ServiceDesignKIT: A Web Platform of Digital Service Design Techniques

  • Xuanhui Liu
  • Erwin Tak-Ming Leung
  • Peyman Toreini
  • Alexander Maedche
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10844)

Abstract

A broad spectrum of design techniques is available to support digital service design processes. With the growing number of available design techniques, selecting suitable design techniques becomes increasingly challenging, especially for design novices. In this paper, we present design principles and their instantiation in the Web platform ServiceDesignKIT for supporting design novices in the process of identifying and selecting design techniques. ServiceDesignKIT is a platform that combines an experts’ top-down knowledge-based classification with novices’ bottom-up suggested tags. With this work, we contribute to the body of design knowledge of Web-based platforms that provides simple and efficient access to design techniques.

Keywords

Digital service design Design technique Selection support Classification Web platform 

References

  1. 1.
    Agid, S.: “…It’s your project, but it’s not necessarily your work…”: infrastructuring, situatedness, and designing relational practice. In: Proceedings of the 14th Participatory Design Conference on Full Papers - PDC 2016, Aarhus, Denmark, pp. 81–90 (2016)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Alves, R., Jardim Nunes, N.: Towards a taxonomy of service design methods and tools. In: Falcão e Cunha, J., Snene, M., Nóvoa, H. (eds.) IESS 2013. LNBIP, vol. 143, pp. 215–229. Springer, Heidelberg (2013).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-36356-6_16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brinkkemper, S.: Method engineering: engineering of information systems development methods and tools. Inf. Softw. Technol. 38, 275–280 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bruun, A.: Training software developers in usability engineering: a literature review. In: Proceedings: NordiCHI, pp. 82–91 (2010)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bussolon, S.: Card sorting, category validity, and contextual navigation. J. Inf. Archit. 1(2), 5–29 (2009)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chaturvedi, A.R., Dolk, D.R., Drnevich, P.L.: Design principles for virtual worlds. MIS Q. 35(3), 673–684 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Choi, Y.: A complete assessment of tagging quality: a consolidated methology. J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 66(4), 798–817 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Duchowski, A.T.: A breadth-first survey of eye-tracking applications. Behav. Res. Methods Instrum. Comput. 34(4), 455–470 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fonteyn, M., Kuipers, B., Grobe, S.: A description of think aloud method and protocol analysis. Qual. Health Res. 3(4), 430–441 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fuge, M., Peters, B., Agogino, A.: Machine learning algorithms for recommending design methods. J. Mech. Des. 136(10), 101103 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Walls, J.G., Widmeyer, G.R., El Sawy, O.A.: Assessing information system design theory in perspective: how useful was our 1992 initial rendition? J. Inf. Technol. Theory Appl. 6(3), 43–58 (2004)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gerrard, V., Sosa, R.: Examining participation. In: Proceedings of the 13th Participatory Design Conference on Research Papers, PDC 2014, Windhoek, Namibia, pp. 111–120 (2014)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Golder, S.A., Huberman, B.A.: Usage patterns of collaborative tagging systems. J. Inf. Sci. 32(2), 198–208 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Goldkuhl, G., Perjons, E.: Focus, goal and roles in e-service design five ideal types of the design process. e-Service J. 9(2), 24–45 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gregor, S.: The nature of theory in information systems. MIS Q. 30(3), 611–642 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Van Den Haak, M.J., De Jong, M.D.T., Schellens, P.J.: Constructive interaction: an analysis of verbal interaction in a usability setting. IEEE Trans. Prof. Commun. 49(4), 311–324 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hileman, R.: An introductory lecture for digital designers (1998). http://www.smsys.com/pub/dsgnmeth.pdf
  18. 18.
    Hyrskykari, A., Ovaska, S., Majaranta, P., Räihä, K.-J., Lehtinen, M.: Gaze path stimulation in retrospective think-aloud. J. Eye Mov. Res. 2(4), 1–18 (2008)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ives, B., Olson, M.H., Baroudi, J.J.: The measurement of user lnformation satisfaction. Commun. ACM 26(10), 785–793 (1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kettinger, W.J., Teng, J.T.C., Guha, S.: Business process change: a study of methodologies, techniques, and tools. MIS Q. 21(1), 55–80 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kim, S.S., Son, J.: Out of dedication or constraint? A dual model of post-adoption phenomena and its empirical test in the context of online services. MIS Q. 33(1), 49–70 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lewis, J.R.: Sample sizes for usability studies: additional considerations. Hum. Factors J. 36(2), 368–378 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Liu, X., Werder, K., Mädche, A.: A taxonomy of digital service design techniques. In: Thirty Seventh International Conference on Information Systems, pp. 1–12 (2016)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lusch, R.F., Vargo, S.L.: Service-dominant logic: reactions, reflections and refinements. Mark. Theory 6(3), 281–288 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    MacKay, J.M., Elam, J.J.: A comparative study of how experts and novices use a decision aid to solve problems in complex knowledge domains. Inf. Syst. Res. 3(2), 150–172 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Maguire, M.: Methods to support human-centred design. Int. J. Hum Comput Stud. 55, 587–634 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Miller, G.A.: The magic number seven plus or minus two: some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychol. Rev. 63, 91–97 (1956)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Mirani, R., King, W.R.: Impacts of end-user and information center characteristics on end-user computing support. J. Manag. Inf. Syst. 11(1), 141–166 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Nickerson, R.C., Varshney, U., Muntermann, J.: A method for taxonomy development and its application in information systems. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 22, 336–359 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Nielsen, J., Pernice, K.: Eyetracking Web Usability. New Riders, Berkeley (2009)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Peffers, K., Tuunanen, T., Rothenberger, M.A., Chatterjee, S.: A design science research methodology for information systems research. J. Manag. Inf. Syst. 24(3), 45–77 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Raymond, L.: Organizational characteristics and MIS success in the context of small business. MIS Q. 9(1), 37 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Roschuni, C., Kramer, J., Agogino, A.: Design talking: how design practitioners talk about design research methods. In: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Design Education DEC 2015, Boston, Massachusetts, USA, pp. 1–8 (2015)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Roschuni, C., Kramer, J., Qian, Z., Zakskorn, L., Agogino, A.: Design talking: an ontology of design methods to support a common language of design. In: Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED 2015), Milan, Italy, pp. 285–294 (2015)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Sanders, E.B.-N., Brandt, E., Binder, T.: A framework for organizing the tools and techniques of participatory design. In: Proceedings of the 11th Biennial Participatory Design Conference, PDC 2010, Sydney, Australia, pp. 195–198. ACM (2010)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Schenk, K.D., Vitalari, N.P., Davis, K.S., Schenk, K.D.: Differences between novice and expert what do we know analysts: systems and what do we do? J. Manag. Inf. Syst. 15(1), 9–50 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Vermeeren, A., Law, E., Roto, V.: User experience evaluation methods: current state and development needs. In: Proceedings of the 6th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (NordiCHI 2010), Reykjavik, Iceland, pp. 521–530. ACM (2010)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Virzi, R.A.: Refining the test phase of usability evaluation: how many subjects is enough? Hum. Factors J. 34(4), 457–468 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    White, H.: Tropics of Discourse: Essays in Cultural Criticism. The Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore (1978)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Williams, K., Chatterjee, S., Rossi, M.: Design of emerging digital services: a taxonomy. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 17(5), 505–517 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Wixom, B.H., Todd, P.A.: A theoretical integration of user satisfaction and technology acceptance. Inf. Syst. Res. 16(1), 85–102 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Zomerdijk, L.G., Voss, C.A.: Service design for experience-centric services. J. Serv. Res. 13(1), 67–82 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Zugal, S., Pinggera, J.: Low–cost eye–trackers: useful for information systems research? In: Iliadis, L., Papazoglou, M., Pohl, K. (eds.) CAiSE 2014. LNBIP, vol. 178, pp. 159–170. Springer, Cham (2014).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07869-4_14CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Xuanhui Liu
    • 1
  • Erwin Tak-Ming Leung
    • 1
  • Peyman Toreini
    • 1
  • Alexander Maedche
    • 1
  1. 1.Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Institute of Information Systems and Marketing (IISM)KarlsruheGermany

Personalised recommendations