Vol.1 No.2 2008

44/85

Research paper : Introduction to service engineering (H. Yoshikawa)−113 Synthesiology - English edition Vol.1 No.2 (2008) As the Reviewer points out, it is necessary to consider that service itself is synthesiology, but it is difficult theoretically to consider them simultaneously, so please refer to the Author’s paper, “Introduction to general design” (Seimitsu Kikai, 1979).2 On terminologyQuestion (Motoyuki Akamatsu)Since the formulation of service is the main subject of this paper, I think it is important to clarify the definition of terminologies and variables as much as possible. When read from this viewpoint, there seems to be lack of unity and unclearness in terminologies. For example, terms “latent ability” and “latent function” seem to be used interchangeably to express similar concept.Answer (Hiroyuki Yoshikawa)Latent function is an expression of a latent ability, so (1) of Section 2.5 is changed to: “Human action and use of things bring out potential ability, and here activation of the ability is considered an exertion of function , so the potential ability can be called a latent function. Then function manifests ‘slowly’ through action and use.” Other terminologies were unified.3 On latent function of receptorQuestion (Motoyuki Akamatsu)In Section 2.5 (2), there is description: “Latent function Lr that the receptor already possessed is exteriorized as fr and regenerates effect. This is the service effect e.” However, this is not presented explicitly in the equation presented below. Since the fact that receptor’s latent function influences service effect is major point from viewpoint of service, I think the formula should be revised to express this point.Answer (Hiroyuki Yoshikawa)Since the point indicated is important issue in service, I shall explain specifically and in details. Taking the example of restaurant, it is probably as follows:fd: Speed of provision of dish (food)fr: Speed on intake of dish (food)Lr: Volume that can be consumed (hunger volume)fr’: Speed of consuming dish (food) perceived to be tasty (meaningful service for receptor)Fr: Amount consumedFr’: Volume of tasty dish among dish consumed ≦ FrTherefore,Lr0 = Lr1 + Fr1’This equation means that initial hunger volume is filled with good food only. It raises question of whether one can be filled with bad food, but here, let us say that that does not happen. In this case, there is a problem to be considered because to reach satisfaction or to make the hunger level 0, the cook (donor) must make preparation Ld0 > Lr0.As indicated by the Reviewer, the relationship of Lr and fr’ is important, and there is basic problem of psychology of dining where food tastes differently depending on hunger level. However, at this stage this will not be addressed explicitly, and the possible future consideration can be expressed as:fr’ = (coefficient of receiving action) * frand is included in “*”.The Author thinks that one of the purposes of the framework theory is that such problems become apparent, and I look forward to future study.4 On fr and Fr, and fr’ and Fr’ in temporal discussion of serviceQuestion (Motoyuki Akamatsu)Since f is defined as differentiation of latent function F, f is speed of appearance, and it is stated, “f is speed of service provision, and equivalent to service in general.” Here, I can understand what fd and Fd represents. However since fr and Fr, and fr’ and Fr’ are only described in the equation, the meaning of “ ’ ” is difficult to understand, so I think it should be explained with words.Answer (Hiroyuki Yoshikawa)In the example of dining, it is as follows. The dish is served by the donor (provided service Fd), receptor recognizes it (Fr), and consumes it (fr). At that time, receptor’s hunger (Lr) sets off the action of receiving service or eating the tasty food (fr’). As result, hunger (Lr) decreases and fullness (Fr’) increases. Therefore the following explanation was added: “The service Fd becomes Fr when delivered to the receptor, and flows into the receptor at fr. Receptor who received it exerts function from Lr at speed fr’, and increases Fr’.”5 On difficulties and issues on systematizationQuestion (Masaaki Mochimaru)In this paper, service engineering is systematized into basic framework (provider, receiver, and time concept) and service amplification, to point out difficulties and technological issues in building specific engineering system and to seek hints for solution. I read it as a scenario for systematization to realize service engineering and to achieve goals, and a discussion of necessity to select, newly study, or integrate technological elements listed as topics. Therefore, I think by systematically organizing and describing the “difficulties and technological issues” that are discussed in “4. Summary,” the objective of this research “to propose systematic methodology to advance Full Research for service engineering by selecting and integrating elemental technology” will become clearer.Answer (Hiroyuki Yoshikawa)At end of “4. Summary,” I organized and described the issues in “(7) Issues of engineering theory: (A) Definition of service, (B) Uncertainty of service, (C) Factors that influence service, and (D) Quantification.”6 On “Receptor’s expectation → …→ Effect on receptor” in Section 2.3Question (Masaaki Mochimaru)Five factors from (1) to (5) are defined according to “excellence” of transition influencing service productivity, and I understand that “Receptor’s expectation → …→ Effect on receptor” circulates and spirals upward. In this case, promoted by the effect that occurs to the receptor, receptor gains new (higher level) expectation, the receptor expresses (orders) that or donor does so (understands intent), and the next spiral is set off. I think the process within “excellence of design” in (1) includes the process of donor learning the receptor’s expectation by communicating with receptor, and then expressing this as effect wanted to happen. It is implied in Section 2.2 that this kind of communication is important. If so, I think this should be clearly state in (1).Answer (Hiroyuki Yoshikawa)It is exactly as the Reviewer indicates, so I described the process in which transition becomes loop. I also described the fact that “excellence of design” includes “ability of donor (understanding intent) and receptor (order) to express the receptor’s expectation as effect wanted to happen to receptor, and the relationship between receptor’s true expectation and expressed effect wanted to happen to receptor,” as well as “relationship between ability to design to realize the expressed effect, and the projection of effect that will be caused by the design.”(41)−

※このページを正しく表示するにはFlashPlayer9以上が必要です