Despite the growth of service design firms in Europe, the success of the Service Design Network, and the globally self-organized service design drinks, including one in San Francisco, service design still really hasn’t made its move on the United States. And while many designers I talk to are very interested in service design, businesses are not demanding it.
Does this mean service design cannot take off in the United States? No. I think it’s got a shot if we can show businesses the value of such an approach.
During the Interaction10 conference, I had the opportunity to meet with Birgit Mager and Shelley Evenson, both founders of the Service Design Network, to talk about plans for a US conference to promote the value of service design to the business sector. One possible location we discussed is Boston, given Shelley’s current ties to Microsoft there. There have already been rumors that Microsoft will sponsor the event. Though these rumors, I have been told, are premature.
But if all goes as discussed, the one-day conference will take place in October around the same time as the Berlin conference. The plan is then for a full US service design conference in 2011, similar to the Berlin conference with content for practitioners, academics, and students. I hope to have a hand in both events, and am excited about bringing the conversation about service design back to the US after the dearth that resulted after the Emergence conference ceased.
While bringing conferences to the US will certainly help raise the profile of service design here, some designers I have talked to either dismiss service design or don’t think it will take hold. What do you think?
Comments
7 responses to “Can Service Design Take Off in the US?”
I think Service Design could have a somewhat delayed start in the US due to the North American markets somewhat stronger service consciousness. Compared to Europe, where service gaps are often more apparent, it might be seen as unnecessary by many potential Service Design clients. As with other design principles, it might have to be understood through a broad range of industries that service is a) something that can be designed, b) that design methods can make a significant contribution towards what services need to be truly creating value for every stakeholder and c) how that translates into a great value (bang-4-$) for the client!
More traditional approaches to the creation of services will likely prevail – if there is a methodology behind them or not. I guess what SD needs now is exposure and especially great projects that shape the field, have impact and become known between a wide community of people – not only potential clients but their customers as well. And by exposure I mean that the connection between “Service” and “Design” should be known as one that is related to the inner workings of the value-creation of a service, not just fancy signage or nice info brochures..
Creating conferences, giving more people the chance to gather around the fireplace and tell their successful stories, will definitely help in this regard. I would also suggest giving services in general a better place in the light (next to products, that are discussed all over time and again) would help. Then again, networking between individual service designers and companies is crucial – especially at this stage.
Guess I will become a member of the SDN myself in the next couple of days ;D
Cheers,
Jan
ps. great blog! keep up the good work.
I concur regarding the necessity for Service to be linked with the notion of added “value” for both provider and those engaged along the way. The fact that “Service” propositions exist whether formally designed or as haphazard concoctions, may lead many to falsely believe that since the system is functioning, that it works. In a culture where product “innovation” is typically seen as the panacea for many ills, the focus on Service barely makes a blip on the radar screen. It appears much easier to excite and entice investment with a flashy rendering or prototype than a service-blueprint.
Another topic to consider may be the relative weakness of co-creative activity here in the US. Where design for service thrives, co-creation closely follows and is seeing a rapid maturation of the tools and methods used. That said, a great deal of work overseas appears in the development of public services. In that case, community involvement plays a key role in the identification of issues through prototyping to implementation. The body of relevant expertise in dealing with what may be a uniquely American context just doesn’t seem to be in place to the degree that it can be support large scale efforts, yet.
I am looking forward to the return of a North American conference where current and emerging practitioners can once again meet face to face and take a fresh look at what it will take for SD to take root and formally establish itself on this side of the world.
Good points all around. Thanks for the input.
In regards to the public service foundations or correlation with service design, it almost seems like a stigma here in the US. I say stigma because the overall impression I get from other designers is that either designing for public services isn’t the real deal or is the only place for service design. And as the US does not offer much public service design, there is no opportunity for service design. In other words, service design equals public service design. To counter this recently, I brought up Engine’s service design project with Virgin Atlantic and my interlocutor seemed surprised. This supports Jan’s call for greater exposure, and I would say, more case studies.
As for co-creation and service design, I’m not convinced one requires the other. Though certainly, as a method, co-creation has a stronger uptake in the service design community. I’m not sure the lack of co-creation is having an impact. But I will give that a think.
There are two questions here: will the label “service design” gain traction in the States, and will the practice of multi-channel design that crosses services & products grow?
It’s inevitable that competitive pressures will drive that multichannel design practice into broader acceptance, both in and outside the public sector. The label in the US today is much more often about customer experience design to talk about the same set of things.
I like service design better as a label (because so much of a good service isn’t at all about customer experience) but in the end, I’m not sure it matters.
On the US conference note, please consider a 2 day event (where 1 day is a barcamp style unconference, if organizing is too much hassle). Flying to the east coast for a 1 day deal is hard for me to justify (though I may be able to combine it with other things depending on the date).
On a different point: of course we have to show the value of design in a business context, and be able to influence decision making in the organizations we work with.
Unfortunately, many designers don’t have the business fluency to be able to do that, though more and more are getting there. More than a new method for ethnographic research or prototyping, business fluency and influence skills are what get design done (whether that’s service design, ux design, or whatever).
J
Jess,
I’d love to hear more about your thoughts on why a good service isn’t all about customer experience. I’ve had a couple conversations where customer experience was equated to service design. I don’t think it’s true.
Unconference suggestion noted.
As for your final point, totally agree. Business fluency is needed. It’s something I increasingly realize as I interact more and more with business development folks. They decide what projects start and which ones continue.
I just wanted to add that I’m hopeful that service design takes off in the US, and I think that one of the keys to that happening is for business leaders and managers to develop design fluency.
As a MBA student at Case Western Reserve University I had the opportunity to take Dick Buchanan’s year long design class that is part of the interdisciplinary initiative, Manage by Designing. While the program obviously doesn’t produce designers, I think it gives future business leaders a greater appreciation for designers and the various disciplines, particularly service design. Time will tell, but as design is being introduced into more and more business schools in the country I’m hopeful that the appreciation continues to grow!
Great blog and great post!