scholarly journals A Schema for Systematic Service Imagining: Context-Based Activity Modeling

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (22) ◽  
pp. 9558
Author(s):  
Yong Se Kim ◽  
Jiyun Jeong ◽  
YeonKoo Hong ◽  
Seok Jin Hong
Keyword(s):  
Human Activities ◽  
Design Thinking ◽  
Service Design ◽  
Visual Thinking ◽  
Structured Design ◽  
Activity Modeling ◽  
Product Service ◽  
Service Activities ◽  
Cognitive Activities ◽  
Structured Design Methods

Design thinking as a mindset and as a process for design and business innovation receives a lot of attention. Thus, concrete and structured methods for design thinking need to be devised, and design thinking competencies should be fostered proactively. Design thinking is underpinned by visual thinking composed of interactive iterations of Seeing—Imagining—Drawing. The visual reasoning model developed to understand and support visual thinking describes the process with cognitive activities as well as knowledge and schema. The visual reasoning model could serve as a framework to devise structured methods and tools for design thinking and to foster design thinking competencies. It would be desirable if schema to serve as underlying models in imagining service activities are to be identified so that cognitive activities in seeing—imagining—drawing can be systematically structured in service design, where the objects of designing are human activities and experiences. In this paper, three structured design methods developed for service design have been described and characterized in the framework of the visual reasoning model. Particularly the context-based activity modeling has been demonstrated as schema in structured imagining of service activities for product-service systems, as it serves the underlying role in organizing information on human activities consistently and yet with different interactions with other constituents of these three imagining methods.

A collaborative application of design thinking and Taguchi approach in restaurant service design for food wellbeing

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
G. Rejikumar ◽  
Asokan-Ajitha Aswathy ◽  
Ajay Jose ◽  
Mathew Sonia
Keyword(s):  
Food Industry ◽  
Design Thinking ◽  
Service Design ◽  
Service Research ◽  
Taguchi Approach ◽  
Simple Method ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Wellbeing Index ◽  
Food Movement ◽  
Practical Implications

PurposeInnovative restaurant service designs impart food wellbeing to diners. This research comprehends customer aspirations and concerns in a restaurant-dining experience to develop a service design that enhances the dining experience using the design thinking approach and evaluates its efficiency using the Taguchi method of robust design.Design/methodology/approachThe sequential incidence technique defines diners' needs, which, followed by brainstorming sessions, helped create multiple service designs with important attributes. Prototype narration, as a scenario, acted as the stimulus for evaluators to respond to the WHO-5 wellbeing index scale. Scenario-based Taguchi experiment with nine foodservice attributes in two levels and the wellbeing score as the response variable helped identify levels of critical factors that develop better FWB.FindingsThe study identified the best combination of factors and their preferred levels to maximize FWB in a restaurant. Food serving hygiene, followed by information about cuisine specification, and food movement in the restaurant, were important to FWB. The experiment revealed that hygiene perceptions are critical to FWB, and service designs have a significant role in it. Consumers prefer detailed information about the ingredients and recipe of the food they eat; being confident that there will be no unacceptable ingredients added to the food inspires their FWB.Research limitations/implicationsTheoretically, this study contributes to the growing body of literature on design thinking and transformative service research, especially in the food industry.Practical implicationsThis paper details a simple method to identify and evaluate important factors that optimize FWB in a restaurant. The proposed methodology will help service designers and technology experts devise settings that consider customer priorities and contribute to their experience.Originality/valueThis study helps to understand the application of design thinking and the Taguchi approach for creating robust service designs that optimize FWB.

scholarly journals From summative to developmental

2019 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 241-248 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carolyn Steele Gray ◽  
James Shaw
Keyword(s):  
Integrated Care ◽  
Design Thinking ◽  
Complex Interventions ◽  
Service Design ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Portal System ◽  
Contextual Influences ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Patient Reported

Purpose Models of integrated care are prime examples of complex interventions, incorporating multiple interacting components that work through varying mechanisms to impact numerous outcomes. The purpose of this paper is to explore summative, process and developmental approaches to evaluating complex interventions to determine how to best test this mess. Design/methodology/approach This viewpoint draws on the evaluation and complex intervention literatures to describe the advantages and disadvantages of different methods. The evaluation of the electronic patient reported outcomes (ePRO) mobile application and portal system is presented as an example of how to evaluate complex interventions with critical lessons learned from this ongoing study. Findings Although favored in the literature, summative and process evaluations rest on two problematic assumptions: it is possible to clearly identify stable mechanisms of action; and intervention fidelity can be maximized in order to control for contextual influences. Complex interventions continually adapt to local contexts, making stability and fidelity unlikely. Developmental evaluation, which is more conceptually aligned with service-design thinking, moves beyond these assumptions, emphasizing supportive adaptation to ensure meaningful adoption. Research limitations/implications Blended approaches that incorporate service-design thinking and rely more heavily on developmental strategies are essential for complex interventions. To maximize the benefit of this approach, three guiding principles are suggested: stress pragmatism over stringency; adopt an implementation lens; and use multi-disciplinary teams to run studies. Originality/value This viewpoint offers novel thinking on the debate around appropriate evaluation methodologies to be applied to complex interventions like models of integrated care.

scholarly journals Design Methods and Processes for ML/DL models

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Meenu Mary John
Keyword(s):  
Embedded Systems ◽  
Design Methods ◽  
Key Factors ◽  
High Performing ◽  
Structured Design ◽  
Continuous Delivery ◽  
End To End ◽  
Access To Data ◽  
Structured Design Methods ◽  
Decentralized Architecture

Context: With the advent of Machine Learning (ML) and especially Deep Learning (DL) technology, companies are increasingly using Artificial Intelligence (AI) in systems, along with electronics and software. Nevertheless, the end-to-end process of developing, deploying and evolving ML and DL models in companies brings some challenges related to the design and scaling of these models. For example, access to and availability of data is often challenging, and activities such as collecting, cleaning, preprocessing, and storing data, as well as training, deploying and monitoring the model(s) are complex. Regardless of the level of expertise and/or access to data scientists, companies in all embedded systems domain struggle to build high-performing models due to a lack of established and systematic design methods and processes. Objective: The overall objective is to establish systematic and structured design methods and processes for the end-to-end process of developing, deploying and successfully evolving ML/DL models. Method: To achieve the objective, we conducted our research in close collaboration with companies in the embedded systems domain using different empirical research methods such as case study, action research and literature review. Results and Conclusions: This research provides six main results: First, it identifies the activities that companies undertake in parallel to develop, deploy and evolve ML/DL models, and the challenges associated with them. Second, it presents a conceptual framework for the continuous delivery of ML/DL models to accelerate AI-driven business in companies. Third, it presents a framework based on current literature to accelerate the end-to-end deployment process and advance knowledge on how to integrate, deploy and operationalize ML/DL models. Fourth, it develops a generic framework with five architectural alternatives for deploying ML/DL models at the edge. These architectural alternatives range from a centralized architecture that prioritizes (re)training in the cloud to a decentralized architecture that prioritizes (re)training at the edge. Fifth, it identifies key factors to help companies decide which architecture to choose for deploying ML/DL models. Finally, it explores how MLOps, as a practice that brings together data scientist teams and operations, ensures the continuous delivery and evolution of models.

scholarly journals A Framework for Systemic Design

2014 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alex Ryan
Keyword(s):  
Systems Thinking ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Design Thinking ◽  
Dynamic Environment ◽  
Service Design ◽  
Design Methods ◽  
Integrated Systems ◽  
Value Conflict ◽  
Systems Approaches ◽  
Systemic Design

As designers move upstream from traditional product and service design to engage with challenges characterised by complexity, uniqueness, value conflict, and ambiguity over objectives, they have increasingly integrated systems approaches into their practice. This synthesis of systems thinking with design thinking is forming a distinct new field of systemic design. This paper presents a framework for systemic design as a mindset, methodology, and set of methods that together enable teams to learn, innovate, and adapt to a complex and dynamic environment. We suggest that a systemic design mindset is inquiring, open, integrative, collaborative, and centred. We propose a systemic design methodology composed of six main activities: framing, formulating, generating, reflecting, inquiring, and facilitating. We view systemic design methods as a flexible and open-ended set of procedures for facilitating group collaboration that are both systemic and designerly.  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document