To investigate how socially assistive robots shape caring practices and support well-being in dementia care settings, this study focuses on agencement—emergent configurations of humans, nonhuman actors, and discourses. Using practice-based action research, the authors introduced the companion robot Hiro in two Italian nursing homes over an 8-month period, involving 22 cognitively impaired residents, followed by a 1-year follow-up. Drawing on qualitative data from observations, interviews, and field notes, the study advances three key contributions, formalized through five propositions. First, caring constitutes a sociomaterial practice, emerging through relational, embodied engagements in which care recipients actively participate in shaping the care. Second, the operationalization of agencement in human–robot dynamics shows how Hiro mobilizes sensory experiences (touch, sound, and movement) to generate relational entanglements that transform caregiving roles and flows of affect. Third, a proposed framework of affect-based well-being, articulated across three interrelated sensory dimensions—psychological (sensory intimacy), physical (sensory responsiveness), and social (sensory bonding)—extends existing service research by capturing embodied, situated, and relational dimensions of well-being. For managers, the findings provide actionable insights for using companion robots to enhance care practices by supporting affect-based well-being, reinforcing relational ties, and enabling personalized, dignified sensory experiences in resource-constrained settings.
AndersonLaurelOstromAmy L. (2015), “Transformative Service Research: Advancing Our Knowledge about Service and Well-Being,” Journal of Service Research, 18 (3), 243–49.
2.
AzerJaylanAlexanderMatthew (2024), “Human-Machine Engagement (HME): Conceptualization, Typology of Forms, Antecedents, and Consequences,” Journal of Service Research, 28 (1), 112–30.
3.
BagozziRichard P.MaheshGopinathNyerPrashanth U. (1999), “The Role of Emotions in Marketing,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 27 (2), 184–206.
4.
BaradKaren (2003), “Posthumanist Performativity: Toward an Understanding of How Matter Comes to Matter,” Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 28 (3), 801–31.
BelkRussell (2022), “Artificial Emotions and Love and Sex Doll Service Workers,” Journal of Service Research, 25 (4), 521–36.
7.
BerryLeonard L.YadavManjit S.HoleMichael K. (2024), “Reclaiming Healthcare’s Healing Mission for a Sustainable Future,” Journal of Service Research, 27 (1), 6–27.
8.
BoykinAnne (2001), Nursing as Caring: A Model for Transforming Practice. Boston: Jones & Bartlett Learning.
9.
BourdieuPierre (1977), Outline of a Theory of Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
10.
BradburyHilaryDivechaSimon (2020), “Action Methods for Faster Transformation: Relationality in Action,” Action Research, 18 (3), 273–81.
11.
BraidottiRosi (2013), Metamorphoses: Towards a Materialist Theory of Becoming. Cambridge: John Wiley & Sons.
12.
ČaićMartinaOdekerken-SchroderGabyMahrDominik (2018), “Service Robots: Value Co-Creation and Co-Destruction in Elderly Care Networks,” Journal of Service Management, 29 (2), 178–205.
13.
ChiangAi-HsuanChouSzu-Yu (2023), “Exploring Robot Service Quality Priorities for Different Levels of Intimacy with Service,” Service Business, 17 (4), 913–35.
14.
CruiseCera E.LashewiczBonnie M. (2022), “Dementia and Dignity of Identity: A Qualitative Evidence Synthesis,” Dementia, 21 (4), 1233–49.
15.
DanaherTracey S.DanaherPeter J.SweeneyJillian C.McColl-KennedyJanet R. (2024), “Dynamic Customer Value Cocreation in Healthcare,” Journal of Service Research, 27 (2), 177–93.
16.
DeFalcoAmelia (2020), “Towards a Theory of Posthuman Care: Real Humans and Caring Robots,” Body & Society, 26 (3), 31–60.
17.
DeFalcoAmeliaDolezalLuna (2023), “What Is Affective Technotouch (and Why Does It Matter)?” The Senses and Society, 18 (2), 85–91.
18.
DeleuzeGillesGuattariFélix (1987), A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
19.
FilieriRaffaeleLinZhibinLiYuleiLuXiaoqianWangXingwei (2022), “Customer Emotions in Service Robot Encounters: A Hybrid Machine-Human Intelligence Approach,” Journal of Service Research, 25, 614–29.
20.
GeGloria L.SchleimerStephanie C. (2023), “Robotic Technologies and Well-Being for Older Adults Living at Home,” Journal of Services Marketing, 37 (3), 340–50.
21.
GherardiSilvia (2016), “To Start Practice-Theorizing Anew: The Contribution of the Concepts of Agencement and Formativeness,” Organization, 23 (5), 680–98.
22.
GherardiSilviaRodeschiniGiulia (2016), “Caring as a Collective Knowledgeable Doing: About Concern and Being Concerned,” Management Learning, 47 (3), 266–84.
23.
GioiaDennis A.CorleyKevin G.HamiltonAimee L. (2013), “Seeking Qualitative Rigor in Inductive Research: Notes on the Gioia Methodology,” Organizational Research Methods, 16 (1), 15–31.
24.
GreggMelissaSeigworthGregory J. (2010). The Affect Theory Reader. Durham: Duke University Press.
25.
GuillemotSamuelDyenMargotTamaroAnnick (2022), “Vital Service Captivity: Coping Strategies and Identity Negotiation,” Journal of Service Research25 (1), 66–85.
26.
HuangMing-HuiRustRoland T. (2023), “The Caring Machine: Feeling AI for Customer Care,” Journal of Marketing, 88 (5), 1–23.
27.
KabadayiSertanHuKejiaLeeYunaHanksLydiaWalsmanMatthewDobrzykowskiDavid (2020), “Fostering Older Adult Care Experiences to Maximize Well-Being Outcomes: A Conceptual Framework,” Journal of Service Management, 31 (5), 953–77.
28.
KhaksarSeyed M. S.KhoslaRajivChuMei T.ShahmehrFatemeh S. (2016), “Service Innovation Using Social Robots to Reduce Social Vulnerability among Older People in Residential Care Facilities,” Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 113, 438–53.
29.
KipnisEvaMcLeayFraserGrimesAnthonyde SailleSteviennaPotterStephen (2022), “Service Robots in Long-Term Care: A Consumer-Centric View,” Journal of Service Research, 25 (4), 667–85.
30.
LangleyAnn. (1999), “Strategies for Theorizing from Process Data,” Academy of Management Review, 24 (4), 691–710.
31.
LeeByounggwanKwonOhkyunLeeInseongKimJinwoo (2017), “Companionship with Smart Home Devices: The Impact of Social Connectedness and Interaction Types on Perceived Social Support and Companionship in Smart Homes,” Computers in Human Behavior, 75, 922–34.
32.
LeinoHenna M.HurmerintaLeilaSandbergBirgitta (2021), “Balancing Service Inclusion for Primary and Secondary Customers Experiencing Vulnerabilities,” Journal of Services Marketing, 35 (6), 692–705.
33.
MeleCristinaMarzulloMarialuisaDi BernardoIreneRusso SpenaTizianaMassiRobertaLa SalandraAlessandraCialabriniStefania (2022), “A Smart Tech Lever to Augment Caregivers' Touch and Foster Vulnerable Patient Engagement and Well-Being,” Journal of Service Theory and Practice, 32 (1), 52–74.
34.
MeleCristinaRusso SpenaTiziana (2025), “Agencement of Onlife and Phygital: Smart Tech–Enabled Value Co-Creation Practices,” Journal of Service Management, 36 (2), 217–40.
35.
MieleFrancescoGherardiSilvia (2025), “Atmospheres of Care, Coercion, and Containment: An Affective Ethnography,” Management Learning, 0 (0), 1–22.
36.
AnnemarieMolMoserIngunnPolsJeannette (Eds.) (2010), Care in Practice: On Tinkering in Clinics, Homes, and Farms. Bielefeld: Transcript Verlag.
37.
Odekerken-SchröderGabyMeleCristinaRusso SpenaTizianaMahrDominikRuggieroAndrea (2020), “Mitigating Loneliness with Companion Robots in the COVID-19 Pandemic and Beyond: An Integrative Framework and Research Agenda,” Journal of Service Management, 31 (6), 1149–62.
38.
OrlikowskiWanda J. (2007), “Sociomaterial Practices: Exploring Technology at Work,” Organization Studies, 28 (9), 1435–48.
39.
ParviainenJaanaPirhonenJari P. (2017), “Vulnerable Bodies in Human–Robot Interactions: Embodiment as Ethical Issue in Robot Care for the Elderly,” Transformations, 29, 104–15.
40.
PatersonMark (2023), “Social Robots and the Futures of Affective Touch,” The Senses and Society, 18 (2), 110–25.
41.
PerryChadGummessonEvert (2004), “Action Research in Marketing,” European Journal of Marketing, 38 (3/4), 310–20.
42.
PeterReasonBradburyHilary (Eds.). (2008). Handbook of Action Research: Participative Inquiry and Practice. London: Sage.
43.
RamaswamyVenkatOzcanKerimcan (2018), “What Is Co-Creation? An Interactional Creation Framework and its Implications for Value Creation,” Journal of Business Research, 84, 196–205.
RodriquezJason (2011). “‘It’s a Dignity Thing’: Nursing Home Care Workers’ Use of Emotions,” in Sociological Forum. Blackwell Publishing Ltd, 265–86.
46.
RosenbaumMark S.Seger-GuttmannTaliGiraldoMario (2017), “Commentary: Vulnerable Consumers in Service Settings,” Journal of Services Marketing, 31 (4/5), 309–312.
47.
Russo SpenaTizianaMeleCristinaNuutinenMaaria (2017), Innovating in Practice. Cham: Springer International Publishing.
48.
SætraHenrik S. (2020), “The Foundations of a Policy for the Use of Social Robots in Care,” Technology in Society, 63, 101383.
49.
SætreAlf S.Van de VenAndrew (2021), “Generating Theory by Abduction,” Academy of Management Review, 46 (4), 684–701.
50.
ScottSusan V.OrlikowskiWanda J. (2014), “Entanglements in Practice,” MIS Quarterly, 38 (3), 873–94.
51.
ShanksIlanaScottMaura L.MendeMartinvan DoornJennyGrewalDhruv (2024), “Cobotic Service Teams and Power Dynamics: Understanding and Mitigating Unintended Consequences of Human-Robot Collaboration in Healthcare Services,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 53, 1–27.
52.
SharkeyAmanda (2014), “Robots and Human Dignity: A Consideration of the Effects of Robot Care on the Dignity of Older People,” Ethics and Information Technology, 16, 63–75.
53.
SkålénPer (2024), “A Framework of Services-as-Practices,” Journal of Service Research, 1–18.
54.
GertSpaargarenWeeninkDonLamersMachiel (Eds.) (2016), Practice Theory and Research: Exploring the Dynamics of Social Life. Milton Park: Routledge.
55.
SumiokaH.YamatoN.ShiomiM.IshiguroH. (2021), “A Minimal Design of a Human Infant Presence: A Case Study Toward Interactive Doll Therapy for Older Adults with Dementia.” Front Robot AI, 8, 633378.
56.
TwiggJulia (2000), “Carework as a Form of Bodywork,” Ageing & Society, 20 (4), 389–411.
57.
van DoornJennyMendeMartinNobleStephanie M.HullandJohnOstromAmy L.GrewalDhruvPetersenAndrew J. (2017), “Domo Arigato Mr. Roboto: Emergence of Automated Social Presence in Organizational Frontlines and Customers’ Service Experiences,” Journal of Service Research, 20 (1), 43–58.
58.
VerleyeKatrienHolvoetSofie (2024), “Organizational Practices to Co-Create Value with Family Members Engaged in Service Journeys of their Loved Ones,” Journal of Service Theory and Practice, 34 (2), 319–40.
59.
XiaoLiKumarV. (2021), “Robotics for Customer Service: A Useful Complement or an Ultimate Substitute?” Journal of Service Research, 24 (1), 9–29.
60.
WatsonDavidClarkLee A.TellegenAuke (1988), “Development and Validation of Brief Measures of Positive and Negative Affect: The PANAS Scales,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54 (6), 1063.
61.
WeinerMyron F.Martin-CookKristinSvetlikDoris A.SaineKathleenFosterBarbaraFontaineCatherine S. (2000), “The Quality of Life in Late-Stage Dementia Scale,” Journal of the American Medical Directors Association, 1 (3), 114–6.
62.
WirtzJochenPattersonPaul G.KunzWerner H.GruberThorstenNhat LuVinhPaluchStefanieMartinsAntje (2018), “Brave New World: Service Robots in the Frontline,” Journal of Service Management, 29 (5), 907–31.
63.
YamatoN.SumiokaH.IshiguroH.ShiomiM.KohdaY. (2023), “Technology Acceptance Models from Different Viewpoints of Caregiver, Receiver, and Care Facility Administrator: Lessons from Long-Term Implementation Using Baby-Like Interactive Robot for Nursing Home Residents with Dementia,” Journal of Technology in Human Services, 41 (4), 296–321.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
