Designing Methodology for Innovative Service Systems



We are interested in establishment of research methodology of serviceology.

We use “service” in its widest meaning and define “X service” as a provision and utilization of X, where X is something or some system.

This paper describes a constructive methodology to design new service systems. We have been working on formalizing the process of design and synthesis, or constructive science, as FNS diagram. It is an infinite loop of generation, interaction (of the system) with the environment, analysis, and scripting (and then back to generation). Service in its narrow sense corresponds to generation and interaction parts where a generated system is actually put into service. Service in its wider sense corresponds to the whole FNS loop.

Design is an important part for a good service. We also extend the definition of design to its widest meaning. Then, service becomes an important part of design process. Therefore, service loop and design loop refer to each other. They form a kind of fractal structure composed of such mutual recursive relations between service and design. Service loop as a whole and design loop as a whole are in fact two different views of a synthetic process.

Information technology (IT) plays an important role when we design an innovative service system. As an example, we report our design and implementation of Smart Access Vehicle System in Hakodate.


Constructive methodology Design FNS diagram PDCA cycle Serviceology 



The project described in Sect. 6 is partially supported by JST RISTEX research funding as a part of S3FIRE (Service Science, Solutions and Foundation Integrated Research Program).


  1. 1.
    Spohrer J, Stephen Kwan SK (2009) Service science, management, engineering, and design (SSMED): an emerging discipline – outline and references. Int J Inf Syst Serv Sect 1(3).
  2. 2.
    Vargo SL, Maglio PP, Akaka MA (2008) On value and value co-creation: a service systems and service logic perspective. Eur Manag J 26(3):145–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Taura T, Nakashima H, Nagai Y (2009) What is “What’s the Design”. Spec Issue Jpn Soc Sci Des 16(2):1–2Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Simon H (1969, 1981) The science of the artificial, 2nd edn. MIT, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jones JC (1992) Design methods, 2nd edn. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hara K (2007) Designing design. Lars Müller Publishers, ZurichGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Nakashima SM, Fujii F (2006) Endo-system view as a method for constructive science. In: 5th International conference of the cognitive science (ICCS 2006), VancouverGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Nakashima H (2009) Design of constructive design process. Spec Issue Jpn Soc Sci Des 16(2):7–12Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kimura B (1988) Aida (In-between), in Japanese, KobundoGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Moen R, Norman C (2006) Evolution of the PDCA cycle.
  11. 11.
    Deming WE (1950) Elementary principles of the statistical control of quality. JUSE, TokyoGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Suzuki S (2010) ME310 2010–2011 introductory lecture slides. Stanford University, Stanford California, 94305Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Von Hippel E, Jeroen DJ, Stephen F (2010) Comparing business and household sector innovation in consumer products: findings from a representative study in the UK, vol 1683503. SSRN:
  14. 14.
    Merton RK (1957) Social theory and social structure. Free Press, GlencoeGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Nakashima H, Matsubara H, Hirata K, Shiraishi Y, Sano S, Kanamori R, Noda I, Yamashita T, Koshiba H (2013) Design of the smart access vehicle system with large scale ma simulation. In: Proceedings of the 1st international workshop on multiagent-based societal systems (MASS 2013), Saint PaulGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ambrosino JD, Romanazzo NM (2003) Demand responsive transport services: towards the flexible mobility agency, italian national agency for new technologies, energy and the environment, lungotevere thaon di revel 76 00196 Rome (ITALY). ISBN 88-8286-043-4.
  17. 17.
    Noda I, Ohta M, Shinoda K, Kumada Y, Nakashima H (2003) Evaluation of usability of Dial-a-Ride systems by social simulation, Multi-Agent-Based Simulation III. In: 4th International workshop, MABS 2003 (LNAI-2927), Melbourne, pp 167–181Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Japan 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hideyuki Nakashima
    • 1
  • Haruyuki Fujii
    • 2
  • Masaki Suwa
    • 3
  1. 1.Future University HakodateHakodateJapan
  2. 2.Tokyo Institute of TechnologyTokyoJapan
  3. 3.Keio UniversityFujisawaJapan

Personalised recommendations