This page has been translated using TexTra by NICT. Please note that the translation may not be completely accurate.If you find any mistranslations, we appreciate your feedback on the "Request form for improving the automatic translation ".

5th Review Meeting for the Revision of Service Design Guidelines

Overview

Date and

Friday, February 20, 2026, from 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.

US>

Online meetings

Agenda

  • 1. Explanation of the purpose of the meeting
  • 2. Collection of Opinions on the Guideline revision policy
  • 3. Summary of the results (overall)

Material

Handouts

  • Overview of the Guidelines Subject to Discussion * Members only
  • Draft guidelines * Limited to members

Attendees

Members (in the order of 50 Japanese syllables / Honorifics omitted)

  • Bunya Akasaka (Senior Researcher, Research Division for Human Society Expansion, National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology; Visiting Associate Professor, Japan Advanced Institute of Science and Technology; and Visiting Associate Professor, Tokyo University of Agriculture and
  • Yoshihiro Ito (President, NPO Information Gap Buster)
  • Mikie Oi (Integrated Design Laboratory, Mitsubishi Electric Corporation)
  • Teppei Okamoto (Associate Professor, Faculty of Distribution and Information Science, Ryutsu Keizai
  • Nobuko Kitazaki (Professor, Department of Visual Communication Design, Faculty of Art and Design, Musashino Art University)
  • Yoko Nakao (Designer (Inclusive Design))
  • Ikuhide Nakayama (Associate Professor, Faculty of Management, Ritsumeikan University)
  • Atsushi Hasegawa (Professor, Faculty of Design and Architecture, Musashino Art University, President of Socket Co., Ltd.)
  • Natsuko Higa (Representative Employee of Mesh Work LLC, Specially Appointed Associate Professor of the University of Yamanashi)
  • Yasuyuki Hirai (Professor, Graduate School of Art and Engineering, Kyushu University)
  • Naotake Hirasawa (Professor, Department of Social Informatics, Otaru University of Commerce)
  • Shinichi Fukuzumi (Deputy Team Leader, RIKEN Center for Innovative Intelligence Research)

Digital Agency (Secretariat)

Technical Review Meeting Service Design Task Force

Summary of the Proceedings

Summary of Opinions from Members

1. Explanation of the purpose of the meeting (Q & A)

  • I would have been able to express my opinions from a different perspective if I had been aware of the fact that I would also be dealing with the policy design, which was explained in the summary explanation, and if I had understood the premise of having the materials read into the AI. There were some misunderstandings because the premise was not explained. Could you share the materials with me?
    • (Answer: Digital Agency) We will share the prerequisite materials later. Please feel free to post additional comments.
  • The "Scope of the Service Design Guidebook," which was explained in the overview explanation, is easy to understand. On the other hand, does the design of administrative services include policies? The examples in the guidebook cover a wide range of areas such as counter operations and information systems. Is it possible to indicate the types of administrative services assumed?
    • (Answer: Digital Agency) It is possible to a certain extent. For example, the Website Guidelines classify websites into categories such as "MHLW websites, information provision sites, administrative service sites, and data search sites" and provide regulations for each category. At a higher level, for example, services for citizens, services for business operators, and services for government officials can be considered.

2. Collection of opinions on the guideline revision policy, 3. Collection of opinions on the overall guideline

<DS-601.1 Service Design Introduction Guidebook>
  • The framework of personas and journey maps is beneficial, as it is clear that the design will be redesigned from the user's understanding based on the premise of constraints. On the other hand, there is a concern that how to secure the equality of information acquisition and parliamentary participation as a design requirement is abstract, and the terms "consideration," "difficulty," and "alternative means" may be interpreted as belonging to individuals. It is necessary to revise the expression to clarify the responsibility of the design side.
  • At the beginning of Chapter 2, "What is Design in Administrative Services?", the message of "Perspective of' Design'." is important but abstract, so it should be described clearly.
  • In Chapter 3, "The Value of Administrative Services and the Perspective of Users," there is not enough discussion on the value at the resident level. It would be better to touch on the distinction between public value and resident level value.
  • 3.4.1 The term "Conviviality" should be reviewed because it is closer to sharing than autonomy. Examples and guidelines for project start-up and organization / role design should be added. The definition of the term "service" should be clarified where it differs from terms such as ITIL (IT Infrastructure Library).
  • 3.6.2 The description of the transfer of the burden of self-service in "Co-creation and Burden Asymmetry" should be based on the premise that people live in relationship with others, and should be considered based on the capability approach.
  • It is better to reinforce the historical background, definition, and public practice (a place for citizens and administration) in 5.3.3 "Positioning of Workshop".
  • For 6.2.2 "Create Personas of Users with Difficult Value Conversion" and "Step 2 Set a Profile of a Person with Multiple Conversion Factors," pay attention to the possibility that inexperienced people may make mistakes when creating personas by imagination or fail to consider difficult people. If possible, it is recommended to brush up by conducting interviews with target users in parallel.
  • 11.1.3 People who cannot or have difficulty hearing or who are not proficient in Japanese may also be at a disadvantage and should be included in the "Time-Lag Dialogue."
  • In 11.5.2 "Multi-channel Participatory Design", it is recommended to include various means such as presentation at support facilities for those who have difficulty in receiving information, and radio programs for visually impaired people (Qualifications information navigation radio).
  • In 11.6.1 "Online and Face-to-Face - Hybrid Participation Design", based on the fact that there are people such as people with disabilities and parents of children with disabilities who are difficult to participate without online due to restrictions, face-to-face and digital should not be used separately in the phase, but should be described to encourage flexible responses.
  • In 12.2 "System of Indicators for Administrative Services", the relationship with the social impact assessment of the Cabinet Office (logic model, etc.) should be mentioned. The effective use of AI in the design process is not sufficiently described.
  • 12.3.1 Regarding the focus on non-users in "Reach - Is it reaching the people it is supposed to reach?", clarify the barriers to information acquisition behind non-use, such as "I didn't know (the information didn't reach me), I didn't know how to do it (I couldn't understand the information), I gave up in the middle of it (There were not enough means of support)."
  • In 12.3.4 "Satisfaction - Is the user experience good?", "Turning to those who cannot speak up" should specify concrete measures such as interviews with support groups and community questionnaires to find out if there are people nearby who are in trouble.
  • 14.3.2 Descriptions of the "System to listen to diverse voices" in the design of public participation should not only be conscious of the existence of people outside the system at all times, but should also encourage concrete actions such as starting improvements and keeping records even if it is small.
  • In contrast to the name "Introduction", the content is rich. A summary version, a two level table of contents, and a conceptual diagram are necessary. It is recommended that a stakeholder map be included in the toolkit to be developed in the future.
  • The concept of PSI Labs (Public Sector Innovation Labs) should also be included in the section on organizational activities.
  • If you read it from the perspective of the disabled and minorities, there are many places that need to be written more specifically.
  • The premise of applying ISO 9241-11 to the administrative context is useful. Starting from the understanding of the status of use, a template is required to present at what granularity the requirements, evaluation design, improvement log, etc. are to be documented. In the HCD concept, it is necessary to clarify in procurement and operation who will leave the deliverables and at what timing.
  • Ambiguous expressions such as "design" should be replaced with concrete terms, and unfamiliar technical terms should be replaced with easy-to-understand terms. The names and translations of books related to Simon should be standardized.
  • The Theory-First structure has a high reading load and should be clearly linked to policy formulation, drafting, and practical work.
  • The connection between S-D logic (service dominant logic) and service design is challenging and meaningful, and it should be made clear that S-D logic is not a shift from a goods economy to a services economy, but a lens that captures value.
  • The entire frame of relationship and structure should be presented first to prevent blurring of AI retrieval and interpretation.
  • There is a gap in perspective (system seed origin, user origin), and it should be presented by organizing it into an approach from systems and systems, an approach from users, and an approach from both relationships.
  • It is a problem that the citizens are placed outside the thickest square in the diagram of the external and internal environments of the Simon and the "Scope of the Service Design Guidebook." Equality in co-creation should be visualized.
  • Annex A "12 Service Design Points" should be updated and brought to the front.
  • If it says, "All administrative activities are designed," the difference between the conventional administrative design and the service design this time should be clearly shown in contrast.
  • It is necessary to clarify whether it is an introduction or a textbook, and to compile it into a guide led by specific examples that is easy for administrators to convey to vendors.
<DS-602.1 Service Design Implementation Guidebook>
  • Service design is linked to procurement, requirements definition, and operation, which is in line with central government ministries and agencies. However, consideration, edge cases, etc. give the impression of exceptional response, and abstract expressions such as necessary, important, and appropriate create a range of interpretation. Therefore, it is necessary to strengthen the expression to clearly specify adjustment items as requirements.
  • In Chapter 2, "Introduction of Service Design to Digital Products," the system and role should be clarified.
  • 2.1.5 The concept of a boundary spanner that "crosses organizational barriers" is important, and we should maintain a posture of not imposing it when the site's own interpretation or resistance is shown, and leave room for bottom-up.
  • In 2.3.1 "Starting Small within Existing Operations", know-how for administrative services is specifically organized for reference. It would be good to make it possible to share and device as administrative service design and policy.
  • It is desirable to add concrete measures to 2.4.3 "Design a good relationship with local governments". It is easy to use in the field if the pattern of procurement is illustrated and presented.
  • For 2.5.2 "Layer-by-layer analysis of conversion factors", the five layer table (layers 1-5) should be improved for better readability.
  • With regard to the interpretation of the conversion factor in 2.5.4 "' Users' are not limited to ultimate beneficiaries", it is necessary to determine what should be respected and what should be resolved.
  • The description of 3.1.1 "Focus on the process as well as the deliverables" is important, and it is better for the ordering party to proceed together and make the procurement include learning. Since the act of service design in the administration covers planning, business improvement during provision, continuous improvement after release, etc., it is necessary to organize the context and places of use by employee.
  • In 3.6 "Positioning of AI in Procurement", it is necessary to organize the complement with other materials.
  • In 3.6.1 "AI Introduction and Users' Viewpoints," it is necessary to specify alternative means (manual response, text information, face-to-face contact, etc.) in the case where AI cannot respond as a requirement for non-use of function.
  • It is necessary to add "the presence or absence of alternative means" to the evaluation axis for "strict prioritization" in 3.8 "ensuring the user's viewpoint within budget constraints." If there are alternative means, priorities may be lowered even if the difficulty is high.
  • 8.5.5 "Aspect B: Participation in service design and operation" in Area 5: Co-creation should include not only quantitative indicators but also evaluation of the diversity of stakeholders and whether they are able to participate in the design process.
  • "Realistic approach" in 8.6.2 "Difficulty in measurement and realistic approach" should be accompanied. It is also recommended to conduct surveys and observation of behavior. (The communication at the counter in DS-601.1 Service Design Introduction Guidebook 5.2.2 "Various means of understanding users and utilization of existing knowledge" should be observed and unified.)
  • Chapter 9, "Cycle of Continuous Improvement," lacks a description of the linkage between the investment system and governance.
  • The Herbert Simon interface issues in the Getting Started Guide can be addressed in the Practitioner's Guide.
  • In relation to the vertical asymmetry, the SLOC (Small, Local, Open, Connected) scenario can be mentioned.
  • It is desirable to integrate procurement from research to implementation, advance sounding system, horizontal development of advanced local governments, and joint expansion with universities.
  • It is necessary to separate the step examples of zero launch and improvement of existing services and change the flow for each administrative officer, business operator and operator.
  • Regarding investment governance, it is necessary to define the framework of roles, responsibilities, approvals, and audits to prevent misreading of the breakdown of responsibilities at the time of procurement.
  • It is also effective to visualize the bias by decomposing the quality target for each user profile and setting the achievement rate for the most difficult layer separately.
  • It would be better to describe the examples of problem setting in the introduction section (such as the case of wait-listed children) in the practice section, and to add methods for finding problems and how to proceed with the workshop.
  • Since there are some errors in citation and standard numbers, they should be corrected thoroughly.
  • When dealing with ISO 9241-221 (HCD Process Assessment Model), there are concerns about whether it can be effectively applied in the local government where the responsibility changes in 2 to 3 years, and the applicability should be examined and clarified.
  • It should be made clear whether the practical part alone should be more readable and the concept should be re-explained as much as possible, or whether the theory should be left to the introductory part and the method should be specialized. It is better to add explanations that can be used freely for concepts such as boundary objects.
  • It is better to visualize the user image and enable the extraction of conflict and conversion points by redesigning the layer structure and table (journey map + blueprint type integrated table).
<DS-651.1 AI Human-Centered Deployment Guidebook>
  • If the intent of the title expression is to show the human-centered approach to system development using AI, it should be changed to an expression that clearly conveys the intent.
  • 3.4.3 In the "Design Guidelines", it is necessary to clearly indicate the matters to be learned, such as having the AI learn expressions that do not fall under the ABE rhythm. It is also effective to develop and operate recommended materials from Digital Agency.
  • 5.2.3 Examples of the "Voiceless Problem -- Adaptive Preferences" should not be limited to pointing out symptoms, but should include measures such as methods of reporting and recording, and a system that leads to evaluation. It is desirable to develop a persona idea support tool for employees who have difficulty in imagining personas.
  • It is useful that the risks associated with the introduction of AI are carefully described in the guidelines. However, there are some parts where the position of consideration and information assurance is ambiguous. Therefore, it is necessary to clearly describe them as a prerequisite for the design stage, not as a good intention or an incidental response.
  • The drafting of AI risk management guidelines is very difficult. The guidelines should indicate the direction in Japan while incorporating the discussions at the ISO/IEC deliberation stage. It is desirable that the guidelines be managed by high-level design for operation and by Digital Agency for use. The guidelines need to be published step by step and continually updated.
  • It is necessary to design the arrangement by clarifying the processing flow without leaving all to the AI, and to establish the system which verifies three of AI, human and rule base like the triangulation of the qualitative research from many sides.
  • Think of AI as an inter-agent that needs to be orchestrated, and treat accountability as an ethical conversation about what relationships to build rather than as a technical discussion.
  • It is necessary to clarify the impact of the lack of transparency and accountability on service users and providers and the specific methods of explanation, and to improve the guidelines from the viewpoint of ergonomics.
  • Designing policies based on principles such as ISO 9241-110/112 are useful, but linking quality-specific risks to AI objectives at the time of use and clearly stating minimum requirements for approval, review and correction are necessary.
  • It is difficult to see the target, purpose, and scope of application, so it is better to clarify the scope and target by separating the concrete case from the outline.
  • The headings and items should be restructured into a checklist format and a glossary should be provided at the beginning of the chapter since there are unique terms such as "orchestration".
  • Regarding types of AI, human involvement (decision making and work assistance) and ethical arrangement (utilitarianism and care ethics) should be indicated, and guidelines for incorporating consideration for the vulnerable and consideration for individuality into design should be described.
  • Internal decision making uses such as budget simulation without end-user involvement should be included in the scope.
  • Regarding inclusive design, the differences between accessibility and universal design should be clarified, and stakeholder co-creation, party-initiated edge case design and impact assessment, and creation of a forum for equal discourse should be clearly stated.
<All Guidebook and Others>
  • In the guidebook as a whole, the target categories of administrative services should be clarified at the beginning. It is described that the main target audience is the government officials of the central government ministries and agencies. Therefore, the side that creates administrative services should be able to grasp the scope and categories.
  • It would be better to classify both administrative services and design, and clearly show the target and design stages (pre-release, operation improvement, window improvement, etc.).
  • The guidebook itself is regarded as a service, and it needs to be updated repeatedly through field surveys by government officials.
  • Concretization of operational governance leaves more room for concretization of the framework of who makes what, when, approves and amends.
  • It is necessary to clarify the basis, and the relationship with JIS, ISO, and EU regulations (AI Act, etc.) should be organized so that anyone can present the basis.
  • I would like to suggest that the history of citizen cooperation in Japan before the import of service design should be added as an example and the Japanese type of practice should be positioned.
  • In editing the AI premise, we would like to propose a structure that can increase the number of cases and target people without worrying about the quantity constraint. On the other hand, a format that is optimized for the premise of joint use with the AI (such as a structure that allows you to read only the related parts for each case, including how to use and knowledge at the beginning, and publication of cases) should be considered.
  • It is necessary to promote SLOC (Small, Local, Open, Connected) horizontal development and feedback loops between the central and local governments, taking into account not only the capabilities of individuals but also those of local communities.
  • In order to prevent the S-D logic from being misunderstood as a simple shift from the G-D logic (goods dominant logic), I would like to propose that the position of the S-D logic as a lens be further clarified, that the English translation be released simultaneously for international reference, and that readership targeting and difficulty adjustment be promoted.
  • Don't put too much capability in the hands of individuals. Value the aspects achieved by communities and networks of mutual aid. Want a message whose only goal is not to reach individuals alone.
  • I would like to see a design that allows external people to share information and co-create, visualization of the image of the user, verification of the parties concerned and reflection of opinions, and incorporation of bias suppression.
  • In light of the current situation in which a framework for human interaction with the AI has not been shared or established, it is necessary to establish a forum for deliberation to formulate a Japanese way of thinking, budget it, and promote it as a project.
  • It is necessary to concretely show the image of users and examples of how to use the guidebook, and to co-create it with a view to the future, including not only AI but also multiple viewpoints.

Greater than or