Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Designing energy solutions: a comparison of two participatory design approaches for service innovation

Designing energy solutions: a comparison of two participatory design approaches for service... Participatory design involves users and other key stakeholders in processes that aim to ensure solutions generated meet their needs. This paper compares the processes and outcomes of two participatory design approaches (design thinking and co-design) to examine their utility in co-creating innovative service solutions for reducing household energy demand.Design/methodology/approachDesign thinking and co-design were implemented in two independent convenience samples of household energy users in Queensland, Australia. Workshops were conducted online using Zoom and Padlet technology. Informed by the capability-practice-ability (CPA) portfolio, a critical analysis based on the research team's experiences with implementing the two participatory design approaches is presented.FindingsThe key distinguishing features that set design thinking apart from co-design is extent of user involvement, solution diversity and resource requirements. With a shorter duration and less intensive user involvement, co-design offers a more resource efficient means of solution generation. In contrast, design thinking expands the solution space by allowing for human-centred problem framing and in so doing gives rise to greater diversity in solutions generated.Research limitations/implicationsMapping the six constellations of service design outlined in the CPA portfolio to the research team's experiences implementing two different participatory design approaches within the same context reconciles theoretical understanding of how capabilities, practices and abilities may differ or converge in an applied setting.Practical implicationsUnderstanding the benefits and expected outcomes across the two participatory design approaches will guide practitioners and funding agencies in the selection of an appropriate method to achieve desired outcomes.Originality/valueThis paper compares two forms of participatory design (design thinking and co-design) for service innovation in the context of household energy demand offering theoretical and practical insights into the utility of each as categorised within the CPA portfolio. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of Service Theory and Practice Emerald Publishing

Designing energy solutions: a comparison of two participatory design approaches for service innovation

Download PDF
25 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/emerald-publishing/designing-energy-solutions-a-comparison-of-two-participatory-design-3mGOQdV80T
Publisher
Emerald Publishing
Copyright
© Emerald Publishing Limited
ISSN
2055-6225
DOI
10.1108/jstp-03-2021-0040
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Participatory design involves users and other key stakeholders in processes that aim to ensure solutions generated meet their needs. This paper compares the processes and outcomes of two participatory design approaches (design thinking and co-design) to examine their utility in co-creating innovative service solutions for reducing household energy demand.Design/methodology/approachDesign thinking and co-design were implemented in two independent convenience samples of household energy users in Queensland, Australia. Workshops were conducted online using Zoom and Padlet technology. Informed by the capability-practice-ability (CPA) portfolio, a critical analysis based on the research team's experiences with implementing the two participatory design approaches is presented.FindingsThe key distinguishing features that set design thinking apart from co-design is extent of user involvement, solution diversity and resource requirements. With a shorter duration and less intensive user involvement, co-design offers a more resource efficient means of solution generation. In contrast, design thinking expands the solution space by allowing for human-centred problem framing and in so doing gives rise to greater diversity in solutions generated.Research limitations/implicationsMapping the six constellations of service design outlined in the CPA portfolio to the research team's experiences implementing two different participatory design approaches within the same context reconciles theoretical understanding of how capabilities, practices and abilities may differ or converge in an applied setting.Practical implicationsUnderstanding the benefits and expected outcomes across the two participatory design approaches will guide practitioners and funding agencies in the selection of an appropriate method to achieve desired outcomes.Originality/valueThis paper compares two forms of participatory design (design thinking and co-design) for service innovation in the context of household energy demand offering theoretical and practical insights into the utility of each as categorised within the CPA portfolio.

Journal

Journal of Service Theory and Practice – Emerald Publishing

Published: Apr 19, 2022

Keywords: Co-creation; Co-design; Design thinking; Energy use; Energy consumption; Participatory design; Service design; Service development; User centred design; Value creation

References

  • Co-creating dementia care: manoeuvring fractured reflexivity in service design
    Bast, A.; Røhnebæk, M.T.; Engen, M.
  • Abductive reasoning and the genesis of new ideas
    Beghetto, R.A.; Peirce, C.S.
  • Service design research: yesterday, today and tomorrow
    Blomkvist, J.; Holmlid, S.; Segelström, F.; Stickdorn, M.; Schneider, J.
  • Design thinking
    Brown, T.
  • Design thinking for social innovation
    Brown, T.; Wyatt, J.
  • Engaging the dog owner community in the design of an effective koala aversion program
    David, P.; Rundle-Thiele, S.; Pang, B.; Knox, K.; Parkinson, J.; Hussenoeder, F.
  • Living lab: a methodology between user-centred design and participatory design
    Dell'Era, C.; Landoni, P.
  • Co-designing social marketing programs
    Dietrich, T.; Rundle-Thiele, S.; Schuster, L.; Connor, J.
  • Co-creating virtual reality interventions for alcohol prevention: living lab vs. co-design
    Dietrich, T.; Guldager, J.D.; Lyk, P.; Vallentin-Holbech, L.; Rundle-Thiele, S.; Majgaard, G.; Stock, C.
  • Managing industrial service co-design: identifying challenges from technology firms
    Durugbo, C.
  • Participation in design things
    Ehn, P.
  • Demonstrating rigor using thematic analysis: a hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development
    Fereday, J.; Muir-Cochrane, E.
  • The importance of user involvement: a systematic review of involving older users in technology design
    Fischer, B.; Peine, A.; Östlund, B.
  • Customer journeys: a systematic literature review
    Følstad, A.; Kvale, K.
  • Reframing service innovation: COVID-19 as a catalyst for imposed service innovation
    Heinonen, K.; Strandvik, T.
  • Exploring the application of co-design to transformative service research
    Hurley, E.; Trischler, J.; Dietrich, T.
  • Integrating theory in co-design: an abductive approach
    Hurley, E.; Dietrich, T.; Rundle-Thiele, S.
  • A multilevel consideration of service design conditions: towards a portfolio of organisational capabilities, interactive practices, and individual abilities
    Karpen, I.O.; Gemser, G.; Calabretta, G.
  • Designing for service as one way of designing services
    Kimbell, L.
  • How large is the owner-renter divide in energy efficient technology? Evidence from an OECD cross-section
    Krishnamurthy, C.K.B.; Kriström, B.
  • An internet-enabled integrated system for co-design and concurrent engineering
    Li, W.D.; Fuh, J.Y.H.; Wong, Y.S.
  • Wicked problems: turning strategic management upside down
    McMillan, C.; Overall, J.
  • Principle-based stakeholder marketing: insights from private triple-bottom-line firms
    Mish, J.; Scammon, D.L.
  • Toward a better understanding of stakeholder participation in the service innovation process: more than one path to success
    Ommen, N.O.; Blut, M.; Backhaus, C.; Woisetschläger, D.M.
  • Moving forward and making a difference: research priorities for the science of service
    Ostrom, A.L.; Bitner, M.J.; Brown, S.W.; Burkhard, K.A.; Goul, M.; Smith-Daniels, V.; Demirkan, H.; Rabinovich, E.
  • Service research priorities in a rapidly changing context
    Ostrom, A.L.; Parasuraman, A.; Bowen, D.E.; Patrício, L.; Voss, C.A.
  • Upframing service design and innovation for research impact
    Patrício, L.; Gustafsson, A.; Fisk, R.
  • Co-designing the next generation of home energy management systems with lead-users
    Peacock, A.D.; Chaney, J.; Goldbach, K.; Walker, G.; Tuohy, P.; Santonja, S.; Todoli, D.; Owens, E.H.
  • A design thinking framework for healthcare management and innovation
    Roberts, J.P.; Fisher, T.R.; Trowbridge, M.J.; Bent, C.
  • Co-creation and the new landscapes of design
    Sanders, E.B.N.; Stappers, P.J.
  • A service research contribution to the global challenge of sustainability
    Saviano, M.; Barile, S.; Spohrer, J.C.; Caputo, F.
  • Co-designing social marketing programs with ‘bottom of the pyramid’ citizens
    Schmidtke, D.; Rundle-Thiele, S.; Kubacki, K.; Burns, G.L.
  • Identifying categories of service innovation: a review and synthesis of the literature
    Snyder, H.; Witell, L.; Gustafsson, A.; Fombelle, P.; Kristensson, P.
  • Co-design: from expert-to user-driven ideas in public service design
    Trischler, J.; Dietrich, T.; Rundle-Thiele, S.
  • Design for experience–a public service design approach in the age of digitalization
    Trischler, J.; Westman Trischler, J.
  • Energy management in prosumer communities: a coordinated approach
    Verschae, R.; Kato, T.; Matsuyama, T.
  • A practical review of energy saving technology for ageing populations
    Walker, G.; Taylor, A.; Whittet, C.; Lynn, C.; Docherty, C.; Stephen, B.; Owens, E.; Galloway, S.
  • Using co-design to develop a collective leadership intervention for healthcare teams to improve safety culture
    Ward, M.E.; Brún, A.D.; Beirne, D.; Conway, C.; Cunningham, U.; English, A.; Fitzsimons, J.; Furlong, E.; Kane, Y.; Kelly, A.; McDonnell, S.; McGinley, S.; Monaghan, B.; Myler, A.; Nolan, E.; O'Donovan, R.; O'Shea, M.; Shuhaiber, A.; McAuliffe, E.
  • How much participation is enough? A comparison of six participatory design projects in terms of outcomes
    Whittle, J.
  • Defining service innovation: a review and synthesis
    Witell, L.; Snyder, H.; Gustafsson, A.; Fombelle, P.; Kristensson, P.
  • Service design for social innovation through participatory action research
    Yang, C.; Sung, T.
  • Prosumer based energy management and sharing in smart grid
    Zafar, R.; Mahmood, A.; Razzaq, S.; Ali, W.; Naeem, U.; Shehzad, K.
  • Trend spotting and service innovation
    Andreassen, T.W.; Lervik-Olsen, L.; Calabretta, G.
  • Smart meters and consumer behaviour: insights from the empirical literature
    Batalla-Bejerano, J.; Trujillo-Baute, E.; Villa-Arrieta, M.
  • Co-designing services with vulnerable consumers
    Dietrich, T.; Trischler, J.; Schuster, L.; Rundle-Thiele, S.
  • Bringing service design to service sciences, management, and engineering
    Holmlid, S.; Evenson, S.
  • What makes consumers adopt to innovative energy services in the energy market? A review of incentives and barriers
    Kowalska-Pyzalska, A.
  • Special issue editorial: designing for services
    Mager, B.; Sung, T.
  • Doing design thinking: conceptual review, synthesis, and research agenda
    Micheli, P.; Wilner, S.J.S.; Bhatti, S.H.; Mura, M.; Beverland, M.B.
  • Creating new services
    Patrício, L.; Fisk, R.P.; Russell-Bennett, R.; Fisk, R.P.; Harris, L.
  • A framework for organizing the tools and techniques of participatory design
    Sanders, E.B.N.; Brandt, E.; Binder, T.