Service Design and Behavioral Economics

Editor's Notes

• #6: 20 years ago in chicago you could only get three types of coffee.
• #7: Now we have dozens of coffee varieties: grain types, preparations, origins, Methods, ingredients, cups, temperaturas, etc.
• #8: 10 years ago we used SD to diagnose experiences, créate customer journey maps, identify problems / opportunities for improvement and develop Service blueprints around new ideas.
• #9: Today we are developing Service design into a more diverse [eclectic, adaptable] discipline. This is being driven by the Market (the type pf problems we are asked to solve) and by eclectic and curious practitioners who are finding value in bringing other disciplines to SD. Such as the arts, social sciences, business, and others. This is what I would like to talk about today. Specificaly about the aplication of BE to SD (I use these conferences to share them and hopefully provoque discussion with other Smart People like you.)
• #11: Which horizontal line is longer?
• #12: Here are the four valid answers. Choose wisely
• #13: Look again…
• #14: If you answered incorrectly, you are part of the 80% who don’t put enough effort in solving this problem. You are know-it-alls, not apprentices. You need to be *always* an apprentice and question everything.
• #15: We humans have cognitive limitations which restrict / limit our decisión making and problem solving process. We are not rational, logical, Smart computers able to decide correctly most of the time. Quite the opposite, People are quite dumb most of the time (but quite Smart if you ask them). Los seres humanos tenemos limitaciones cognitivas que restringen nuestra forma de tomar decisiones (no somos totalmente racionales) y nuestra capacidad para resolver problemas.
• #16: There are three ways in which we have applied behavioral economic principles (or behavioral science) lens to Service design. As a Research tool (to explain observable behavior or plan for the best research approach) As an Assessment tool (to evaluate current experiences / system) As an Ideation tool (to inspire the divergent thinking phase or purposefully embed principles in the design)
• #18: Sunk Cost Fallacy: The more you invest in something the harder it becomes to abandon it.
• #20: Intertemporal Choice: People make decisions (and have desires) based on their current situation, not their future one. Cuando les preguntamos a los pacientes con enfermedades crónicas o terminales qué es lo que necesitan o desean a futuro, muchas veces responden "me quiero curar o que descubran la cura de la enfermedad" y esto responde a que en ese momento están aceptando el diagnóstico que recibieron o están en proceso de adaptación del tratamiento, por lo que les cuesta trabajo ver otras necesidades que realmente les ayudaría a aprender a vivir y sobrellevar la enfermedad.  Por eso nosotros siempre procuramos tener pacientes que se encuentren en distintos momentos del proceso o ruta de la enfermedad, así como hacer ejercicios proyectivos para ayudarlos a imaginar un mejor futuro, para ellos u otros pacientes. 
• #24: Status Quo Bias: People tend to choose the default option because they are unwilling to assume the time, effort and risk of a different choice. Esto lo veo al momento de seleccionar tratamientos por parte de algunos médicos, están los que sí estudian el caso y son más arriesgados, pero la mayoría se van por la terapia estándar, lo ya probado.
• #26: Information avoidance: People avoid receiving information which may lead to negative emotions. Information avoidance Cuando la gente sospecha que podría tener alguna enfermedad grave, comienza a ignorar los síntomas, evita leer al respecto, y sobre todo a ir al doctor a que le confirme lo que prácticamente ya sabe. Es probable que su condición esté mucho peor y menos manejable cuando por fin decide diagnosticarse o lo obligan sus parientes. Este tipo de historias las hemos escuchado en una gran cantidad de proyectos
• #28: Availability Heuristic: People rely on easy to access decisions (top of mind) Bandwagon Effect: People do and believe things just because others do or believe the same Status quo plays here too!
• #30: Super sticky adherence: Have someone else with positive attributes (friendly female) visit patient in their home and bond in order for positive attributes of the nurse/experience migrate to the therapy.
• #31: If you look closely, you wil find that most experiences are affected—positively or negatively—by a number of BE principles. Identifying these allows you to understand [behaviors, thoughts, decisions, needs], dissect [problems, systems, consequences] and design [define, prioritize, ideate] Service designers should be proficient in these principles if they want to use them purposefully to help people live better.
• #32: The ideas presented here are just a small example of how Service design can evolve. I believe we should bring in new ideas, concepts, theories, tolos from other disciplines to nurture and grow this practice. The world needs lots of Service designers, but we also need to be able to deliver more value to organizations. My next gig will be on bringing the concepts of stoicism into Service design—i hope someone invites me to talk about this son ;-)
• #33: But again, it may be pushing it too far (Image: Nitro Coffee)
• #34: Keep in touch, give feedback, connect, like this, share.