from Product to Service; b) If so, in which areas; c) In this new reality, does your company benchmark its performance against the office printing industry; d) What about any benchmark against any other type of industries; e) To you acquire or have access to competitors data; f) Do you monitor you customer’s satisfaction;

V – Human Resources In this section we will pose some questions related to the impact on Human Resources upon the transition from Product to Service.

a) Was there any downsize upon the transition from Product to Service; b) Can you please tell us a number or percentage; c) Will there be any reduction on head count in the near future; d) Was there any recruitment of staff with new competencies and skills; e) Was there new or additional training given the existing staff to cope with the transition from Product to Service; f) If so, can you please tell us in which areas of knowledge; g) With the advent of the transition from Product to Service did the company change the working hours schedule. h) Were new ways of working such as remote of telework implemented; i) Was there any resistance to change from the staff or management; j) If so, how did you handle with it;

275

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Once again let me thank you for most kind attention and cooperation for our research, should there be any question or doubt regarding any of the contents discussed, please do not hesitate to contact us, through the following means:

Email: [email protected]

Telephone: +351 937106025

276

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Annex 4: Transcript from the interviews to Informa D&B9

Interview 1

Date: 10.03.2015

Location: Lisbon

Interviewed: Teresa Menezes (CEO), Perla Pinto (Operations Director)

Interview 2

Date: 20.03.2015

Location: Lisbon

Interviewed: Teresa Menezes (CEO), Perla Pinto (Operations Director)

I – Motivation for dematerialization

Informa D&B was established in Portugal in 1906 as a subsidiary of the American company Dun & Bradstreet having as core activity the distribution of commercial information to support business. As from its establishment and till the beginning of the 1980’s information was delivered in paper format through post as well as by fax (1985).

By 1986 the dematerialization process started and took about six years to produce the first results. Initially focused on internal processes, by 1990’s some contents available were available online to selected customers. By 1992 most of information was available online and to most of its customers. Finally, in 2009 with the implementation of the platform “elinforma” all the contents were available exclusively online and to all customers.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Interviews were face‐to‐face and occurred at Informa D&B ‘s headquarter in Lisbon.

277

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Main reasons that motivated a dematerialization process were:

a) Copy tax for each set of copies produced, plus the cost to create and deliver to the customer the requested information; b) Life time of information delivered was about 6 months; c) Archived paper information occupied a substantial space. With the growth of services and information, a need to increment archive space was always latent; d) A need of more efficient technologies as the available ones at the time were labor intensive and not very efficient; e) The necessity to have a more fluid offer in the offer.

As for our competition, we only have competitor (circa 25% of market share), as far as we know they are in a very early stage of dematerialization, offering only print screen type information to their customers.

II – Overall Image Our image was substantially reinforced with the dematerialization process, but, mainly due the flexibility, reliability and speed of the information delivered.

III – Sustainability Although we are keen on environmental and sustainability issues, these matters were in no circumstance the reasons behind our dematerialization process.

We are not certified in any industry standard, although we support social responsibility, we are not engaged in any such activities.

278

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

IV – Financial Aspects As for economic related facts, we had cost reductions, mainly derived from a decrease in the head count (150 ‐> 110). Financial wise we are sorry, but cannot disclose any further figures.

On the investment side, we have been investing up around 20% of our net sales in HW, SW, IT infrastructure, databases and royalties paid to the head quarter.

V – Internal Processes As a result of the dematerialization process, there a substantial change in the following processes: a) Data collection (now online); b) Data maintenance and archiving (now in immaterial format); c) Access to data either internally or externally (intranet or internet); d) External data disclosure (now online).

The new processes have legal recognition, however, we keep a back up on paper (print screens only) as some judges or courts demand them for legal activities (mostly evidences to support of defense or accusation).

VI – Human Resources In a timeframe of ten years (1994 ‐> 2004) we have reduced our headcount by forty (40) people. By 2015 we have increase our 13 headcount bearing new competencies (more related with the usage of new technologies), fixing our actual headcount on 123 employees.

To support the transition to dematerialized information and the operation of new technologies we have promoted internal training, which took around 100 hours per employee per year.

279

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Due to the typology of our work, we did not change our way of working, maintaining it as office based with a team of external salespeople to visit the customers. Since its foundation in 1841, Dun & Bradstreet was always ahead with new and more efficient ways of working, being this practice embedded in company’s culture. With such mindset, we have considered dematerialization as one more step in evolutionary process. As so, we had no resistance to change within our employees.

280

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Annex 5: Transcripts from interviews to University of Minho10

Interview 1 Date: 27.11.2014 Location: Braga Interviewed: Pedro Camões (administrator) Interview 2 Date: 20.02.2015 Location: Braga Interviewed: José Fernandes (administrator), Alexandra Seixas (coordinator of the dematerialization project) Interview 3 Date: 12.06.2015 Location: Braga Interviewed: José Fernandes (administrator), Alexandra Seixas (coordinator of the dematerialization project)

I – Motivation for dematerialization At the University of Minho, the dematerialization process formally started in 2012 with QREN candidacy, but in practice in only started by January 2014, and today (2015) it is still being implemented. Foremost motives behind the dematerialization process were: a) Strategic Plan: 9‐13 and 13‐17; b) Efficacy gains; c) Cost Reduction; d) Efficiency on main processes; e) Carbon foot print; f) Introduce the green mindset.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Interviews occurred at the University of Minho’s rectory located at Largo do Paço in Braga.

281

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

At this point in time (2015) was far ahead its pairs in terms of process dematerialization and was sharing its working model and helping institutions such as: UTAD, University of Aveiro, University of Algarve, ISCTE and Instituto Politécnico do Porto to start their own dematerialization process.

II – Overall Image Our image was highly strengthened with the dematerialization process, as we (UM) were the first university (public or private) to start such an ambitious project within the Portuguese academy.

III – Sustainability Environmental and sustainability matters are very keen to the institution. The dean has passed an internal decree on how the institution officially should face such matter. Apart from the High Education standard “A3E’S” we are not certified in any industry or social responsibility standard, we are engaged a substantial number of sustainability / environment protection and social responsibility activities.

IV – Financial Aspects With dematerialization, there was substantial cost reduction, we can estimate at this moment (2015) just above 1M€. On the investment, side we can see one of the biggest efforts to succeed on our willing. Our areas of investment were focused on HW, SW and Infrastructure. Our main partners in the dematerialization project are: a) Fujtsu; b) Corfax; c) MC; d) Dell; e) Microsoft Portugal; f) Cabo Digital g) Link Consulting; h) Deb Scope. Total amount invested was 2,7M€ (financed through support programs)

282

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

V – Internal Processes As a result of the dematerialization process, there was an extensive change in the following processes: a) Process opening; b) Process closing; c) Finance area; d) Human Resources;

At this moment a total of 15 ~20 processes changed within the above areas, more will follow.

The new processes can be remotely accessed using a user and password and where necessary certified the user through the Citizen Card (Cartão do Cidadão) and have legal recognition. Outside the academic sphere paper documents maybe very seldom solicited for legal requests.

VI – Human Resources One of biggest advantage of our dematerialization programs when compared with others we know of is the absence of downsizing. Nevertheless, for new admittances, a new set of competencies is required which includes a university or similar degree and skills related to the usage of new technologies. During the transition period to dematerialization a training program was put in place to help our staff. The number approximate number of hours spent was as follows: a) 1.000 hours for internal, non teaching staff; b) 2.500 hours for teaching staff; c) 7 hour training for 600 employees more related with processes change.

283

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

No employee functions or processes were diverted for remote work. As to resistance to change, we have witnessed some especially from our IT or technical areas, and related to reasons why we chosen certain HW or SW.

To handle this resistance, maintain transparency and avoid any possible doubts, we developed dedicated training sessions, manuals and FAQ’s.

As a final comment, we would like to announce that in 2016, we will start working a new area of dematerialization, Arquive.

284

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

12 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Annex 6: Transcripts from interviews to Sonae11

Interview 1 Date: 03.06.2015 Location: Senhora da Hora, Matosinhos Interviewed: Miguel Cruz Function: IT Director

Interview 2 Date: 08.06.2015 Location: Vila Nova de Gaia Interviewed: Natália Reis Function: Document Management Director

Interview 3 Date: 15.06.2015 Location: Lugar do Espido, Maia Interviewed: Catarina Fernandes Function: Sonae’s Communication and Marketing Director

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Due to the geographical dispersion of Sonae, the interviews occurred in different locations.

285

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

I – Motivation for dematerialization First steps on Sonae’s dematerialization process were given in 1998‐1999 with the implementation of an OCR (Optical Character Recognition) system, later,by 2001 the real process has started, by 2002 it was on full speed and by 2007 a new platform was launched. Electronic invoice was launched in 2005, to boost the change to dematerialized invoices (PDF format) a 5€ fee is charged for customers demanding a paper invoice. By 2014, 75% of the group documents were electronic produced and transmitted, objective for 2016 is 80% of dematerialized documents. On a higher level, a pilot to dematerialize top management documents started in 2008 and is still ongoing (2015).

The main reasons behind the dematerialization process were: a) Heavy processes inside group companies and retail; b) An average of 3,5Mi (A4) pages printed yearly on invoices; c) Absolute need of space, the current archive (2015) occupied a line with 65Km; d) Need to improve processes and gain operational efficiency; e) Need to gain on speed for document handling and transmition inside and outside the group; f) Cost reduction;

When looking to our direct competition, Jeronimo Martins Group has electronic invoicing, but as far as we know do total dematerialization process.

II – Overall Image Sonae has a large reputation both in Portugal as well as abroad. Our dematerialization process was publicized, and we are sure that our image was considerably fortified with the dematerialization process inside the group, amongst our customer and suppliers as well as in society.

286

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

III – Sustainability Sonae heavily promotes Green Marketing, on all its group companies and engages them with society. We have a specific department in the group to handle environment and sustainability and share best practices amongst all employees. Sonae is certified in ISO 9001 and 14001 (No ISO 26000) plus other industrial standards and has CSR (Corporate Social Responsibility) in place.

IV – Financial Aspects As for finance related facts, due to internal policies, we can only disclose at some extent financial related facts. We estimate cost reductions in the second year of the program implementation around 244.411€ and later 3.85€ per dematerialized invoice. Currently (2015) we estimate savings around 1.35M€ per year. As for we can only quantify the initial investment, 214.863€, other investments are of confidential nature.

V – Internal Processes There were processes changes resulting from the dematerialization process, most important are:

a) Invoice emission (now online); b) Reception of invoices (now automatic); c) Automatic content matching; d) Newsletters; e) Internal communication; f) Letters.

287

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

The new processes are fully legal compliant with a lifetime of 12 years due to fiscal regulation. Nevertheless we keep some essential we are oblige to use some paper documents for AT (Autoridade Tributária) such as “Guia de Acompanhamenteo de Mercadoria” and other documents for legal purposes. As an example, Sonae has processes in court with over 25 years.

VI – Human Resources Related to the dematerialization process there was no downsizing, as one can imagine with 40K plus employees we have regular turnaround in our headcount. Due to new processes we have hired new competencies in the area of IT and Systems. In order to cope with the type of information, Sonae has given training to all its staff, around 35hours per employee per year. No type of job / type of work was diverted to remote work, nor there was any resistance to change upon the implementation of the dematerialization process.

288

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

12 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Annex 7: Interview transcript from Xerox12

Interview 1 Date: 28.09.2015 Location: Norwalk, Connecticut, USA Interviewed: Armando Zagalo Function: President of Xerox Technology Business

Interview 2 Date: 24.02.2016 Location: Norwalk, Connecticut, USA Interviewed: Armando Zagalo Function: President of Xerox Technology Business

I – Motivation to move from Product to Service As a pioneer in the industry of the office printing, Xerox was one of the first manufacturers within the industry to start this transition by offering services to its customers by the end of the XX century; nevertheless, it was only during the last decade that the true offer begin to produce visible results.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Two telephone interviews were performed in English on: 28.09.2015 and 24.02.2016.

289

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

It is still an ongoing process that we forecast to be dilated in time as it involves a structured change within today’s market regarding and the way companies react upon printing necessities and new counterpart methodologies less based on paper documents.

In order to anticipate market changes (reduction on equipment demand) and avoid all the discomfort that a manufacturer can face when premium goods are transformed into commodities (i.e. margin erosion), Xerox was motivated to migrate from a manufacturer of products to service provide.

II – Overall Image and Sustainability Being a renowned manufacturer will ease the transition from Product to Service, our brand awareness and long history of product reliability and a global player since the 1960’s will hollow the necessary image within service market as well as with our current customers.

Environmental and sustainability aspects are part of our culture; furthermore our customers give premium attention to manufacturers who base their manufacturing policies on sustainability and natural resource savings. Circular economy is also one of our concerns regarding future offerings on our product life cycle.

Xerox is certified in ISO 9001, ISO 14001 and currently applying for information security (ISO 27001), although we are not certified in ISO 26000, we have global social responsibility policies in place, for which we are accounted both by our stakeholders and society in general.

290

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

III –Financial Aspects Substantial investments were made in the past and still being presently to adequate the current structure from a world class manufacturer to a future reference service provider both on equipment portfolio that we sell as well as from other vendors. Other investment is being made on knowledge, back office services centralization or regionalization and SW companies’ acquisition (i.e. acquisition of Consilience Software Company) is part of our current strategy.

Amounts involved in these operations are of confidential nature and cannot be disclosed. All these investments have impacted our growth on costs, but we expect to have a return on investment shortly.

IV – Internal Processes With the transition from Product to Service, we have changed some processes, especially the ones related to elimination of some manufacturing processes (now outsourced) and the implementation of new service areas (i.e. SW, service on installed bases from other manufacturers) We give special attention to our customer’s voice, reason why we survey constantly our customer’s opinion for our products and services.

V – Human Resources Unfortunately with structural paradigm changes, it is necessary to take measures in order to compete in the services market (with operational costs as low as possible) We had to downsize in all areas and where possible either in manufacturing as well as in our operations around the world. Not being able to quantify the number of employees at this moment, as an example I can refer the Portuguese subsidiary which had a workforce around 400 people at the beginning of the 2000's and currently has a little more than 100 employees.

291

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

New competencies were acquired, mainly in IT area and Customer Support, furthermore we have outsourced part of our service operation to service providers, and qualified dealers.

Depending on the subsidiaries and area of operation (Americas, EMEA, ASIA/PACIFIC), but I can estimate a minimum of 20hours per year. Some type of work was diverted mainly for helpdesks or support activities. As expected, we had some resistance to change, mostly amongst senior staff or when unions were involved.

We were able to contour this predictable obstacle with meetings involving senior management to explain the nature of change, group meetings and FAQ content developed for our Intranet.

292

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Annex 8: Mail sent to customers (Originally in Portuguese, translated to English)

Dear Sirs, In the recent past, copying and printing equipment underwent extensive technological advancements. Since the last thirty‐five years to the present day, the evolution was substantially higher when compared to the five centuries preceding Gutenberg's invention.

With the pervasive use of new digital technologies, there were profound changes within companies’ processes. One of the most notorious is the dematerialization of documentary information in detriment of paper usage. Aspects such as cost reduction, environmental aspects, new intangible flows of information, simplified archiving and easy retrieval of information amongst others have contributed for this transformation. At the moment, a research is being held at the University of Minho aiming to investigate the dematerialization in today’s companies and how it impacts the office printing industry.

Given the dematerialization process occurred or taking place in your company / institution, it is important for this research to collect valuable information on this development, whereby initially the documentary information was supported physically on paper and is currently being dematerialized, maintained and accessed throughout immaterial platforms.

293

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Thanks in advance for your willingness to participate by completing the attached questionnaire* (totally confidential and anonymous). Later, you will be contacted by telephone in order to clarify any relevant doubts or questions.

Yours Sincerely,

José Castro Oliveira

Universidade do Minho * Link to access the questionnaire: http://pwc.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_3mDNyZRztHhBZK5

294

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Annex 9: Letter sent to the industry

Braga, xx‐xx‐2016 (Sent between February and March, 2016)

Dear Sirs,

In the recent past, office‐printing technologies underwent a drastic advancement. From the last decades to the present day, the evolution is extensively visible when compared to the five centuries that preceded Gutenberg’s invention.

The accessibility to new digital technologies leads to profound changes in the processes of today’s companies. The most visible is certainly the dematerialization of documental information and the consequent reduction of physical support on paper. As opposed to the growth of non‐tangible processes in companies, the demand on equipment to the office printing industry is decreasing and changing in the arrangement. Manufacturers that once produced and sold premium goods are now compelled to sell mostly commoditized goods. In order to take advantage of accumulated knowledge and large installed bases, services are now offered, either concurrently with a product or independently from the product, in practical terms it means the office printing industry is facing a dramatic change of paradigm; from product to service. Such transformation, also entitled as Servitization* by the academia is nowadays applicable to diverse types of industries.

Presently, a research related to the dematerialization of information and the impact on the office printing industry is taking place at Minho University in Portugal, the results will be published on international scientific papers as well as on doctoral thesis.

295

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Being a fact that this industry was never studied in depth by the academia, the relevance of this investigation has a great significance both to the academic community and the manufacturers. Our endeavors on this research are aimed to reach high levels of excellence. Aside with the latest scientific knowledge available, the study will use up to date market information provided from two bespoke surveyed samples: 1) A sample from the demand (customers), using the six most important vertical markets; 2) A sample from the supply (industry), using the full universe of B2B manufacturers (data collected from all manufacturers at their European HQ).

Manufacturer’s opinion on this matter is mostly appreciated, if not crucial. For such, we attach a link (see below **) to an online questionnaire for which we request your generous participation. Replies are fully confidential, anonymous and untraceable.

Your participation is the only entreaty from the academia, on return, we will deliver a scientific study on this industry never performed before at this level. Afore being public, the study will be distributed amongst the industry.

Please, kindly inform us on the completion of the questionnaire and let us know if a follow up interview is necessary.

As the supervisor for this research and on behalf of the university, we would like to thank you for your willingness to cooperate in this study that we are certain to be of high interest to all parts involved.

Yours sincerely,

António Azevedo (Professor)

296

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

School of Economics and Management University of Minho Campus Gualtar 4710‐057 Braga ‐ Portugal E‐mail: [email protected] Phone: +351 253601925 Mobile: +351 936300607 *Servitization refers to the transformation of manufacturers by gaining revenues from service provision, or rather the infusion of services into manufacturing (Baines et al., 2009).

**Link to questionnaire: http://pwc.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_0BoGtxR9tMFEfOd

297

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

This page intentionally left blank

298

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Annex 10: Questions and literature review for the questionnaire applied to customers

# 1‐ Company Characterization

A1 Activity Sector Literature Review A1.1 Trade Infosource (2016) A1.2 Higher Education Brodbeck et al (2004) A1.3 Public Administration Palmer (2008) A1.4 Industry Caldeira, et al. (2012) A1.5 Health Scott et al. (2016) A1.6 Services Davis, Headley and Davis (2015) Jones (2012) A2 Characterization of the company Isaeva and Yoon (2016) A 2.1 Net Sales (approx.) in 2014 (K€) Meena (2013) A 2.2 Number of employees (approx.) Chao (2015) Coreynen et al. (2017) A3 The respondent has one of the following ranks within the organization Wang (2013) A3.1 CEO, President, Administrator A3.2 Financial Director (first line director) A3.3 Commercial director (first line director) A3.4 Technical / IT Director (first line director) A3.5 Production Director (first line director) A3.6 Marketing Director (first line director) A3.7 Other, empowered by the Board/Administration

2‐ Motivation For Dematerialization

1 What has motivated dematerialization of information in your company / organization? Literature Review (whereby 1 is not important and 7 very important) Oliver (1996), 1.1 Economic Issues Whitehead (2001) 1.2 Sustainability / Environmental issues Carr (2005) 1.3 In need of physical space McMullen (2011) 1.4 Imposition of new processes by suppliers / customers Meel (2011) 1.5 Matters related to image or reputation of the instituion towards the customers Sun (2014 1.6 Others (please specify) Fimbel (2015) Velte and Elsenpeter (2008) 2 In which year began the process of dematerialization Dykman and Davis (2012) Stratton (2013) 3 In which year ended the process of dematerialization Gibson et al. (2000) Davis, Hadley and Davis (2015) Schutz and Welfens (2000) Chowdhury (2010) Holmund et al. (2016) Windahl and Lakemond (2006, 2010) Bejou (2011) Wilburn (2015) Moser (2015) Kjaergaard, Morsing and Ravasi (2011) Wong and Wong (2015) Bednarska‐Olejniczak (2016)

3‐Overall Image

4 In your opinion, dematerialization of information (whereby 1 is not important and 7 very important): Literature Review 4.1 Favors the company's image towards its customers / competitors Lantos (2001) 4.2 It is a sine qua non condition to be able to negotiate with some suppliers / customers Chowdhury (2010) 4.3 In no way interferes with company's image Golds (2011) 4.4 Contributed to a positive image of the company towards in the area of sustainability and ecology Wang et al (2013) 4.5 On a scale from ‐2 to +2, whereby +2 is greatly improved and ‐2 is worsened a lot, how do you rate: Chowdhury (2013) Overall the company's image was worsened or improved after the dematerialization process (‐2 to +2) Wilburn et al (2015) Moser (2015) 5 Are there Factors / Blockers inhibiting the dematerialization process(i.e. Mandatory paper invoices)? Yes / No Wilson (2015) 5.1 Environmental matters weighed in your decision for the dematerialization of information (whereby 1 is not important and 7 very important)

6 Does your company hold any of the following accreditations? 6.1 ISO 9001 6.2 ISO 14001 6.3 ISO 26000 6.4 Others, which? 6.5 None

299

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

4‐ Financial Aspects

7 What was the reduction of costs with the process of dematerialization? (Choose one of the options) Literature Review 21 7With.1 Less the than implementation 1% of the company of dematerialization,net sales was there promotion of teleworking and 7 or extension of the work schedule?Bhuiyan Yes / and No Baghel (2005) 7.2 Less than 2,5% of the company net sales Chesbrough (2010) 22 7Was.3 More there than resistance 2,5% of the to company change? net Yes sales / No Karaszewski, R.,(2010) 7.4 More than 5% of the company net sales Coroama et al. (2014) 23 7If.5 you There answered was no cost yes reduction in the previous question, please define the degree of resistance to change Whereby 1 is not important and 7 very important 8 What was the investment on Hardware / Software (Choose one of the options) 8.1 Less than 1% of the company net sales 24 If there was resistance to change, how was it circumvented? (Box for free comments) 8.2 Less than 2,5% of the company net sales 8.3 More than 2,5% of the company net sales 25 8In.4 yMoreour belief,than 5% in of y ourthe companycompan ynet / institutionsales the normal user's role still maintains paper as an indispensable resource? Yes / No 825.1.5 None If yes, in which of the following age groups is it more perceptible? 825.1.1.6 Not quantifiableUp to 20 years 25.1.2 From 20 to 30 years 9 Was25.1.3 there From a reduction 40 to 50 on y paperears consumption? Yes / No 9.125.1.4 If yes, From what 50 is the to 6approximate0 years percentage 25.1.5 More than 60 years

10 What25.1.was6 Allthe ageestimate groupsreduction percentage of ESS (External Supplies and Services) spending on paper? (equivalente a FSE)

11 11.1Box In for general, free comments you consider box that ended the process the questionnaire of dematerialization applied was: to customers 11.2 In general, you consider that the process of dematerialization contributed to cost reduction in your company / Institution: 11.3End In of general, Questionnaire you consider that the process of dematerialization contributed to increase profitability in your company / Institution: Whereby 1 is not important and 7 very important

5‐Internal Processes

12 With the dematerialization of information, were there changes in your company's / institution's processes? Yes / No Literature Review O'Boyle et al (2011) 13 If yes, which? Cantor et al (2013) Tucker et al (2014) 14 The new processes have legal recognition? Yes / No

15 However they still continue to depend on paper? 15.1 No 15.2 Yes due the design of internal processes (workflow) 15.3 Yes, because of tax / legal motives (availability of a physical document)

6‐ Human Resources

16 As a result of the occurred dematerialization process, was there a reduction in the headcount? Yes / No Literature Review Savolainen (2000) 17 If yes, how many people? Erickson and Roloff (2008) 17.1 Till 5 Doherty (2010) 17.2 Till 10 Aronsson and Blom (2010) 17.3 More than 10 Engel et al (2015) 17.4 More than 20 Denning (2015) Anonymous (2015) 18 Were there addition of new competencies? Yes / No Dimitrov (2015) 18.1 If yes, in which areas

19 With the processes, was there any additional training given to the employees? Yes / No 19.1 If yes, in which of the following areas? 19.1.1 IT 19.1.2 Languages 19.1.3 Human Resources 19.1.4 Processes 19.1.5 Other, please specify

20 If you answered yes to the previous question, please select one of the following options: 20.1 Up to 10 hours / year per employee 20.2 More than 10 hours / year per employee 20.3 More than 20 hours / year per employee 20.4 More than 30 hours / year per employee

300

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Annex 11: Questionnaire applied to customers (Originally in Portuguese, translated to English by the author)

301

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Company Characterization

302

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Motivation For Dematerialization

303

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Overall Image

304

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

305

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Financial Aspects

306

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Internal Processes

307

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Human Resources

308

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

309

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

310

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Annex 12: Questions and literature review for the questionnaire applied to the Industry #1‐Respondent Characterization

A1 To start the questionnaire, please select one of the following options to characterize the position of the respondent within the organization:

a) CEO, President, Director b) First line director: Financial c) First line director: Commercial d) First line director: Technical / IT e) First line director: Production f) First line director: Marketing g) First line director: Legal h) Others (appointed by the Board)

2‐Motivation to move from Product to Service

1 The foremost intents that motivated your company to migrate from producer of goods to service provider are best described as (whereby 1 is not important and 7 very important): Literature Review 1.1 Economic reasons Pine and Gilmore (1998) 1.2 Sustainability reasons Cassia (2015 Windahl and Lakemond 1.3 Adapting to new market conditions (2010) 1.4 Merge or Acquisition Hays and Riggs (2002) 1.5 Business opportunity Vargo and Lusch (2004), 1.6 Other (please specify) Gebauer et al (2012) Oliva and Kallenberg Parvatiyar and Sheth 2 At this moment the transition from Product to Service (P‐>S) is: (2000) 2.1 At the initial phase (Awareness to change) 2.2 Transition phase (Implementation) 2.3 Concluded (Business is mostly services)

3 When was the process (from product to service) initiated? (Year)

4 When was the transition completed (Δ t)? (Year)

5 Taking the most important areas of your company, please state the degree of importance with the change of paradigm from product to service (whereby 1 is not important and 7 very important): 5.1 Marketing 5.2 Production 5.3 Finance 5.4 R&D 5.5 Other (please specify)

6 In practice, what were the major consequences occurred in you company by area, with a paradigm change from Product to Service (please give us your comment limited to 200 words per box): 6.1 Marketing 6.2 Production 6.3 Finance 6.4 R&D

3‐ Overall Image

7 Regarding your company's image/sustainability, the paradigm change from Product to Service: Literature Review (whereby 1 is not important and 7 very important) Chowdhury (2010) 7.1 Enhances company's image towards customers, society and competitors Dacko et al (2013) 7.2 Is important for the business in general Golds (2011) 7.3 Other (Please specify) Wang et al (2013) Chowdhury (2013) 7.1 Regarding your company's image/sustainability, the paradigm change from Product to Service: Han et al (2009) (whereby 1 is not important and 7 very important) Moser (2015) 7.1.1 Is embedded within company's philosophy Visintin (2012) 7.1.2 Does not interfere at all with company's policies Carr (1997) 7.1.3 Other (Please specify)

8 On a scale between ‐2 and +2, whereby +2 improved substantially, and ‐2 worsened a lot, how do you rate: By adopting sustainable and ecological policies ,in general the company’s image:

9 Is your company certified in any of the industry standards? Yes / No 9.1 If yes, which ones? 311

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

4‐ Financial Aspects 10 On which of the following areas was financial investment made to promote the process from Product to Service: Literature Review 10.1 HR Martinez et al (2010) 10.2 Hardware Kastalli and Looy (2013) 10.3 Software Bikfalvi et al (2013) 10.4 Merging Goldhar and Berg (2010) 10.5 Acquisition 10.6 Communication 10.7 Knowledge 10.8 R&D 10.9 Other (Please specify)

10.1 Can you please quantify the investment (% of sales)? (For example for 10%, insert 10) 10.1.1 HR 10.1.2Hardware 10.1.3 Software 10.1.4 Merging 10.1.5 Acquisition 10.1.6 Communication 10.1.7 Knowledge 10.1.8 R&D 10.1.9 Other (please specify) 11 With the advent of Product to Service, was the global performance of the company affected? (Where ‐5 Worsened Drastically and +5 Outstanding Improvement) (‐5 to +5) 12 Regarding financial variations, what was the impact (%)? (For example for 10%, insert 10) 12.1 Δ EBITA 12.2 Δ Total sales

5‐Internal Processes

13 Were there any changes on the internal processes of your company with the advent of paradigm change (P‐>S)? Yes / No advent of paradigm change (P‐>S)? Literature Review 13.1 If yes, which ones? (Please give us your comment limited to 200 words per box) Oliva and Kallenberg Gomes et al (2004 14 Does your company benchmark its performance against the Office Printing industry? Hanman (1997) Knox et al (2003) 15 To acquire data from your competitors, your company uses? Angelova and Zekiri (2011) 15.1 Internal resources Cantor et al (2013) 15.2 External companies Tucker et al (2014) 15.3 Both

16 Does your company benchmark its performance against any other type of industry? Yes / No 16.1 If yes, which one(s)? (Please give us your comment limited to 200 words per box)

17 To acquire data from your customers, your company uses? 17.1 Internal resources 17.2 External companies (Company controlled) 17.3 None 18 Does your company perform regular surveys on customer satisfaction? Yes / No If yes, they are applied to: 18.1 Product satisfaction 18.2 Service satisfaction 18.3 Both 6‐Human Resources

19 As a consequence of paradigm change, was there a downsizing on the head count? Yes / No count? Literature Review 19.1 If yes, what was the percentage against total HC head count? (For example for 10%, insert 10) Savolainen (2000) 19.2 If no, is it likely to occur in a near future? Yes / No Erickson and Roloff (2008) Wallace et al (2014) 20 Were there any new competencies acquired? Yes / No Doherty (2010) 20.1 If yes, which of the following types best describes your recent acquisitions Aronsson and Blom (2010) 20.1.1 SW (IT) Driven Engel et al (2015) 20.1.2 HW Driven Denning (2015) 20.1.3 Sales Driven Anonymous (2015) 20.1.4 Service Driven Dimitrov (2015) 20.1.5 Others (please specify) 312

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

21 Was there specific training given to your staff during the transition period? Yes / No 21.1 If yes, how many hours per employee/year?

22 Was there a change on working hours, or, promotion of home based work (telework)? Yes / No

23 Concerning the transition process (P‐>S) was there any resistance to change within your company? 23.1 If yes, how was it handled? (Please give us your comment limited to 200 words per box)

24 Box for free comments ended the questionnaire applied to the industry End of questionnaire

313

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

This page intentionally left blank

314

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Annex 13: Questionnaire applied to the industry

315

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Motivation to move from Products to Services

316

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

317

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Overall Image

318

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Financial Aspects

319

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Internal Processes

320

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

321

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

Human Resources

322

The dematerialization of information and its impact on the servitization of office printing industry

323