Service Science: The Opportunity to Re-think What We Know About Service Design
The evolution of service science or Service Science, Management and Engineering – SSME, provides us with a platform to critically review the area of service design. The drivers for this include the lack of cross-disciplinary writing on service design, the limitations of the treatment of service design as an extension of product design and the dominance of B2C and neglect of B2B design. Three perspectives are used: service delivery systems, service architecture including modularity and platforms, and the service supply chain/network. Empirical examples are provided and a service modularity function is developed. It is argued that an important role of SSME is to be able to link the operationally based service architectures and resulting design methods and information system (IS) architectures, and that there is a need to develop a combined view of the physical, organisational, and IS architectures of services.
KeywordsModularity Service design Service architecture Service science Service systems
This research has been funded by the ESRC, grant RES-331-25-0027, through the Advanced Institute of Management Research.
- Bessant, J., and Davies, A. (2007). Managing Service Innovation, Innovation in Services, DTI Occasional Paper no 9: 61–96: UK Department of Trade and Industry.Google Scholar
- BIMCO/ISF. (2005). Manpower 2005 update. Coventry, UK: Warwick Institute for Employment Research.Google Scholar
- de Blok, C., Luijkx, K., Meijboom, B., and Schols, J. (2010). Modular care and service packages for independently living elderly. International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 30(1), 75–97Google Scholar
- Done, A., Schmeer, F., and Voss, C. A. (2001). The Woolwich Bank, Project Lifestyle. Cranfield: European Case Clearing HouseGoogle Scholar
- Eisenmann, T., Parker, G., and Alstyne, M. W. V. (2006). Strategies for two sided markets. Harvard Business Review, 84(10), 92–101.Google Scholar
- Gawer, A., and Cusumano, M. A. (2002). Platform Leadership: How Intel, Microsoft, and Cisco Drive Industry Innovation. Boston: Harvard Business School Press Books.Google Scholar
- Rettig, C. (2007). The trouble with enterprise software. MIT Sloan Management Review, 49(1), 21–27.Google Scholar
- Simon, H. (1962). The Architecture of complexity. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 106, 467–482.Google Scholar
- Voss, C. A., and Zomerdijk, L. (2007). Innovation in Experiential Services an Experiential view. Innovation in Services DTI Occasional Paper no 9, 5, 97–134, UK Department of Trade and Industry.Google Scholar