Article | Service Design Geographies. Proceedings of the ServDes.2016 Conference | Service Design Ways to Value-In-Use
Göm menyn

Title:
Service Design Ways to Value-In-Use
Author:
Mattias Arvola: Department of Computer and Information Science, Linköping University, Sweden Stefan Holmlid: Department of Computer and Information Science, Linköping University, Sweden
Download:
Full text (pdf)
Year:
2016
Conference:
Service Design Geographies. Proceedings of the ServDes.2016 Conference
Issue:
125
Article no.:
047
Pages:
530-536
No. of pages:
7
Publication type:
Abstract and Fulltext
Published:
2016-05-17
ISBN:
978-91-7685-738-0
Series:
Linköping Electronic Conference Proceedings
ISSN (print):
1650-3686
ISSN (online):
1650-3740
Publisher:
Linköping University Electronic Press, Linköpings universitet


Export in BibTex, RIS or text

What do we mean if we say that a service design work is an example of good design? This paper presents a provisional typology for the ways in which a service design proposal can contribute to value-in-use. The typology covers instrumentality, technical excellence, usefulness, social significance, mutual advantage, collective welfare, and aesthetic values. Moral implications related to norms, power structures and tensions between stakeholders are also considered. It is argued that the typology can facilitate service designers and researchers in framing and re-framing a design effort and conceptualise a value proposition.

Keywords: service design, value creation, use quality, user experience, value-in-use

Service Design Geographies. Proceedings of the ServDes.2016 Conference

Author:
Mattias Arvola, Stefan Holmlid
Title:
Service Design Ways to Value-In-Use
References:

Arvola, M. (2014). Interaction and Service Design as Offering Perspectives in a Space of Action. In Proceedings of DRS 2014: Design’s Big Debates (pp. 7-15). Ume√•: Ume√• Institute of Design, Ume√• University.


Arvola, M. & Holmlid, S. (2015). User experience qualities and the use-quality prism. In The fuzzy front end of experience design: Workshop proceedings. Espoo: VTT.


Beyer, H., & Holtzblatt, K. (1998). Contextual Design: Defining Customer-Centered Systems. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann.


Boztepe, S. (2007). User value: Competing theories and models. International Journal of Design, 1(2), 55‚Äď63.


Brady, M.K., & Cronin, J. Jr. (2001), Some new thoughts on conceptualizing perceived service quality: A hierarchical approach. The Journal of Marketing, 65(3), 34-49.


Dahlbom, B., & Mathiassen, L. (1995). Computers in Context: The Philosophy and Practice of Systems Design. Oxford: Blackwell.


Desmet, P. M. A., & Hekkert, P. (2007). Framework of product experience. International Journal of Design, 1(1), 57‚Äď66.


Edvardsson, B., Tronvoll, B., & Gruber, T. (2011). Expanding understanding of service exchange and value co-creation: A social construction approach. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 39(2), 327‚Äď339.


Ehn, P., & Löwgren, J. Design for quality-in-use: Human-computer interaction meets informations systems development. In M. Helander, T. Landauer, & P. Prabhu (Eds.), Handbook of Human-Computer Interaction. Second, Completely Revised Edition (pp. 299-313).


Amsterdam: Elsevier. Gann, D., Salter, A., & Whyte, J. (2003). Design quality indicator as a tool for thinking. Building Research and Information, 3(5), 318-333.


Holmlid, S. (2014). One approach to understand design’s value under a service logic. In: Design Management in an Era of Disruption. In Proceedings from 19th DMI Academic Design Management Conference (pp. 2633-2640). Boston, MA: Design Management Institute.


Holmlid, S. (2007). Interaction design and service design: Expanding a comparison of design disciplines. In Proceedings of the 2nd Nordic Design Research Conference, NorDes 07.


Hult, L., Irestig, M., & Lundberg, J. (2006). Design perspectives. Human-Computer Interaction, 21(1), 5-48.


Krippendorff, K. (2006). The Semantic Turn; A New Foundation for Design. Boca Ratan, London, New York: Taylor & Francis CRC.


Lim, Y., Lee, S., & Kim, D. (2011). Interactivity attributes for expression-oriented interaction design. International Journal of Design, 5(3), 113-128.


Löwgren, J., & Stolterman, E. (2005). Thoughtful Interaction Design: A Design Perspective on Information Technology. Cambridge: MIT Press.


Vargo, S. L. & Lusch R. F. (2008). Service-Dominant Logic: Continuing the Evolution. In Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 36, 1‚Äď10.


von Wright, G. H. (1963). The Varieties of Goodness. Routledge.


Wetter-Edman, K., Sangiorgi, D., Edvardsson, B., Holmlid, S., Grönroos, C., & Mattelmäki, T. (2014). Design for Value Co-Creation: Exploring Synergies Between Design for Service and Service Logic. Service Science, 6(2), 106-121.


Whiteside, J., Bennet, J. & Holtzbatt, K. (1988). Usability engineering: Our experience and evolution. In M. Helander (Ed.), Handbook of Human Computer Interaction (pp. 791-817). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

Service Design Geographies. Proceedings of the ServDes.2016 Conference

Author:
Mattias Arvola, Stefan Holmlid
Title:
Service Design Ways to Value-In-Use
Note: the following are taken directly from CrossRef
Citations:
No citations available at the moment


Responsible for this page: Peter Berkesand
Last updated: 2017-02-21