Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Fabian Segelström on July 10, 2012 at 17:27

Hi Jean-Sébastien,

I think Jess is spot on when he says "I often think of a blueprint as an extension of a journey map, with additional layers that show how we as an organization support that journey". Starting out by doing a customer journey map will help you ease the process of creating a service blueprint. I see the two techniques merging more and more - for several reasons. One is the attitude which Arne is showing; tweak and adapt the methods to your current needs. Which is absolutely how you should do it.

The other main reason is unfortunately less flattering, namely that there are lot of lazy designers out there. I'd dare to say that most of the blueprints you'll find by googling it are flawed (compared to how it was intended). Most people seem to learn the technique by downloading a few examples from the web and then doing guesswork on how it should look based on that, missing crucial aspects (especially the functionality of the lines seems to evade most). Although these blueprints are useful, they are not as powerful as blueprint done according to (service management) standards. I recommend you to read "How to Design a Service" by Lynn Shostack where the blueprint was first suggested (If you have access through a university you can download it at http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?articleid=852817 - otherwise try finding someone who uploaded a pdf) and "Service Blueprinting: A Practical Technique for Service Innovation" by Bitner, Ostrom and Morgan which is a state-of-the-art article on how blueprinting has evolved (available through http://people.ischool.berkeley.edu/~glushko/IS243Readings/ServiceBl... )

If you for the sake of it want to compare it with an orginal customer journey, the first published (service design) one I've been able to find (and I spent some time searching as this is part of my PhD topic) is by Parker & Heapy in "The Journey to the Interface" (downloadble at http://www.demos.co.uk/publications/thejourneytotheinterface ). During the last two years or so it has become really popular to include different contact channels in the journey map again, but the train ride example from http://servicedesigntools.org/tools/8 is how probably how most journey maps have looked (but with more chrome) during SD's short history. The current trend is heavily influence by the touchpoint matrix; http://servicedesigntools.org/tools/8

And now I'll stop ramlbling (if you still want more, have a look at my halfway-through-phf-thesis at http://liu.diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2:354845&rvn=1 )

/Fabian

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jean-Sébastien Chouinard on July 10, 2012 at 18:00

Thanks Fabian. I'll look closely on what you sent me. I already made a large documentation harvesting and a lot a vision, practice and recommendations emerge and it comes hard to filter what is good and what is average. 

I tried to merge both methods lately (I'm clearly a noephyte is this field) and I found it difficult to put all the same information in a same map. Moreover, service processes are addressed to one state of the CMJ (ie investment online application) or some part of a process could lived in to state. Consequently It is hard to rightly align process and task by state since enterprise process are built on its reality and not user quest. 

On the format, Many thinkers push the idea that we need to image every task or pain point in a state. I found it easier and more precise to list user (see persona) questions in order to evaluate quality of a given service. What's your opinion on that?

thanks for your help! 

JS

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Martin Schobert on July 10, 2012 at 22:11

Really a great discussion. Like it - this has to be said and is the only point I can add to this fantastic overview over two important tools I often use to create meaningful eperiences of visitors in touristic destinations.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Fabian Segelström on July 11, 2012 at 16:12

Not quite sure I understand your question. But if I understand it right ("do you think it is important to list every task/pain point when visualising the service?"), my answer would be that is up to the specific case. Things such as your brief, where in the process you are and the complexity of the service all affect the best way to visualise. It's up to you to be visualise in a way which lets you design the service in the best possible way.

When I teach our students the various visualisation tools I always make a point out of them making informed decisions on what to include and not. There is no right or wrong when it comes to visualising services, just good and bad arguments. The techniques we use are tools, not answers.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Graham Hill on July 11, 2012 at 14:38

Just to add to Fabian's comment.

If you want a more detailed review of Servicescapes look at John Sherry's excellent book Servicescapes: The Concept of Place in Contemporary Markets. This will give you a lot of the background of the origins, application and future of Servicescapes.

Graham Hill
@grahamhill

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Marcin Chlodnicki on July 12, 2012 at 0:00

Isn't it just a matter of perspective? Blueprint is about the firm and customer journey is about the customer, more or less.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Gerard Tocquer on July 12, 2012 at 2:57

I used both with my students and executive seminars.  Indeed i wrote a book with Michel  Langlois in 1987 (the book is written in French), "Service Marketing a relational approach" in which we introduced a tool call Experigram. This tool was about a consumer journey including emotional states. In the book we gave an example of  a ski resort.

The problem we face with journey and blueprint is the level of innovation we create. I found very few examples where participants arrive with a radical innovation because the two tools are process driven and  most of the time the process drive their thinking...so we need to create other tools

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page