“Dear child goes by many names”, is a Swedish saying (“Kärt barn har många namn”), meaning that important concepts will have many different names. The professional field of using methodology from the domains of design, anthropology and psychology to involve different actors to create better products, services and experiences is very dear to its practitioners. Actually I find myself, and many of my colleagues, to be somewhat religious about how important we think our own competence and perspective is. And so concluding from the Swedish saying mentioned above, this professional field goes by many names. For some, especially the academics, the difference between these names might be super clear, and of great importance. But for most, including myself, it just makes it more confusing while trying to make sense of what this is and why it is important.
Some examples of names that I have seen for the field itself are:
- Service Logic
- Service Design
- Service Thinking
- Service Thinking Logic
- Service-Dominant Logic
Also, any of the above can also be called a “perspective”, which would make the terms “Service Logic Perspective”, “Service Design Perspective”, and so on.
Currently I have no interest in taking part of the academic debate about which term means what. I’m interested in driving the design and deliver of great services. Thus, I don’t mean different things depending on what term I use. In my blog posts I often use “Service Logic Perspective”, mostly because of the university class “Making Sense of Service Logic” that I took in the spring of 2015, that made me start this blog. I will, however, use other terms whenever I think it fits the context better.