Exploring the Role of Service Design in Software Development:

A Systematic Mapping

Henrique Pucci Pinto

, J

ulia de Souza

, Elaine Venson

and Rejane da Costa Figueiredo

Information Technology Research and Application Center (ITRAC), University of Brasilia (UnB), Brazil

Keywords:

Service Design, Software Development, User-Centered, Systematic Mapping.

Abstract:

As digital services gain prominence in our society, service design has become a valuable approach for sup-

porting the development of complex software applications that interact with multiple stakeholders. This paper

presents a systematic mapping study to offer an overview of the literature regarding the use of the service de-

sign approach in driving software development. We analyzed 30 papers focusing on the utilization of service

design techniques, along with its beneﬁts. Our ﬁndings show a wide range of references to service design, but

few focus on the process itself; most only mention the approach. Service design, as our analysis highlights,

bridges communication gaps in projects and ensures user needs are fully met. We compiled methodologies

and techniques commonly used in the service design process. In conclusion, applying service design to guide

software development is an unexplored approach with signiﬁcant potential. The literature gap highlights the

need for further research to explore its implications and beneﬁts.

1 INTRODUCTION

A key objective of Service Design (SD) is to foster

communication among stakeholders, users, and de-

velopers by establishing a common language. SD has

successfully introduced a human-centered perspective

across various business sectors (Leinonen and Roto,

2023). However, its diverse origins create ambiguity

around its concepts and methodologies. (Lee et al.,

2022) emphasize the need for multidisciplinary stud-

ies spanning SD, computer science, social sciences,

and business. (Leinonen and Roto, 2023) argue that

a holistic view of service creation projects clariﬁes

SD’s impact on software development, which inte-

grates Agile UX activities, implementation, and com-

mercialization.

This study explores how SD principles can en-

hance software development practices, identifying

current industry methods and techniques, analyzing

the beneﬁts of SD adoption.To this end, we conducted

a systematic mapping of the literature following the

framework of (Petersen et al., 2008). Through a rigor-

ous selection process, we examined 30 primary stud-

https://orcid.org/0009-0007-4705-7564

https://orcid.org/0009-0006-9671-5415

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7607-5936

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8243-7924

ies, concluding that SD acts as a bridge between users

and software implementation. Our ﬁndings also re-

veal a lack of empirical studies in the area, highlight-

ing its potential as a promising avenue for future re-

search.

2 BACKGROUND

SD is grounded in the principles of design think-

ing, thus offering improvements for services and their

projects through a creative process that is centered

on human needs (Stickdorn et al., 2019). Moreover,

SD is not only concerned with the experiences of end

users but also with the experiences of various stake-

holders and intermediaries within a service network

(Roto et al., 2018).

As discussed by (Forlizzi and Zimmerman, 2013),

SD transcends the traditional concept of design fo-

cused exclusively on products, embracing a more

holistic approach that considers the entire ecology of

interactions, relationships, and experiences that com-

prise a service system. SD elevates the software de-

velopment process beyond the creation of functional

interfaces (Forlizzi and Zimmerman, 2013), provid-

ing a framework to tackle complex challenges in tech-

nological systems and meet the increasing expecta-

tions of users and stakeholders (Trischler and West-

Pinto, H. P., de Souza, J., Venson, E. and Figueiredo, R. C.

Exploring the Role of Service Design in Software Development: A Systematic Mapping.

DOI: 10.5220/0013257300003928

In Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Evaluation of Novel Approaches to Software Engineering (ENASE 2025), pages 433-440

ISBN: 978-989-758-742-9; ISSN: 2184-4895

433

man Trischler, 2022).

The work of (Yoo et al., ) expands this view by

discussing how SD, within the ﬁeld of HCI, promotes

value co-creation, not just delivering a service, but fa-

cilitating an ecosystem where users actively shape the

service experience. This aspect is vital for software

development, as it recognizes users not just as end

consumers but as active participants in the develop-

ment process.

In summary, SD guides software development by

emphasizing the importance of aligning user needs

with technical capabilities, promoting a user-centered

approach. Through this integration, organizations can

create more resilient, adaptable, and user-centered

solutions that effectively meet market demands and

stakeholder expectations.

3 RESEARCH METHODS

Following the framework proposed by (Petersen et al.,

2008), our systematic mapping approach was struc-

tured into three distinct phases: (1) Deﬁnition; (2)

Search; and (3) Selection.

3.1 Deﬁnition

To initiate our investigation, we provided an overview

of our research area by articulating four research

questions:

• RQ1. How does SD guide software development?

• RQ2. Which methods and techniques of SD are

currently employed in software development?

• RQ3. What are the advantages associated with

the implementation of SD in the software devel-

opment process?

Our search string was constructed by combining

the two main keywords (“Software Development” and

“Service Design”). With the synonyms considered,

the resulting search string was (”Software Develop-

ment” OR ”Software Design” OR ”Software Engi-

neering” OR ”Software Industry” OR ”Software Pro-

cess” OR ”Software Project” OR ”Software Imple-

mentation”) AND (”Service Design”).

We formulated inclusion and exclusion criteria to

exclude papers that weren’t relevant to the study (see

Table 1).

3.2 Search

We applied the search string across ﬁve scientiﬁc

databases: ACM Digital Library, IEEE Xplore, Sci-

enceDirect, Scopus, and ISI Web of Science. All

Table 1: Inclusion and exclusion criteria.

ID Description

IC1 Papers concerning SD in software develop-

ment

EC1 Duplicated papers

EC2 Papers where service is not associated with

the user

EC3 Papers unavailable for download

EC4 Papers not written in English

EC5 Papers devoid of discussion on SD in soft-

ware development

EC6 Papers lacking peer review

searches were conducted in August 2023, yielding a

total of 393 papers.

Figure 1 illustrates the distribution of articles re-

trieved from each database, thereby elucidating the

search process and subsequent selection of pertinent

literature.

3.3 Selection

After conducting the search in the databases, the se-

lected articles underwent a selection process for in-

clusion in our systematic mapping. This involved four

stages of ﬁltering, outlined in Figure 1.

• Step 1: Initial screening based on title, abstract

and keywords.

• Step 2: Evaluation of agreement using the Kappa

coefﬁcient.

• Step 3: Reading of the full text.

• Step 4: In-depth study of the selected articles.

To start the ﬁltering process of the identiﬁed pa-

pers, two researchers scrutinized their titles, abstracts,

and keywords. Duplicates were removed.

Cohen’s Kappa Coefﬁcient (P

erez et al., 2020)

was used to measure agreement among researchers.

Based on evaluations of 393 papers, the Kappa coefﬁ-

cient showed a 68.75% agreement rate, with consen-

sus on 304 papers and disagreements on 89. Discrep-

ancies were resolved through online discussions, re-

sulting in consensus-based decisions. In the end, 185

papers were accepted, and 208 were rejected.

In the third step, researchers examined the full

texts of 185 papers, evenly dividing the workload. Af-

ter review, 140 papers were rejected, an exclusion rate

of about 75.67%. This process left 45 papers for fur-

ther study, each undergoing a detailed review by the

assigned researchers.

Then, a thorough examination was carried out,

leading to the exclusion of an additional 15 papers

ENASE 2025 - 20th International Conference on Evaluation of Novel Approaches to Software Engineering

434

Figure 1: Paper selection process.

deemed irrelevant to this research. Therefore, 30 arti-

cles remained, which were selected for detailed anal-

ysis and study.

4 RESULTS

Table 2 showcases the 30 accepted papers identiﬁed in

our literature review, featuring each paper’s ID, title

and authors. Subsequently, the paper’s ID was used

in Table 3 for cross-referencing in other analyses.

Table 3 presents a classiﬁcation into empirical and

non-empirical research (Cruzes and Dyb

a, 2010). The

non-empirical category encompasses theoretical pa-

pers, deﬁned as those lacking practical application

discussions (Parizi et al., 2022). The empirical pa-

pers were divided into three categories (Parizi et al.,

2022):

• Industry: the paper was developed within the

framework of a company or industrial setting;

• Academic: the paper was developed within the

context of a university or course;

• Innovation: the paper employed a novel approach

aimed at fostering social innovation.

4.1 RQ1: How SD Guides Software

Development

SD is usually portrayed as a bridge connecting the

user needs with software implementation. This con-

cept of SD was employed by (Tuunanen and Przybil-

ski, 2014). It serves as a link between elicited require-

ments from target users and the technical implemen-

tation of the software. Therefore, software develop-

ment is guided by SD, both ensuring that user needs

are fully met throughout the technical implementation

process and closely adhering to initial requirements

(Lytras and Sicilia, 2009).

As described by (Patricio et al., 2004), SD goes

beyond mere software functionality by incorporating

subjective perceptions and user interactions with the

service. This suggests that software development en-

tails more than just adding features; it requires the cre-

ation of interfaces that offer a positive and personal-

ized experience for customers across various service

platforms (Chatley et al., 2023). SD broadens require-

ment acquisition techniques to encompass emotional

aspects, emphasizing coherence among touch points

in crafting an agile solution (Maiden, 2010).

In this manner, SD emerges as a guiding force

in software development, adopting an integrated ap-

proach that combines service management, Human-

Computer Interaction (HCI), and software engineer-

ing (Patr

ıcio et al., 2008). As articulated by (Tuu-

nanen and Przybilski, 2014), SD not only translates

user requirements into technical language but also of-

fers strategic direction, aiding developers in navigat-

ing complex challenges, enhancing user experience,

and facilitating informed decision-making throughout

the software development lifecycle.

4.2 RQ2: SD Methods and Techniques

Employed in Software Development

Table 4 shows the list of the most relevant tools and

methods, focusing on those that appeared in multiple

studies. These tools and methods allow for a better

understanding of the user needs and helps guide the

software development process.

Prototyping was the most mentioned tool. It

plays a role in validating projects and/or collecting

user feedback for improvement. (Leinonen and Roto,

2023) highlight that prototypes serve to communi-

cate service features to development teams and can

be processed into product backlog items. Addition-

ally, (Chatley et al., 2023) stated the use of proto-

types across various stages of the project develop-

ment, including the usability, desirability, and func-

tionality assessments. The prototypes were primar-

ily developed by prioritizing speciﬁc requirements

(Villa-Garc

ıa et al., 2022). According to (Tuunanen

and Przybilski, 2014), a functional prototype allows

users to effectively assess the collected requirements.

Finally, (Villa-Garc

ıa et al., 2022) describes the pro-

Exploring the Role of Service Design in Software Development: A Systematic Mapping

435

Table 2: Papers Selected.

ID Title Ref RQ1 RQ2 RQ3

01 A dimensional model of service design (Yamakami, 2017) ✓

02 A Proposition for a Design Method of Service Systems (Kostova, 2018) ✓ ✓

03 A service-based innovation process for improving cooperative prac-

tices in AEC

(Kubicki et al., 2009) ✓ ✓

04 A Study on the Improvement of User-centered Public Service (Lee et al., 2021) ✓ ✓ ✓

05 An agile model-based framework for service innovation for the future

internet

(Berre, 2012) ✓ ✓ ✓

06 Can we know upfront how to prioritize quality requirements? (Condori-Fernandez

and Lago, 2015)

✓ ✓ ✓

07 Customer experience requirements for multi-platform service inter-

action: Bringing services marketing to the elicitation of user require-

ments

(Patricio et al., 2004) ✓ ✓ ✓

08 Design and Research of Mobile Assisted Medical System Interven-

tion in the Elderly Community: A Case Study

(Zhiming et al., 2021) ✓ ✓ ✓

09 Designing for Real People: Teaching Agility through User-Centric

Service Design

(Chatley et al., 2023) ✓ ✓

10 Designing multi-interface service experiences: The service experi-

ence blueprint

(Patr

ıcio et al., 2008) ✓ ✓ ✓

11 Designing new software-included service system: Methodology and

operational tools

(Zhang Li et al., 2009) ✓ ✓

12 Domain speciﬁc case tool for ICT-enabled service design (Tuunanen and Przybil-

ski, 2014)

✓ ✓

13 Empower a team’s product vision with lego® serious play® (Pichlis et al., 2015) ✓ ✓ ✓

14 Ethical by design - A manifesto (Mulvenna et al., 2017) ✓

15 Hospital volunteer management process digitalization through ser-

vice design: Design decision and implementation

(Wongpinkaew et al.,

2021)

✓ ✓

16 In Search of Coproduction: Smart Services as Reciprocal Activities (Carroll et al., 2016) ✓ ✓

17 Is designing independent of domain? Comparing models of engineer-

ing, software and service design

(Kannengiesser and

Gero, 2015)

✓

18 Model-based tool support for Service Design (P

erez-Blanco et al.,

2020)

✓ ✓ ✓

19 Pragmatic web service design: An agile approach with the service

responsibility and interaction design method

(Millard et al., 2009) ✓ ✓

20 Service Design Handover to user experience design – a systematic

literature review

L(Leinonen and Roto,

2023)

✓

21 Service Design: It’s All in the Brand (Maiden, 2010) ✓

22 Service feature modeling: modeling and participatory ranking of ser-

vice design alternatives

(Wittern and Zirpins,

2016)

✓

23 Software process as a service? Bridging service design and the soft-

ware process

(Lytras and Sicilia,

2009)

✓ ✓

24 Supporting service design decisions (Gebhart et al., 2010) ✓ ✓

25 Telecommunications service development: A design methodology

and its intelligent support

(Eberlein and Halsall,

1997)

✓ ✓ ✓

26 The development of a platform to ensure an integrated care plan for

older adults with complex care needs living at home

(Villa-Garc

ıa et al.,

2022)

✓ ✓

27 Towards a new service design approach assisted by computer tools:

A typology of services and a post sale service case study in the auto-

motive industry

(Bakiri, 2003) ✓

28 User Experience in Service Design: A Case Study from Algeria (Touloum et al., 2017) ✓ ✓

29 Validation of service blueprint models by means of formal simulation

techniques

(Esta

nol et al., 2017) ✓ ✓

30 VDML4RS: A Tool for Reputation Systems Modeling and Design (Bettini and Capecchi,

2016)

✓ ✓ ✓

totype development methodology employed in their

study. Initially, a general mock-up of the application

was created to facilitate user interaction and feedback

collection. Subsequent iterative phases reﬁned the

prototype based on the received feedback, ultimately

enhancing the platform.

The interview technique emerged as a prominent

method for uncovering underlying problems and chal-

lenges faced by communities ((Zhiming et al., 2021),

(Lee et al., 2021), (Villa-Garc

ıa et al., 2022)). It was

ENASE 2025 - 20th International Conference on Evaluation of Novel Approaches to Software Engineering

436

Table 3: Classiﬁcation of the papers.

Classiﬁcation % Papers

Theoretical 64% 02, 05, 10, 11, 12, 14,

16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21,

22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 29,

Emp Industry 24% 03, 04, 07, 08, 15, 27,

Emp Academic 7% 06, 09

Emp Innovation 5% 13

Table 4: Service Design methods and techniques.

Technique/

Method

% Papers

Prototype 37% 03, 04, 05, 07, 09, 10,

12, 17, 20, 21, 26

Interview 33% 02, 03, 04, 06, 07, 08,

12, 15, 26, 28

Survey 33% 02, 03, 04, 06, 07, 10,

15, 22, 28, 30

Scenarios 30% 02, 03, 04, 06, 11, 12,

17, 19, 28

Service

Blueprint

27% 08, 10, 11, 16, 18, 20,

28, 29

User Journey 27% 04, 05, 08, 09, 13, 15,

20, 28

Personas 13% 04, 09, 15, 28

Brainstorming 10% 01, 03, 25

used to collect initial needs formulated by end-users

((Kubicki et al., 2009), (Villa-Garc

ıa et al., 2022)) and

capture user perspectives (Patricio et al., 2004), aiding

in requirement elicitation (Tuunanen and Przybilski,

2014). The studies of (Wongpinkaew et al., 2021) and

(Kostova, 2018) mentioned using interviews for eval-

uating whether the developed solution effectively ad-

dressed the identiﬁed problem. Interviews also served

as a means to analyze the usability and effectiveness

of proposed systems. Finally, (Kubicki et al., 2009)

mentioned its utility in soliciting feedback for system

improvements.

Questionnaires and surveys served as primary

tools for gathering user data, such as user feedback,

akin to the interview method. (Kubicki et al., 2009)

utilized a survey to delineate the initial needs of end-

users, while (Patricio et al., 2004) stated its utility in

providing valuable insights for requirement elicitation

and interface design methods, despite not being fully

tested. Finally, (Patricio et al., 2004) assert that per-

forming surveys was helpful in identifying the key di-

mensions of requirements inﬂuencing customers’ us-

age patterns.

According to (Chatley et al., 2023), Scenarios de-

scribe a problem to be addressed through interac-

tions among systems. It is also stated that their rel-

evance is ensured through development in collabora-

tion with the community or in a user-focused manner.

(Carroll et al., 2016) characterizes scenarios as rich,

semi-formal design representations, while (Eberlein

and Halsall, 1997) used scenarios to help achieve a

comprehensive gathering of necessary requirements.

(Condori-Fernandez and Lago, 2015) employed sce-

narios to identify business services.

Service blueprinting is characterized by a user-

centered approach to business process modeling, it is

a graphic tool used as a ﬁrst-draft solution provider

(Esta

nol et al., 2017). It facilitates both the visualiza-

tion of tasks and activities in a service and the inter-

actions among stakeholders within the service. Al-

though service blueprinting is a popular technique,

(Esta

nol et al., 2017) notes that it is rarely used to

support formal reasoning and that there is no formal

meaning attached to each of the tasks represented.

(Zhang Li et al., 2009) reports using service blueprint-

ing to visually display the service process, aiming

to design service prerequisites and requirements that

meet users’ needs.

User Journey mapping served different purposes

during the development process. According to (Berre,

2012), custom journey maps can illustrate user ex-

periences throughout the service journey between the

service provider and the user. (Zhiming et al., 2021)

mentioned using interview data to conduct a user jour-

ney analysis. (Zhiming et al., 2021) points out that

design touch points identiﬁed in the user journey pro-

vided a foundation for further exploration of SD in-

novations.

Personas was mentioned in three papers. (Carroll

et al., 2016) asserts that personas serve as semi-formal

design representations. (Touloum et al., 2017) men-

tioned utilizing personas to model the UX for each

user involved. (Wongpinkaew et al., 2021) describe

the use of co-creative workshops and interviews with

the people involved in the project to create the per-

sonas, facilitating the gathering of requirements.

Brainstorming was mentioned in only two of the

papers analyzed. (Kubicki et al., 2009) reported run-

ning brainstorming sessions to collect valuable infor-

mation and (Eberlein and Halsall, 1997) mentioned

using brainstorming in the initial stages of require-

ment elicitation to encourage innovation.

4.3 RQ3: Beneﬁts of Adopting SD in

Software Development

Out of the 30 papers analyzed, 12 highlighted bene-

ﬁts associated with the utilization of SD in software

Exploring the Role of Service Design in Software Development: A Systematic Mapping

437

development. Among these beneﬁts, the most fre-

quently mentioned was the facilitation of a more user-

centered development approach, focused on user sat-

isfaction by gaining a deeper understanding of users’

needs.

(Esta

nol et al., 2017) states that SD can aid in the

development or improvement of services by ensuring

user-centeredness. This study utilized interviews with

stakeholders to assess the impact of SD on enhancing

user-centered practices. (Lee et al., 2021) says that

SD facilitates the understanding of consumer needs

through the collection of opinions and ﬁeld observa-

tions. (Zhiming et al., 2021) claim that SD techniques

can enable the creation of solutions more compatible

with users’ lives by involving consumers in the pro-

cess of ﬁnding solutions. This beneﬁt was measured

through workshops and co-creation sessions involv-

ing end-users. (Patricio et al., 2004) afﬁrms that SD

tools enhance the understanding of customer needs

and perceptions, ultimately improving the customer

experience. Lastly, (Leinonen and Roto, 2023) notes

that SD explores user and customer needs and desires.

The authors based their ﬁndings on qualitative analy-

ses of user interactions and feedback.

SD can also play a crucial role in bridging the

communication gap among the various people in-

volved in a software development project. (Esta

nol

et al., 2017) mentions that SD can facilitate collab-

oration among individuals from diverse backgrounds

and languages, including all stakeholders involved in

a service. This was observed through case studies that

involved cross-functional team workshops and com-

munication assessments.

Another frequently mentioned beneﬁt of SD is its

ability to foster innovation. For instance, (Zhiming

et al., 2021) assert that SD methods can generate inno-

vative and optimized solutions for societal challenges.

The innovation was assessed through the analysis of

generated ideas and the feasibility of the proposed so-

lutions during participatory design sessions. (Berre,

2012) afﬁrms that SD can foster the innovation of

services. Furthermore, (Eberlein and Halsall, 1997)

suggest that certain SD tools encourage innovation

through the informal gathering of requirements. Both

studies relied on iterative prototyping and feedback

loops to evaluate the introduction of innovative fea-

tures.

In (Patr

ıcio et al., 2008), the beneﬁts of the Service

Experience Blueprint (SEB) method are outlined, par-

ticularly its capability to design multi-interface ser-

vice experiences. The paper indicates that this method

empowers customers to co-create unique service ex-

periences.

5 DISCUSSION

Through our research, we identiﬁed several ways in

which the software development community could

utilize SD as a guiding framework. Our key ﬁnding is

that SD can act as a bridge between users and software

implementation, facilitating communication between

these two entities. Also, it can contribute to deliver-

ing a more positive and personalized experience for

customers, resulting in greater user satisfaction and,

consequently, client satisfaction as well.

SD techniques and methods are typically em-

ployed in a co-creation environment, where users

and stakeholders are involved. Many of the tools

we identiﬁed were also found in the HCI RSL (Yap

et al., 2021), including interviews, prototypes, ser-

vice blueprint and journey map. Interviews, question-

naires/surveys and brainstorming were typically used

for collecting requirements and user’s needs. Service

blueprint, scenarios, user journeys and personas were

used to help in the visualization of the software, its

tasks and activities. For validation, prototypes, in-

terviews and questionnaires/surveys were employed,

collecting feedback from the user.

We identiﬁed many beneﬁts to integrating SD into

software development. The main advantage is that SD

facilitates a more user-centered approach to develop-

ment as it facilitates a deeper comprehension of users’

needs. Therefore, it allows for a system that is more

compatible with the user’s life and contributes to user

satisfaction. Furthermore, we found that SD can also

foster innovation. With its ﬂexible methods that pro-

moted creativity, and through co-creation workshops

that include multiple people, this results in a more fa-

vorable environment for innovation, through diverse

feedback and suggestions from the people involved.

6 CONCLUSION

SD offers a holistic, human-centered approach that

emphasizes understanding user needs through re-

search and continuous feedback, ensuring that prod-

ucts are both functional and user-relevant.

Our systematic mapping study provided insights

into how SD can guide software development by iden-

tifying key techniques like user journey mapping, sce-

narios, and service blueprinting. These methods help

integrate user requirements more effectively, enhanc-

ing user experience and fostering innovation. How-

ever, challenges remain in managing the complexity

of software systems and effectively incorporating SD

principles, highlighting the need for more adaptive

strategies.

ENASE 2025 - 20th International Conference on Evaluation of Novel Approaches to Software Engineering

438

A notable ﬁnding is the scarcity of in-depth lit-

erature on SD in software development. Most refer-

ences only touch on the topic, suggesting signiﬁcant

research potential.

Given the many beneﬁts of integrating SD in soft-

ware development, there is a promising opportunity

for further exploration in this area. Future research

should evaluate the impact of SD on software de-

velopment, examine the associated beneﬁts and chal-

lenges, and adopt a holistic perspective that spans

from strategic business aspects to the development

process for a more comprehensive understanding.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We utilized OpenAI’s ChatGPT to help improve the

clarity and readability of the manuscript.

REFERENCES

Bakiri, R. (2003). Towards a new service design approach

assisted by computer tools: a typology of services and

a post sale service case study in the automotive indus-

try. In SMC’03 Conference Proceedings. 2003 IEEE

International Conference on Systems, Man and Cy-

bernetics. Conference Theme - System Security and

Assurance (Cat. No.03CH37483), volume 4, pages

3899–3904, Washington, DC, USA. IEEE.

Berre, A. J. (2012). An Agile Model-Based Framework for

Service Innovation for the Future Internet. In Hutchi-

son, D., Kanade, T., Kittler, J., Kleinberg, J. M.,

Mattern, F., Mitchell, J. C., Naor, M., Nierstrasz,

O., Pandu Rangan, C., Steffen, B., Sudan, M., Ter-

zopoulos, D., Tygar, D., Vardi, M. Y., Weikum, G.,

Grossniklaus, M., and Wimmer, M., editors, Current

Trends in Web Engineering, volume 7703, pages 1–4.

Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg. Se-

ries Title: Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

Bettini, L. and Capecchi, S. (2016). VDML4RS: a tool

for reputation systems modeling and design. In Pro-

ceedings of the 8th International Workshop on Social

Software Engineering, pages 8–14, Seattle WA USA.

ACM.

Carroll, J. M., Chen, J., Yuan, C. W. T., and Hanrahan, B. V.

(2016). In Search of Coproduction: Smart Services as

Reciprocal Activities. Computer, 49(7):26–32.

Chatley, R., Field, T., Wheelhouse, M., Runcie, C., Grinyer,

C., and Leon, N. D. (2023). Designing for Real Peo-

ple: Teaching Agility through User-Centric Service

Design. In 2023 IEEE/ACM 45th International Con-

ference on Software Engineering: Software Engineer-

ing Education and Training (ICSE-SEET), pages 11–

22, Melbourne, Australia. IEEE.

Condori-Fernandez, N. and Lago, P. (2015). Can we know

upfront how to prioritize quality requirements? In

2015 IEEE Fifth International Workshop on Empiri-

cal Requirements Engineering (EmpiRE), pages 33–

40, Ottawa, ON. IEEE.

Cruzes, D. S. and Dyb

a, T. (2010). Synthesizing evidence in

software engineering research. In Proceedings of the

2010 ACM-IEEE International Symposium on Empiri-

cal Software Engineering and Measurement, pages 1–

10, Bolzano-Bozen Italy. ACM.

Eberlein, A. P.-G. and Halsall, F. (1997). Telecommuni-

cations service development: A design methodology

and its intelligent support. Engineering Applications

of Artiﬁcial Intelligence, 10(6):647–663.

Esta

nol, M., Marcos, E., Oriol, X., P

erez, F. J., Teniente,

E., and Vara, J. M. (2017). Validation of Service

Blueprint Models by Means of Formal Simulation

Techniques. In Maximilien, M., Vallecillo, A., Wang,

J., and Oriol, M., editors, Service-Oriented Comput-

ing, volume 10601, pages 80–95. Springer Interna-

tional Publishing, Cham. Series Title: Lecture Notes

in Computer Science.

Forlizzi, J. and Zimmerman, J. (2013). Promoting service

design as a core practice in interaction design. Pro-

ceedings of the International Association of Societies

of Design Research, pages 1–12.

Gebhart, M., Baumgartner, M., and Abeck, S. (2010). Sup-

porting Service Design Decisions. In 2010 Fifth In-

ternational Conference on Software Engineering Ad-

vances, pages 76–81, Nice, France. IEEE.

Kannengiesser, U. and Gero, J. S. (2015). Is designing inde-

pendent of domain? Comparing models of engineer-

ing, software and service design. Research in Engi-

neering Design, 26(3):253–275.

Kostova, B. (2018). A Proposition for a Design Method

of Service Systems. In Braubach, L., Murillo, J. M.,

Kaviani, N., Lama, M., Burgue

no, L., Moha, N., and

Oriol, M., editors, Service-Oriented Computing – IC-

SOC 2017 Workshops, volume 10797, pages 339–345.

Springer International Publishing, Cham. Series Title:

Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

Kubicki, S., Guerriero, A., and Johannsen, L. (2009). A

SERVICE-BASED INNOVATION PROCESS FOR

IMPROVING COOPERATIVE PRACTICES IN

AEC.

Lee, J.-J., Yap, C. E. L., and Roto, V. (2022). How HCI

adopts service design: Unpacking current perceptions

and scopes of service design in HCI and identifying

future opportunities. In CHI Conference on Human

Factors in Computing Systems, pages 1–14. ACM.

Lee, K.-S., Kim, Y. S., Kim, S. Y., and Park, M. S. (2021).

A Study on the Improvement of User-centered Pub-

lic Service. In 2021 21st ACIS International Win-

ter Conference on Software Engineering, Artiﬁcial In-

telligence, Networking and Parallel/Distributed Com-

puting (SNPD-Winter), pages 198–202, Ho Chi Minh

City, Vietnam. IEEE.

Leinonen, A. and Roto, V. (2023). Service Design Han-

dover to user experience design – a systematic liter-

ature review. Information and Software Technology,

154:107087.

Lytras, M. and Sicilia, M.-

A. (2009). Software Process as

Exploring the Role of Service Design in Software Development: A Systematic Mapping

439

a Service? Bridging Service Design and the Software

Process.

Maiden, N. (2010). Service Design: It’s All in the Brand.

IEEE Software, 27(5):18–19.

Millard, D. E., Howard, Y., Abbas, N., Davis, H. C.,

Gilbert, L., Wills, G. B., and Walters, R. J. (2009).

Pragmatic web service design: An agile approach

with the service responsibility and interaction design

method. Computer Science - Research and Develop-

ment, 24(4):173–184.

Mulvenna, M., Boger, J., and Bond, R. (2017). Ethical by

Design: A Manifesto. In Proceedings of the European

Conference on Cognitive Ergonomics 2017, pages 51–

54, Ume

a Sweden. ACM.

Parizi, R., Prestes, M., Marczak, S., and Conte, T. (2022).

How has design thinking being used and integrated

into software development activities? A system-

atic mapping. Journal of Systems and Software,

187:111217.

Patricio, L., E Cunha, J., Fisk, R., and Nunes, N. (2004).

Customer experience requirements for multi-platform

service interaction: bringing services marketing to the

elicitation of user requirements. In Proceedings. 12th

IEEE International Requirements Engineering Con-

ference, 2004., pages 23–32, Kyoto, Japan. IEEE.

Patr

ıcio, L., Fisk, R. P., and Falc

ao E Cunha, J. (2008).

Designing Multi-Interface Service Experiences: The

Service Experience Blueprint. Journal of Service Re-

search, 10(4):318–334.

erez, J., D

ıaz, J., Garcia-Martin, J., and Tabuenca, B.

(2020). Systematic literature reviews in software engi-

neering—enhancement of the study selection process

using cohen’s kappa statistic. Journal of Systems and

Software, 168:110657.

Petersen, K., Feldt, R., Mujtaba, S., and Mattsson, M.

(2008). Systematic mapping studies in software engi-

neering. In 12th International Conference on Evalua-

tion and Assessment in Software Engineering (EASE)

12, pages 1–10.

Pichlis, D., Hofemann, S., Raatikainen, M., Sorvettula, J.,

and Stenholm, C. (2015). Empower a Team’s Product

Vision with LEGO® SERIOUS PLAY®. In Abra-

hamsson, P., Corral, L., Oivo, M., and Russo, B.,

editors, Product-Focused Software Process Improve-

ment, volume 9459, pages 210–216. Springer Interna-

tional Publishing, Cham. Series Title: Lecture Notes

in Computer Science.

erez-Blanco, F. J., Vara, J. M., G

omez, C., De Castro, V.,

and Marcos, E. (2020). Model-Based Tool Support

for Service Design. In Wehrheim, H. and Cabot, J.,

editors, Fundamental Approaches to Software Engi-

neering, volume 12076, pages 266–272. Springer In-

ternational Publishing, Cham. Series Title: Lecture

Notes in Computer Science.

Roto, V., Lee, J.-J., Mattelm

aki, T., and Zimmerman, J.

(2018). Experience design meets service design:

Method clash or marriage? In Proceedings of the

ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing

Systems, Montreal, QC, Canada. ACM.

Stickdorn, M., Lawrence, A., and Hormess, M. (2019). Isto

e design de servic¸o na pr

atica: como aplicar o de-

sign de servic¸o no mundo real: manual do praticante.

Grupo A, [Digite o Local da Editora]. E-book. Acesso

em: 13 mai. 2024.

Touloum, K., Idoughi, D., and Seffah, A. (2017). User Ex-

perience in Service Design: A Case Study from Alge-

ria. IT Professional, 19(1):56–58.

Trischler, J. and Westman Trischler, J. (2022). Design for

experience – a public service design approach in the

age of digitalization. Public Management Review,

24(8):1251–1270.

Tuunanen, T. and Przybilski, M. (2014). Domain Speciﬁc

Case Tool for ICT-Enabled Service Design. In 2014

47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sci-

ences, pages 955–964, Waikoloa, HI. IEEE.

Villa-Garc

ıa, L., Puig, A., Puigpelat, P., Sol

e-Casals, M.,

and Fuertes, O. (2022). The development of a plat-

form to ensure an integrated care plan for older adults

with complex care needs living at home. Journal of

Integrated Care, 30(4):310–323.

Wittern, E. and Zirpins, C. (2016). Service feature mod-

eling: modeling and participatory ranking of service

design alternatives. Software & Systems Modeling,

15(2):553–578.

Wongpinkaew, T., Triukose, S., Nitinawarat, S., and Pirom-

sopa, K. (2021). Hospital Volunteer Management Pro-

cess Digitalization Through Service Design: Design

Decision and Implementation. In 2021 3rd Asia Pa-

ciﬁc Information Technology Conference, pages 47–

53, Bangkok Thailand. ACM.

Yamakami, T. (2017). A dimensional model of service

design toward utilizing public transportation open

data. In 2017 8th IEEE International Conference on

Software Engineering and Service Science (ICSESS),

pages 922–925, Beijing. IEEE.

Yap, C. E. L., Lee, J.-J., and Roto, V. (2021). How HCI

Interprets Service Design: A Systematic Literature

Review. In Ardito, C., Lanzilotti, R., Malizia, A.,

Petrie, H., Piccinno, A., Desolda, G., and Inkpen,

K., editors, Human-Computer Interaction – INTER-

ACT 2021, volume 12933, pages 259–280. Springer

International Publishing, Cham. Series Title: Lecture

Notes in Computer Science.

Yoo, D., Ernest, A., Serholt, S., Eriksson, E., and Dals-

gaard, P. Service design in HCI research: The ex-

tended value co-creation model. In Proceedings of the

Halfway to the Future Symposium 2019, pages 1–8.

ACM.

Zhang Li, Chen Zhong, Ni Yulin, and Si Huayou (2009).

Designing new software-included service system:

methodology and operational tools. In 2009 6th Inter-

national Conference on Service Systems and Service

Management, pages 727–730, Xiamen, China. IEEE.

Zhiming, N., Lele, Z., Yu, Z., Yumeng, T., and Choi, S.

(2021). Design and Research of Mobile Assisted

Medical System Intervention in the Elderly Commu-

nity: A Case Study. In 2021 2nd Asia Service Sciences

and Software Engineering Conference, pages 74–83,

Macau Macao. ACM.

ENASE 2025 - 20th International Conference on Evaluation of Novel Approaches to Software Engineering

440