Necmiye Savut
Department of Interior Architecture and Environmental Design, Bilkent University, Turkey
Halime Demirkan
Department of Interior Architecture and Environmental Design, Bilkent University, Turkey
Ladda ner artikel
Ingår i: ServDes.2014 Service Future; Proceedings of the fourth Service Design and Service Innovation Conference; Lancaster University; United Kingdom; 9-11 April 2014
Linköping Electronic Conference Proceedings 99:2, s. 11-22
Publicerad: 2014-06-25
ISBN: 978-91-7519-280-2
ISSN: 1650-3686 (tryckt), 1650-3740 (online)
The aim of the study is to develop a public service design framework as an innovative management tool to be used in decision-making in the urban areas for age-friendly cities. Based on the previous research on age-friendly cities; the relevant initiative priorities that are mainly shaped by the population of the city of Ankara are determined. A collaborative approach among the citizens and service providers is used as a basis for developing a framework for public service design. The self-assessment tool that is composed of 82 items categorized under eight themes of an age-friendly city was completed by 251 citizens. Results of the Principal Component Analysis method indicated that the primary factor was composed of the community support and health services features. The second factor was related to transportation; and; the third was the combination of civic participation and employment features with respect and social inclusion features.
Age-Friendly NYC: A Progress Report (2011). New York Academy of Medicine. Retrieved 9 26;
2013 from http://www.nyam.org/agefriendlynyc/Age-Friendly-NYC-Report-Final-High-Res2_new.pdf
Alam; I.; & Perry; C. (2002). A customer-oriented new service development process. Journal of Services Marketing; 16(6); 515-534.
Bason; C. (2012). Designing co-production: discovering new business models for public services. Leading Innovation Through Design; Boston MA; USA; 311-324.
Bibby; J.; Bevan; H.; Carter; C.; Bate; P.; & Robert; G. (2009). The power of one; the power of
many: Bringing social movement thinking to health and healthcare improvement. Warwick; UK: NHS
Institute for Innovation and Improvement.
Botero; A.; Paterson; A.G.; & Saad-Sulonen; J. (Eds.) (2012). Towards peer production in public
services: Cases from Finland; Helsinki: Aalto University. Retrieved 9 22; 2013 from
http://books.aalto.fi
Edvardsson; B.; Gustafsson; A.; Kristensson; P.; Magnusson; P.; & Matthing; J. (2006). Involving customers in new service development. Series on Technology Management; 11;
London; UK: Imperial College Press.
Government of South Australia (2011); South Australia age-friendly environments and communities.
South Australia: Government of South Australia. Retrieved 9 24; 2013 from
http://www.sa.gov.au/upload/franchise/Seniors/Office%20for%20the%20Ageing%20-%20Publications/Publications/Age%20friendly%20local%20gov.pdf
Harari; D.; Hopper; A.; Dhesi; J.; Babic-Illman; G.; Lockwood; L.; & Martin; F. (2007). Proactive care of older people undergoing surgery (‘POPS’): designing; embedding;
evaluating and funding a comprehensive geriatric assessment service for older elective
surgical patients. Age and Ageing; 36(2); 190-196.
Kimbell; L. (2009). The turn to service design. In Julier; G. & Moor; L.; (Eds.) Design and
Creativity: Policy; Management and Practice (pp. 157-173); Oxford: Berg.
Kristensson; P.; Matthing; J.; & Johansson; N. (2008). Key strategies for the successful
involvement of customers in the co-creation of new technology-based services;
International Journal of Service Industry Management; 19(4); 474-491.
Kuusisto; A.; & Kuusisto; J. (2010). Customers and users as drivers and resources of new
service development: Three approaches towards user needs driven service innovations.
Proceedings from the 11th International CINet Conference (pp. 5-7).
Kuusisto; J.; Kuusisto; A.; & Yli-Viitala; P. (2013). Service development tools in action. The
Service Industries Journal; 33(3-4); 352-365.
Lin; M.; Hughes; B.; Katica; M.; Zuber; C.; & Plsek; P. (2011). Service design and change of
systems; human-centered approaches to implementing and spreading service design.
International Journal of Design; 5(2); 73-86.
Lui; C. W.; Everingham; J. A.; Warburton; J.; Cuthill; M.; & Bartlett; H. (2009). What makes
a community age-friendly: A review of international literature. Australasian Journal on
Ageing; 28(3); 116-121.
Morelli; N. (2003). Product-service systems; a perspective shift for designers: A case study:
the design of a telecentre. Design Studies; 24(1); 73-99.
Ostrom; A. L.; Bitner; M. J.; Brown; S. W.; Burkhard; K. A.; Goul; M.; Smith-Daniels;
Demirkan; H. & Rabinovich; E. (2010). Moving forward and making a difference:
research priorities for the science of service. Journal of Service Research; 13(1); 4-36.
Parker; S.; & Heapy; J. (2006). The journey to the interface. London: Demos.
Plouffe; L. A.; & Kalache; A. (2011). Making communities age friendly: state and municipal
initiatives in Canada and other countries. Gaceta Sanitaria; 25; 131-137.
Sangiorgi; D. (2011). Transformative services and transformation design. International Journal
of Design; 5(2); 29-40.
Tabachnick; B. G.; & Fidell; LS (1996). Using multivariate statistics; (3rd ed.) New York: Harper
Collins.
Turkish Statistical Institution (2012) Ankara Providence Population Distribution 2012. Retrieved
01 11 2013 from www.tuik.gov.tr
United Nations. (2002). Report of the Second World Assembly on Ageing; Madrid; 8-12
April 2002. New York: United Nations. A/CONF.197/9. Retrieved at 09 20; 2013 from
http://c-fam.org/docLib/20080625_Madrid_Ageing_Conference.pdf
World Health Organization (2007) Global age-friendly cities: a guide. Geneva: World Health Organization.
World Health Organization (2009) WHO Global Network of Age-friendly Cities and Communities.
Retrieved at 10 05; 2013 from:
http://www.who.int/ageing/age_friendly_cities_network/en/
