topic: service design

welcome, again! and again! and again!welcome, again! and again! and again! originally uploaded by steelmonkey

every time the hotel staff clean my room during the day, they reliably place this welcome package on my bed even after i repeatedly move it to a remote corner of the room, as if to insist that i read this stuff. presumably this happens because they have been given instructions as to what a clean room should look like, and go about replicating it regardless of the circumstance?

what happens when the instruction designers are not also the instruction performers? how do service patterns migrate through an organization? how can situational/contextual thinking be formalised or reified? how can formal systems can be made fluid?

This is a coffee maker - the kind where you slot in a container of coffee and push a button and coffee is produced. Both the coffee-maker and the coffee ground 'pods' are made by the same company, Gevalia.

This is an instance of coupling product (coffee-maker) with service (coffee). Presumably, this could be because:

1. It's an instance of the Gillette razor strategy (make money on the consumables) or,
2. The design of the coffee-maker necessitates the use of their own coffee pods

The consequence of this coupling is that the fate of the product depends on the fate of the company: if it goes out of business, the coffeemaker becomes worthless instantly. It also means that the quality of the coffee experience is entirely dictated by the ability of the manufacturer to procure good coffee and package it well. That is, assuming there are no 3rd party coffeepod manufacturers. Even if there were, they would have to support different manufacturer's coffeemakers to avoid being too tightly coupled to the success of any single one of them.

What these guys need is good standards, same as the web. While tightly coupled systems work in certain cases, loosely coupled systems with standards are more robust when openness of experience is important. In this case, while the institution probably wanted to relieve themselves of the burden of always having fresh coffee ready for it's customers, they did so at the cost of not having any fresh milk (there was creamer) and limiting themselves to the coffee Gevalia decided to provide.

Oh, and the coffee was lousy, needless to say.










0427_1811150427_181126

Now I'm not actually talking about solving the Israel-Palestine question or some grand political dilemma like that. Consider this crate of Gatorades in a supermarket store (left) that is marked "Do not stack more than two pallets high". Consider also that this instruction is violated well beyond the limits prescribed (right)

Who is in the right in situations like this? Perhaps the store employee never saw this warning, or did not pay attention to it, in which case better graphic design might have helped there. Perhaps the store employee comprehended the instruction, but chose to ignore it. Perhaps it is store policy (whether formal or informal) that allows this behaviour.

Clearly, this is a conflict of interest - the manufacturer does not want the retailer to store the pallets for safety or damage prevention reasons, and perhaps they are justified. On the other hand, the supermarket would clearly waste precious retail space by storing in that manner. If you're a designer, whose side do you take? Is what the supermarket has done "right" or "wrong"?

Syndicate content