Engaging Diverse Stakeholders in Interdisciplinary Co-Design Project for Better Service Design

Engaging Diverse Stakeholders in Interdisciplinary Co-Design Project for Better Service Design

Muneer Nusir, Usman Tariq, Tariq Ahamed Ahanger
Copyright: © 2021 |Pages: 29
DOI: 10.4018/JCIT.296253
Article PDF Download
Open access articles are freely available for download

Abstract

The rapid development of information technology (IT) has enabled digital services to evolve continually and support a growing number of internet-enabled devices, along with user diversity. The end-user anticipation within the smart environments, which are internet-enabled, delivery networks and innovative technologies. What tools/methods can support the collaborative design and effectively choreograph the design process with dynamic knowledge between service designers and service users? The cooperative design is recognizable in the design environment with a collection wide-ranged by co-design methods and tools. In-depth interviews uncover contextually appropriate design process requirements from diverse stakeholder groups. A collection of design tools and methods are selected and implemented within a Web-based co-design platform. Uncovered design requirements are subsequently applied in extending the Double Diamond framework prior to operationalization into a design process blueprint with supporting service design tool selection as the main contributions for this paper.
Article Preview
Top

Introduction

Information and communication technology (ICT) is an active domain for conveyance and rapid evolution within the IT field at a rate that affects various aspects of our lives (Kaschek et al., 2006). It also contributes to the advent and advancement of the most recent digital services (Stegaru et al., 2015). Typically, e-Government has been conceptualized as the use of ICT by governments along with administrative organizations in changing or improving structures, procedures that are followed, and operations of the government (OECD, 2003). Furthermore, the goal of e-Government is the creation and offering of satisfactory e-services to its people, organizations, along with other civic and private sectors. However, Heeks (2003) stated that a high failure rate of e-Government in unindustrialized nations has been investigated with estimates that 35% of governmental projects failed completely, 50% failed partially, and only a mere 15% of the proposed projects had been successful. Because of the failing projects, there have been oppositions towards future projects because trust and credibility is not present on the part of service providers and users of the e-Government services (Twizeyimana & Andersson, 2019).

In fact, for developing nations, e-Government services are generally offered by service providers internally, while frequently overlooking the users of the services (Axelsson & Melin, 2007; Bridge, 2012). Consequently, service delivery is often jeopardized without any consideration of the users of the services in terms of what they desire and expect within the service framework processes (Lenk & Traunmüller, 2002; Wu, et al., 2013; Zhao et al., 2008). Moreover, the marginal effectiveness of e-Government services creates a situation where the providers are not obligated to meet the real needs of citizens (service's user). Hence, there is a need to maximize the endeavours towards bridging the requirement gaps between them. Therefore, the authors adopted a ‘co-design approach’ to assist the government as a provider of services to work towards collaborating with users of services; such that the provider and user become partners in a collaborative relationship that is beneficial to the entire citizenry (Chang et al., 2005). This approach seeks to maximize the opportunities of users in participating and collaborating with providers of services through providing them appropriate design tools or methods, which facilitate their involvement (i.e. participation and collaboration) in each stage of development of e-Government services and to identify services requirements in accordance with the needs of users (Sanders and Stappers, 2008). Further detail is reported in the consequent sections.

Complete Article List

Search this Journal:
Reset
Volume 26: 1 Issue (2024)
Volume 25: 1 Issue (2023)
Volume 24: 5 Issues (2022)
Volume 23: 4 Issues (2021)
Volume 22: 4 Issues (2020)
Volume 21: 4 Issues (2019)
Volume 20: 4 Issues (2018)
Volume 19: 4 Issues (2017)
Volume 18: 4 Issues (2016)
Volume 17: 4 Issues (2015)
Volume 16: 4 Issues (2014)
Volume 15: 4 Issues (2013)
Volume 14: 4 Issues (2012)
Volume 13: 4 Issues (2011)
Volume 12: 4 Issues (2010)
Volume 11: 4 Issues (2009)
Volume 10: 4 Issues (2008)
Volume 9: 4 Issues (2007)
Volume 8: 4 Issues (2006)
Volume 7: 4 Issues (2005)
Volume 6: 1 Issue (2004)
Volume 5: 1 Issue (2003)
Volume 4: 1 Issue (2002)
Volume 3: 1 Issue (2001)
Volume 2: 1 Issue (2000)
Volume 1: 1 Issue (1999)
View Complete Journal Contents Listing