1. Enhancing service system design : An entity interaction pattern approach Author ： Soe-Tsyr Daphne Yuan, Shiou-Tian Hsu Professor ： Soe-Tsyr Daphne Yuan Presenter ： Po-Wei Chiang Author ： Soe-Tsyr Daphne Yuan, Shiou-Tian Hsu Professor ： Soe-Tsyr Daphne Yuan Presenter ： Po-Wei Chiang

2. Outline 1.Introduction 2.Literature review 3.Entity interaction pattern approach for service system design 4.The details of the approach’s modules 5.Propositions and evaluations 6.Discussion 7.Conclusion 1.Introduction 2.Literature review 3.Entity interaction pattern approach for service system design 4.The details of the approach’s modules 5.Propositions and evaluations 6.Discussion 7.Conclusion

3. Introduction  Explanatory works focusing on why and how to design service systems are still lacking.  Most existing service design methods place more emphasis on customer-centric and behavioral aspects.  Aronson (1997) addressed that a service is created during interactions between actors under governing mechanisms.  Explanatory works focusing on why and how to design service systems are still lacking.  Most existing service design methods place more emphasis on customer-centric and behavioral aspects.  Aronson (1997) addressed that a service is created during interactions between actors under governing mechanisms.

4. Key elements of a service system

5. The aims of the study  Investigate the effectiveness of using interaction pattern as our chosen perspective for designing a service system.  Develop a service system design approach based on the interaction-centric notion with easy-to-adopt features for businesses.  Implement a prototype information system to demonstrate the utility of the approach.  Investigate the effectiveness of using interaction pattern as our chosen perspective for designing a service system.  Develop a service system design approach based on the interaction-centric notion with easy-to-adopt features for businesses.  Implement a prototype information system to demonstrate the utility of the approach.

6. Literature review 1.IMP interaction model 2.Interaction pattern 3.Service system & alliance 1.IMP interaction model 2.Interaction pattern 3.Service system & alliance

7. Industrial Marketing and Purchasing (IMP) interaction model  The IMP has argued that interaction is the core of the research of relationships and networks in business markets.  Separating interactions into four components ： a)interaction process b)interaction parties c)interaction environment d)Interaction atmosphere  The IMP has argued that interaction is the core of the research of relationships and networks in business markets.  Separating interactions into four components ： a)interaction process b)interaction parties c)interaction environment d)Interaction atmosphere

8. IMP interaction model

9. Interaction pattern  In Wynstra et al’s research, they defined interaction patterns in terms of different service types.  However, service systems not only have buyer and supplier entities, but also have other related entities.  In Wynstra et al’s research, they defined interaction patterns in terms of different service types.  However, service systems not only have buyer and supplier entities, but also have other related entities.

10. Service system & alliance  Benefits of alliance ： Linking to market Reducing costs Sharing risks Building market momentum Combining skills

11. Summarizing of literature review  Interaction patterns should involve lateral companies,and multiple- to-multiple relations.  The IMP interaction model should have more proper reinterpretations as the aforementioned about the four constructs of interaction patterns.  Interaction patterns should involve lateral companies,and multiple- to-multiple relations.  The IMP interaction model should have more proper reinterpretations as the aforementioned about the four constructs of interaction patterns.

12. Entity interaction pattern approach for service system design 1.Basic concept 2.Entity interaction pattern approach 1.Basic concept 2.Entity interaction pattern approach

13. Interaction roles of alliance entities SMEs Lateral entities customer supplier

14. Measurement of interaction pattern Power dependenceCooperationTrustExpectation

15. Interaction patterns and constructs mapping diagram

16. Entity interaction pattern approach

17. The details of the approach’s modules 1.Data collection module 2.Interaction pattern recognizing module 3.Interaction pattern adjusting module 4.Alliance adjustment guiding module 1.Data collection module 2.Interaction pattern recognizing module 3.Interaction pattern adjusting module 4.Alliance adjustment guiding module

18. Data collection module

19. Data collection module (cont’d)

22. Interaction pattern recognizing module  Value definition of alliance a)Major innovation b)start-up business c)new services for the market presently served d)service line extension e)service improvements, style changes.  Value definition of alliance a)Major innovation b)start-up business c)new services for the market presently served d)service line extension e)service improvements, style changes.

23. Interaction pattern recognizing module (cont’d)

24. Interaction pattern adjusting module  Assumption – most enterprise try to achieve the highest level of service system.  The top-down way of value based adjustment lets the enterprise user choose a value from the five levels of value.  The bottom-up way then adjusts the interaction patterns of the enterprise throughout the adjusting process.  Assumption – most enterprise try to achieve the highest level of service system.  The top-down way of value based adjustment lets the enterprise user choose a value from the five levels of value.  The bottom-up way then adjusts the interaction patterns of the enterprise throughout the adjusting process.

25. Top-down

26. Bottom-up

27. Alliance adjustment guiding module  The purpose of this module is to link the service system design direction created from previous modules to a business case database.

28. Alliance adjustment guiding module (cont’d)  Case requirements ： a)the case company achieves some kind of service system design value improvement from changing interaction with other companies. b)enough details are provided about how the company changed the interaction.  Case requirements ： a)the case company achieves some kind of service system design value improvement from changing interaction with other companies. b)enough details are provided about how the company changed the interaction.

29. Alliance adjustment guiding module (cont’d)

30. Propositions and evaluations 1.The propositions 2.Experiment details for proposition 1 3.Experiment details for proposition 2 1.The propositions 2.Experiment details for proposition 1 3.Experiment details for proposition 2

31. The propositions  Proposition 1 ： Interaction serves as an important aspect of business service innovation.  Proposition 2 ： While an enterprise follows the interaction pattern adjusting suggestions, they should be able to attain higher levels of service system design and service value.  Proposition 1 ： Interaction serves as an important aspect of business service innovation.  Proposition 2 ： While an enterprise follows the interaction pattern adjusting suggestions, they should be able to attain higher levels of service system design and service value.

32. Experiment details for proposition 1  Functions of alliance  franchising, co-marketing, and joint innovation  Interaction based(SDL)  these enterprises choose the functions to execute based on their interactions.  Resource based(GDL)  find partners based on perceived ability and resources which they do not have.  Functions of alliance  franchising, co-marketing, and joint innovation  Interaction based(SDL)  these enterprises choose the functions to execute based on their interactions.  Resource based(GDL)  find partners based on perceived ability and resources which they do not have.

33. Experiment design parameters  Randomly generate 100 SME enterprises and 10,000 customers in a tourist attraction region (to simulate the illustrative scenario of the Pillow Mountain Leisure Agriculture Area).  Each of the enterprises is assumed to provide one type of service - eat, live, or entertain to customers.  Each type of service is further assumed to have three different styles.  Randomly generate 100 SME enterprises and 10,000 customers in a tourist attraction region (to simulate the illustrative scenario of the Pillow Mountain Leisure Agriculture Area).  Each of the enterprises is assumed to provide one type of service - eat, live, or entertain to customers.  Each type of service is further assumed to have three different styles.

34. Example

35. Alliance success rate  The alliance success rate is considered as the possibility that enterprises could obtain positive value outcome from their alliance.  In this study, we assume that enterprises focusing the resource based aspect will lead to a higher chance of building up a successful alliance;  The alliance success rate is considered as the possibility that enterprises could obtain positive value outcome from their alliance.  In this study, we assume that enterprises focusing the resource based aspect will lead to a higher chance of building up a successful alliance;

36. Alliance functions and alliance constraints  functions of alliance ： a)joint innovation b)co-marketing c)co-servicing d)co-service & marketing e)franchising  functions of alliance ： a)joint innovation b)co-marketing c)co-servicing d)co-service & marketing e)franchising

37. Alliance functions and alliance constraints (cont’d)  Alliance constraints ：

38. Experiments setting

39. Experiment results

40. Experiment results (cont’d)

41. Experiment details for proposition 2  Proposition 2-A: For enterprises with scarcer resources, the effectiveness of our proposed model will be higher.  Proposition 2-B: For enterprises that are more loosely related, the effectiveness of our proposed model will be higher.  Proposition 2-C: For enterprises that have less knowledge of exploiting the benefits of interaction, the effectiveness of our proposed approach will be higher.  Proposition 2-A: For enterprises with scarcer resources, the effectiveness of our proposed model will be higher.  Proposition 2-B: For enterprises that are more loosely related, the effectiveness of our proposed model will be higher.  Proposition 2-C: For enterprises that have less knowledge of exploiting the benefits of interaction, the effectiveness of our proposed approach will be higher.

42. Experiment design details 1.Degree of interaction quality 2.Company resources 1.Degree of interaction quality 2.Company resources

43. Settings of different simulation factors

44. Experiment results

45. Experiment results (cont’d)

48. Discussion  Based on the findings learned from the experiments,enterprises shall enhance their linkage with other enterprises to improve their interaction density to discover more value possibilities within their current service system.  Enterprises who are located in highly competitive area, without enough resource, and lack of proper business managing knowledge to improve their service, can possibly gain more advantage by adopting our approach than any other kinds of enterprise users.  Based on the findings learned from the experiments,enterprises shall enhance their linkage with other enterprises to improve their interaction density to discover more value possibilities within their current service system.  Enterprises who are located in highly competitive area, without enough resource, and lack of proper business managing knowledge to improve their service, can possibly gain more advantage by adopting our approach than any other kinds of enterprise users.

49. Discussion (cont’d)

51. Conclusion  This study’s limitations ：  Separation of different interaction pattern levels needing further investigation in order to reduce possible classification ambiguity, real field tests to collect practical interaction data besides the technical experiments, etc.  Future researchers ：  Investigate different categories of system entities, different entity interaction patterns, different service value levels, different entity replacement mechanisms, etc.  This study’s limitations ：  Separation of different interaction pattern levels needing further investigation in order to reduce possible classification ambiguity, real field tests to collect practical interaction data besides the technical experiments, etc.  Future researchers ：  Investigate different categories of system entities, different entity interaction patterns, different service value levels, different entity replacement mechanisms, etc.

52. Thank you!