designing and developing intentional service systems
TRANSCRIPT
Designing and developing intentional service systems
Lysanne Lessard, PhD Assistant Professor
Telfer School of Management, University of Ottawa [email protected]
Talk presented to the International Society for Service Innovation Professionals
July 23, 2014
Overview
Ø Profile
Ø Current research focus: KIBS engagements
Ø Research objectives and methodology
Ø Understanding value cocreation in KIBS engagements
Ø Designing for value cocreation in KIBS engagements
Ø Modeling for value cocreation in KIBS engagements: an intentional perspective
Ø Toward engineering knowledge-intensive service systems
Bio
Current position Assistant Professor Business Analytics and Information Systems Telfer School of Management, University of Ottawa
Previously Ø PhD in Information Systems, University of Toronto (Kelly Lyons was
committee member, Paul Maglio was external examiner) Ø MSc in Information Technology, Téluq-Université du Québec à
Montréal Ø Undergrad in Communications, with specialization in multimedia Ø Many years of consultancy work in web design, development, and
support, often in the context of techno-pedagogical projects
Teaching Ø Programs
§ Bachelor of Commerce § Master’s in E-Business Technologies § MBA (French and English)
Ø Courses § Intro to IT for managers (B.Com. and MBA) § Socio-technical change, business process transformation (MEBT,
MBA) Ø Supervision
§ MEBT § MSc in Health Systems (upcoming)
Ø Context § No space for service science course – need to integrate service
perspective into current courses § Longer-term goal: create and deliver service design and
engineering course for undergrad or grad level
Research focus: KIBS engagements
Ø Knowledge-intensive business services
§ Industrial sector encompassing management consultancy, outsourcing, research and development (R&D), and more
§ Characterized by expertise, co-production, and relational exchanges (
§ Important factors of productivity and innovation in industrialised economies
§ Lack of research on business services, in particular knowledge-intensive business services
Research focus: KIBS engagements
Ø From firms to engagements
§ Multiple stakeholder perspectives (provider, client, partners)
§ KIBS-type of activities in many sectors
Ø For KIBS engagements such as R&D, IT outsourcing, software development:
§ High level of collaboration between provider, client, and third-party collaborators for co-production of solution
§ Actors driven by strategic concerns: desire to innovate, long-term interests
Research objectives and methodology: thesis
Develop a design
framework and identify
modeling requirements
Identify generative
mechanisms of value cocreation
in KIBS
Develop a modeling
technique for analysis and
design of KIBS
Understanding of value
cocreation in KIBS
Practical tools for design and
decision-making
Research objectives
Methodology
Design Science Research (Hevner, 2004; van Aken, 2005)
Understand ǀ Build (concept)
Multiple-case study, iterative strategy for theory-building (Yin, 1994)
Identify and fulfill modeling
requirements
Validate modeling technique through case study data
Build (artefact) Evaluate
Research objectives and methodology: current work
Ø Objectives § Develop models, methods, tools for
systematic approach to design, development, and monitoring of knowledge-intensive service systems
Ø Methodologies § Design Science research § Service systems engineering
Understanding value cocreation in KIBS engagements
9
Process of aligning, leading to commitment
Process of integrating, leading to determination of value
Perceiving benefits
Organizing resources
Developing high-level interests
Creating value propositions
Articulating deliverables
Deliverables (and
outcomes)
Valuing
Perceiving benefits
Developing high-level interests
Organizing resources
Understanding value cocreation in KIBS engagements
Ø Results in line with current literature, but emphasize intentional, strategic dimension of value cocreation (Lessard et Yu, 2013)
Ø Typical problems • Alignment: some actors are ignored • Integration: lack of explicit indicators
Designing for value cocreation in KIBS engagements
11
Provider Client
Value proposi-on
High-‐level interests Perceived
benefits
High-‐level interests
Value proposi-on
Perceived benefits
Are there other benefits that could meet each actor’s high-‐level
interests?
Is the value proposi3on of each actor well aligned with benefits that the other actor is interested in? Are there
poten-al risks for each actor associated with the other actor’s value proposi3on?
Perceived benefits
Value proposi-on
Perceived benefits
Value proposi-on
Provider Client
High-‐level interests
High-‐level interests
Organized resources
Do actors have the means to access, allocate or create the resources required to fulfill their value proposi3ons?
Organized resources
Is the amount of resources required by each actor to fulfill its value proposi-on on a par with the benefits that it perceives from the service engagement?
Designing for value cocreation in KIBS engagements
12
Perceived benefits
Value proposi-on
Perceived benefits
Value proposi-on
Provider Client
High-‐level interests
High-‐level interests
Organized resources
Ar-culated deliverable
Organized resources
How will each actor determine the actual or poten-al value derived from integra-ng the deliverables and outcomes of the service engagement into their ac-vi-es?
Designing for value cocreation in KIBS engagements
13
Perceived benefits
Value proposi-on
Perceived benefits
Value proposi-on
Provider Client
High-‐level interests
High-‐level interests
Organized resources
Ar-culated deliverable
Organized resources
Partner
Technolo-‐gical actor
Partner
Designing for value cocreation in KIBS engagements
14
Modeling for value cocreation in KIBS: requirements Ø Descriptive requirements
§ Ability to express each mechanism in the alignment and integration processes § E.g., high-level interests, perceived benefits, organized
resources, etc. § Ability to express the relationship between each pair
of mechanisms § E.g., high-level interests shaping perceived benefits, alignment
of perceived benefits and value propositions, etc.)
Ø Analytical requirements § Ability to help answer questions for the design of
each process, derived from each pair of mechanisms § E.g., Are Actor A’s perceived benefits in line with her high-level
interests? Are Actor A’s perceived benefits aligned with Actor B’s value proposition(s)?
Modeling approaches for services
Ø Service blueprinting (Bitner & al., 2008)
§ Focus on linear processes and encounters
Ø Service system maps (Morelli, 2009)
• Focus on actors and resource flows
Ø Service system capstone model (Kami & Kaner, 2007)
• Focus on service objects and attributes
Ø E3forces (Pijpers & Gordijn, 2007)
• Focus on exchange of value in actor network
No current modeling approach able to express and analyze both the collaborative and strategic nature of KIBS engagements
Modeling for value cocreation in KIBS: Value cocreation modeling (VCM)
Ø Elaborated using and adapting concepts and constructs from three existing modeling approaches: § i* (agent-oriented modeling) (Yu, 2009)
actors and boundaries, goal elements (softgoals, tasks, resources), link elements (contribution, decomposition, dependency)
§ Business intelligence modeling (Barone et al., 2010) process, indicators
§ Value Network Analysis (Allee, 2008) analytic tables
17
18
!
GENERIC VCM MODEL
19
GENERIC VCM ANALYTIC TABLES
Illustration of VCM with case study data Ø HCA Training
§ Case study of R&D service engagement between Canadian College (provider) and continuing care organization (client)
§ Goal of engagement: develop new curriculum for training health care aides (HCA) on how to manage clients with mental health diagnoses
§ Data used to identify key processes of value cocreation and modeling requirements to be fulfilled by VCM
!
Analyzing alignment with VCM For all actors: • Medium or high level
of perceived benefits • Medium or low risk /
resource costs Likely commitment to engagement • If not, use of VCM to
support reflection on how to improve value proposition, lower resource costs, etc.
Supporting analytic tables for alignment
Analyzing integration with VCM
!
• Different evaluations of “effectiveness of curriculum”
Did not use the same indicators • Use of VCM to
choose and plan indicators (ensure data is available)
• High evaluation of outcomes by provider
• Low evaluation of outcomes by client
Client did not have resources to integrate results • Use of VCM could
have alerted actors and helped find a solution
Toward engineering knowledge-intensive service systems
Tool support § Current research project to specify modeling
requirements from systematic literature review on KIBS value cocreation processes
§ More research needed on performance indicators for KIBS engagements § In particular, KPIs for outcome level (integration of deliverables
and outcomes as resources in line actors’ with high-level interests)
§ Can performance indicators be derived from enterprise / network data?
24 Lysanne Lessard, Telfer-Sprott Research Symposium 2014
Model-driven service engineering § Bring intentional modeling to service system design and
development to move from functional to business preoccupations
§ Develop models and methods for engineering each dimension and phase of a knowledge-intensive service system lifecycle
§ Account for multiple perspectives on value (values cocreation), people / IT interactions, knowledge processes as key enablers
Toward engineering knowledge-intensive service systems
Selected publications Ø Lessard, L., (2014). Designing and Managing Value Co-Creation in KIBS Engagements, Technology
Innovation Management Review (July 2014). Ø Lessard, L. (2014). Reframing the socio-technical problem: A way forward for social informatics. In
H. Rosenbaum & P. Fichman (Eds.), Social Informatics: Past, Present and Future (pp. 136-151): Cambridge Scholars.
Ø Lessard, L. (2014).Cocreating value in knowledge-intensive business services: An empirically-grounded design framework and a modeling technique. (Ph.D.), University of Toronto, Toronto.
Ø Lessard, Lysanne, & Eric Yu (2013) Service Systems Design: An Intentional Agent Perspective. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries, 23(1), 68-75. doi: 10.1002/hfm.20513
Ø Lessard, Lysanne, & Eric Yu. (2012). Using Design Science Research to Develop a Modeling Technique for Service Design. In K. Peffers, M. Rothenberger & Kuechler B. (Eds.), DESRIST 2012, LNCS (Vol. 7286, pp. 66-77). Heidelberg: Springer.
Ø Lyons, Kelly, Lysanne Lessard, & S. Marks (2011, August 4-8) Integrating social features in service systems: the case of a library service. Paper presented at the 17th Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS 2011), Detroit, MI, USA.
Ø Lessard, Lysanne, & Eric Yu. (2008). Supporting service design through ontology-based service reference models: a proposition. Paper presented at the SIGSVC 2008, the AIS Special Interest Group on Services Workshop, Paris, France.
Thank you!
I look forward to contributing to ISSIP R&E SIG.
Don’t hesitate to contact me for more
information or potential collaborations.
Lysanne Lessard, Assistant Professor 613-562-5800, ext. 2468 [email protected]
École de gestion Telfer Université d’Ottawa
55, avenue Laurier Est Ottawa ON K1N 6N5
Tél. : (613) 562-5731
Téléc. : (613) 562-5164
Telfer School of Management University of Ottawa 55 Laurier Avenue East Ottawa ON K1N 6N5 Tel.: (613) 562-5731 Fax: (613) 562-5164
www.telfer.uOttawa.ca