Open Seminar on Service Systems Science (2009), Systems Sciences Meet Service Sciences, Service Innovation Educational Program, Tokyo Institute of Technology (Tamachi campus)

This digest was created in real-time during the meeting, based on the speaker's presentation(s) and comments from the audience. The content should not be viewed as an official transcript of the meeting, but only as an interpretation by a single individual. Lapses, grammatical errors, and typing mistakes may not have been corrected. Questions about content should be directed to the originator. The digest has been made available for purposes of scholarship, posted on the Coevolving Innovation web site by David Ing.

Introduction by Kyoichi Jim Kijima

Klaus-Peter Faunrich

• Chair, business information systems, Univesity of Leipzig
• Integrative software solutions, from middleware to complete operational modeling

Dean said listening to management gurus is prohibited during business hours

Will present the view of an engineer

• Believe that systems engineers have to play a vital role of service
• No management philosophy will help

Four parts:

• Service science and systems science
• Fundamentals of service engineering, developed from the 1990s, Mandelbaum, etc.
• Service modeling
• Applied example in globalization of business

Diagram: remote service system: big in European manufacturers

• It's a social-technical system

Service systems science

1. Service systems theory

• Very weak these days, often over-generalizing
• Weak in concept, inadequate in terminology and inaccurate in terminology

2. Analysis

• 2.1 Service systems modeling
• Semi-formal model, e.g. don't do deep modeling of customers
• Modeled as a deterministic, nonlinear, qualitative, semi-formal and domain-specific
• Can't do dynamic models, some things can be done with OR in queuing, but not the whole complex system

• 2.2 Simulation:  not yet

3. Service systems engineering

• Systemic procedures, new
• Management of developed services

History:

• 1998, first report DIN on service engineering, "adequate methods and tools"
• Minimally, says try to do it systematically
• Literature was dominated by marketing, management science, it's all so different that engineers can't do it

• 1998 Avishai Mandelbaum, Haifa Tech, in Israel, good friend

• Developed from an OR background
• "compared against the more prevalent industrial engineering and service management"

Fundamentals of service engineering

Haven't changed slides in 13 years

Provocative approach: Services can be defined as products

• Not just done as one-time
• Can be variance, mass customization
• Should be a turnover
• When lots size got up, and variance goes down, can describe them like products
• e.g. telecom services are products

Objection of immateriality:  but don't fear as immaterial, because come from a software business

Coming from industrial engineering, can keep things (high tech)

• Reference models
• Process models
• Notation of a product model
• Notation of a component
• Notarion of component-base architecture
• Learn from variants construction
• Configuration management

But then, need to add some new concepts (high touch)

• Design of customer interactions are different
• A stronger focus on human resources
• Will have emotion, cooperation, empathy, that we're not used to dealing with, but in civil engineering, used to complex
• Ragaswamy came as a civil engineer
• Integration of methods from social sciences

All men are created equal, but all services are not

Start from position, for service it is true that "x", then it's wrong

• Have to distinguish in service sector, there are too many types
• Better to do work on typology and morphology

Morphology:  all of the combinations

Built a typology, empirical study of 300 German enterprises

• Came with four clusters -- not necessarily true everywhere
• Two dimensions: complexity, and interactiveness (how involved you get)

Low complexity, low interactiveness, e.g. very simple insurance

• Goals:  service factory
• Challenges: automation and industrialization, like mass production and factories
• Industralization of services, lose jobs
• Automation, i.e. symbolic machines (computing) and telecommunications (logistics)

High involvement, customer integrative services

• Customer gets involved
• System model before and after looks the same, but the roles have changed
• Challenges include multi-channeling

Knowledge / interaction intensive services, e.g. consulting at the top of the pyramid

• Ability interact in multiple value chains, rapid time to market

Complex services, for engineers:  not highly interactive, but very complex

• Want to master product complexity
• Efficient configuration management
• Realize platform strategies

Service engineering is like all engineering

• Need a procedural model
• Need methods
• Need tools to do it efficiently
• Do at two levels:  developing services; and innovation management

Service development

• Potential --> provision --> result
• Result == product model
• Provision == porcess model
• Potential == resource model

Business schools say look at product, but have to understand the product instead:  e.g. don't look at auto manufacturing, look at the end car

• Product model defines what a service delivers

In addition to product model --> process model --> resource model, have to develop marketing models in parallel

• Have to talk about customer interactions

Core of a service system, in UML class diagram

Benefits of service engineering:

• Customer orientation
• Innovation management
• Productivity
• Quality

Computer Aided Service Engineering, trying to build from ECMA tools

Service modeling

2x2: complexity (variations), intensity of contact

Created metamodel

Future:

• interested in emphasizing differences between specific classes of services
• want to find standardized service types

Previous Post Next Post