Evaluating the effectiveness of „customer journey” tools for service design in online education

• Autorzy: Maik Artur , Osika Grażyna

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.29119/1641-3466.2023.172.28

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Purpose: The main purpose of this article is to describe an assessment of the effectiveness of the methods used in design thinking (DT) for service design. The analysis includes a tool that, due to the range of data used in service planning, is likely to provide reliable information for service optimization, namely the Customer Journey (CJ). Design/methodology/approach: The key source of economic value is now considered innovation and the use of technological facilities to optimise ongoing economic processes. Such an approach enforces the need to develop methods that improve the efficiency of processes related to innovation generation. DT is considered to be one of them, in which, thanks to the methodology used, innovations are developed by design in an optimal way adapted to customers. One of the tools used in DT is CJ, which is a visualised description of the logical sequence of interactions between the customer and the service occurring at each stage of contact, allowing maximum customisation of designed products or services. Methods and tools are powerful insofar as they are subjected to evaluation, so it is important to evaluate the effectiveness of a given tool by those who use it. This article presents research on the evaluation of CJ effectiveness by the online education community, given the economic importance that the industry is increasingly gaining. Survey research was used because this type of research provides tools for analysing attitudes, views, and opinions and can be used for descriptive, explanatory, and exploratory purposes. The main research objective was to determine to what extent the DT and CJ methods were used and to evaluate their effectiveness in designing services in the remote education sector. Findings: The survey showed that the surveyed group makes significant use of DT in the design of their services, in turn, among those who use DT, the vast majority are familiar with and use CJ. This may indicate, and the research confirms it, a high evaluation of CJ's effectiveness as a design tool. In addition, those who do not use CJ mainly cited lack of familiarity or lack of necessity (low complexity of the service being designed) as a reason, rather than a low effectiveness evaluation. These findings may indicate the high design potential of CJ and recommendations for its implementation. Research limitations/implications: Regardless of the results obtained, it should be borne in mind that the high evaluation examined of the effectiveness of DT and CJ remains an opinion on the subject and not an objective fact, but this is a shortcoming that applies to all survey research. It should also be emphasised that the results obtained are limited in scope; as they apply to a single industry, more general conclusions on the subject require extending the research to other sectors. Practical implications: The research conducted in this article has a very practical dimension due to the subject itself, DT and CJ as a method of action and a concrete design tool are pragmatic in nature, so determining the evaluation of their effectiveness by practitioners, because such a group was surveyed, should be considered a measurable guideline for further implementation. In the present research, the scientific goal is combined with the pragmatic goal. Social implications: Due to the fact that both DT and CJ are, by definition, aimed at maximising the matching of products or services to customers' needs, verification of their effectiveness makes it possible to assess their design potential and, in a broader perspective, to predict how much of the expected difficulties can be eliminated. Originality/value: The most significant thing about the research conducted for this article is its contribution to filling the research gap on evaluating the effectiveness of methods and tools used in the service design process, as while DT is increasingly studied and described, there is still little research on the CJ, this study is a small contribution to changing that trend.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

design thinking; customer journey; service design; online education; online education market

PL

myślenie projektowe; ścieżka klienta; projektowanie usług; edukacja online; rynek edukacji online

• Wydawca: Wydawnictwo Politechniki Śląskiej
• Czasopismo: Zeszyty Naukowe. Organizacja i Zarządzanie / Politechnika Śląska
• Rocznik: 2023
• Tom: z. 172
• Strony: 467--485
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 49 poz.

Twórcy

autor

Maik Artur

• Maik Group, Podstrobow

• https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9665-2713

autor

Osika Grażyna

• Silesian University of Technology, Zabrze

• https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8729-1001

Bibliografia

• 1. Barsalou, L.W. (2017). Define Design Thinking. The Journal of Design, Economics and Innovation, Vol. 3(2), pp. 102-105.
• 2. Belen Calavia, M., Blanco, T., Casas, R., Dieste, B. (2022). Making Design Thinking for Education sustainable: Training preservice teachers to address practice challenges. Thinking Skills and Creatiity, 101199, pp. 1-23.
• 3. Bhattacherjee, A. (2012). Social Science Research: Principles, Methods, and Practices. Florida: University of South Florida.
• 4. Boguszewicz-Kreft, A. (2021). Marketing doświadczeń. Warszawa: CeDeWu.
• 5. Brodnicki, K. (2015). Zastosowanie koncepcji design thinking w funkcjonowaniu przedsiębiorstw. Przedsiębiorstwo we współczesnej gospodarce/Research on enterprise in modern economy, Vol. 4(15), pp. 5-45.
• 6. Brown, T. (2013). Zmiana przez design: jak design thinking zmienia organizacje i pobudza innowacyjność. Wrocław: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego; Wydawnictwo LIBRON.
• 7. Brown, T., Wyatt, J. (2010). Design Thinking for Social Innovation. Stanford: Stanford Social Review. Retrieved from: https://ojs.unbc.ca/index.php/design/article/viewFile/ 1272/1089.
• 8. Buchanan, R. (1992). Wicked Problems in Design Thinking. Design Issues, The MIT Press, Vol 8(2), pp. 5-21.
• 9. Camacho, M. (2016). David Kelley: From Design to Design Thinking at Stanford and IDEO. The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation, Vol. 2(1), pp. 1-14. Retrieved from: https://reader.elsevier.com/reader/sd/pii/S2405872616300065?token=4E35D749FB 4B4CD5DC53D94814DF08C93D328113807509D865E182C9BE610D105AB64E91682 D4F5DEA7FB5231D6C1B62&originRegion=eu-west-1&originCreation= 20221208103449.
• 10. Chasanidou, D., Gasparini, A.A., Lee, E. (2015). Design method and Tools for Innovation. In: A. Marcus (ed.), Design, User Experience, and Usability: Design Discourse (pp. 1223). London-New York: Springer.
• 11. Ebdrup, T. (2012). Relational Aesthetics as a New Approach for Designing Spatial Aesthetic Expressions in Participatory Design. Retrieved from: http://www.designresearchsociety.org/images/publications/2012drs/drs2012_vol2.pdf, 4.02.2022.
• 12. Gonzalez, E.F. (2005). Fundamentals of Survey Research Methodology. Virginia: MITRE Washington C3 Centre McLean.
• 13. Halvorsrud, R. et al. (2016). Improving Quality through Customer Journey Analysis. Journal of Theory and Practice, 26(6), pp. 840-867.
• 14. Helman, J., Rosienkiewicz, M. (2016). Design Thinking jako koncepcja pobudzania innowacyjności. In: R. Knosala (ed.), Innowacje w Zarządzaniu i Inżynieria Produkcji (pp. 62-72). Opole: Oficyna Wydawnicza Polskiego Towarzystwa Zarządzania Produkcją.
• 15. Jui-Che Tu, Li-Xia Liu, Kuan-Yi Wu (2018). Study on the Learning Effectiveness of Stanford Design Thinking in Integrated Design Education. Sustainability, Vol. 10, pp. 26-49.
• 16. Kalbach, J. (2017). Mapowanie wrażeń. Kreowanie wartości za pomocą ścieżek klienta. Gliwice: Helion.
• 17. Liedtka, J. (2014). Perspective: Linking Design Thinking with Innovation Outcomes through Cognitive Bias Reduction. Product Development & Management Association, Vol. 32(6), pp. 925-938.
• 18. Lokwood, T. (2010). Design Thinking: Integrating Innovation, Customer Experience and Brand Value. New York: Allworth Press.
• 19. Maik, A (2016b). Zastosowanie service design w sektorze medycznym. FBiN, 199-219.
• 20. Maik, A. (2015). Efektywność, twórczość, dopasowanie - service design. Wydawnictwo Naukowe Sophia, pp. 149-157.
• 21. Maik, A. (2016a). Rozpoznanie zasad stosowania service design w podmiotach uzdrowiskowych. Wydawnictwo Naukowe Sophia, pp. 95-108.
• 22. Maik, A. (2017). Design usług w sektorze uzdrowiskowym na przykładzie sanatoriów województwa świętokrzyskiego. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo AM.
• 23. Mayer, K. (2017). The Aesthetic-Usability Effect. Retrieved from: https://www.nngroup.com/articles/aesthetic-usability-effect/.
• 24. Medina, B., Bravo, C., Kamachi, D., Xavier, L. (2012). Design Thinking. Business Innovation. Rio de Janeiro: MJV Press.
• 25. Olko, S. (2017). The Impact of the Networks and Clusters in Cultural and Creative Industries on Regional Innovation Ecosystem - Analysis of the Selected Case in Europe. Zeszyty Naukowe Politechniki Śląskiej, Seria: Organizacja i Zarządzanie, Vol. 1984, pp. 25-42.
• 26. Online Education Market, Size, Global Forecast 2022-2027, Industry Trends, Share, Growth, Impact of COVID-19, Opportunity Company Analysis. Retrieved from: https://www.researchandmarkets.com/reports/5521683/online-education-market-size-global-forecast.
• 27. Osika, G. (2017). Analiza design user experience w kontekście Inteligentnych Specjalizacji. Zeszyty Naukowe Politechniki Śląskiej, Seria: Organizacja i Zarządzanie, Vol. 1980, pp. 321-334.
• 28. Osika, G. (2019a). Social Innovation as Support for Industry 4.0. Scientific Papers of Silesian University of Technology, Organization and Management Series, 141, pp. 289-301.
• 29. Osika, G. (2019b). Design User Experience jako podstawa budowania relacji w sektorze kreatywnym. Studia Ekonomiczne. Zeszyty Naukowe Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego w Katowicach, 388, pp. 122-133.
• 30. Pande, M., Bharathi, S.V. (2020) Theoretical foundations of design thinking -A constructivism learning approach to design thinking. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 36, 100637, pp. 1-17.
• 31. Pereira, J.C., de Russo, R.F.S. (2018). Design Thinking Integrated in Agile Software Development: Systematic Literature Review. Procedia Computer Science, Vol. 138, pp. 775-782.
• 32. Pine, B.J., Gilmore, J.H. (1999). The experience economy: work is theatre and every business a stage. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
• 33. Prokurat, S. (2016). Praca 2.0. Nie ukryjesz się przed rewolucją runku pracy. Gliwice: Helion.
• 34. Romer, P. (2008). Economic Growth. Library of Economics and Liberty. Retrieved from: https://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/EconomicGrowth.html.
• 35. Rosenbaum, M.S. et al. (2017). How to create a realistic customer journey. Business Horizons, Vol. 60(1), pp. 143-150.
• 36. Rubin, A., Babbie, E.R. (2009). Research Methods for Social Work. Belmont: Books/Cole.
• 37. Shavitt, Sh., Barnes, A.J. (2020). Culture and the Consumer Journey. Journal of Retailing, Vol. 96(1), pp. 40-54.
• 38. Shiratori et al. (2021). The customer journey in a product-service system business model. 31 st CIRP Design Conference, Procedia CIRP, 100, pp. 313-318.
• 39. Śledziewska, K., Włoch, R. (2020). Gospodarka cyfrowa: Jak nowe technologie zmieniają świat. Warszawa: WUM.
• 40. Sobota, D.R., Szewczykowski, P.P. (2014). Design thinking jako metoda twórczości. Filo-Sofija, Vol. 27(4/1), pp. 91-113.
• 41. Świątek, A. (2022). Usługi edukacyjne w dobie pandemii COVID-19. Studies of the Industrial Geography Commission of the Polish Geographical Society, 36(2), pp. 91-106.
• 42. Szultka, S. (ed.) (2014). Kreatywny łańcuch. Powiązania sektora kultury i kreatywnego w Polsce. Gdańsk: Instytut Badań nad Gospodarką Rynkową.
• 43. Tschimmel, K. (2012). Design Thinking as an effective Toolkit for Innovation. Retrieved from: http://www.idmais.org/pubs/KatjaTschimmel/2012/actas_internacionais%20c%F3pia/2012.4.ISPIM.KatjaTschimmel1.pdf.
• 44. Tueanrat, Y. et al. (2021). Goinmg on a journey: A review of the customer journey literature. Journal of Business Research, Vol. 125, pp. 336-353.
• 45. Wasyluk, P., Kucner, A., Pacewicz, G. (2020). Edukacja przyszłości. Raport. Olsztyn: Analiza i Kreowanie Trendów.
• 46. Wilkerson, B., Trellevik, L.-K.L. (2021) Sustainability-oriented innovation: Improving problems through combined design thinking and system mapping approaches. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 42, 100932, Retrieved from: https://reader.elsevier.com/reader/sd/pii/ S1871187121001474?token=FD35A3EF5BD12F4215F1B79F61C2742D3535684D93714 B27A37A06A05CEBA853CDC349E3CDA65D8C91B6683F57DE55E1&originRegion= eu-west-1&originCreation=20221208095908, pp. 1-12.
• 47. Wojciechowska, K. (2020). Customer Experience Management. Gliwice: Helion.
• 48. Wolniak, R. (2017), Design Thinking method and its stages. In: J. Brodny, J. Kaźmierczak (eds.), Systemy wspomagania w inżynierii produkcji (pp. 247-255). Gliwice: PA NOWA SA.
• 49. Zygmuntowski, J.J. (2020). Kapitalizm sieci. Warszawa:. Rozruch.