Setting up a social network for elderly people is not an obvious exercise. The Life 2.0 project worked with this aim in the last three years. What is also not easy is setting up the right service ecology and the right business model. Here are some indications coming from the project.
The funding period for the Life 2.0 project is ended, but the communities are still there, and new ones can be added. Some suggestions on how to create new communities are available here
The professional profile of a service designer has so far been discussed in conferences and research projects, but so far no design education had offered a master program on this. Aalborg University is now proposing a master that will mix creative/design competences, together with IT and organisational/management skills. The master is open to international students and will be based on the work of researchers and professional practitioners working in relevant areas for service design, such as Industrial Design, IT and media communication, interaction design, experience design, user-driven innovation and strategic design.
More information about the master at www.servicedesigners.dk
I just received a new book on service design. The book is “design for services”, by Anna Meroni and Daniela Sangiorgi.
I just browsed it and it seems quite promising, with a lot of case studies on different areas. I am particularly curious to see the areas of service co-design and on the future of service design. This could be the first real text book to support service design teaching
I’m trying to put together some idea about using a narrative approach to service design, and in particular I am trying to understand if we can use this approach to describe uers’ experience when approaching a service.
I found this description of the characteristics of a narrative on edutechwiki (according to Jean-Michel Adam’s definition)
- a narrative involves a succession of actions (a description of a landscape is not a narrative);
- a narrative involves at least one character, even if this character is not human (animal, object);
- a narrative concerns a transformation from one initial state to a final state;
- Unity of action: the actions is organized into a bigger unit, which forms a whole.
- Causality: actions are causing other actions. Actions are not just following each other but are a consequences of each others.
- Final evaluation: a narrative intends to exhibit a point of view, either explicitely (in the morale) or implicitely. In that sense, a narrative is a communication device.
Can a use case (or what many call “the user’s journey” be considered as a narrative, on the basis of this definition?
I hope someone will see this post and give me some feedback
I’m just back from an interesting trip to Finland, where I met a lot of people that have done the history of service design (e.g. Prof Birgitte Mager) and who will make the next history of this new discipline, such as my friend Redjotter and Satu Miettinen. The occasion was a workshop organised by Satu Miettinen and Kuopio Academy of Design.
The first day was mainly a seminar with Prof Mager and many other very interesting speakers; the second and third day was organised in 3 parallel workshops on different service design themes. I was particularly impressed by the organisation of the workshop on the hotel experience (for the use of personas and touch points, very well planned) and the use of the concept of journey (but I call it routine), to describe the average day of some of the actors, in the workshop on healthcare.
I also visited some colleagues at the Joensuu University of Applied Arts. In both cases I had a chance to expose my idea about service design as something that should not be just the design of the “front office”, as implicitely suggested by the idea of Experience design. I believe that if designers run the risk to get stuck, once again, in the position of “decorators”. The idea that product designers are just good at decorating the surface of products that have been technically defined by someone else is far from being antiquate. I believe that the idea that designer should just look at services as experience is more or less the parallel of this position in service design. I thing engineers and managers, who now claim their “ownership” on service design, would be very happy if we, designers accepted the idea that service desgin be just related to a series of human intervention to make the fron office more acceptable for users. But I cannot accept this role. I think we should work on the “mechanism” of a service, that means working on the organiational structure, on the technological infrastructure, and even on the business aspects of the service.
Well the reaction to this position have been positive in general, but a couple of comments struck me more: one of my colleague called me “engineer”, that implicitely means that he associated me with a sort of “machinistic” or even tayloristic idea about desgning services, nothing farther from my intention. Another comment, this time from a business professor, was that, seen from the perspective I propose, service design is boring. I may agree with this last comment, in the sense that the technical aspects of service desgin may imply less emotional involvement. However, given my whort past as an Architect and designer, I must say that I found the technical part sometimes challenging and even interesting!
However those comments, and especially the second, left me with the doubt: can service design be boring? If so, do we risk to make this discipline less “sexy” and therefore to loose students in the coming courses of service design? And above all, should we bother about this (And this is not just a rethorical question, I’m really asking this to myself)?