Study Guide

Objective

The student is able to describe the central service design concepts, emphasis and meanings. The student understands the key principles of service design thinking in business development and learns to seek for and interpret user / customer needs from the perspective of his/her own field. He/She learns to improve an existing service or to create a new one – based on creating value for users and customers and to be as efficient as possible. The student is familiar with the service design process and can implement that knowledge creatively into practice. The student is aware of the various research methods and creative tools used in service design when seeking information. In addition, she/he is able to enhance the stakeholder involvement and encourage the engagement with the design process. Student’s workshop facilitator skills will improve.

Content

The key guidelines in design thinking.
Step-by-step –process of the service design (Empathize, Define, Ideate, Prototype, Test).
Creative tools and research methods to collect and construct point of view based on user needs.
Building representation of the creative solutions and ideas.
The stakeholder engagement methods and practices & facilitation tools.
Guidelines to facilitate and conduct a workshop and an innovative design process.
Service design case study connected with the specific field chosen.
Facilitating innovation, and change in the organization and stressing current user needs: Planning, organizing, facilitating and conducting one workshop.

Location and time

Etäopiskeluna.

Materials

Kurssimateriaali ilmoitetaan kurssin oppimisalustalla.

Teaching methods

Ennakkotehtävä, verkko-opetus, ryhmätehtävät, yksilötehtävät

Employer connections

Tavoitteena saada aito toimeksianto lopputehtävälle.

Completion alternatives

Ei valinnaisia suoritustapoja.

Student workload

22.9. online lähiopetus (4 h), 10.11. online lähiopetus (4 h) sekä 8.12. (4 h) sekä nauhoitettuja luentoja kurssin aikana.

Content scheduling

22.9. online lähiopetus (4 h), 10.11. online lähiopetus (4 h) sekä 8.12. (4 h) sekä nauhoitettuja luentoja kurssin aikana.

KURSSITEHTÄVÄT:
1_a Muotoiluajattelu vs. Palvelumuotoilu - konseptin kuvaus, hyv/hyl ( 4 tuntia)
1_b Asiakkaan tehtävä työ + Experience Economy -koonti (videot) (osa online-luentoa)
2. Vargo_Lusch_Reflektointi, hyv/hyl (3 tuntia)
3. Kirjareferaatti, hyv/hyl (20 tuntia)
4. Itsenäinen lukutehtävä, akateeminen artikkeli: hyv/hyl (8 tuntia)
5. Käytännön palvelumuotoilu -case 1 - 5, ryhmätyö 4-5 opiskelijaa, (70 tuntia)

Online-lähipäivät 12 h + nauhoitetut luennot 8 h

Evaluation scale

0 - 5

Assessment methods and criteria

Kts. arviointikriteerit alla

Assessment criteria, excellent (5)

Arviointiasteikko 1-5
Erinomainen (5) - Kaikki kurssitehtävät on suoritettu erittäin korkeatasoisesti: Teorioita, käsitteitä, prosesseja ja luovia työkaluja on hyödynnetty ja sovellettu omintakeisesti. Arvioitavan tehtävän ohjeistusta on noudatettu tarkasti. Työn rakenne ja esitystapa sekä työpajatyöskentely on korkealaatuista. Viestintä ja tiimityöskentely on ollut dialogiin perustuvaa ja tehokasta. Ratkaisujen perustelut ovat tarkkoja ja monipuolisia sekä vastaavat tehtävänantoon. Kurssityöt on suoritettu laajalla ja luovalla otteella. Opiskelijalla on erinomainen kyky tehdä realistisia ratkaisuja vaikeankin aineiston perusteella. Sisällön analyysi, synteesi, arviointi ja kriittinen reflektointi on erittäin monipuolista. Opiskelija osoittaa luovuutta ja systemaattisuutta sekä tarjoaa myös vaihtoehtoisia lähestymistapoja.

Toteutuksen arviointikriteerit, hyvä (3-4)

Hyvä (3-4) - Kurssitehtävien suorittaminen on ollut hyvällä tasolla:
Teorioita, käsitteitä, prosesseja ja luovia työkaluja on hyödynnetty ja sovellettu hyvin ja tavoitteiden mukaisesti. Tehtävissä ei havaittavia merkittäviä väärinkäsityksiä tai virheitä. Arvioitavien tehtävien ohjeistuksia on noudatettu tavoitteiden mukaisesti. Työn rakenne ja esitystapa sekä työpajatyöskentely saavuttanut tavoitteet hyvin. Viestintä ja tiimityöskentely on ollut dialogiin perustuvaa ja rakentavaa. Argumentointi on osittain jäsenneltyä ja / tai selkeää. Tehtävissä on hyödynnetty jossakin määrin omaperäisyyttä. Tehtävissä on päädytty asianmukaisiin johtopäätöksiin vaikeankin aineiston kohdalla. Sisällön analyysi, synteesi, arviointi ja kriittinen reflektointi on kohtuullista. Opiskelija osoittaa riittävää ongelmanratkaisutaitoa, luovuutta ja systemaattisuutta.

Assessment criteria, satisfactory (1)

Tyydyttävä (1-2) – Kurssitehtävien suorittaminen on täyttänyt arviointiperusteet: Teorioita, käsitteitä, prosesseja ja luovia työkaluja on tarkasteltu, mutta niissä on epätarkkuuksia ja / tai pieniä väärinkäsitykset, ei kuitenkaan merkittäviä virheitä. Arvioitavien tehtävien ohjeistuksia on noudatettu osittain tai suurin piirtein tavoitteiden mukaisesti. Työn rakenne ja esitystapa sekä työpajatyöskentely saavuttanut tavoitteet osittain tai hyvin. Viestintä ja tiimityöskentely onnistuu hyvin tai tuottaa hieman hankaluuksia. Oppimistehtävät on ratkaistu / suoritettu tavanmukaisella tavalla. Tehtävissä on päädytty yksinkertaisiin johtopäätöksiin ja teoria-aineiston hyödyntäminen on suppeaa tai vajaata. Sisällön analyysi, synteesi, arviointi sekä kriittinen reflektointi on rajallista tai sitä ei ole lainkaan. Opiskelija osoittaa tyydyttävää ongelmanratkaisutaitoa, luovuutta ja systemaattisuutta.

Further information

Grading scale 1-5
Excellent (5) - All learning outcomes/ assessment criteria have been achieved to an exceptionally high-level demonstrating the following attributes: Exceptional understanding, exploration, insight and application of the theories, concepts, processes and creative tools learned. Clear adherence to all specifications for the assessment task. The structure and standard of presentation of the work and conduction of workshop are of very high quality throughout. Evidence of effective communication of work to peers and others. Excellent teamwork. Offer stimulating and rigorous arguments that are likely to be at the limits of what may be expected at this level. The course work has been executed/performed in an original way. Outstanding ability to reach appropriate decisions based on complex evidence. Evidence of very high-quality analysis, synthesis, evaluation and critical appraisal and ability suggest alternative approaches as well as ability to address complex issues both systematically and creatively

Good (3-4) - All learning outcomes/ assessment criteria have been met fully at a good or very good standard demonstrating the following attributes:
Good to very good understanding, exploration, insight and application of the theories, concepts, processes and creative tools learned. No significant misunderstandings or errors. Clear adherence to all specifications for the assessment task. The structure and standard of presentation of the work are of reasonable to good quality throughout. Evidence of sufficiently effective communication of work and good teamwork. Ability to present structured, clear and concise arguments. The work has been approached and/or executed/performed in a comprehensive way with some degree of originality. Evidence of sufficient ability to reach appropriate decisions based on complex evidence. Evidence of reasonable to good quality analysis, synthesis, evaluation and critical appraisal as well as sufficient problem solving skills and ability to suggest alternative approaches.

Satisfactory (1-2) -All learning outcomes/ assessment criteria have been met demonstrating the following attributes:Demonstrate sound understanding and exploration, some insight and/or appropriate research and using creative tools and processes. Some minor inaccuracies and/or misunderstandings of concepts, theories or literature – small but not significant errors. Some minor deviation from the specifications for the assessment task. Meet the minimum standard to organize and present with some adherence to the subject-specific conventions. Demonstrate some ability to develop an argument but can lack fluency. Teamwork is challenging. The course work has been approached and/or executed/performed in a standard way with limited evidence of originality. Some contextualisation but with a heavy reliance on a limited number of sources and, in general, the breadth and depth of sources and research are lacking. Evidence of study and demonstration of ability to reach appropriate decisions based on complex evidence. Some, but limited evidence of analysis, synthesis, evaluation and critical appraisal. Some evidence of problem solving skills and ability to address complex issues adequately.

Objective

The student is able to describe the central service design concepts, emphasis and meanings. The student understands the key principles of service design thinking in business development and learns to seek for and interpret user / customer needs from the perspective of his/her own field. He/She learns to improve an existing service or to create a new one – based on creating value for users and customers and to be as efficient as possible. The student is familiar with the service design process and can implement that knowledge creatively into practice. The student is aware of the various research methods and creative tools used in service design when seeking information. In addition, she/he is able to enhance the stakeholder involvement and encourage the engagement with the design process. Student’s workshop facilitator skills will improve.

Content

The key guidelines in design thinking.
Step-by-step –process of the service design (Empathize, Define, Ideate, Prototype, Test).
Creative tools and research methods to collect and construct point of view based on user needs.
Building representation of the creative solutions and ideas.
The stakeholder engagement methods and practices & facilitation tools.
Guidelines to facilitate and conduct a workshop and an innovative design process.
Service design case study connected with the specific field chosen.
Facilitating innovation, and change in the organization and stressing current user needs: Planning, organizing, facilitating and conducting one workshop.

Evaluation scale

0 - 5

Further information

Grading scale 1-5
Excellent (5) - All learning outcomes/ assessment criteria have been achieved to an exceptionally high-level demonstrating the following attributes: Exceptional understanding, exploration, insight and application of the theories, concepts, processes and creative tools learned. Clear adherence to all specifications for the assessment task. The structure and standard of presentation of the work and conduction of workshop are of very high quality throughout. Evidence of effective communication of work to peers and others. Excellent teamwork. Offer stimulating and rigorous arguments that are likely to be at the limits of what may be expected at this level. The course work has been executed/performed in an original way. Outstanding ability to reach appropriate decisions based on complex evidence. Evidence of very high-quality analysis, synthesis, evaluation and critical appraisal and ability suggest alternative approaches as well as ability to address complex issues both systematically and creatively

Good (3-4) - All learning outcomes/ assessment criteria have been met fully at a good or very good standard demonstrating the following attributes:
Good to very good understanding, exploration, insight and application of the theories, concepts, processes and creative tools learned. No significant misunderstandings or errors. Clear adherence to all specifications for the assessment task. The structure and standard of presentation of the work are of reasonable to good quality throughout. Evidence of sufficiently effective communication of work and good teamwork. Ability to present structured, clear and concise arguments. The work has been approached and/or executed/performed in a comprehensive way with some degree of originality. Evidence of sufficient ability to reach appropriate decisions based on complex evidence. Evidence of reasonable to good quality analysis, synthesis, evaluation and critical appraisal as well as sufficient problem solving skills and ability to suggest alternative approaches.

Satisfactory (1-2) -All learning outcomes/ assessment criteria have been met demonstrating the following attributes:Demonstrate sound understanding and exploration, some insight and/or appropriate research and using creative tools and processes. Some minor inaccuracies and/or misunderstandings of concepts, theories or literature – small but not significant errors. Some minor deviation from the specifications for the assessment task. Meet the minimum standard to organize and present with some adherence to the subject-specific conventions. Demonstrate some ability to develop an argument but can lack fluency. Teamwork is challenging. The course work has been approached and/or executed/performed in a standard way with limited evidence of originality. Some contextualisation but with a heavy reliance on a limited number of sources and, in general, the breadth and depth of sources and research are lacking. Evidence of study and demonstration of ability to reach appropriate decisions based on complex evidence. Some, but limited evidence of analysis, synthesis, evaluation and critical appraisal. Some evidence of problem solving skills and ability to address complex issues adequately.