Among the many insightful observations the Thinking in Services book offers is how the human element in the design is the cause of many failures. How ironic then that the book has several errors that went unnoticed during proof-reading.
- page 35: cutomer should be customer
- page 71: shortterm should be short term
- page 89: first paragraph, performance [Y+ and X+] should be performance [Y+ and Y-]
- page 123, Figure 33: the one-line definition of 1V Provider should be Those who offer the service and get paid for the outcomes.
- page 124: 1U4 should be 1U
- page 128: 2M should be 2A
- page 130: 1V Customer should be 1M Customer
- page 133: Things with shortcomings, or why there will be demand for performances. should be How the artifact needs to be acted upon; actual instances of demand.
- page 133: The type of promise for Capability should be Y+, not Y-
- page 133: The counterpart in 2C should be 2A Artifact
- pages 157 and 159: himself should be herself
- Page 182 features sample arithmetic to explain the workings of the O-P/E=N equation. In the first example, N = 1000 – 1080/1.14 should be N = 900 – 1080/1.14, so that the final result evaluates to N = -47.
Let’s turn this obvious mistake into an explanation that still makes sense. Airlines do lose money on some fares, while earning a good profit on others. Therefore, a negative net value is not an absurd idea. Airlines have historically struggled with profitability despite deregulation. Indeed, low-fare airlines after having forced legacy carriers into introducing the basic economy fare, are now struggling for survival.
If you discover any other errors, the author of the book will be most grateful if you kindly inform him. He hopes you nevertheless enjoy reading the book and find new ideas, insights, and inspirations.