Systematic Literature Review on Product and Customer Centricity, Customer Experience, and Loyalty

Abstract

In this article, we present a systematic literature review (SLR) focused on Product and Customer Centrism, as well as Customer Experience and Customer Loyalty—topics that are often studied together. Our goal was to map the evolution of these subjects over the past 125 years, offering a significant advancement compared to a traditional bibliographic review. We collected a total of 12,000 records of scholarly publications from four different databases using keyword searches, resulting in 15,343 publications (657 exclusions) with a combined total of 2,937,235 citations, excluding patents. Using these records, we conducted a bibliometric analysis, which revealed that academic research primarily revolves around two themes: customer centricity. Notably, the number of citations related to Customer Experience and Customer Loyalty has increased sevenfold over the past 50 years and is projected to double in the coming decades. Our findings also show trends in research studies and the geographical distribution of academic contributions. Furthermore, our article offers implications and recommendations for future research in this field.

Share and Cite:

Sobrinho, J. , Dias, M. , Marcolino, G. and Cruz, P. (2025) Systematic Literature Review on Product and Customer Centricity, Customer Experience, and Loyalty. Open Journal of Business and Management, 13, 904-923. doi: 10.4236/ojbm.2025.132049.

1. Introduction

Although traditional literature reviews offer a more flexible structure, they do not present the evolution of a study in a systematic and organized way, nor do they present publication trends or which authors and topics are most cited. An SLR is a comprehensive review covering several databases based on strict inclusion and exclusion criteria, which presents an overview of the topic in question and its evolution in the last 125 years (1900-2025). We present a Systematic Literature Review (SLR) on four topics: 1) Product Centrism, 2) Customer Centrism, 3) Customer Loyalty, and 4) Customer Experience. It offers the advantage of identifying the leading authors in the field of research, trends in publications and citations in a given period, following Hart (2018). After analyzing the data, we can present critical arguments in the literature review summary.

In this section, we present the SLR strategy, adopting the approach recommended by Goyal and Kumar (2020), Denyer & Tranfield (2009), Singh and Walia (2020), Hart (2018); Cheng et al. (2018); Prashar et al. (2020) which are introduced in the following sections. The choice was made based on how widely accepted it was in bibliometric analyses. SLR has attracted recent research (Dias, Vivanco, & Teixeira, 2024; Schmitz & Dias, 2023; Teixeira et al., 2024; Dias, et al., 2023, 2023a, 2023b; Dias et al., 2022).

This work has attracted research from other fields or subfields of study such as 1) Internet banking (Smith & Anderson, 2024); 2) large corporations (Manral, 2016; Levitt, 2014); 3) in commercial banks (Muzanarwo et al., 2020); 4) associating financial institutions with innovation and customer focus (Michel, 2014; Marjanovic & Murthy, 2016); 5) disruptive financial services (Naseema, Akhtar, & Al Hinai, 2024); 6) customer centrism and sustainability (Lulaj et al., 2024), 7) focused on fintechs (Sanyaolu et al., 2024), among others.

Despite its relevance to the current epistemology, some relevant aspects still need to be clarified through the following questions: Q1: How has product and customer centrism been cited in the last 125 years? Q2: What are the leading publications in the field? Q3: What is the geographical distribution and development of the theme? Q4: What are the gaps in the literature and the themes of the articles that were mapped? Q5: How did the publications behave in relation to these themes in the timeline—what were the gaps and how were they answered in each period?

2. Research Design

In this research, a research based on a systematic review of the literature (SLR) was adopted, following Denyer and Tranfield (2009). Next, the selection was based on its wide acceptance in bibliometric evaluations (Cheng et al., 2018; Prashar et al., 2020; Singh & Walia 2020). The research is described in detail in the following subsections.

2.1. Objectives

The main objective is to map the evolution of knowledge about the aforementioned themes in the last 125 years (1900-2025). To this end, we studied academic publications and citations, excluding patents, according to Goyal and Kumar (2020).

In addition, the objectives of the study are organized into sub-objectives following the model of Zahoor & Al-Tabbaa (2020), which included 1) mapping the top publications on the topics and 2) identifying important research papers using citation network and text network analysis to present new trends in the field. Finally, Table 1 summarizes the objectives of the review, including publications and citations of both topics cited, in accordance with the general research objectives, as follows:

Table 1. Research objectives and preliminary results.

Total

Research Objectives

Publications

Citations

Product centric

3,754

638,981

Customer centric

3,723

139,848

Customer Experience

3,943

1,360,740

Customer Loyalty

3,923

797,666

Total

15,343

2,937,235

Source: database.

2.2. Search Strategy

Table 1 shows that the comprehensive literature study revealed 685,503 citations, which included 15,344 publications. The Publish or Perish software (Harzing, 2007) version 8.0 was used to analyze the survey coverage from 1900 to 2025. The research included terms in English and Portuguese for the research, to give greater scope and depth to the themes, since the largest number of existing publications is in the English language.

The application of the above-mentioned criteria resulted in the following research databases: 1) Scopus; 2) Google Scholar; 3) Crossref and finally 4) Semantic Scholar. Both are databases widely disseminated in academia and available for consultation. The inclusion/exclusion criteria is summarized below:

Inclusion Criteria

1) Language: English and Portuguese.

2) Databases: Scopus, Google Scholar, Crossref and Semantic Scholar.

3) Coverage period: 1900 to 2025.

4) Type of publication: Articles (exclusion of patents).

5) Relevance to the academic environment: The selected databases must be relevant to the academic environment.

Exclusion Criteria

The following criteria were employed to exclude publications from the systematic review.

Invalid Entries

- Publications that are not research articles, such as editorials, letters to the editor, book reviews, etc.

- Publications that are not in English or Portuguese.

- Publications that are not available in full text.

- Publications that are prior to 1900 or after 2025.

- Publications that are not related to the review topic.

Duplicates

- Publications that are identical copies of other articles already included in the review.

- Publications that contain substantially similar information to other articles already included in the review.

Irrelevant Publications

- Publications that do not address the topic of transformational leadership and motivation in technology companies.

- Publications that do not present empirical research results.

- Publications that are theoretical or conceptual in nature, without practical application.

These criteria were applied rigorously and transparently to ensure the quality and relevance of the publications included in this SLR.

Keywords

“Product centric”

“Customer-centric”

“Customer Experience”

“Customer Loyalty”

Boolean logic

The Boolean logic AND was employed to return searches with all keywords, whereas OR was employed to return searches for documents containing at least one. Therefore, the abovementioned keywords, Product AND Centric, Customer AND Centric, Customer AND Experience, and Customer AND Loyalty, were investigated to report results containing both words. In addition, the logic AND was combined with logic OR, as follows: Product AND Centric OR Customer AND Centric OR Customer AND Experience OR Customer AND Loyalty.

It is worth noting two restrictions on the use of the databases: all of them allowed access to 1000 possible entries each, totaling 4000 possible entries. By default, Publish or Perish v.8.0 (Harzing, 2007) allows 1000 results per query session. The total number of items analyzed, however, was reduced due to exclusions, which occurred due to invalid or redundant entries, as can be seen in Table 2, as follows:

Table 2. Total publication exclusions per database.

Database

Exclusions Product centric

Exclusions customer centric

Exclusions Customer Experience

Exclusions Customer Loyalty

Total

Google Scholar

207

207

17

12

443

Crossref

19

2

5

0

26

Scopus

15

28

33

26

102

Semantic Scholar

5

40

2

39

86

Total

246

277

57

77

657

Source: database.

After the first round of searches, the most relevant emerging topics were determined using a text network analysis, and these themes served as keyword inputs in the subsequent iterative cycle. The data were then subjected to a text network and content analysis. Through Google My Maps®, the new patterns were also examined spatially. The screening and selection process will be detailed as follows.

2.3. Screening and Selection Process

First, using the program described above with the default search settings of article inclusion and patent exclusion, we analyzed the terms (keywords), such as “Product centric”, “Customer-centric”, “Customer Experience”, and “Customer Loyalty”. The search included 16,000 articles on each of the four themes. Therefore, 4000 entries of publications per theme were inspected, of which 657 were deleted after visual consultation due to duplicates and invalid entries. Of the 16,000 entries studied, only 15,343 were considered valid for the research, resulting in 657 exclusions (see Table 1 and Table 2).

Table 3 shows the total number of citations and publications for product centric, we have a total of 3754 publications analyzed and 638,981 citations, as follows:

Table 3. Product centric results.

Database

Product centric

Publications

Citations

Google Scholar

793

334,156

Crossref

981

7,188

Scopus

985

102,575

Semantic Scholar

995

195,062

Total

3,754

638,981

Source: database.

Regarding the total number of citations and publications for customer centric, we have a total of 3723 publications analyzed and 139,848 citations, as displayed in Table 4, organized by theme and database.

Table 4. Customer-centric results.

Database

Customer centric

Publications

Citations

Google Scholar

793

5,815

Crossref

998

2,779

Scopus

972

70,274

Semantic Scholar

960

60,980

Total

3,723

139,848

Source: database.

Regarding the total number of citations and publications for customer experience, we have a total of 3943 publications analyzed and 1,360,740 citations, as illustrated in Table 5, organized by theme and database.

Table 5. Customer experience results.

Database

Customer Experience

Publications

Citations

Google Scholar

983

627,872

Crossref

995

5,927

Scopus

967

426,445

Semantic Scholar

998

300,496

Total

3,943

1,360,740

Source: database.

Regarding the total number of citations and publications for customer loyalty, we have a total of 3933 publications analyzed and 797,666 citations, as depicted in Table 6, as follows.

Table 6. Customer loyalty results.

Database

Customer Loyalty

Publications

Citations

Google Scholar

988

408,656

Crossref

1,000

6,844

Scopus

974

191,083

Semantic Scholar

961

191,083

Total

3,923

797,666

Source: database.

2.4. Data Analysis

The results emerged after eight rounds of interactions, through consultation with the bases individually. Figure 1 summarizes the entire research design, organized by sections, as follows.

3. Findings and Analysis

3.1. Bibliometric Analysis

Bibliometric analysis was the methodology selected to evaluate and quantify the article, identifying trends, patterns and relationships between the selected publications. It serves to evaluate the production of authors and institutions, map knowledge, manage research policies, and develop academic performance indicators. In addition, it helps to identify emerging research areas, influential authors, and collaboration networks, contributing to effective research management and the advancement of scientific knowledge (Braun et al., 2006; Georghiou, 1995; Garfield, 2006).

Figure 1. Research design. Source: adapted from Zahoor & Al-Tabbaa (2020).

3.2. Trend Analysis

Table 7 shows the total number of publications of product centric, while Table 8 shows the total number of publications of customer centrism. Table 9 illustrates the results from Customer Experience and Table 10 shows the results for Customer Loyalty, organized by database and their respective frequencies, as follows:

Table 7. Publications product centric.

Timeline

Google Scholar

Crossref

Scopus

Semantic Scholar

Total

1900-1949

0

0

0

0

0

1950-1969

0

0

0

5

5

1970-1979

0

0

0

13

13

1980-1989

0

0

1

27

28

1990-1999

10

12

7

122

151

2000-2009

129

205

444

358

1,136

2010-2025

654

764

533

470

2,421

Total

793

981

985

995

3,754

Source: database.

Table 8. Publications customer centric.

Timeline

Google Scholar

Crossref

Scopus

Semantic Scholar

Total

1900-1949

0

16

0

0

16

1950-1969

0

10

0

0

10

1970-1979

0

15

0

0

15

1980-1989

0

14

0

6

20

1990-1999

0

124

10

122

256

2000-2009

54

197

286

438

975

2010-2025

739

622

676

394

2,431

Total

793

998

972

960

3,723

Source: database.

Table 9. Publications customer experience.

Timeline

Google Scholar

Crossref

Scopus

Semantic Scholar

Total

1900-1949

0

0

0

0

0

1950-1969

0

0

0

3

3

1970-1979

0

0

0

1

1

1980-1989

8

0

2

8

18

1990-1999

30

4

19

84

137

2000-2009

331

72

256

306

965

2010-2025

614

919

690

596

2,819

Total

983

995

967

998

3,943

Source: database.

Table 10. Publications customer loyalty.

Timeline

Google Scholar

Crossref

Scopus

Semantic Scholar

Total

1900-1949

0

0

0

0

0

1950-1969

0

0

0

0

0

1970-1979

0

0

0

0

0

1980-1989

8

2

2

0

12

1990-1999

30

25

19

8

82

2000-2009

44

81

103

103

331

2010-2025

906

892

850

850

3,498

Total

988

1,000

974

961

3,923

Source: database.

Figure 2 summarizes the evolution of publications in the frequency distribution format, both product and customer centrism, from 1900 to 2025.

Figure 2. Evolution of publications (1900-2025). Source: excerpted from Harzing (2007).

Figure 2 shows that in the last decade they have doubled in relation to previous decades. Figure 3 graphically shows the distribution of publications between customer and product centrism, for better visualization.

Figure 3. Frequency of publications. Source: excerpted from Harzing, 2007.

Figure 3 shows that we had a very similar number of publications on both topics, which helps us to have a good basis for comparison between the publications, since a disproportionate number of one of the two themes could suggest that the distribution of citations could also be disproportionate. So, with a very similar number between the frequency of publications, we can see that customer centrism

Table 11 shows the total number of citations of product centrism and Table 12 shows the total number of citations of customer centrism. Table 13 illustrates the total citations of customer experience and Table 14 shows the total citations of customer loyalty organized by database and their respective frequencies, as follows:

Figure 4, illustrates the evolution of citations in the frequency distribution format, both product and customer centrism, from 1900 to 2025.

Table 11. Citations product centric.

Timeline

Google Scholar

Crossref

Scopus

Semantic Scholar

Total

1900-1949

0

0

0

0

0

1950-1969

0

0

0

143

143

1970-1979

0

0

0

378

378

1980-1989

0

0

4,091

1,024

5,115

1990-1999

21,164

87

6,150

19,709

47,110

2000-2009

310,817

2,089

51,491

72,072

436,469

2010-2025

2,175

5,012

40,843

101,736

149,766

Total

334,156

7,188

102,575

195,062

638,981

Source: database.

Table 12. Citations customer centric.

Timeline

Google Scholar

Crossref

Scopus

Semantic Scholar

Total

1900-1949

0

0

0

0

0

1950-1969

0

13

0

0

13

1970-1979

0

42

0

0

42

1980-1989

0

48

0

68

116

1990-1999

0

267

230

148

645

2000-2009

1,566

134

20,541

32,957

55,198

2010-2025

4,249

2,275

49,503

27,807

83,834

Total

5,815

2,779

70,274

60,980

139,848

Source: database.

Table 13. Citations customer experience.

Timeline

Google Scholar

Crossref

Scopus

Semantic Scholar

Total

1900-1949

0

0

0

0

0

1950-1969

0

0

0

1,036

1,036

1970-1979

0

0

0

293

293

1980-1989

31,190

0

907

4,665

36,762

1990-1999

135,420

26

19,186

65,597

220,229

2000-2009

288,700

605

183,847

124,047

597,199

2010-2025

172,562

5,296

222,505

104,858

505,221

Total

627,872

5,927

426,445

300,496

1,360,740

Source: database.

Table 14. Citations of customer loyalty.

Timeline

Google Scholar

Crossref

Scopus

Semantic Scholar

Total

1900-1949

0

0

0

0

0

1950-1969

0

0

0

0

0

1970-1979

0

0

0

0

0

1980-1989

28,894

907

907

0

30,708

1990-1999

137,701

1,711

19,186

4,970

163,568

2000-2009

172,182

2,047

82,339

87,009

343,577

2010-2025

69,879

2,179

88,651

99,104

259,813

Total

408,656

6,844

191,083

191,083

797,666

Source: database.

Figure 4. Evolution of citations (1900-2025). Source: excerpted from Harzing, 2007.

Figure 5. Map of the distribution of publications by country. Source: Google MyMaps.

We then gathered the publications’ affiliations from the .csv saved archive of Publish or Perish (Harzing, 2007). Using https://www.google.com/intl/pt-BR/maps/about/mymaps/ (Google My Maps), the geographic distribution of the top publishers is illustrated in Figure 5, as follows.

3.3. Influence Analysis

Table 15 shows the top 10 authors.

Table 15. Top 10 authors.

Author(s)

Year

Seufert et al.

2014

M.K. Constand

1997

P. Pace

1998

V. Bellotti

1998

H. Bhimani

1998

D. Saxena

1998

S.K. Datta

1999

R. Tourani

1999

I.I. Moraru

1999

S. Acharya

1999

Source: Harzing, 2007.

3.4. Network Text Analysis

Figure 6. Textual analysis of the network. Source: http://www.infranodus.com/.

A network map of the keywords, titles and abstracts was used to find the thematic groupings on the assumption that the grouped terms may represent similar subjects. Network text analysis is shown in Figure 6 and used density-based spacing and normalization clustering techniques. Figure 7 shows a network graph from the text-based data using www.infrandus.com, which revealed insights and trends based on network characteristics, including primarily the phrases “customer centric”. As a result, current topics and developing trends in the area were discovered by carefully examining the research papers in each cluster.

Figure 7. Textual analysis of the network (product centrism). Source: https://infranodus.com/.

In an analogous way, Figure 7 presents the Textual analysis of the network (product centrism).

Content analysis reveals that the four themes have grown in the last two decades, while the number of citations is following an upward trend.

4. Discussion

In this section, we evaluate the discussion of the identified trends and gaps in literature. The critical evaluation indicates that research should adopt a broader geographical perspective by including developing and emerging regions. This approach will help establish a clear and operational definition of customer-centricity, enabling researchers to measure and assess this concept consistently. Additionally, it is essential for research to incorporate insights from various disciplines, such as marketing, operations, and information technology, to provide a comprehensive understanding of trends and gaps in the literature.

Firstly, regarding Trends, evidence suggests three major trends: 1) Customer centricity: The text highlights the importance of customer centricity in companies, especially in the financial sector. 2) Digitization: Digitization is a trend transforming how companies operate, especially in the financial sector. 3) Data analysis: Data analysis is an important tool for understanding customer behavior and improving the customer experience.

Secondly, regarding Gaps, evidence suggests three major gaps in the literature: 1) Definition of customer centricity: Although the text highlights the importance of customer centricity, its definition is not clear in practice. 2) Lack of empirical studies: Although the text mentions some studies, few examine the relationship between customer-centricity and company results. 3) Geographic limitations: The text appears to focus primarily on the financial sector in the US and Europe, with little attention given to other regions of the world.

The discussion also presents the answers to the following research questions: Q1: How has product and customer centrism been cited in the last 125 years? Q2: What are the leading publications in the field? Q3: What is the geographical distribution and development of the theme? Q4: What are the gaps in the literature and the themes of the articles that were mapped? Q5: How did the publications behave in relation to these themes in the timeline—what were the gaps and how were they answered in each period?

4.1. How Has Product and Customer Centrism Been Cited in the Last 125 Years?

The answer to Q1 is shown in Figure 3. Over the past century, product and customer centrism, as well as customer experience and customer loyalty are topics that have been widely studied in the past century, especially from the 1990s to today. Table 1 presents a total of 15,343 publications analyzed and 2,937,235 citations in four databases: Google Scholar, Scopus, Semantic Scholar and Crossref.

4.2. What Are the Main Publications in the Area?

The answer to Q2 is found in Table 15, where we present the top 10 authors of the two investigated themes. Seufert et al. (2014), the most influential author, highlighted customer centrism.

4.3. What Is the Geographical Distribution and Development of the Theme?

The answer to Q3 is found in Figure 5, where Google MyMaps showed a higher prevalence of publications in North America, followed by Europe.

4.4. What Are the Gaps in the Literature and the Themes of the Articles that Were Mapped?

Customer centrism predominates in contemporary economics (Demirkan et al., 2008), with various disciplines, such as information technology, marketing, operations and, increasingly, information systems, actively involved in service-related research (Barrett et al., 2015). The themes of the mapped articles point to a growing interest of researchers related to Information Technology and Internet Banking, which was to be expected due to recent technological advances in the area (Barrett et al., 2015).

However, the main gap concerns the assumptions and new definitions about customer-centrism. For example, information technology (IT) and information systems (IS) researchers often perceive services as IT-enabled services, while, for example, the marketing research community views them as business services offered to customers (Marjanovic & Murthy, 2016). Therefore, there are gaps as to the typology to be used by the theme. Customer-centric logic can best be illustrated by the proliferation of different definitions and assumptions about the fundamental concept of service, with the aim of investigating the existing gap on the strategic behavior of multi-product companies whose portfolio of complementary product offerings belongs to several sectors (Manral, 2016).

4.5. How Did the Publications Behave in Relation to These Themes in the Timeline—What Were the Gaps and How Were They Answered in Each Period?

Over time, the themes and gaps varied according to the interest aroused by the theme and the gaps that existed at the time. As demonstrated in Figure 4, both customer and product centrism became prominent from the 1990s onwards. Therefore, we divided the study into three time periods: from 1990 to 1999; from 2000 to 2009 and from 2010 to 2025, presented below:

4.5.1. Period from 1990 to 1999

In the period between 1990 and 1999, studies on the distribution of financial services predominated (Worthington, 1998); growth of the banking industry (Carifio Jr. & Jahnke, 1998). The paradigm shifts from product to customer centrism (Hamel, 1998) and the embryonic impact of e-commerce on financial institutions (Ambrose, 1998). Also studies on the introduction and change of the role of information technology related to the services provided by financial institutions (Brohman & Copeland, 1999). The research gaps of this period were answered using mixed methods, sometimes qualitative as case studies (Brohman & Copeland, 1999; Chan, 2005), sometimes quantitative (Ambrose, 1998), for example.

Finally, the conclusions of this period sought to understand and anticipate the paradigm shift from product to customer centrism with the rise of banking e-commerce, still embryonic and pre-internet. Digital banks, as we know them today, were still nothing more than utopia.

4.5.2. Period from 2000 to 2009

Between 2000 and 2009, studies focused on the development of client-centric systems (Heckl & Moorman, 2007; Galbraith, 2005). Baines, et al., (2009), for example, developed operations strategies for product-centered servitization. Others have focused their research efforts on customer relationship management (CRM) related to financial services (Chan, 2005; Peppard, 2000; Wind, 2001). The research gaps of this period were answered using mixed methods, sometimes qualitative as case studies (Peppard, 2000), sometimes quantitative (Heckl & Moorman, 2007; Galbraith, 2005; Baines, et al., 2009), for example.

The conclusions of the period already highlight a considerable increase in the adoption of digitalization projects by banks, with a growing increase in the relevance of customer-focused service delivery.

4.5.3. Period from 2010 to 2025

Between 2010 and 2025, studies focused on the effect of customer-centric structure on long-term financial performance (Kindström & Kowalkowski, 2014; Lee et al., 2015). Studies on mobile banking in developing countries have also emerged (Mishra & Bisht, 2013). Studies have also focused on digital banking disruption (Wewege et al., 2020), as well as the emergence and prominence of fintechs (Pollari, 2016; Milian et al., 2019; Jorge et al., 2018; Tello-Gamarra et al., 2022; Grennan and Michaely, 2021). The research gaps of this period were answered using mixed methods, sometimes qualitative as case studies (Pollari, 2016; Milian et al., 2019; Jorge et al., 2018), sometimes quantitative (Grennan & Michaely, 2021), for example.

The conclusions of this period were marked by an exponential increase in the use of banking digitization systems, with the birth of digital banks without physical bank branches, offering the same services as traditional banks, where operations via application and website gained intense prominence, either due to the evolution of the technology involved, or due to the increasing security of banking systems, in the face of fraud attempts, a theme that was widely ventilated in the period.

5. Conclusion

This research is limited by the information contained in the databases, which were accessed between January 3 and February 4, 2025. The article is limited to product and customer centrism. Other themes and research topics are not part of this article and should be studied separately. Surveys are also limited to the reported period (1900-2025).

The review of the advanced literature by previous scholars in the discipline and the related citations served as the basis for the themes that emerged from the present article. Systematic study of the literature has identified an upward trend in customer centrism citations over the past two decades, indicating that the citation count could double in the next two decades.

By understanding customer-focused ideas through methodical evaluations of the literature, we can remove some of the confusion that has plagued leadership studies for more than a century and pave the way for further investigation. In addition, practice and examination will improve as practitioners and analysts collaborate to develop consensus opinions on these complex subjects. This paper will also increase the theoretical basis for subsequent actions and estimates and progress research in generally neglected regions. Global academics have contributed to the field, and product and customer centrism have gained popularity in the three four decades mostly. Future research in other disciplines, including databases and languages, is also invited.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.

References

[1] Ambrose, M. (1998). The Impact of Electronic Commerce on Financial Institutions. American Bankers Association. ABA Banking Journal, S12, 1-2.
[2] Baines, T., Lightfoot, H., Peppard, J., Johnson, M., Tiwari, A., Shehab, E. et al. (2009). Towards an Operations Strategy for Product‐Centric Servitization. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 29, 494-519.
https://doi.org/10.1108/01443570910953603
[3] Barrett, M., Davidson, E., Prabhu, J., & Vargo, S. L. (2015). Service Innovation in the Digital Age: Key Contributions and Future Directions. MIS Quarterly, 39, 135-154.
https://doi.org/10.25300/misq/2015/39:1.03
[4] Braun, T., Glänzel, W., & Schubert, A. (2006). A Hirsch-Type Index for Journals. Scientometrics, 69, 169-173.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-006-0147-4
[5] Brohman, M. K., & Copeland, D. G. (1999). Riverbank Financial: Changing the Role of Information Technology. Journal of Information Technology, 14, 287-293.
https://doi.org/10.1177/026839629901400308
[6] Carifio Jr, F., & Jahnke, M. (1998). Bank of America Case Study: The Information Currency Advantage.
[7] Chan, J. O. (2005). Toward a Unified View of Customer Relationship Management. Journal of American Academy of Business, 6, 32-38.
[8] Cheng, H., Clymer, J. W., Po-Han Chen, B., Sadeghirad, B., Ferko, N. C., Cameron, C. G. et al. (2018). Prolonged Operative Duration Is Associated with Complications: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Journal of Surgical Research, 229, 134-144.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2018.03.022
[9] Demirkan, H., Kauffman, R. J., Vayghan, J. A., Fill, H., Karagiannis, D., & Maglio, P. P. (2008). Service-Oriented Technology and Management: Perspectives on Research and Practice for the Coming Decade. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 7, 356-376.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.elerap.2008.07.002
[10] Denyer, D., & Tranfield, D. (2009). Producing a Systematic Review. In: The Sage Handbook of Organisational Research Methods (pp. 671-689). Sage.
[11] Dias, M. d. O., Lafraia, J., Schmitz, T., & Vieira, P. (2023). Systematic Literature Review on Negotiation & Conflict Management. European Journal of Theoretical and Applied Sciences, 1, 20-31.
https://doi.org/10.59324/ejtas.2023.1(3).03
[12] Dias, M. d. O., Pan, J., Vieira, P., & Pereira, L. J. D. (2022). From Plato to e-Leaders: The Evolution of Leadership Theories and Styles. Journal of Economics and Business, 5, 133-146.
https://doi.org/10.31014/aior.1992.05.02.420
[13] Dias, M., Pereira, L., Vieira, P., Barbosa, L., Quintão, H., & Lafraia, J. (2023a). Mediation & Dispute Board Resolution: A Systematic Literature Review. GPH-International Journal of Social Science and Humanities Research, 6, 21-32.
[14] Dias, M., Vieira, P., Pereira, L., Quintão, H., & Lafraia, J. (2023b). Leadership Theories: A Systematic Review Based on Bibliometric and Content Analysis. GPH-International Journal of Business Management, 6, 1-16.
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7937272
[15] Dias, M., Vivanco, L., & Teixeira, E. (2024). A Systematic Literature Review on Business Cycles and Microeconomics. International Journal of Applied Science, 7, 18-33.
[16] Galbraith, J. R. (2005). Designing the Customer-Centric Organization: A Guide to Strategy, Structure, and Process. John Wiley & Sons.
[17] Garfield, E. (2006). The History and Meaning of the Journal Impact Factor. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57, 3-8.
[18] Georghiou, L. (1995). Evaluation of Research: A Review of the Literature. Science and Public Policy, 22, 157-166.
[19] Goyal, D., & Kumar, N. (2020). Systematic Literature Review: A Conceptual Framework. Journal of Management and Organization, 26, 531-544.
[20] Grennan, J., & Michaely, R. (2021). Fintechs and the Market for Financial Analysis. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 56, 1877-1907.
https://doi.org/10.1017/s0022109020000721
[21] Hamel, G. (1998). The Challenge Today: Changing the Rules of the Game. Business Strategy Review, 9, 19-26.
https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8616.00062
[22] Hart, C. (2018). Doing a Literature Review: Releasing the Research Imagination. Sage.
[23] Harzing, A. W. (2007). Publish or Perish.
https://harzing.com/resources/publish-or-perish
[24] Heckl, D., & Moormann, J. (2007). How to Design Customer-Centric Business Processes in the Banking Industry. Journal of Financial Transformation, 21, 67-76.
[25] Jorge, R. R., Urich, L. G., Junger, A. P., de Andrade, A. A., & Facó, J. F. B. (2018). O ecossistema de Fintechs no Brasil. Revista de Casos e Consultoria, 9, e931-e931.
[26] Kindström, D., & Kowalkowski, C. (2014). Service Innovation in Product-Centric Firms: A Multidimensional Business Model Perspective. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 29, 96-111.
https://doi.org/10.1108/jbim-08-2013-0165
[27] Lee, J., Sridhar, S., Henderson, C. M., & Palmatier, R. W. (2015). Effect of Customer-Centric Structure on Long-Term Financial Performance. Marketing Science, 34, 250-268.
https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.2014.0878
[28] Levitt, B. (2014). Product Service Transformation in Product-Centric Firms. Doctoral Dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
[29] Lulaj, E., Dragusha, B., Hysa, E., & Voica, M. C. (2024). Synergizing Sustainability and Financial Prosperity: Unraveling the Structure of Business Profit Growth through Consumer-Centric Strategies—The Cases of Kosovo and Albania. International Journal of Financial Studies, 12, Article No. 35.
[30] Manral, L. (2016). The Customer-Centric Logic of Multi-Product Corporations. Journal of Strategy and Management, 9, 74-92.
https://doi.org/10.1108/jsma-05-2015-0036
[31] Marjanovic, O., & Murthy, V. (2016). From Product-Centric to Customer-Centric Services in a Financial Institution—Exploring the Organizational Challenges of the Transition Process. Information Systems Frontiers, 18, 479-497.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-015-9606-x
[32] Michel, S. (2014). 13. Financial Services and Innovation: A Customer-Centric Approach. In T. Harrison, & H. Estelami (Eds.), The Routledge Companion to Financial Services Marketing (pp. 191-203). Routledge.
[33] Milian, E. Z., Spinola, M. d. M., & Carvalho, M. M. d. (2019). Fintechs: A Literature Review and Research Agenda. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 34, Article ID: 100833.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.elerap.2019.100833
[34] Mishra, V., & Singh Bisht, S. (2013). Mobile Banking in a Developing Economy: A Customer-Centric Model for Policy Formulation. Telecommunications Policy, 37, 503-514.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2012.10.004
[35] Muzanarwo, P., Fah, B. C. Y., & Chen, T. K. (2020). The Data Driven Transformation of Zimbabwean Banks from Product Centric to Customer Service Delivery. International Journal of Pharmaceutical Research, 12, 855.
[36] Naseema, N., Akhtar, S., & Al Hinai, A. A. (2024). Disrupting Financial Services: A Case Study on Capital One’s Fintech Odyssey. In S. H. Jafar, et al. (Eds.), Harnessing Blockchain-Digital Twin Fusion for Sustainable Investments (pp. 363-383). IGI Global.
https://doi.org/10.4018/979-8-3693-1878-2.ch015
[37] Peppard, J. (2000). Customer Relationship Management (CRM) in Financial Services. European Management Journal, 18, 312-327.
https://doi.org/10.1016/s0263-2373(00)00013-x
[38] Pollari, I. (2016). The Rise of Fintech Opportunities and Challenges. Jassa, No. 3, 15-21.
[39] Prashar, S., Kumar, N., & Singh, M. (2020). Systematic Literature Review: A Methodological Framework. Journal of Business Research, 116, 253-262.
[40] Sanyaolu, T. O., Adeleke, A. G., Azubuko, C. F., & Osundare, O. S. (2024). Exploring Fintech Innovations and Their Potential to Transform the Future of Financial Services and Banking. International Journal of Scholarly Research in Science and Technology, 5, 54-72.
https://doi.org/10.56781/ijsrst.2024.5.1.0033
[41] Schmitz, T., & Dias, M. d. O. (2023). From Face-to-Face to Teleworking: A Literature Review on How Different Types of Work Affect Psychological Well-Being. British journal of Psychology Research, 11, 51-71.
https://doi.org/10.37745/bjpr.2013/vol11n2124
[42] Seufert, M., Egger, S., Slanina, M., Zinner, T., Hoßfeld, T., & Tran-Gia, P. (2014). A Survey on Quality of Experience of HTTP Adaptive Streaming. IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, 17, 469-492.
https://doi.org/10.1109/comst.2014.2360940
[43] Singh, S., & Walia, N. (2020). Momentum Investing: A Systematic Literature Review and Bibliometric Analysis. Management Review Quarterly, 72, 87-113.
[44] Smith, J., & Anderson, J. (2024). Customer Experience in Internet Banking: Enhancing Satisfaction and Loyalty Through User-Centric Design (No. 12230). EasyChair.
[45] Teixeira, E. A., Kallas, R. M., & Dias, M. d. O. (2024). Consumer Purchase Behavior: A Systematic Literature Review. British Journal of Multidisciplinary and Advanced Studies, 5, 121-131.
https://doi.org/10.37745/bjmas.2022.0472
[46] Tello-Gamarra, J., Campos-Teixeira, D., Longaray, A. A., Reis, J., & Hernani-Merino, M. (2022). Fintechs and Institutions: A Systematic Literature Review and Future Research Agenda. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research, 17, 722-750.
https://doi.org/10.3390/jtaer17020038
[47] Wewege, L., Lee, J., & Thomsett, M. C. (2020). Disruptions and Digital Banking Trends. Journal of Applied Finance and Banking, 10, 15-56.
[48] Wind, Y. (2001). The Challenge of “Customerization” in Financial Services. Communications of the ACM, 44, 39-44.
https://doi.org/10.1145/376134.376153
[49] Worthington, A. C. (1998). The Determinants of Non-Bank Financial Institution Efficiency: A Stochastic Cost Frontier Approach. Applied Financial Economics, 8, 279-287.
https://doi.org/10.1080/096031098333032
[50] Zahoor, N., & Al-Tabbaa, O. (2020). Inter-Organizational Collaboration and SMEs’ Innovation: A Systematic Review and Future Research Directions. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 36, Article ID: 101109.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scaman.2020.101109

Copyright © 2025 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.