Earlier this summer, I was the guest on a podcast by Gerry Scullion, a designer with experience across the continents, and Director of Humana Design a human-centered service design practice in Dublin, Ireland. He is also a Fellow of the Royal Society of Arts.
Gerry and I discussed commonly asked questions, such as “What is a service?”, and therefore, “What does designing a service mean?”. In this podcast, which is part of the This is HCD series, Gerry and I discuss common misconceptions caused by the use of popular phrases. We also touch upon how my book aims to bring more clarity and depth to the concepts.
A shit post I recently made led to a lively Twitter thread that got into origins of service design and inadvertently brought to light how broad the meaning and scope of #servicedesign actually is, and how far back it actually goes beyond Europe and the United States.
A few hours later, we were jokingly one-upping each other after Tom Wynne-Morgan, a service designer in the UK government, turned it into an auction with this tweet:
In the spirit of sharing, and showing just how vast a body of knowledge service designers can bring to bear from many disciplines, here is the reading list I gave students at Carnegie Mellon, when I last taught the course in 2008.
The first few clarify the meaning of services.
Judd, R.C. 1964. The Case for Redefining Services. Journal of Marketing, Vol. 28, 58–59.
Rathmell, J.M. 1966. What Is Meant by Services? Journal of Marketing, Vol. 30, 1966, 32–36.
Hill, Peter. 1977. On Goods and Services. The Review of Income and Wealth, 23: 315–338.
The next few are about the nature of their designs.
Shostack, G. Lynn. 1982. How to Design a Service. European Journal of Marketing
Bryson, J.R., Daniels, P.W. and Warf, B. 2004. Service Worlds: People, Organisations, Technologies. Routledge.
Rayport, J.F. and Jaworski, B.J. 2004. Best Face Forward. Harvard Business Review. December 2004.
Grönroos, Christian, 2001. Service management and Marketing: A Customer Relationship Management Approach. John Wiley and Sons.
To deepen your understanding of services, back to the basics.
Lidwell, W., Holden, K. and Butler, J. 2003. Universal Principles of Design. Rockport Publishers.
Forrester, Jay W. 1971. Principles of Systems. Wright-Allen Press.
Williamson, O.E. and Winter, S.G. 1993. The Nature of the Firm: Origins, Evolution and Development. Oxford University Press.
Goold, Michael and Campbell, Andrew 2002. Designing Effective Organizations: How to create structured networks. Jossey-Bass.
Next, the peculiar challenges of service quality.
Ulwick, Anthony. 2005. What Customers Want: Using Outcome-Driven Innovation to Create Breakthrough Products and Services. McGraw-Hill.
Kano, N., Seraku, N., Tsuji, S. and Takahashi, F. 1984. Attractive quality and must-be quality. Hinshitsu (Quality, The Journal of Japanese Society for Quality Control), Vol. 14, No. 2, 39–48.
Tax, S.S. and Brown, S.W. 1998. Recovering and Learning from Service Failure. Sloan Management Review, Fall, 75–88.
Lev, B. 2001. Intangibles: Management, Measurement, and Reporting. The Brookings Institution.
Because design is the ultimate expression of strategy.
Porter, Michael E. 1996. What is strategy? Harvard Business Review. November–December 1996.
Nagle, T.N. and Holden, R.K. 2002. Strategy and tactics of pricing: A guide to profitable decision-making. 3rd Edition. Prentice-Hall.
Luehrman, T.A. 1998. Strategy as a portfolio of real options. Harvard Business Review, Vol. 76, No. 5, 89–99.
Milgrom, Paul and Roberts, John 1992. Economics, Organization and Management. Prentice-Hall.
Why designers as change agents
Edmondson and Frei. 2002. Transformation at the IRS. Harvard Business School.
Keating, Elizabeth et al. 1999. Overcoming the Improvement Paradox. European Management Journal, Vol. 17, No. 2, 120–134.
Iravani, S.M. et al. 2005. Structural Flexibility: A New Perspective on the Design of Manufacturing and Service Operations. Management Science, Vol. 51, No. 2, February 2005, 151–166.
Jones, Gareth R. 2007. Organizational Theory, Design and Change. Pearson Prentiss Hall.
As usual, technology changes everything
Carr, Nicholas 2005. The End of Corporate Computing. MIT Sloan Management Review. Spring 2005, Vol. 46, No. 3, 67–73.
Froehle, C. and Roth, A.V. 2004. New measurement scales for evaluating perceptions of the technology mediated customer service experience. Journal of Operations Management, 22 (1), 1–21.
Cherbakov et al. 2005. Impact of service orientation at the business level. IBM Systems Journal, Vol. 44, No. 4.
Burner, Mike 2004. Service Orientation and Its Role in Your Connected Systems Strategy. Microsoft Corporation. July 2004. MSDN. URL: http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms954826.aspx
How to get a grip
Simons, Robert 1995. Levers of Control: How Managers Use Innovative Control Systems to Drive Strategic Renewal. Harvard Business School Press, Boston, Massachusetts.
OGC (Office of Government Commerce) 2007. Management of Risk: Guidance for Practitioners. The Stationery Office.
Repenning, Nelson P. et al. 2001b. Past the Tipping Point: The Persistence of Firefighting in Product Development. California Management Review. Vol. 43, No. 4, Summer 2001.
Rummler, Geary 1995. Improving Performance: how to manage the white space on the organization chart. Jossey-Bass.
It was a November afternoon. I was leaving Las Vegas after teaching a class on designing services. After a last-minute meeting and lunch I arrive at the airport just in time for my flight. Without bags to check in, I get through the security checkpoint and head straight for gate D54. That’s when I notice the shoeshine stand. Good leather lasts forever if you take good care of it. I reckon there is enough time before the gate closes.
“Hi, I would like my shoes shined.”
“Yes, of course. I’d be happy to.”
“Can I pay by card?”
“Sorry, cash only.”
I’m usually annoyed by that answer. Making it easier to pay for purchases is a key aspect of designing services. It improves the quality of experiences. In the age of Venmo, we seldom carry notes and coins, making “cash only” cumbersome. Indeed merchants are willing to pay considerable card processing fees mostly to avoid losing sales due to empty wallets. I was about to walk away with a shrug when I notice a Wells Fargo Bank ATM a few yards away. My bank.
“I’ll be right back.”
Cash withdrawals convert bank balances and “transport” money from a computer record somewhere, to where you need it in the form of currency notes. Banks load these machines with money and put them out there, literally exposing them weather and vandalism. For your convenience, they stash money at thousands of locations, not knowing when and where you may need to make a withdrawal next.
Services are performances and affordances, producing outcomes that satisfy a set of customer needs. My shoes define a window of opportunity for the shoeshine company. They need to be shined (demand for performance) and they need to have new layers of polish and protection (demand for affordance). Their need to have and the need to be together form a set of customer needs.
Services are performances and affordances, producing outcomes that satisfy a set of customer needs. ~ Thinking in Services (2018)
When and where do the needs actualize? Then and there by gate D54 prior to boarding a flight. But I did not have cash on me. So that creates a window of opportunity for the bank to convert a portion of my bank balance (supply of performance) and make it available in the form of bank notes (supply of affordance). Then and there at that machine. A window within a window.
Windows of opportunity are imaginary lines drawn across time and space within which outcomes are valuable, if performances and affordance can produce them.
For the ATM to do its job, it needs essential things such as floor space at that corner of that airport terminal, electricity, and a data link. It also needs the performances and affordances of a cash management service, to regularly replenish it with bank notes. Windows within windows within windows. This is the matryoshka doll problem in service design.
Anyway, I take out some money, just enough for the shoeshine and then some, and walk back to the stand, ready to commission the service with freshly printed money.
“I have cash.”
“What time is your flight?”
“Aaah! Then we don’t have enough time. It takes 12 minutes for me to do a good job. I don’t want to hurry it, or make you anxious they may close the gate by the time we are done.”
He was right. Boarding usually ends 15 to 20 minutes before the scheduled time of departure. Airline staff are strict about it for a reason. Airport gates are windows of opportunity for airlines to turnaround a flight within a time slot. Runways are windows with queues, especially at busy airports during peak hours. If pilots push out of the gate late and they risk losing their position on a queue. They then risk arriving late.
Window after window after window. Some open after a previous one closes. Some close so the next one opens. The afforded courtesies are based on policies, procedures and protocols, to ensure one outcome surely leads to another, at the lowest possible cost. This is the choreography problem in service design. Ballet dancers instead of dolls.
“Are you sure it can’t be done faster?“
No, then I will not do a good job. I have apply several layers of cream and polish, and work them in nicely.
Then he opens a drawer built into the workstation and to show me 27 different creams and polishes the service maintains at the stand, according its design. While the highly animated activity of shining shoes is most obvious (i.e., performance), the availability of resources at the stand are just as important. Without the right kind of materials in the right amounts, consumables and durables, it would be pantomime.
The ontology of a service, its molecular model or knowledge graph, includes things that are tangible, intangible, visible and invisible. The shoes, seats, foot rests, polishes, creams, brushes, rags, and skillful hands, are obvious. Less obvious, are things that facilitate what happens on the ‘front stage’. For example, the assortment, equipment, and floor space. Together, the front stage and back stage create a condition of harmonious, orderly interactions, based on a service blueprint.
That is good Italian leather you’ve got there. I would have made them beautiful! Aaaah!
At this point he is visibly upset (not angry) at the lost opportunity. One he needn’t have lost if not for his honesty and integrity. He could’ve made a quick buck from an okay job. Not knowing the difference, I would’ve paid him the full amount. But for him it was unethical it seemed for the quality of outcomes to be less than promised. He is conscious of it, even if his customers are not.
That’s when it occurs to me to take a picture of him by his stand (with his permission of course) to tell this story, using the concept of windows of opportunity to illustrate it. Services should produce outcomes that pay off well for both sides. Good designs are equitable. Bad designs are marketable. Customers tolerate them when there is no choice. However, such designs are unsustainable. They eventually fail.
The Good Fellows Shoeshine Company did not fail me. I failed to open the window of opportunity early enough for its agent to properly set up and execute the performance and affordance for my shoes, to “make them beautiful.” Writing in the Harvard Business Review in 1984, long before ‘service designer’ became a job title, G. Lynn Shostack explains the importance of setting standards:
A service designer must establish a time-of-service-execution standard that precludes unprofitable business and maintains productivity. Such a standard not only helps measure performance and control uniformity and quality, it also serves as a model for distribution of the service to far-flung locations. ~ G. Lynn Shostack
Gate D54 at the Las Vegas airport is among many locations at which the Company offers its services. For me it was far flung enough, given how much farther some gates can be after security checkpoints. Whether the company has service designers on its payroll or not, it appears to know exactly what to promise when and where. Some service providers fail at something as simple as that.
The total cost of utilization (TCU) is the idea that customers pay over and above the price of the service. To make use of the service, they may incur other expenses or suffer hidden fees and penalties. Or, they pay in terms of the additional time and effort for enrolling or signing up for the service, using it, and making the sure promises are kept.
Some services require costly installations, including changes that need to be made to things customers own. Others require additional purchases, such as Internet broadband to use Netflix, or taxis and train tickets to airports from where low-fare airlines fly. Airlines fares include significant amounts of taxes and fees. Some services require customers to allow access to their personal date, as part of the end user agreement.
When a service is poorly functioning at degraded service levels, customers may suffer a loss of benefits from downtime and disruption for which they may not be compensated. Worse, they have to resort to temporary solutions or alternatives to get by. Enforcement costs, which include getting help and assistance to fix service disruptions are costly for customers as well, and poorly designed recovery processes place an undue burden on customers.
All of these costs add up. For a given price, the TCU is the ratio of price and quality of experience. The TCU is high when the quality of experience is low. It is low when the quality of experience is high. When their TCU is high, services become less attractive because of a lower net value. When the costs are low, service offerings become more attractive.
When transaction costs are high, they eat into the benefits. The totality of these costs has the effect of reducing perceived benefits, and driving down the willingness of customers to pay for and use a service. So, the ability of a service provider isn’t just about having capabilities and resources, but also deploying them in a manner that does not erode net value.
Higher levels of quality assurance can also reduce unnecessary and unexpected costs. Goodwill and trust of service providers, in the form of discounts and rewards, can also reduce the TCU. For a fixed quality of outcomes, any reduction in TCU results in an economic surplus (also known as consumer surplus) that in turn generates goodwill and trust towards the service provider, thus completing the feedback loop.
The business of selling premium options can be tricky. The basic premise is that the buyer of those options is afforded special treatment, mostly having to do with improving the quality of their outcomes and experiences. It works because societies and its members are risk averse, as Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky have illustrated with their prospect theory. However, what if things don’t turn out to be that bad? Or, what if despite the insurance against needless aggravation, there is aggravation? Then the premium one has paid for turns out to be a loss.
The air travel provides us with a few useful examples. The option to zip through airport security using a fast lane. What if the airport isn’t busy at all at that hour? We pay more to depart within a certain time slot, sooner or later than a cheaper flight. But then the flight is delayed, arriving at the destination around the same time as a cheaper alternative. Is that option to board the flight before others really worth buying? The flight won’t depart until everyone has boarded.
Not everyone is a frequent flyer or an aviation geek (as I am), so they won’t know to first check on SeatGuru.com which aircraft the airline will be flying them on. They may pay for a seat upgrade without any idea of the actual configuration. Even the airline cannot always be sure which aircraft they will fly, subject to the vagaries of flight operations.
No worries, because you are flying on Southwest Airlines. Their entire fleet is of the Boeing 737 family of aircraft. You will always know what you’re getting into. Plus Southwest does not insist you pick a seat in advance and stick to it. You can purchase the option of picking where you want to sit after boarding and also not worrying about stowage for your carryon bags — that coveted space that sometimes leads to alterations.
EarlyBird Check-In is a low-cost option giving you the convenience of automatic check-in before our traditional 24-hour check-in. You’ll have the benefit of an earlier boarding position. As an EarlyBird Check-In Customer, you will have a better opportunity to select your preferred available seat and have earlier access to overhead bin storage for your carryon luggage. ~ Southwest Airlines
So you board early, see what is available, and situate yourself away from the window or the aisle, based on your preferences. If the airline has put enough thinking into its designs, you will most likely get what you paid for. In general, service providers design their services to maximize net value for their customers, subject to the constraints of outcomes, experiences, and price. It is a non-linear optimization problem.
But even the best airlines provide publictransportation. That means you don’t get to choose who else should be on that flight (let’s not go there), how much they choose to pay, and therefore where they get to sit. If you do, then you are on a private jet. Besides, be happy there are many others who have the same idea about flying at the same time on the same day. If airlines don’t make enough money over time, they discontinue the service.
The boarding continues. The early birds have caught their worms. The rest of the passengers survey their limited options. They aren’t many, so one of them occupies the seat next to you. Then it happens. The sheer expanse of their human self, causes the net value of your prepaid option to dramatically contract.
Surely the early bird option isn’t just about having the privilege to pick a seat as if people are driven purely by self-conceit. It is also a matter of personal comfort, especially on long flights. Those who pay for the option are justifiably upset to see its value diminishes all of a sudden. When seats are assigned, having an empty seat next to you feels like a gain. When you pay to pick any seat you want, finding that seat more than occupied, feels like a veritable loss.
Nobody is at fault here. We can optimize designs only to an extent beyond which they becomes entirely different designs. Some problems are simply difficult to solve. Unless airlines start weighing passengers during the check-in process, such situations are likely to happen. Doing so would be onerous, outrageous, and unethical. Thus are some of the challenges of human-centered design.
The more human-centered the design is, the greater the ethical considerations. Airlines need to make money. Many of their flights hardly make any. Price comparison sites like Priceline, Kayak, and Skyscanner have made it convenient to find cheaper fares. Low-fare airlines have forced legacy carriers to offer the basic economy fare. Most people aren’t above paying for exclusivity based on the packaging of privilege and the merchandizing of pain.
Services are sets of promises.
Promises of performances and affordances. Everybody on that flight will enjoy the same performance — modification of their physical coordinates from one set to another, within a certain timeframe. But they will not enjoy the same affordances — due to the differences across the seat map. Since the airline is profiting from price discrimination, they should factor in the probability of failing to keep the promises, into the designs of the performances and affordances.
Designs are closer to perfect when they incorporate the handling of exceptions. If a person has paid extra for the privilege to pick a seat, which they are then forced to give up, then they should be given a refund without having ask for it. Designs should fully leverage the power of human intelligence. Airlines should give flight attendants the discretionary authority to initiate the process.
To understand something is not to be able to define it or describe it. Instead, taking something that we think we already know and making it unknown thrills us afresh with its reality and deepens our understanding of it. ~ Kenya Hara
This applies to the notion of ‘service’ – a widely used word that have so many meanings, many of them quite narrow. I recently gave a PechaKucha talk in Brussels. My aim was to broaden the meaning and thus deepen it. Twenty images in twenty seconds. Here I have posted the images with additional commentary.
This is where Kenya Hara’s advice of making it unknown is useful. Gaining a deeper understanding of what services are, what they can be, and why they even exist, helps us understand why they often fail in the most unexpected ways, despite efforts to design them well. That is Charlie Chaplin in that picture, by the way.
In the previous picture what do you see is happening? What do you first notice. What service first comes to mind? Do you first notice passengers boarding their flight? Or do you first notice the airport ground services preparing the aircraft for a timely departure?
When we say #servicedesign is all encompassing, holistic and “end-to-end”, what do we fail to see? Without ground services, the passenger boarding process is an exercise in futility. Think of all those cases of delays on the tarmac. In many services, the airlines are the customers. Pilots and cabin crew are the users. Next: Coinciding coordinates and coordinated coincidences.
Runways are perhaps the most expensive real estate in the world. Aircraft get to stay for barely a minute during take-off, a little longer during landing. Airports are the hosts.
The same aircraft deployed on a different route creates a different affordance, again between two time slots. Think of an airline’s route map and schedule as their portfolio of promises. Promises of on-time affordance. That’s what passengers pay for. Services are sets of performances and affordances. The airline industry’s core metric of available seat miles (ASM) captures this duality. Revenue/ASM and Cost/ASM make or break an airline’s strategy. This is also #servicedesign although not commonly seen that way.
Designs of performances and affordances are in harmony with the artifacts and events that create the need for the service. This C-130J Super Hercules flying past Mt Fuji can transport troops and equipment to hot spots and through hostile environments. In Japan though, it is in friendly airspace. It can take-off and land from USAF bases. Thus in the business of military transport, treaties, leases, and diplomatic relations are part of the design. Parts that have to put in place ahead of time. Can’t “move fast and break things”.
Also an example of taxpayer-funded services producing pure public goods — namely, safety, security, and sense of calm — that are non-rivalrous and non-excludable i.e., enjoyed by all, the homeless and the billionaires, those who are for tax cuts and against.
The police arresting a protester in Baton Rouge. Who is using this service? Who are the customers? Are they happy with the outcomes? Are the users happy with their experiences? If not, what are the policies for cancellations and refunds?
People can expression their political opinions any which they want on any forum. But when they do so on the ballot paper, a special material called public confidence converts their opinions into votes. And only when those votes are captured in a ballot box supervised by officials, do they count towards the totals that bring parties into power or keep them there.
Empty chairs in empty rooms do not make economic sense. Not for long. Who owns and operates these built-environments within which demand meets supply? Who bears the risk that the meetings may not happen? The answer to these questions determines where or not they are part of a service.
Joking apart, Sunday services spark joy, helping people get rid of the clutter in their lives, to make room for what is important. Faith-based and religious organiziations offer another valuable service: Convert goodwill and trust into food, shelter, and clothing for the needy. Disaster recovery for dignity. #GodFundMe
The way our societies have evolved, not a single day goes by without paying for or making use of services. Infrastructures services by definition are below the surface. They support economic activity, lifestyles, and cultures. They aren’t designed so much for individuals as for populations.
It’s as if you and your neighbors have a shared off-site storage to hold excess inventory, from which you can claim items as and when the need arises. They’re yours! Private stocks on public shelves. The store charges fees for stocking and claims processing.
Services supply goods. They also remove ‘bads’. Less is more. Removing waste of all kinds recovers the capacities and restores the conditions of valuable assets such as living and working spaces. Excessive consumption leading to waste, is of course an unintended consequence.
Often, your bank balance is useless if it is isn’t in the form of currency notes. But do you want carry those around until you really need them? Cash withdrawals convert a portion of your balance (performance) and makes it available in various denominations (affordance). #teletransportation
It is a frightful experience to be made as short as possible. The means to an end. No matter how much we improve the experience we’re not going to put this baby through it if not for the outcome of insight into her health. Experience, we go through. Outcomes, we get. MRI scans of 6-12- month-old infants at high-risk of autism were able to predict a diagnosis at 24 months of age or later.
Better experience means fewer burdens and therefore paying less over and above the price, in terms of physical or emotional effort. The ratio of price and quality of experience is the total cost of utilization or TCU. We can also understand this with low-fare airlines.
This is why you should never compare the quality or the cost of similar services offered in smaller geographies like Dubai, Denmark, or Estonia, to those in the US, India, or China. It is illogical. Not just economics. Also physics.
So you see, so many kinds of services, with so many different shapes and sizes. Which is why we have to careful in using words like holistic and end-to-end when talking about their designs. We have to use our imaginations to see services for what they truly are and can be.
It is important for designs to show how everything fits together to form “a whole that is other than the sum of its parts”, allows us to create products that achieve “a condition of harmonious, orderly interactions”. Yes, designers are systems thinkers by design.
Look around. There are services everywhere. If you suspend the ancient meaning of the word “service”, what will you see?