Designers move more and more in the direction of Service Design, in which frequently a participatory or co-design approach is used to involve service providers in the design process. The designerprovider relationship in such Service Design processes differs in four aspects from traditional client-relationships: The relationship is 1) more dynamic and interactive, 2) based on collaboratively evolving ideas and ambitions, 3) focusing on the process of innovation, rather than on the outcome, and 4) frequently based on extrinsic motivation for innovation or on fuzzy starting points. Designers experience difficulties in persuading service providers of the importance of such a collaborative approach, while providers are not familiar with this kind of approach and their organizations are not ready for such a kind of collaboration. This paper positions designer-provider relationship in Service Design processes in literature and describes a research proposal for the development of an efficient and effective participatory design intervention that stimulates collaboration between designers and service providers.
DOCUMENT
During a service interaction, a customer should be viewed as having three distinct capacities: as a client, as a connection and as a resource. In each of these respective capacities, service (S) processes, relationship (R) processes and loyalty (L) processes create value for both customers and organizations. Satisfactory service is the minimum requirement for relationship processes to be effective and for the connection capacity to be activated. Likewise, high relationship quality is a minimal condition for loyalty processes to be effective and for the resource capacity to be activated. After presenting the measurable and actionable dimensions of relationship quality, I explain the difference between service processes and relationship processes. According to the service integrated relationships (SIR) framework, when relationship processes are integrated with existing service processes: (a) relationship quality improves; (b) loyal customer behaviours are evoked; and (c) service satisfaction improves. I conclude by discussing implications of the SIR framework for organizational systems and service employees.
LINK
Previous research suggests that in today’s experience economy, service is no longer the key determinant and that customer experience has taken over. However, few studies compare the relative impact of service quality and customer experiences on outcomes. The aim of this quantitative study is to examine the separate effects of service quality and customer experience on satisfaction, revisit intentions and word-of-mouth communication. Contrary to expectations, service quality has a larger effect on outcomes than customer experience. The mediation analysis shows very small indirect effect sizes, suggesting that that customer experience hardly mediates the relationship between service quality and the three outcomes. The conclusion is that measuring service quality remains essential to explaining consumer behaviour in the experience economy.
LINK