Palvelujen tuotteistamisen käsikirja – nyt saatavana kirjana

Aalto-yliopiston IRIS-tutkimusryhmä ja Tampereen teknillisen yliopiston CROPS tutkimusryhmä julkaisivat Palvelujen tuotteistamisen käsikirjan viime syksynä verkkosivustona osoitteessa palveluntuotteistaminen.fi. Nyt kirjoittajat muokkasivat sivuston sisällön kirjaksi. Kirjan voi ladata Aalto-yliopiston tietokannasta osoitteesta tämän linkin kautta.

Painettua kirjaa myy Aalto-yliopiston Tuotantotalouden laitoksen kirjasto.

Palvelujen tuotteistamisen käsikirja – Osallistavia menetelmiä palvelujen tuotteistamiseen

Aalto-yliopiston julkaisusarja TIEDE + TEKNOLOGIA, 5/2015

Palvelujen tuotteistaminen on ihmisten ajattelutapojen ja toiminnan muuttamista, siksi onnistunut tuotteistaminen pohjaa vahvasti yhteisen ymmärryksen muodostumiseen.

Palvelujen tuotteistamisen käsikirjaan on koottu parhaat reseptit osallistavaan tuotteistamiseen. Käsikirjassa kuvataan osallistavan tuotteistamisen malli sekä annetaan vinkkejä osallistujien valintaan ja osallistumisen tavan suunniteluun. Käsikirjassa esitellään 17 menetelmää ja 10 esimerkkiä työpajoista, joiden avulla luot palvelusta elävän ja toimivan niin palvelun tuottajille kuin asiakkaillekin.

Osallistava tuotteistaminen sitouttaa ja motivoi, muuttaa toimintatapoja ja ajatusmalleja sekä mahdollistaa innovointia. Kokeile osallistavia menetelmiä ja varaudu siihen, ettei palvelusi näytä enää sen jälkeen samalta!

Avainsanat: palvelut, tuotteistaminen, osallistaminen, ryhmätyömenetelmät, työpajamenetelmät, yhteistyö, vuorovaikutus

PT-kansi

Posted by Mikko

All posts - Leave a comment

New articles from the Inno-Wellness project

We are working on the scientific publications from the Inno-Wellness-project, although the closing seminar was already in 2013. We just got two article out. Abstracts and download links below.

Making bottom-up and top-down processes meet in public innovation

Eveliina Saari, Mikko Lehtonen & Marja Toivonen

Service Industries Journal, volume 35, issue 6, 325-344, DOI:10.1080/02642069.2015.1003369

Abstract

Innovations in an organisation derive from multiple sources. In the public sector, users and the policy sphere provide important but often unconnected impulses for innovation. These impulses are transmitted to the organisation by grassroots employees who interact with users and managers who implement policy requirements. The paper examines the actors and activities that coordinate bottom-up and top-down initiatives and promote their development into innovations. It creates a theoretical framework that combines the views of employee-driven innovation and strategic reflexivity and supplements them with an analysis of coordination in innovation processes. The functioning of this framework is illustrated in the context of children’s day care services. The results highlight the central role of middle managers and provide new knowledge regarding their ‘bridging’ activities in innovation. The adjustment of bottom-up and top-down processes requires the personal involvement of managers, and the creation of communication arenas, networks and mediating tools.

Use this link, if your organisation has a subscription to Service Industries Journal.

If you do not have a subscription, grab the accepted manusript here.

Leadership with care – Constructing responsibility as ‘shared caring’ in a complex public service organisation

Mervi Hasu & Mikko Lehtonen

Scandinavian Journal of Public Administration, Volume 18, Issue 4, 9-24

Abstract

The article investigates the pattern of influence enacted by shop-floor service workers and line managers in a public sector organisation which have been affected by New Public Management changes. Applying the concepts of care (caring) and trust, we expand the concept of the relational influence pattern originating from leadership theory. We supplement our analysis with the sensitive methodology of studying activities in shop-floor work, namely experiences of transitions on the micro-level among a group of employees, managers and clients. The results show that the caring observed in the group is shared among the individuals, it supports their collective responsibility, and exhibits trust relationships that have been created through shared experiences. Qualitative evidence illustrates that shared caring can be a pattern of relational, embodied leadership influence, directed to nurture, improve or help the situation of others in the work community. The pattern had evolved naturally through shared and expected, foreseeable experiences. We suggest the notion of leadership with care to describe this type of relational leadership influence.

Download the article with this link.

Posted by Mikko

Inno-Wellness - Leave a comment

Käsikirja palvelujen tuotteistamiseen – uusi verkkosivusto julkaistaan 21.10.2014

 

Miten kudot monista näkemyksistä saumattoman palvelun? Miten luot elävyyttä tuotteistettuun palveluun? Miten osallistava tuotteistaminen toteutetaan käytännössä? Aalto-yliopiston ja Tampereen teknillisen yliopiston tutkijoiden tuottama palvelujen tuotteistamisen käsikirja esittelee asiakaslähtöisen ja osallistavan palvelujen tuotteistamisen käytännöllisestä näkökulmasta.

Palvelujen tuotteistamisen käsikirja keskittyy asiakaslähtöiseen ja osallistavaan palvelujen tuotteistamiseen. Sivusto täydentää jo olemassa olevia tuotteistamisen malleja kiinnittämällä huomiota ensisijaisesti siihen, miten palveluun osallistuvien toimijoiden kesken luodaan yhteinen ymmärrys palvelusta tuotteistamisen avulla.

Sivusto koostuu neljästä kokonaisuudesta:

  1. Tuotteistamisen kuvaus: Mitä on tuotteistaminen?
  2. Tuotteistamisen toteutus: Mikä on tuotteistamisen prosessi?
  3. Menetelmiä osallistavaan tuotteistamiseen: Miten osallistat henkilöstöä ja asiakkaita tuotteistamiseen?
  4. Esimerkkejä osallistavien menetelmien käytöstä LEAPS-projektiin osallistuneissa yrityksissä.

Palvelujen tuotteistamisen käsikirja julkaistaan 21.10.2014 osoitteessa http://palveluntuotteistaminen.fi/.

Sivusto perustuu kolmivuotiseen LEAPS (Leadership in the Productisation of Services 2012-4) -tutkimusprojektin tuloksiin ja siinä kokeiltuihin osallistaviin tuotteistamisen menetelmiin. Projekti toteutettiin yhdessä Aalto-yliopiston IRIS-tutkimusryhmän, Tampereen teknillisen yliopiston Teollisuustalouden laitoksen ja neljän yrityksen kanssa. Tutkimuksessa tarkasteltiin palvelujen tuotteistamisen nykytilaa, kehitettiin ja kokeiltiin osallistavia ja asiakaslähtöisiä palvelujen tuotteistamisen menetelmiä ja arvioitiin niiden toimivuutta. Projektin päärahoittajana toimi Tekes.

Lisätietoja

Projektipäällikkö Katriina Järvi, katriina.jarvi(at)aalto.fi, +358 50 919 5481

Professori Miia Martinsuo, miia.martinsuo(at)tut.fi, +358 40 849 0895

Lisätietoja projektista http://iris.aalto.fi/en/research/current_projects/leaps/

Palvelujen tuotteistamisen käsikirja http://palveluntuotteistaminen.fi/ (julkaistaan 21.10.2014).

Posted by Mikko

All posts - Leave a comment

Saumatonta tuotteistamista – elävää palvelua -seminaari

Aika: Tiistaina 21.10.2014 klo 12-16 
Paikka: Aalto-yliopisto, Otaniementie 17, TUAS-talo

Lataa seminaariesite | Ilmoittaudu nyt

Onko palvelusi jämähtänyt väärään asentoon tuotteistamisen seurauksena?

leaps_loppusemma_banner

Seminaari tarjoaa pääoivalluksia ja esimerkkejä LEAPS (Leadership in the Productisation of Services) -tutkimusprojektista. Iltapäivän aikana pohditaan muun muassa seuraavia kysymyksiä:

  • Miten kudot monista näkemyksistä saumattoman palvelun?
  • Miten luot elävyyttä tuotteistettuun palveluun?
  • Miten osallistava tuotteistaminen toteutetaan käytännössä?

Seminaari on suunnattu erityisesti yritysten johto- ja kehittämistehtävissä toimiville henkilöille, tutkijoille, konsulteille ja muille palvelujen kehittämisestä ja innovaatiotoiminnasta kiinnostuneille. Tilaisuus on maksuton. Tilaisuuden järjestävät yhteistyössä Aalto-yliopisto ja Tampereen teknillinen yliopisto.

Seminaarin puhujat

Professori Anders Gustafsson, Service Research Center (CTF), Karlstad University. Anders Gustafsson on kansainvälisesti arvostettu  palvelututkimuksen pohjoismainen tähti: hän on julkaissut yli 150 tieteellistä artikkelia ja yhdeksän kirjaa ja tekee läheistä yhteistyötä yritysten kanssa. Hän on työskennellyt muun muassa Ikean, Löfbergsin, Volvon ja TeliaSoneran kanssa.

Miia Martinsuo_TBProfessori Miia Martinsuo on Tampereen teknillisen yliopiston Teollisuustalouden laitoksen johtaja ja projekti- ja palveluliiketoiminnan opetukseen ja tutkimukseen liittyvän CROPS (Center for Research on Operations, Projects and Services)-yksikön johtaja. Martinsuolla on 20 vuoden kokemus yritysten ja niiden toiminnan kehittämisestä, tutkimuksesta, opettamisesta ja ohjauksesta. Hänen tutkimuksensa keskittyy moniprojektiorganisaatioiden johtamiseen, asiantuntijatyön organisointiin, teollisen palveluliiketoiminnan innovaatioihin ja toimitusketjuihin sekä tuote- ja palvelukehitysprojektien päätöksentekoon. Hän on kirjoittanut yli sata artikkelia, kirjanlukua ja kirjaa ja toimii aktiivisesti täydennyskouluttajana.

QPR Miika NurminenMBA Miika Nurminen toimii liiketoimintajohtajana QPR Softwaressa, vastaten palvelutarjoomasta, markkinoinnista ja myynnintuesta. Hän on työskennellyt QPR:ssä vuodessa 1999 useissa eri toimenkuvissa ja rooleissa vastaten koko ohjelmistotuotanto- ja asiantuntijaliiketoiminnasta. Lisäksi hän on toiminut vastuukonsulttina useissa kansallisissa ja kansainvälisissä asiakasprojekteissa, joissa globaalisti operoivien organisaatioiden operatiivista toimintaa on kehitetty prosessien, kokonaisarkkitehtuurin ja suorituskyvyn mittaamisen avulla sekä yksityisellä että julkisella sektorilla.

eMBa Tiina Metsävuori toimii apulaisjohtajana LähiTapiolassa vastuualueenaan henkiyhtiön liiketoiminnan kehittäminen.

Jarno PoskelaTkT, Senior Partner Jarno Poskela toimii innovaatiotoiminnan konsulttina ja hallituksen jäsenenä Innotiimi Oy:ssä. Hänen viimeaikaiset konsultointi- ja valmennustoimeksiannot ovat keskittyneet mm. palvelu- ja tuoteinnovaatioiden, innovaatiostrategian, ennakointityön, innovaatiojohtamisen, innovaatioprosessin, innovaatiokulttuurin ja innovaatiokyvykkyyden kehittämiseen. Hän on myös kirjoittanut ko. aiheista lukuisia artikkeleja ja kirjoja. Hänen väitöskirjansa käsitteli innovaatiotoiminnan strategista ohjaamista ja innovaatioprosessin alkupään kehittämistä.

Lisätietoa LEAPS-projektista

Posted by Mikko

All posts - Leave a comment

Restaurant Day – A Citizen Generated Social Innovation

I have been working on my master’s thesis as part of IRIS research group for the past six months. It has been a wonderful experience and provided me with a great opportunity to get acquainted with the world of scientific research. Thanks to IRIS and all the people in the group for that!

My thesis is a study of social innovations that are generated by ordinary citizens focusing on one case, Restaurant Day. Restaurant Day is an event that takes place every three months and where anyone can set up their own restaurant or café for that one day. It was started in Finland in spring 2011 as an initiative of a few citizens who were dissatisfied with the bureaucracy and difficulty of setting up a restaurant in a bureaucratic country like Finland. It was not all unhappiness, though; at the same time the founders saw this to be a good opportunity to create an exciting event for everyone.

I studied how this kind of social innovation emerges, and what encourages citizens to contribute in its generation. In the interviews there was discussion about the changes this kind of social innovation can create in the attitudes and behavior of people, and also in more official structures like the attitudes and regulations of cities.

The theoretical background in the thesis is a combination of social innovation research, user innovation research and institutional change research. The main emphasis is on social innovation; user innovation is viewed to provide a new perspective on social innovation, one where ordinary people are the main generators of the innovation. Similarly institutional change gives a different perspective on social innovation. Institutional change can be seen as resulting from the initiation and diffusion of a social innovation, therefore showing the possible consequences of social innovation. The data for the empirical study was collected through observing Restaurant Day twice and conducting 10 thematic semi-structured interviews.

The findings of my study show that citizen generated social innovation emergence requires a great idea that ideally fills a gap, right kind of individuals and opportunity to work in collaboration with others, and a suitable context – surroundings that enable the emergence of such innovation together with successful timing. The contribution of citizens to a citizen generated social innovation is explained by the open structure of the innovation that enables many reasons for participation and allows different incentives. The four main themes that Restaurant Day enables are building, expressing and verifying identity; engaging in social interactions; feeling of empowerment when the citizens see their contribution making a difference; and tangible benefits like earning some extra money, getting visibility for different causes e.g. charity work or political promotion.

Restaurant Day can also be seen to have created institutional change on two levels; in the attitudes and behavior of ordinary citizens, and on a more structural level in cities like Helsinki which has adopted a positive approach to this kind of citizen activism. This institutional change is initiated by social innovation, and as the innovation spreads, diffuses and receives visibility from legitimate media people slowly start changing their attitudes. This change in attitudes can lead to action, in this case taking part in Restaurant Day either as a restaurateur or as a customer. As more people take action, the cycle of changing attitudes that leads to action spreads thus creating legitimacy around the citizen generated social innovation.

Studying Restaurant Day gave me an opportunity to meet wonderful people who contribute in Restaurant Day, huge thanks for them for finding time to be interviewed.

Have a lovely and relaxing summer!

Posted by Outi Martikainen

All posts - Leave a comment

Lead Users and the Lead User Method – what are the challenges?

Most companies have come to realize that in order to remain in business, and especially, gain economic success, they need to be able to identify user needs and respond to those needs. In order to do that, two well-known directions exist. The core idea of user-centered design is that developers learn about users and their needs with the help of methods like interviews, observation, or ethnographic methods, and then develop a solution to meet these needs. Participatory design, on the other hand, aims to involve users in the design process directly.

Yet many success stories from Post-it notes to sporting equipment and from surgical instruments to banking services tell the story of users independently developing solutions. This kind of user innovation happens in all fields and is often overlooked by companies. Lead users are users that currently experience needs still unknown to the public and who also benefit greatly if they obtain a solution to these needs. As lead user’s present strong need is likely to become general in a marketplace, but it will take months or even years for that to happen, identifying lead users allows a company to anticipate trends and to leapfrog competitive products. The lead user method aims to identify lead users and to involve them in the development of products or services. The lead user method consists of first identifying important trends and key customer needs, then identifying lead users and understanding their needs and possible solutions, and finally working with lead users in order to improve or generate product/service concepts.

Although the process seems straight-forward, there are challenges. The first bottleneck of the process is the identification of lead users. Literature to date has contributed to the range of available search methods, and has sought to rationalize these search processes, formalized some of the strategies developed in doing these searches, as well as pursued comparisons and simulations for establishing the efficiency between different lead-user identification methods. The real-life search processes that we have carried out appear, however, more complicated. We have also found that it is not a question of choosing the best method but on the contrary systematically combining different methods. Our freshly-baked research on the subject is forthcoming in IJIM (see below).

The second bottleneck of the process is working with lead users. The lead user method itself suggests “lead user workshop”, but only vague descriptions are available in the literature. We are currently working on this challenge and finalizing papers on collaborative methods that we have developed for transferring the lead user knowledge to the company.

Third, even though lead users have this incredible potential to innovate, the lead user method remains in the marginal and is not known or used in most companies. Very little research exists about implementing the lead user method into companies’ development processes and about the matters that would help or hinder the implementation. We have been fortunate to have a front-row seat to events in a large public-service company where the plan was that lead user method would be adopted. At the moment we have 50 and some interviews along with internal reports and documents in our hands waiting to be dived into. Hang on for more news on the subject!

Selected sources:

  • Churchill, J., von Hippel, E., & Sonnack, M. (2009). Lead User Project Handbook: A practical guide for lead user project teams.
  • Hyysalo, S., Helminen, P., Mäkinen, S., Johnson, M., Juntunen, J. K., & Freeman, S. (forthcoming). Intermediate Search Elements and Method Combination in Lead-User Searches. International Journal of Innovation Management.
  • Lüthje, C., & Herstatt, C. (2004). The lead user method: an outline of empirical findings and issues for future research. R&D Management, 34(5), 553-568.
  • von Hippel, E. (2005). Democratizing innovation (p. 204). Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA: MIT Press.

Posted by Pia Helminen

All posts - Leave a comment

Who defines your ability to innovate?

What makes a person capable of transformative action has interested scholars in various fields.

The problem is that it is not easy to evaluate innovative abilities. Have you ever felt you could contribute in developing your field but others have ignored your attempts? Perhaps you did not even try because you anticipated you would fail.

In such a situation, others have defined your capabilities. This might be a natural outcome of what is expected from people in your position – a doctoral student, for example, is not usually expected to challenge traditions, or a grassroots employee to suggest renewing the business model of a company. These expectations are part of the schemas people share in their field.

We suggest it need not be so. Previous research shows that people identify, create, legitimize and use resources from various sources creatively to enact new schemas.  This indicates that we are all surrounded by potential resources, such as pieces of information, trust, expertise, contacts, problems, and rules. They are just waiting to be put into use creatively. Whether this happens or not depends on your capability to identify them and to convince others of your abilities and opinion.

You may have two tactics to do so. The first is to negotiate. Your colleagues tend to value skills they have seen in action. This means that the skills you use in your daily work are credible in their eyes, whereas you need to prove your capabilities in other areas. You need to convince them of three issues; first, that you are capable of initiating change; second, that your approach is novel and interesting; and third, that it is valuable to their work. Knowing your colleagues’ current schemas is thus relevant in order to change them.

With the second tactic, you can make your point by using your novel resources directly at work. This is an option if you anticipate that negotiation will not work, but you have autonomy to act. According to our research, this happens in many service organisations where service providers interact with their customers directly. Convincing your colleagues may be easier once your ideas have already provided value for customers. The downside is that others may not perceive your ideas useful from their own perspective. Instead of seeing you as a change agent, they now see you as a rule-breaker.

But what would the world be like without such rule-breakers? For some people we have interviewed, being able to experiment with new ideas in responding to urgent situations in their work is worth the risk of colleagues’ unfavorable reactions. Instead of trying to change their current work, these individuals may find opportunities to use their skills in other fields where they are valued more – which may eventually bring benefits for all parties involved.

These insights show that resources, such as individuals’ skills, are socially constructed and situated – and therefore subject to re-evaluation, creative use, and transformation.  Whether the tactic is to break rules or negotiate, we encourage innovation-minded people to believe in their skills and finding tactics to make other believe in them, too.

Stay tuned for updates and publications from our research!

Sources:

  • Feldman, M. S. (2004). Resources in Emerging Structures and Processes of Change. Organization Science, 15(3), 295–309.
  • Heusinkveld, S., & Benders, J. (2005). Contested commodification: Consultancies and their struggle with new concept development. Human Relations, 58(3), 283 –310.
  • Howard-Grenville, J. A. (2007). Developing Issue-Selling Effectiveness over Time: Issue Selling as Resourcing. Organization Science, 18(4), 560–577.

Posted by Tiina Tuominen

All posts - Leave a comment

Sales interaction research project running

We have recently started a new research project focusing on business-to-business sales interactions. The MANIA sales research project (2014-2015) both opens doors to new scientific findings and produces practical results that will benefit organisations. The research project is part of the Feelings programme of TEKES focusing on intangible values in business.

For this purpose, we have brought together a strong and multi-skilled research group. The researchers present various different fields of research: sales, innovation, organization, and intersubjective interaction. In the project, Aalto University and University of Helsinki aim at novel methodological and scientific findings, whereas HAAGA-HELIA focuses on applying these findings into sales practice both through teaching and development activities.

We explore business-to-business sales interactions in three different contexts: within the customer organisation, between the individual sellers and customers, and within the seller organisation. Understanding sales activities is important since they often form the first encounters between customers and sellers in which value expectations and propositions are created, communicated, and demonstrated via social interaction.

We are very excited about this new collaboration and the promise it holds to gain truly novel insights through a multidisciplinary approach. We have already started data collection in five partner companies, and will continue collecting more data throughout the rest of 2014. We are collecting video recordings of real sales meetings providing a unique set of data to analyze. In addition, observations and interviews are to be conducted and cross-referenced with the video material.

Please, find more about the research project through out web site at http://www.maniaresearch.com/ or by contacting Mari Holopainen.

Posted by Mari

All posts - Leave a comment

Eva Kirchberger: In search of the future of service design

In an open event at Aalto University School of Science, 4th of December, 2013 Eva presented her research under a title ’Future of service design: authentic adaptation as a way out?’

Will service design become a management fad or a success story? We had a great pleasure to have a guest speaker Eva Kirchberger from Imperial College, London and DESMA Network to address that topic. Eva is a doctoral candidate and a member of DESMA (Design + Management) Network that seeks new approaches to design research. (http://desmanetwork.eu/)

Service design yields excitement and seems to be everywhere. Master’s programs, conferences and companies with the title service design spring up. Eva’s interest in service design as a new market category provides a novel approach to service design and especially to the changing roles of service design agencies which have been scarcely studied. Eva points out how service design attracts management consultancies, and how this happens vice versa. Service designers aim to adopt the traditional ‘management territory’. Redefining and naming new skills and offerings form a continuous process changing over the years. Devaluation of a category can also become a threat. Eva Kirchberger’s study covers how pioneers of service design react and adapt features to form new labels. Eva uses newspaper articles and interviews as her data.

The event was organized as a part of the international networking of ATLAS research program. For further information, please contact Mari Holopainen.

Posted by Mari

All posts - Leave a comment

Service innovation and well-being – any results yet?

We recently got to the end of a research project. The Inno-Wellness project was a collaboration with FIOH and VTT during 2010-2013. Looking back at the objectives and the results is an interesting exercise.

We set out with an ambitious goal: to look for practices of innovation management that would simultaneously increase innovativeness and well-being. Our starting point was an expectation that employee-driven innovation and user-driven innovation would be key perspectives in our investigation. Combining them with management that acknowledges well-being as an objective would constitute the set of practices we wanted to find and describe. Our focus was on public services ranging from basic services such as cleaning and catering to knowledge intensive services such as research as taxation.

That’s interesting … and a bit tricky

We met many interesting people through our case studies in interviews, meetings and workshops. We found a number of innovative solutions from different service contexts. We found well-being as well as stress. Apparently the connection between innovativeness and well-being is a rather complex issue.

Turns out that getting through a development process can be a tremendous boost for well-being, but it can also be a source of great stress. Also, well-being can increase innovativeness, but it can also reduce it. Once you are content and happy with your work, you don’t always want to rock the boat by fixing it.

Any results?

A few tentative propositions can probably be made.

  1. In an organisation, where well-being is at an all-time-low, innovativeness is not the first thing you’ll find. It takes quite an effort to try to develop anything, and if all the energy is spent on coping with the present, there is little left to think of the future.
  2. People, who get to develop their own jobs and work environment tend to experience more well-being than stress from innovating.
  3. Participating in developing things that are distant to a person is not in itself that rewarding, at least not in terms of well-being.
  4. Those who produce or use the service are those who know it best.

And the conclusions?

Already with those tentative propositions you can derive a simple strategy for approaching development in service organisations.

  1. Getting producers and users to participate in developing services gets you the best knowledge there is.
  2. Focusing first on their immediate work and needs first provides well-being and motivation.
  3. Once you have people on board and motivated, you can proceed to more  distant aspects in the development activities.

Even if you are in a situation where well-being is scarce, you should start with getting people to develop their own work, even if you feel the first thing should be “a structural change in the organisation or revising the strategic objectives stated on the organisation’s score card”. These are things that do not have a clear, immediate effect on the employees or users of services. Making changes on everyday practices do.

More information

The main results are available in Finnish through these links.

Posted by Mikko

All posts , Inno-Wellness - Leave a comment