Advertisement

Service Thinking in Design of Complex Sustainment Solutions

  • L. A. Wood
  • P. H. Tasker
Chapter
Part of the Decision Engineering book series (DECENGIN)

Abstract

Delivering contracted performance levels for service based on the sustainment of complex engineering systems is a necessary but not sufficient condition for user satisfaction. Service is received in a context that is shaped by the state of mind of the customer—perceptions, biases, memories, intentions and patterns of thinking. Service teams need to understand the “mind of the customer”, complementing the “voice of the customer” used in requirements development. The chapter considers how service solutions are designed and suggests that the state of mind of the customer needs greater consideration during solution development. The service team functions in the social dimension to understand the customer’s mind and harmonises the service solution. The dominant thinking style in social space is characterised as “service thinking”, complementing the system thinking style which dominates in the conceptual space of product-service systems.

Keywords

Social Space System Thinking Service Design Conceptual Space Expert Team 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. P. Alford, Copy giant sees sense in services. The Australian, 10 June 2009 p. 26Google Scholar
  2. P. Allen, S. Higgins, P. McRae, H. Schlaman, Service orientation (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. T. Alonso-Rasgado, G. Thompson, A rapid design process for total care product creation. J. Eng. Des. 17(6), 509–531 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. T. Alonso-Rasgado, G. Thompson, B.-O. Elfstrom, The design of functional (total care) products. J. Eng. Des. 15(6), 515–540 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. J.C. Aurich, C. Fuchs, C. Wagenknecht, Life cycle oriented design of technical Product Service Systems. J. Clean Prod. 14, 1480–1494 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. L. Bertalanffy, Modern theories of development: An introduction to theoretical biology (Harper, New York, 1962). (originally published in 1933 in German)Google Scholar
  7. W.E. Bijker, Of bicycles, bakelites, and bulbs: Toward a theory of sociotechnical change (MIT Press, Cambridge, 1995)Google Scholar
  8. W.E. Bijker, P.T. Hughes, T.J. Pinch, The social construction of technological systems (MIT Press, Cambridge, 1987)Google Scholar
  9. B.S. Blanchard, Logistics engineering and management, 5th edn. (Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, 1998)Google Scholar
  10. H.-J. Bullinger, K.-P. Fahnrich, T. Meiren, Service engineering—Methodological development of new service products. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 85, 275–287 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. P. Checkland, Soft systems methodology: A thirty year retrospective. Syst. Res. Behav. Sci. 17, S11–S58 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. P. Checkland, A. Casar, Vicker’s concept of an appreciative system: A systematic account. J. Appl. Syst. Anal. 13, 3–17 (1986)Google Scholar
  13. L. Cozzolino, The neuroscience of human relationships (WW Norton & Company, NY, 2006)Google Scholar
  14. A. Damasio, The somatic marker hypothesis and the possible functions of the prefrontal cortex. Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. Lond. Ser. B (Biol. Sci.) 151, 1413–1420 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. A. Damasio, The feeling of what happens: Body, emotion and the making of consciousness (Vintage Books, London, 2000)Google Scholar
  16. J. Decety, T. Chaminade, When the self represents the other: A new cognitive neuroscience view on psychological identification. Conscious Cogn. Int. J. 12, 577–596 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. C. Frith, Attention to action and awareness of other minds. Conscious Cogn. Int. J. 11, 481–487 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. V. Gallese, C. Keysers, G. Rizzolati, A unifying view of the basis of social cognition. Trends Cogn. Sci. 8(9), 396–403 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. S. Greenfield, The quest for identity in the 21st century (Hodder & Stoughton, London, 2008)Google Scholar
  20. A. Griffin, J.R. Hauser, The voice of the customer. Mark. Sci. 12(1), 1–27 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. J.R. Hackman (ed.), Groups that work (Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, 1990)Google Scholar
  22. E. Hollnagel, D.D. Woods, Cognitive systems engineering: New wine in new bottles. Int. J. Man. Mach. Stud. 18, 583–600 (1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. E. Hutchins, Cognition in the wild (MIT Press, Cambridge MA, 1995)Google Scholar
  24. S. Johnstone, A. Dainty, A. Wilkinson, In search of “product-service”: Evidence from aerospace, construction and engineering. Serv. Ind. J. 28(6), 861–875 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. S. Johnstone, A. Dainty, A. Wilkinson, Integrating products and services through life: An aerospace experience. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 29(5), 520–538 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. M.W. Maier, E. Rechtin, The art of systems architecting (CRC Press, Boca Raton FL, 2002)Google Scholar
  27. R. Milo, S. Itzkovitz, N. Kashtan, R. Levitt, S. Shen-Orr, I. Ayzenshtat, M. Sheffer, U. Alon, Superfamilies of evolved and designed networks. Science 303, 1538–1542 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. N. Morelli, Developing new product service systems (PSS): Methodologies and operational tools. J. Clean Prod. 14, 1495–1501 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. National Audit Office, Transforming logistics support for fast jets. Report by the Comptroller and Auditor General, UK. HC 825 Session 2006-2007 (2007)Google Scholar
  30. A. Neely, Exploring the financial consequences of the servitization of manufacturing. Oper Manag Res. doi:  10.1007/s12063-009-0015-5 (2008)
  31. I.C.L. Ng, R. Maull, N. Yip, Outcome-based contracts as a driver for systems thinking and service-dominant logic in service science: Evidence from the defence industry. Eur. Manag. J. 27, 377–387 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. R. Ramaswamy, Design and management of service processes (Addison-Wesley, Reading, 1996)Google Scholar
  33. J. Rasmussen, A. Pejtersen, L. Goodstein, Cognitive systems engineering (Wiley, New York, 1994)Google Scholar
  34. E. Rechtin, Systems architecting, creating and building complex systems (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, 1991)Google Scholar
  35. G. Rizzolatti, L. Fogassi, V. Gallese, Neurophysiological mechanisms underlying the understanding and the imitation of action. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 2, 661–670 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. T. Sakao, Y. Shimomura, Service engineering: A novel engineering discipline for producers to increase value combing service and product. J. Clean Prod. 15, 590–604 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. E. Salas, M.A. Rosen, C.S. Burke, G.F. Goodwin, S.M. Fiore, in The making of a dream team: When expert teams do best, ed. by K.A. Ericsson et al. Handbook of expertise and expert performance (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2006)Google Scholar
  38. M. Shaw, D. Garlan, Software architecture: Perspectives on an emerging discipline (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, 1996)MATHGoogle Scholar
  39. L.G. Shostack, How to design a service. Eur. J. Mark. 16(1), 49–63 (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. D.J. Siegel, The developing mind (The Guildford Press, New York, 1999)Google Scholar
  41. D.J. Siegel, The mindful brain (W W Norton & Company, New York, 2007)Google Scholar
  42. N. Stanton, P. Salmon, G. Walker, C. Baber, D. Jenkins, Human factors methods: A practical guide for engineering and design (Ashgate Publishing, Aldershot, 2005)Google Scholar
  43. US Department of Defense, DoD architectures framework version 2.0. www.defenselink.mil/cio-nii/docs/DoDAF%20V2%20-%20Volume%201.pdf. Accessed 6 Nov 2009 (2009)
  44. G. Vickers, The art of judgement (Chapman and Hall, London, 1965)Google Scholar
  45. S. Williams, Business process modeling improves administrative control. Automat Dec, pp 44–50 (1967)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited  2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The University of AdelaideAdelaideAustralia
  2. 2.The University of CambridgeCambridgeUK
  3. 3.Cranfield UniversityCranfieldUK
  4. 4.University of KentKentUK

Personalised recommendations