Conference PaperPDF Available

Building up a framework for Service Design research

Authors:

Abstract

This paper outlines the evolution of Service Design from its origin within Interaction Design to its current state of development, which is strongly affected by the growing complexity and collaborative nature of service projects and social demands. The paper aims to provide a platform to ground the current state of the discipline, to offer a critique of what has been achieved to date, and to outline the main research questions that could drive Service Design Research in the near future.
415
8th European Academy Of Design Conference - 1st, 2nd & 3rd April 2009, The Robert Gordon University, Aberdeen, Scotland
BUILDING UP A FRAMEWORK FOR SERVICE DESIGN RESEARCH
Daniela SANGIORGI
ImaginationLancaster, Lancaster University
ABSTRACT
This paper outlines the evolution of Service Design from its origin within Interaction Design to its current
state of development, which is strongly affected by the growing complexity and collaborative nature of
service projects and social demands. The paper aims to provide a platform to ground the current state
of the discipline, to offer a critique of what has been achieved to date, and to outline the main research
questions that could drive Service Design Research in the near future.
Keywords: Service Design, Service Design research
1 INTRODUCTION
While Service Design is now recognised in much of the design community and service-design related
initiatives, events and research projects are growing in number, any attempt to precisely dene what
Service Design is and what it does are more difcult tasks. Design practice is quickly evolving -
stretching the borders and questioning the underlying bases of this emerging specialisation. This paper
stresses the importance of, and provides a rst platform to start a reection on, Service Design. We need
to understand where Service Design comes from, where we have been in the last two decades and where
we are now to better drive future research directions and make them meaningful to the current challenges
design is dealing with.
Without any intent to be exhaustive, this paper outlines the evolution of Service Design from its original
connection with the Interaction Design discipline and practice to its current state, which is strongly
inuenced by the growing of complexity and collaborative nature of service projects and society
demands. The analogy between designing ‘interactions’ (user - device interface) and designing ‘service
interactions’ or ‘service encounters’ (user – service interface) is at the core of Service Design’s identity
and practice. What has been gradually changing in the last decade is the context and nature of the
interactions that Service Design has been dealing with: from one-to-one to many-to-many interactions;
from sequential to open-ended interactions (Winhall, 2004); from within to amongst organisations.
Buchanan (1994) talks about ‘third order’ and ‘fourth order’ design to represent this recent need to move
where strategic decisions are made in order to be in a position to inuence future directions.
While ‘scaling up’, Service Design is also ‘reaching out’ and ‘deepening in’; this means that when both
the complexity of challenges and the objects of design become larger, design needs to collaborate with a
wider number of stakeholders and professions, but also to work ‘within’ service organisations and users
communities to provide tools and modes to deal with change and complexity on a daily basis.
The following sections will briey track this evolution, providing a platform to critique what has been
achieved to date, and what are the main research questions that could drive Service Design Research in
the near future.
2 DESIGNING SERVICE INTERACTIONS
As Richard Buchanan has asserted “design problems are ‘indeterminate’ and ‘wicked’ because design has
no special subject matter of its own apart from what a designer conceives it to be” (Buchanan, 1992: 16).
This means that the object and the practice of design depend more on what designers perceive design is,
than from a stable denition elaborated by a scientic community.
Building on this lack of ‘determination’ Service Design emerged as a contribution to a changing context
EAD09/037
416
8th European Academy Of Design Conference - 1st, 2nd & 3rd April 2009, The Robert Gordon University, Aberdeen, Scotland
and to what a certain group of informed thinkers (notably Morello, 1991; Hollins, 1991; Manzini, 1993;
Erlhoff et al., 1997; Pacenti, 1998) started to perceive and describe as a new design agenda. In the ‘90s
the growing economic role of the service sector in most of the developed economies was in a clear
contrast to the practice and culture of design, which still focused on to the physical and tangible output of
the traditional industrial sectors.
During this rst decade Service Design research has been mainly dedicated to articulating and
legitimating why design could and should work on services. Only with the introduction of the Interaction
Paradigm, Service Design has started to build its own identity and legitimacy to work in this area. The
Interaction Paradigm in Service Design refers to the set of concepts, values and tools that derive from the
interpretation of services and of Service Design, starting from the area and the moments of interaction
between the user and the supply system (Sangiorgi, 2004). This area and the moments of interaction have
been referred to in different ways, such as: service interface, service encounters, touch-points, moments of
truth, etc.
The perspective that looks at services from the interaction point of view, is different from the one that
was trying to dene services as ‘products’ (Mager, 2004; Hollins, 1991) and therefore as objects of a
design process. Hollins and Mager, suggesting that services should be designed with the same attention to
‘products’ (see concept of ‘total design’), place the focus on the process (design management), with less
emphasis on the specicity of services and therefore of design contribution.
By contrast, the introduction of the interaction perspective has enabled a deeper understanding of
the nature of services and of Service Design, opening up a liaison with the schools, research and
methodology of Interaction Design. This perspective was proposed for the rst time in the PhD research
by Elena Pacenti (1998) who dened Service Design as the design of the area, ambit, and scene where
the interactions between the service and the user take place. She made an analogy between the design
of advanced interactive devices and the design of services, suggesting a shift from the interpretation of
services as complex organisations to one of services as complex interfaces to the user. This contribution
helped to position Service Design (focused on the service interface) between Service Management
(focused on service organisation) and Service Marketing (focused on service offering and market).
The Service Interface is the tangible and visible part of a service that a user can experience, beyond the
so-called ‘line of visibility’. It is made up of people, products, information and environments that will
support the user experience. Adopting a theatre metaphor, Service Designers are described as ‘directors’
that “manage the integrated and coherent project of all [these] elements that determine the quality of
interaction” (Pacenti, 1998: 123). Livework (London-based service design studio) describes Service
Design as the “design for experiences that reach people through many different touch-points, and that
happen over time”. Service Design therefore iteratively moves from designing intangible experiences to
designing the tangible elements that enable the desired experiences to occur in a coherent way.
This correlation and analogy between Interaction Design and Service Design has been further developed
both on a methodological and practical way. As Holmlid (2007) points out “the service perspectives
become a challenge to interaction design, and technology usage becomes a challenge to service design”.
A set of design tools have been then adopted and adapted mainly from interaction design disciplines
and practices, including such things as drama, scenarios, service interface analysis (Mager, 2004),
storyboards, ow charts, storytelling (Shelley, 2006), use case (Morelli and Tollestrup, 2007), scripts,
personas, role play, experience prototypes, etc. These tools and methods support the design practice and
at the same time contribute to the visualisation and testing of the service experience and interface - from a
general description to detailed implementation specications.
It should also be recognised that, so far, little attention and research has been dedicated to evaluating
what determines the quality of service interaction and how design contributes to this quality as well as to
EAD09/037
417
8th European Academy Of Design Conference - 1st, 2nd & 3rd April 2009, The Robert Gordon University, Aberdeen, Scotland
its innovation. As Hoepy and Parker have said in “Journey to the interface” (2006) “being able to assess
the quality of the experiences is as important as knowing the efciency of the operations”. In addition
the so-called “service relationship” or “delivery” innovation (Green et al., 2001), which is where design
mostly intervenes, is one of the most diffuse kind of innovation in the service sector. However, because
of the interactivity dimension of services, which means that services are co-produced with users and are
often highly bespoke or customised, innovations are often made ‘on the y’ and are, therefore, difcult
to reproduce and measure. For this reason, new modes to evaluate innovation, mixing quantitative with
qualitative measures, are under investigation (http://www.innovationindex.org.uk). Service Design
scientic and professional community should participate to this ongoing discussion: a new interpretative
framework is required to depict and explore a new theory of service innovation that merges contemporary
innovation theory (that is more focused on the process/product dichotomy) with the contributions and
models of the user-design driven approach (Maffei et al., 2005).
3 SCALING UP AND REACHING OUT
The rst evolutions of the interaction paradigm have focussed mainly on the acknowledgment that the
design of service interactions cannot be separated from the overall service system and organisation; nor
can it be separated from the user context. Service interactions do not occur in a vacuum, they are highly
inuenced by the specicity of the situation. In the same way Interaction Design has developed studies
and theories to contextualise and locate interactions within wider systems and practices (Bødker, 2008),
Service Design has explored the contextual and systemic dimension of services in different ways and
adopted different theories in order to build conceptual models and theoretical frameworks that support
designers. These models and frameworks enable the designer to observe, understand and visualise
complex social systems of service organisations.
One research project has explored the application of Activity Theory to the analysis and design of services
(Sangiorgi, 2004; Sangiorgi and Clark, 2004). In a similar way to Interaction Design (Kaptelinin and
Nardi, 2006), Activity Theory has provided a framework to go beyond one-to-one (user-service interface)
and sequential interaction models (service scripts) to include wider systems of action and interactions.
In this framework, service encounters are described as mediated by the situated instrumental (service
evidences) and social (people, rules and roles) conditions (the service interface), but are also located in
the wider Activity Systems to which each service participant belongs. The benet of this approach is that
the encounters and potential conicts among service participants can be better understood when their
behaviour is situated within their wider context of action; the success of designing good services can be
increased by synchronizing the perspectives, goals and existing practices of service participants.
The same concern about synchronising multiple perspectives in Service Design, appears when describing
services as the result of a co-production among different stakeholders. Ramirez and Mannervick (2008)
talk about the shift from the design of ‘moments of truth’ to the design of ‘Value Systems’, from
‘Interaction Design’ to ‘Navigation and Enclave Design’. The main idea is to co-produce value for and
with users and a wider system of actors, the so-called ‘network of scope’. This approach is similar to
the one proposed by the Product Service System (PSS) literature, when talking about Solution Oriented
Partnerships (Jegou et al., 2004). PSS are described as the result of a “social construction, based on
‘attraction forces’ (such as goals, expected results and problem-solving criteria) that catalyse the
participation of several partners” (Morelli, 2006: 2). In particular when “dealing with complex challenges
of sustainable development, the designer can become a connector between multiple stakeholders, teasing
out issues and nding common values” (Brass and Bowden, 2008).
The need for design to work on a systemic level has increased the number of tools generated with the
scope of mapping out the potential system of actors, facilitating a conversation and co-designing and
visualising possible and desirable scenarios. Tools such as the ‘Activity System map’ (Sangiorgi, 2004),
the ‘service ecology’, the ‘map of interaction’ (Morelli, 2006), the ‘system organisation map’ or the
‘motivation matrix’ (Jegou et al., 2006) are part of these research studies.
EAD09/037
418
8th European Academy Of Design Conference - 1st, 2nd & 3rd April 2009, The Robert Gordon University, Aberdeen, Scotland
4 DEEPENING IN
Service Design is also ‘deepening in’, meaning that, while scaling up the object of intervention, Service
Design is also starting to work more closely with and within organisations and user communities. This
seems to reect a general shift in the perception of ‘creativity’ itself as no longer the province of a few
specialisations, but as a capacity that permeates every part of modern life and draws upon the knowledge
and skills present in every organisation (Cox, 2005). Working with and within service organisations and
user communities generally aims at making people aware and able to use their existing creativity to deal
with change and complexity and co-develop innovative solutions.
The European research project EMUDE has investigated this kind of creativity, identifying examples
of ‘social innovation’ and exploring ways design could support and empower this emerging approach
to sustainable solutions. Manzini talks about the need to develop ‘enabling solutions, i.e. systems
that provide cognitive, technical and organisational instruments so as to enable individuals and/or
communities to achieve a result, using their skills and abilities to the best advantage and, at the same
time, to regenerate the quality of living contexts, in which they happen to live’ (Manzini, 2007: 6).
A similar consideration was developed by the RED team at the Design Council (now Participle) as a
reection on pilot projects such as Activmob (Vanstone and Winhall, 2006); the co-developed service
was actually a platform, with a set of rules and tools to ‘enable’ people to create their own way to keep
themselves active and healthy. In a key paper RED talks about ‘Transformation Design’ (Burns et al.,
2004) as a new discipline aiming at generating lasting changes in terms of their ability to change and spur
innovation in communities and organisations for socially progressive ends. Dott07 initiative has been the
consequent development of these researches, which worked with and within communities in the North
East of England to explore new and more sustainable ways of carrying out familiar, daily-life activities.
As for the other projects, the focus was on participatory approaches to design, using existing capacities,
resources and relationships as inspiration and sources for design.
The call for ‘creativity’ is also particularly strong within the businesses and public sectors. The latest
innovation studies on services highlight the need to create a permanent innovation culture within
organisations. Instead of focusing on single innovation projects, leaders are called to focus on building
innovation programmes (Tekes, 2008). On a professional level, this call has already had signicant
answers by service design studios such as Enginegroup with the design of a ‘social innovation lab’
for Kent County Council or as Thinkpublic that co-developed with staff from Birmingham North and
East NHS Primary Care Trust a prototype for a ‘Clinic to Go’, a portable carry kit containing all the
information required to set up a community clinic.
When the object of design becomes the way organisations conceive and redesign their own services,
Service Design needs to become more familiar with the dynamics and issues of organisational change.
Junginger (2007) suggests that if designers know about the different ways organisations change they
will be able to reect on their own design efforts: “the ability to assess their own work in the context of
organizational change allows designers to take on ever more important roles within the organization”.
Considering a ‘transformational change’ as the one that deeply affects an organization’s values and beliefs
(Rousseau, 1995 cited in Junginger 2007), the main question is how and when Service Design does have a
‘transformative’ effect on service organisations and how this can be evaluated.
5 CONCLUSIONS
This paper has briey described some of the main areas where Service Design is currently working on
and that represent the main ambit of Service Design driven innovation (Sangiorgi and Pacenti, 2008).
Although the number of initiatives and practitioners are starting to grow in this eld, there remains a lack
of theory. Furthermore, the development of the discipline seems to be mainly driven by and through a
reection on what practitioners do. This results in a strong emphasis on methodologies, with less focus
on the development of foundational theoretical frameworks. As a result Service Design currently lacks
a strong sense of research direction, which is reected by the limited number of (academic) publications
EAD09/037
419
8th European Academy Of Design Conference - 1st, 2nd & 3rd April 2009, The Robert Gordon University, Aberdeen, Scotland
in this area. Here, the author has provided an overview of the main areas in which Service Design is
operating - which could be used as a basis for reecting on where to develop research directions in
Service Design.
The three areas of practice and investigation outlined above can be summarised as Interactions,
Complexity and Transformation. In turn, these could correspond to three main research areas that warrant
more detailed investigations:
1) Interactions: what is ‘quality’ in service interactions and how it can be designed and/or evaluated,
2) Complexity: what are the qualities and dynamics of ‘systems’ and what is the scale and mode of
intervention of Service Design
3) Transformation: how and when Service Design has a ‘transformative’ impact on service organisations
and user communities.
Service Design research is in its infancy. At this point in its development it has the opportunity and
responsibility to 1) investigate the above areas 2) relate them to existing knowledge and experience
developed in other similar Design Research areas such as Interaction Design, Participatory Design,
Experience Design and System Design 3) explore these emerging areas in collaboration with other
disciplines and theoretical frameworks that could support and enrich the practice and theory of Service
Design, such as Behavioural Science, Organisational Theory, Innovation Studies, Science and Technology
Studies, etc..
REFERENCES
BRASS, C. and BOWDEN F., (2008). Design for Social and Environmental Enterprise. Design at the Service of
Social Businesses, Changing the Change conference proceedings, Torino
BØDKER, S. and SUNDBLAD, Y., 2008. Usability and interaction design - new challenges for the
Scandinavian tradition, Behaviour & Information Technology, 27:4, 293 — 300
BUCHANAN, R., 1992. Wicked Problems in Design Thinking. Design Issues, Vol. 8, No. 2., pp. 5-21.
BUCHANAN, R., 1995. Branzi’s Dilemma. In P. Tahkokallio and S. Vihma, Ed. Design – Pleasure or
Responsibility? Helsinki: University of Art and Design, UIAH.
BURNS C., COTTAM H., VANSTONE C, and WINHALL J., 2006. Transformation design. RED paper 02, Design
Council, London
COX, G., (2005). Cox Review of Creativity in Business: building on the UK’s strengths, HM Treasury. Available at:
http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/cox_review_creativity_business.htm
ERLHOFF, M., MAGER, B., and MANZINI E., 1997. Dienstleistung braucht Design, Professioneller Produkt- und
Markenauftritt für Serviceanbieter. Herausgeber: Hermann Luchterhand Verlag GmbEVENSON, S. 2006. Directed
Storytelling: Interpreting Experience for Design. In A. Bennett and S. Heller, Ed. Design Studies: Theory and
Research in Graphic Design. Princeton Architectural Press
GREEN, L., HOWELL J., and MILES I., 2001. Services and Innovation: Dynamics of Service Innovation in the
European Union, PREST/CRI, University of Manchester & UMIST
HOLLINS, G. and HOLLINS, B., 1991. Total design: managing the design process in the service sector. London:
Pitman
HOLMLID, S. (2007). Interaction design and service design: Expanding a comparison of design disciplines. Nordes.
KAPTELININ, V. and NARDI, B. A., 2006. Acting with Technology: Activity Theory and Interaction Design, MIT
JEGOU F., MANZINI E. and MERONI A., 2004. Solution oriented partnerships as models of network of advanced
industrialisation to build value in specic contexts. In SusProNet Conference: Product Service Systems: Practical
Value. Brussels, Delft, The Netherlands: TNO-STB
JUNGINGER, S., 2007. Designing Change and Changing By Design: Thoughts on Drifters, Accommodators and
Transformers. DRS Wonderground conference, Lisbon
MAFFEI S., MAGER B. and SANGIORGI D., 2005. Innovation through Service Design. From Research and Theory
to a Network of Practice. A users’ driven perspective. Joining Forces Conference, 21-23 September, Helsinki
MANZINI, E., 1993. Il Design dei Servizi. La progettazione del prodotto-servizio. Design Management, 4,
pp. 7-12
MANZINI E., 2007. Design research for sustainable social innovation in: Michel R., Ed. Design Research Now:
Essays and Selected Projects, Birkhäuser Basel
MAGER B., 2004. Service Design. A review. Köln: Köln International School of Design
MORELLI, N., 2006. Developing new product service systems (PSS): methodologies and operational tools. Journal
of Cleaner Production, 14(17), pp. 1495-1501
MORELLI, N. and TOLLESTRUP C., 2007. New representation techniques for designing in a systemic perspective.
EAD09/037
420
8th European Academy Of Design Conference - 1st, 2nd & 3rd April 2009, The Robert Gordon University, Aberdeen, Scotland
Design Inquiries, May 27-30 2007, Stockholm, Sweden
MORELLO, A., 1991. Design e mercato dei prodotti e dei Servizi. Document for the PhD in Industrial Design,
Milano: Politecnico di Milano, 11 December 1991
PACENTI, E., 1998. Il progetto dell’interazione nei servizi. Un contributo al tema della progettazione dei servizi.
PhD thesis in Industrial Design, Politecnico di Milano
PARKER, S. and J. HOEPY, 2006. The Journey to the Interface. How public service design can connect users to
reform. London: Demos
RAMIREZ R. and MANNERVICK U., 2008. Designing Value-creating Systems. In L. Kimbell and V. P. Seidel, ed.
Designing for Services – Multidisciplinary perspectives: Proceedings from the Exploratory Project on Designing for
Services in Science and technology-based Enterprises. Oxford: University of Oxford
SANGIORGI, D., 2004. Il Design dei servizi come Design dei Sistemi di Attività. La Teoria dell’Attività applicata
alla progettazione dei servizi. PHD in Industrial Design in Industrial Design, Politecnico di Milano
SANGIORGI, D. and CLARK, B., 2004. Toward a participatory design approach to service design. In Artful
Integration. Interweaving Media, Materials and Practices, Participatory Design Conference, Toronto, 27-31 July
SANGIORGI, D. and PACENTI, E., 2008. Emerging practices of Service Design driven innovation, Service Design
Network Conference, Amsterdam: 24-26 November
TEKES, 2007. Seizing the White Space: Innovative Service Concepts in the United States. Technology Review 205
VANSTONE, C. and WINHALL, J., 2006. RED Design Notes 01. Activmobs, Design Council
WINHALL, J., 2004. Design notes on open health. Design Council
Corresponding Author Contact Information
1Dr Daniela SANGIORGI
ImaginationLancaster, Lancaster University
The Roundhouse
Lancaster University
Bailrigg, Lancaster
LA1 4YW, UK
d.sangiorgi@lancaster.ac.uk
0044 (0)1524 592982
www.imagination.lancaster.ac.uk
EAD09/037
... Service design is described as a holistic, collaborative, and human-centered approach that includes strategic aspects [35][36][37][38]. Sangiorgi [16] identifies three areas for service design evolution: interactions, complexity and transformation. From this perspective, service design as a strategic approach is applied to urban contexts by incorporating the complexity of sustainable transitions [39], including organizational, social, and technological aspects, along with qualitative components concerning users' needs and how they interact with providers and their context [40]. ...
... Design, by its nature, is a future-oriented approach [69,70], and it aims to resolve the most challenging problems that require designers to have a holistic mindset [27] and the ability to manage the human-centered dimension and multi-stakeholder design processes. The transformative perspective of service design [13][14][15][16] entails envisioning collaborative actions on a larger scale where everyone can design [30], where the object of design shifts from product to service, to organizational level, to social transformation [25,71]. In this collaborative transformation scenario, imagining the future could help citizens, organizations and institutions reflect on complex challenges and long-term perspectives to inform the current situation [72,73]. ...
Article
Full-text available
Cities provide a privileged context for observing environmental, social, political, and economic changes. They offer great opportunities for experimentation, often becoming laboratories for innovative practices in different fields of research. This article describes how Service Design can concretely contribute to promoting sustainable and inclusive services at the city level by adopting participatory, collaborative, and multi-stakeholder processes. In particular, the article analyses, through a literature review, the evolution of service design applied to complex and large-scale systems, identifying in the recent conceptualization of service ecosystem design the framework for designing sustainable and inclusive solutions in urban contexts. Two design studies were developed through a collaborative design process to link theory and practice. Three examples of service concepts are described as experiments in transformative service design practices that incorporate systems thinking. The article explains how service designers can deal with complex and large-scale transformations in terms of sustainable urban services and outlines a service design process and some design and research implications related to the ability to adapt to uncertainty and incorporate complexity as design elements.
... show that an Islamic banking service is co-created by multiple service creators through collaboration since IFMs provide little knowledge related to this aspect of the banking practice (Sangiorgi, 2009). We, therefore, theoretically and empirically investigate who or what parties participate in the creation of holistic Islamic banking service and also how each party integrates its role (s) with others to enable the service creation process. ...
Article
Full-text available
Ijarah is a contract for the transfer of usufructuary rights over goods or services, through payment of rental wages, without being followed by a transfer of ownership of the goods themselves. The context of ijarah in Islamic banking is a lease contract in which a bank or financial institution leases equipment to one of its customers based on a definite predetermined cost. The research method is qualitative with a comparative study approach. Data collection techniques include observation, documentation, and deep interviews. The object of this research was carried out in the Yogyakarta area. The findings of the ijarah case presented in this study indicate that the services created jointly by customers, service organizations (Islamic banks), and assisting parties divide their roles into sub-roles assigned to individuals. This research provides a basic understanding of the development of a sharia service model, which can complement the current IFM to holistically capture both economic transactions and service elements, which are currently prevailing in the Islamic banking market.
... SD is an approach with a very clear framework, and its process emphasizes practical methods and tools (Sangiorgi, 2009). On the other side, there is no fixed framework, methods, techniques, and tools for SPD, but a variety of methods and techniques are being adjusted and adapted according to different contexts, technologies, perspectives, and audiences (Auger, 2013). ...
Conference Paper
Full-text available
Social exclusion needs to be studied from a comprehensive and exploratory perspective as a complex and systemic social problem, and there is an urgent need to promote social transformation towards an inclusive society. Over the past decade, Speculative Design has shown great potential as a critical approach to exploring the future and dealing with social issues. Also, there has been growing discussion about the approaches and applications of Service Design and Systemic Design to social issues and complex system problems. Complexity is a keyword in common for coping with social transformation and these three approaches. Further, to reach an inclusive society, designers have to face complex systems and wicked problems at different scales, from government, organizations, and communities to final users, even including a non-human perspective. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to build a more comprehensive understanding of Speculative Design, Service Design, and Systemic De-sign themselves and the relationships between them by drawing together discussions from existing literature. This paper aims to support the startup of new research exploring whether integrating these three design approaches can support the systemic inclusive social transformation.
... The past 50 years have seen a change in how the role of design is perceived by business and society, recognizing it as an effective way of thinking, working, and solving problems (Voûte, Stappers, Giaccardi, Mooij, & Boeijen, 2020). This approach to design has enlarged the complexity of the challenges designers face (Sangiorgi, 2009), as the object of design transforms into a process aimed at achieving results, where "design no longer 'designs something' but rather 'designs for something' or to get something to happen" (Manzini, 2016, p. 3). In this context, it is inevitable that the people who design change as well, moving from product-centered thinking and doing towards centering in the interactions of people, things, and places (Manzini, 2016). ...
... Application of methods and tools: SD is an approach with a very clear framework, and its process emphasizes practical methods and tools (Sangiorgi, 2009). On the other side, there is no fixed framework, methods, techniques, and tools for SPD, but a variety of methods and techniques are being adjusted and adapted according to different contexts, technologies, perspectives, and audiences (Auger, 2013). ...
Book
Full-text available
Editorial The RSD10 symposium was held at the faculty of Industrial Design Engineering, Delft University of Technology, 2nd-6th November 2021. After a successful (yet unforeseen) online version of the RSD 9 symposium, RSD10 was designed as a hybrid conference. How can we facilitate the physical encounters that inspire our work, yet ensure a global easy access for joining the conference, while dealing well with the ongoing uncertainties of the global COVID pandemic at the same time? In hindsight, the theme of RSD10 could not have been a better fit with the conditions in which it had to be organized: “Playing with Tensions: Embracing new complexity, collaboration and contexts in systemic design”. Playing with Tensions Complex systems do not lend themselves for simplification. Systemic designers have no choice but to embrace complexity, and in doing so, embrace opposing concepts and the resulting paradoxes. It is at the interplay of these ideas that they find the most fruitful regions of exploration. The main conference theme explored design and systems thinking practices as mediators to deal fruitfully with tensions. Our human tendency is to relieve the tensions, and in design, to resolve the so-called “pain points.” But tensions reveal paradoxes, the sites of connection, breaks in scale, emergence of complexity. Can we embrace the tension and paradoxes as valuable social feedback in our path to just and sustainable futures? The symposium took off with two days of well-attended workshops on campus and online. One could sense tensions through embodied experiences in one of the workshops, while reframing systemic paradoxes as fruitful design starting points in another. In the tradition of RSD, a Gigamap Exhibition was organized. The exhibition showcased mind-blowing visuals that reveal the tension between our own desire for order and structure and our desire to capture real-life dynamics and contradicting perspectives. Many of us enjoyed the high quality and diversity in the keynotes throughout the symposium. As chair of the SDA, Dr. Silvia Barbero opened in her keynote with a reflection on the start and impressive evolution of the Relating Systems thinking and Design symposia. Prof.Dr. Derk Loorbach showed us how transition research conceptualizes shifts in societal systems and gave us a glimpse into their efforts to foster desired ones. Prof.Dr. Elisa Giaccardi took us along a journey of technologically mediated agency. She advocated for a radical shift in design to deal with this complex web of relationships between things and humans. Indy Johar talked about the need to reimagine our relationship with the world as one based on fundamental interdependence. And finally, Prof.Dr. Klaus Krippendorf systematically unpacked the systemic consequences of design decisions. Together these keynote speakers provided important insights into the role of design in embracing systemic complexity, from the micro-scale of our material contexts to the macro-scale of globally connected societies. And of course, RSD10 would not be an RSD symposium if it did not offer a place to connect around practical case examples and discuss how knowledge could improve practice and how practice could inform and guide research. Proceedings RSD10 has been the first symposium in which contributors were asked to submit a full paper: either a short one that presented work-in-progress, or a long one presenting finished work. With the help of an excellent list of reviewers, this set-up allowed us to shape a symposium that offered stage for high-quality research, providing a platform for critical and fruitful conversations. Short papers were combined around a research approach or methodology, aiming for peer-learning on how to increase the rigour and relevance of our studies. Long papers were combined around commonalities in the phenomena under study, offering state-of-the-art research. The moderation of engaged and knowledgeable chairs and audience lifted the quality of our discussions. In total, these proceedings cover 33 short papers and 19 long papers from all over the world. From India to the United States, and Australia to Italy. In the table of contents, each paper is represented under its RSD 10 symposium track as well as a list of authors ordered alphabetically. The RSD10 proceedings capture the great variety of high-quality papers yet is limited to only textual contributions. We invite any reader to visit the rsdsymposium.org website to browse through slide-decks, video recordings, drawing notes and the exhibition to get the full experience of RSD10 and witness how great minds and insights have been beautifully captured! Word of thanks Let us close off with a word of thanks to our dean and colleagues for supporting us in hosting this conference, the SDA for their trust and guidance, Dr. Peter Jones and Dr. Silvia Barbero for being part of the RSD10 scientific committee, but especially everyone who contributed to the content of the symposium: workshop moderators, presenters, and anyone who participated in the RSD 10 conversation. It is only in this complex web of (friction-full) relationships that we can further our knowledge on systemic design: thanks for being part of it! Dr. JC Diehl, Dr. Nynke Tromp, and Dr. Mieke van der Bijl-Brouwer Editors RSD10
... • is multidisciplinary, emphasizing particularly the theories and principles of design thinking and service innovation management (Zhang et al., 2003;Holmlid and Evenson, 2008;Karpen et al., 2017;Sangiorgi et al. 2019) • uses several interactive and visual tools (Gummesson, 1991;Norling et al. 1992;Holmlid and Evenson, 2008;Saco and Goncalves, 2008;Sangiorgi et al., 2019;Sangiorgi, 2009;Patrício et al., 2011) • is human-centred and experience-oriented, addressing the experience of customers and users, as well as other stakeholders (Mager and Sung, 2011;Zomerdijk and Voss, 2010;Kimbel, 2011;Meroni and Sangiorgi, 2011;Wetter-Edman et al., 2014;Costa et al., 2018;Anderson et al., 2018;Bitner, 1990;Holmild, 2007;Goldstein et al., 2002;Teixeira et al., 2017;Holmlid and Evenson, 2008) • aims at developing service holistically (Patrício et al., 2011;Teixeira et al., 2017;Trischler at al., 2018) Taxonomy of Significant Learning. Fink's (2003a) Taxonomy of Significant Learning has been widely used in planning and analysing learning in higher education over the past 20 years. ...
Article
Full-text available
This article presents findings on learning with challenge-based innovation (CBI) in higher education. It describes how different dimensions of Significant Learning are enhanced with challenge-based innovation among multidisciplinary students in higher education. It is based on a case study on designing and implementing a master's-level course for learning service design by solving societal challenges related to United Nations' sustainable development goals (SDG) with challenge-based innovation at CERN IdeaSquare. As a result, this article describes how the case CBI enhances Significant Learning, and what is critical for instructors and organizers of challenge-based innovation.
... The past 50 years have seen a change in how the role of design is perceived by business and society, recognizing it as an effective way of thinking, working, and solving problems (Voûte, Stappers, Giaccardi, Mooij, & Boeijen, 2020). This approach to design has enlarged the complexity of the challenges designers face (Sangiorgi, 2009), as the object of design transforms into a process aimed at achieving results, where "design no longer 'designs something' but rather 'designs for something' or to get something to happen" (Manzini, 2016, p. 3). ...
Book
Full-text available
Proceedings of the DRS LEARN X DESIGN 2021: 6th International Conference for Design Education Researchers Engaging with Challenges in Design Education: 10th Anniversary of the International Conference for Design Education Researchers Editors: Erik Bohemia; Liv Merete Nielsen; Lusheng Pan; Naz A.G.Z. Börekçi & Yang Zhang Section Editors: Úrsula Bravo; Catalina Cortés; Jeannette LaFors; Fabio Andres Telle; Natalia Allende; Eva Lutnæs; Karen Brænne; Siri Homlong; Hanna Hofverberg; Ingvill Gjerdrum https://learnxdesign.net/lxd2021/
Chapter
Since China actively joined the globalization process, industrialization and urbanization have brought economic development to China’s traditional rural areas, but at the same time, many problems have also arisen. Among them, the problems faced by rural areas where ethnic minorities live in compact communities are more severe. Besides the common problems in rural areas, they also need to face the decline and disappearance of ethnic culture. The design and social innovation of rural areas and ethnic minority settlements have attracted scholars from many fields to study and practice. In 2013, we formed an interdisciplinary team to cooperate with Guangxi’s ethnic management agencies to carry out a series of social innovation practices in many places in Guangxi, China, this paper explores the development model of local social innovation and promotes the sustainable development of local society. Based on the Internet platform application service thinking design and product-service system design method, a new model is established to promote the local economic development and protect and inherit the national culture characteristic. The experiences, sustainability and discussed methods in this paper provide reference for the practice and research of different social innovation and social lessons.KeywordsSocial innovationService designProduct service systemNational culture
Chapter
Full-text available
Both service design and service innovation scholars are embracing a more systemic understanding of the outcomes and processes underpinning design and innovation in the service context. This chapter provides an overview of this ongoing “systems turn” and shows how service design and service innovation discourses are converging toward informing a common phenomenon: service system transformation. The two discourses provide distinct, yet complementary perspectives in understanding how transformation within service systems unfolds by shedding light on the nature of intentional design and innovation interventions and how these intentional efforts bring forth change as part of the broader systemic and institutional processes at play within service systems.
Chapter
Exploring the patient innovation culture is essential to design future solutions regarding service innovation in healthcare. A new family of collaborative, participatory and social, informal, independent, and experimental practices and experiences is emerging from below. Patients and their caregiving system create an emerging and pervasive phenomenon that can be identified as patient innovation. When we talk about it, we refer to a set of product, service, process, or system innovations generated by end-users. In a broader perspective, patient innovation represents the final step, perhaps the most radical or revolutionary, of a process of action and organization of individuals. The study of these bottom-up and independent innovations and innovators has been considered more concerning the research and political sphere than the strictly productive and service ones. Cure and care services are changing, incorporating inclusion, and the processes’ enhancement guaranteed by the idea of an open and distributed (access to) augmentative technology. The healthcare system needs, thus, to question its more traditional techno-scientific and organizational models. Furthermore, it includes the patient perspective into service design processes.
Article
The abstract for this document is available on CSA Illumina.To view the Abstract, click the Abstract button above the document title.
Design for Social and Environmental Enterprise Design at the Service of Social Businesses, Changing the Change conference proceedings Usability and interaction design - new challenges for the Scandinavian tradition
  • C Brass
  • Bowden F Torino Bødker
  • S Sundblad
  • Y Buchanan
BRASS, C. and BOWDEN F., (2008). Design for Social and Environmental Enterprise. Design at the Service of Social Businesses, Changing the Change conference proceedings, Torino BØDKER, S. and SUNDBLAD, Y., 2008. Usability and interaction design - new challenges for the Scandinavian tradition, Behaviour & Information Technology, 27:4, 293 — 300 BUCHANAN, R., 1992. Wicked Problems in Design Thinking. Design Issues, Vol. 8, No. 2., pp. 5-21
Design research for sustainable social innovation Design Research Now: Essays and Selected Projects Service Design. A review Developing new product service systems (PSS): methodologies and operational tools
MANZINI E., 2007. Design research for sustainable social innovation in: Michel R., Ed. Design Research Now: Essays and Selected Projects, Birkhäuser Basel MAGER B., 2004. Service Design. A review. Köln: Köln International School of Design MORELLI, N., 2006. Developing new product service systems (PSS): methodologies and operational tools. Journal of Cleaner Production, 14(17), pp. 1495-1501
Developing new product service systems (PSS): methodologies and operational tools
MANZINI E., 2007. Design research for sustainable social innovation in: Michel R., Ed. Design Research Now: Essays and Selected Projects, Birkhäuser Basel MAGER B., 2004. Service Design. A review. Köln: Köln International School of Design MORELLI, N., 2006. Developing new product service systems (PSS): methodologies and operational tools. Journal of Cleaner Production, 14(17), pp. 1495-1501