Service Design process…

The author has chosen to follow the Service Design process to fulfil the service innovation task¹² of the thesis. SD applies Design Thinking¹³ to the innovation and design of services (Wetter-Edman, 2011). The aim of SD is to achieve a service that is useful, desirable, and easy to use from the customer’s perspective and that is effective, distinguishable, and profitable from the service organization’s perspective (Edvardsson, Gustafsson, Kristensson, and Witell, 2010; Michel, Brown and Gallan, 2008; Möller, Rajala and Westerlund, 2008).

Many authors assess DT and SD to be especially suitable for creating meaningful solutions for wicked problems of practice, as they focus on practical, realizable, and user-oriented solutions (Bayazit, 2004; Brown, 2009; Leverenz, 2014; Melles, 2010; Soule, 2013; Verganti, 2009).

12 “A service innovation is a new service experience or service solution that consist of one or several of the following dimensions: new service concept, new customer interaction, new value system, new business partners, new revenue model, new organizational or technological service delivery process.” (Den Hertog, Van der Aa and De Jong, 2010: 494)

13 Richard Buchanan (1922) was the first to connect design thinking to wicked problems: In his view, the iterative design thinking process can be useful in tackling ill-defined problems by reframing the problem in human-centrist ways, creating numerous ideas in brainstorming sessions, and adopting a hands-on approach in prototyping and testing. Later, other authors have also acknowledged the potential of DT and SD for creating meaningful solutions for wicked, real-world problems, as they focus on practical, realizable user-oriented solutions (Bayazit, 2004; Brown, 2009; Leverenz, 2014; Melles, 2010; Soule, 2013; Verganti, 2009).

Service Design offers an informed approach for service innovations, as it allows much time for in-depth observation and analysis, before eventually translating the gained insights into new service solutions (Bayazit, 2004; Brown, 2009). SD combines analytic with creative processes (Martin, 2009; Razzouk and Shute, 2012) and allows for experiments to achieve innovations that are balanced between technical, business, and human dimensions (Holloway, 2009; Wetter-Edman, 2011). Other features of SD include agility and flexibility (Edvardsson et al., 2010; Kerguenne, Schaefer and Taherivand, 2017; Moggridge, 2007), as well as visualization of ideas and rapid concept prototyping (Lockwood, 2010).

Also, SD fosters stakeholder involvement and is interdisciplinary by nature: It allows integrating diverse views in the process of analysing, synthesizing, and generating of new ideas, bridging the gaps in experience and knowledge of individual team members (Beckman and Barry, 2007; Leverenz, 2014;

Stickdorn and Schneider, 2010).

Stickdorn and Schneider (2010) identify five core principles of SD, which help to understand the characteristics of the approach: (1) user orientation; (2) co-creation: (3) sequencing; (4) evidencing; and (5) holism. User orientation means developing customized solutions that serve users’ needs. It also refers to the inclusion of different stakeholders in the service development process (Edvardsson et al., 2010; Moggridge, 2007; Stickdorn and Schneider, 2010).

Co-creation means the cooperative design of services. It empowers users to participate and collaborate with designers (Wetter-Edman, 2011). They are included in the value creation process by providing resources like their knowledge and skills (Edvardsson et al., 2010; Moggridge, 2007). Sanders and Stappers (2008: 5) frame this as “designing with users.” By sequencing complex services are partitioned into smaller separate processes to make them more tangible (Stickdorn and Schneider, 2010). Typical outcomes of the SD process are prototypes, which illustrate abstract service situations concretely and make them tangible (Melles, 2010; Stickdorn and Schneider, 2010). Prototypes allow testing different solutions fast and can facilitate communication between people with different backgrounds (Eppler and Burkhard, 2004). Holistic approach refers to the fact that SD takes the entire service experience into account, including different channels and experiences as well as digital and human interactions, which are put into context (Stickdorn and Schneider, 2010).

Nowadays, SD and its methods are more and more frequently utilized for planning digital services and interfaces, as they make it possible to describe immaterial service concepts in concrete terms and test them before application (Goodwin, 2009). For the authors, the user- and stakeholder-integration principle seems especially reminiscent of the activities of a social network like the Alumniportal Deutschland, for which participation and integration of the community and users are part of the day-to-day practices. Hence, following the SD process and including users in the process seems promising for developing digital learning offers that truly serve their needs.

SD offers a comprehensive tool set and methods to create or improve the value generated by an organization's services. Interdisciplinary methods aim at encouraging and engaging current and future users in co-designing the service (Sanders and Stappers, 2008). The decision on which methods exactly are applied in the course of a SD process is situational, highly context driven and depending on the resources available (Saco and Goncalves, 2010). Various models of the SD process exist. All these models comprise stages of comprehensive data acquisition, collaborative idea generating, creating different prototypes as well as fast testing, analysing and redefining the outcomes. This thesis follows the SD framework proposed by Ojasalo, Koskelo, and Nousiainen (2015). This SD framework combines classic elements of SD with futures thinking and illustrative foresight methods, creating a comprehensive approach for service innovation that takes possible futures into account. The SD process proposed by Ojasalo et al. (2015) is segmented into four phases: (1) Map and Understand; (2) Forecast and Ideate; (3) Model and Evaluate; (4) Conceptualize and Influence. The process, however, is rarely a linear process, „instead it may be highly iterative, the phases might overlap, and the innovation process may be heavily integrated in actual service practice” (Ojasalo et al., 2015: 203).

Stickdorn et al. (2018b) also stress, that the SD process usually is not a linear problem-solving process, but a circular one, meaning that the above-mentioned stages may be repeated rapidly for several times. The picture below illustrates the service innovation process grounded on SD as suggested by Ojasalo et al.

(2015). It serves as a road map for the thesis project at hand. In the following, the nature of each of the four phases as well as the specific methods that have been applied in the process of this thesis project will be elaborated briefly.

PICTURE 1. Service innovation process grounded on foresight and service design (Ojasalo et al., 2015: 202).

2.1.1 Phase 1: Map and Understand

The first phase in the SD process aims at analysing and mapping a service and its ecosystem, including the current situation as well as possible future changes in the service environment. This phase also puts strong focus on understanding and anticipating users’ needs, attitudes and behaviour. (Bell, 2009) To ensure that the service solution will meet users’ needs, SD aims at gaining a holistic, emphatic, and in-depth understanding of their actions, situations, needs and wishes from different viewpoints (Slaughter, 2009; Stickdorn et al., 2018b). This first phase of SD can be seen as the ‘research phase’ of the process. It usually takes the longest time and should be done carefully as it is the backbone of the whole development process and the basis for the subsequent phases of the SD process (Ojasalo et al., 2015).

In this first phase, SD usually uses a range of mostly qualitative research methods, that allow to achieve an emphatic and deep understanding of users’

and other stakeholders’ understanding, experiences and perspectives (Stickdorn et al., 2018b). In the case of the thesis, a literature review and content analysis as well as a member survey among users of the Alumniportal Deutschland were conducted. Furthermore, the author analysed the existing service as well as the service environment by using journey maps, a

stakeholder analysis, and a benchmarking process. The applied methods are explained in more detail in chapter 3 of the thesis.

2.1.2 Phase 2: Forecast and Ideate

Based on the acquired data and findings from the research phase, the SD process continues with a second phase, which focuses on ideation and forecasting alternative futures. The goal for this phase is to achieve non-biased collaboration and co-designing, preferably in heterogeneous teams (Brown, 2009; Lockwood, 2010). Here, emphasis is put on creativity and social relations but also rapid development and visualization (Ojasalo et al., 2015). In the case of the thesis project, a co-design workshop with team members and users was organized to jointly identify room for improvement regarding the existing service and to produce ideas and alternative futures for the digital learning offers on the Alumniportal Deutschland. The co-design workshop aimed at translating research findings into usable solutions based on brainstorming and collaboratively generating ideas with different interest groups (Ojasalo et al., 2015; Polaine, Lovlie and Reason, 2013; Ramos, Mansfield and Priday, 2012).

Furthermore, personas were created based on the data generated by the member survey and a trend mapping was conducted to collect and visualize trends in the field of digital lifelong learning.

2.1.3 Phase 3: Model and Evaluate

In the third phase, the SD process focuses on modelling and evaluating new service solutions. Narrative and visual means are utilized, as they can help to propose, communicate and test potential new service solutions. Typical outcomes of this phase are scenarios, prototypes and models that enable evaluating and testing the value for users and providers quickly and in an early stage (Meroni and Sangiorgi, 2011; Ojasalo et al., 2015; Polaine et al., 2013). If necessary, the development process can then be redirected, before large amounts of resources are used for actual implementation at too early a stage (Dyer et al., 2011; Ojasalo et al., 2015). By including different stakeholders, like employees, users, and experts, in the process of creating and testing the models, it should be possible to find out fairly quickly if they are leading to a

functioning and desirable service or if they should be retouched (Ojasalo et al., 2015). In the case of the thesis, the SD process ends with conceptual and practical recommendations on how to develop the digital learning offers on the Alumniportal Deutschland in the future. These recommendations are presented in chapter 5 of the thesis.

2.1.4 Phase 4: Conceptualize and Influence

The last stage of the SD process focuses on further conceptualizing, communicating and introducing the new service. While the precedent phases emphasize creative thinking, this phase also integrates concurrent business analysis, for instance by utilizing business model canvas or role scripts. This phase brings a more strategic and entrepreneurial perspective to the SD process by quickly outlining business models and visualizing their key components (Lockwood, 2010; Osterwalder and Pigneur, 2010). This phase also covers the implementation and ongoing evaluation of the new service solution (Lawrence et al., 2018), which may lead to a circular process of iteratively testing and refining it in several loops. Due to the limited scope of this thesis, this SD phase is not covered.