3rd PLATE Conference
September 18 – 20, 2019
Berlin, Germany
Nils F. Nissen
Melanie Jaeger-Erben (eds.)
Universitätsverlag der TU Berlin
van Dam, Sonja S.; Bakker, Conny; Hazenoot, Thomas; Mihelič, Aleš:
Co-creating circular product-service systems for long-lasting
washing machines . In: Nissen, Nils F.; Jaeger-Erben, Melanie (Eds.):
PLATE – Product Lifetimes And The Environment : Proceedings, 3rd PLATE
CONFERENCE, BERLIN, GERMANY, 18 – 20 September 2019. Berlin: Uni-
versitätsverlag der TU Berlin, 2021. pp. 805 – 810. ISBN 978-3-7983-3125-9
(online). https://doi.org/10.14279/depositonce-9253.
This article – except for quotes, fi gures and where otherwise noted – is
licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License (Creative Commons Attribution 4.0).
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
805
3rd PLATE 2019 Conference
Berlin, Germany, 18-20 September 2019
Co-creating Circular Product-service Systems for Long-lasting
Washing Machines
van Dam, Sonja a); Bakker, Conny a); Hazenoot, Thomas a); Miheli, Alešb)
a) Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands
b) Gorenje d.d. Velenje, Slovenia
Keywords: Co-creation; Product-service Systems; Circular Product Design; Washing Machines;
Circular Economy.
Abstract: This paper presents the result of a co-creation and context mapping study amongst
seventeen washing machines users. The users had widely varying experiences with products offered
through alternative ownership models, including three who were active users of a washing machine
with pay-per-use or monthly subscription model. Through the co-creation process, user’s needs,
concerns and desires were identified and translated into potential opportunities and barriers concerning
the acceptance of circular product-service-systems for washing machines. The paper details the
method used in the co-creation process and consecutively highlights six key benefits of using co-
creation in the development of circular product-service systems and exemplify them with citations from
users. Examples of these benefits are the added value that the product-service systems can give over
classic ownership models, the value propositions that can form an entry point for users to be interested
in the service, as well as how pricing and feedback schemes could accommodate different users and
their needs and desires. In closing, the paper addresses the implications of these benefits, relate them
to past literature, but also raise a number of questions and considerations in the application of co-
creation for the development of circular product-service propositions.
Introduction
Access models are seen as a key factor in
successfully closing loops in a circular
economy (MacArthur, 2013). However, for the
circular economy to become truly successful, it
is crucial that people actually start using
circular products and services on a sufficiently
large scale. As Selvefors et al., (2019) state, “it
is essential to increase the understanding of
what circular consumption entails for people in
everyday life”. To achieve this, it is imperative
to understand people’s aspirations, ideas,
fears and dreams, so that these future circular
propositions are optimally aligned with user’s
needs. This is where co-creation comes in.
Co-creation methods enable users and other
relevant stakeholders to participate in the
design process of new service and product
offerings (Holmlid et al., 2015; Sanders &
Stappers, 2008). By taking this bottom-up
approach, the chances of success on the
market are increased because the resulting
services and products better fit the way they
will actually be used in people’s own lives, and
are therefore more attractive. To date, this
approach has received limited attention within
the circular economy community (Lofthouse &
Prendeville, 2018; Selvefors et al., 2019) while
Cherry and Pidgeon (2018) argue there is an
“urgent need for research that explicitly
explores the concept of Results-oriented
services and how these new business models
may be perceived.”
This paper details the method used in a co-
creation process amongst washing machines
users to develop new laundry services.
Consecutively, it highlights the benefits of using
co-creation in the development of circular
product-service systems (PSS) based on the
outcomes of the case study. This study is part
of a large-scale white goods demonstrator,
implementing circular economy in practice
within the EU project ReCiPSS (2018). The aim
of the demonstrator is to develop and pilot a
product-service system that incorporates long-
lasting washing machines offered through an
access model. As a key first step, co-creation
sessions were held with users to identify their
needs and to translate these into potential
opportunities and barriers concerning the
acceptance of circular washing machine
806
3rd PLATE Conference Berlin, Germany, 18-20 September 2019
van Dam S.S., Bakker C.A., Hazenoot T.D., Miheli A.
Co-creating circular Product-service systems for long-lasting washing
machines
business models. This is part of a larger co-
creation process where users will be actively
involved during strategic stages of the
demonstrator to ensure a meaningful match
between users and the PSS being developed.
Method/approach
Seventeen washing machine users
participated in the co-creation study. The users
had widely varying experiences with products
offered through access models, including three
who were active users of a washing machine
with pay-per-use (PPU) or monthly
subscription model. Others had no experience
with access models whatsoever.
The study was conducted in two countries, the
Netherlands and Slovenia, to verify if the same
needs, concerns and opportunities were valid
in different cultural contexts. The Dutch and
Slovenian context was chosen as a
representation of the North- and South-
European context.
The study consisted of filling in a sensitizer
booklet about their current washing machine
practices beforehand and participating in a co-
creation workshop.
The sensitizer was used as a basis for the
discussion in the workshop. By using a
sensitizer beforehand, users are able to reflect
on their laundry experiences (Visser et al.,
2005).
The co-creation workshop itself was split into
two parts. The first half delved into user’s
laundry experiences based on what they had
written in the sensitizer. In the Dutch session,
mixing users who used a PPU washing
machine with ‘normal washing machine’ users
provoked a natural dialogue in which users
exchanged their laundry experiences and, in
the process, unsurfaced underlying desires and
needs. In the second half participants were
asked to design their ideal laundry service in
pairs of two. A slightly different setup was
chosen for the second half of the Slovenian
session. There, the ideas from the Dutch
session were presented to elicit reactions from
the Slovenian participants, who were less
familiar with (washing machine) access
models, about what Dutch participants said.
Data analysis
The goal of the co-creation session was to
inspire and engage the project team and create
empathy for the users. (Sleeswijk Visser et al.,
2007). Therefore, a medium needed to be
chosen that affords presenting rich and in-
depth information about the user in an
accessible way for designers to work with and
delve into. An infographic poster can give an
extensive graphic summary of the data while
retaining the personal identity of the users in
the process. Infographic were made of each of
the participants to be able to present the data
in a manner that was easily accessible by the
washing machine design team.
To be able to extract relevant data for the
infographics, we first familiarized ourselves
with the data by repeatedly listening to the
recordings. Through this processed we
reviewed what each participant had said to
gain a better understanding of their key
characteristics, needs, and concerns as well as
their similarities and differences. During several
analysis sessions, open coding was then used
to identify key characteristics to include in the
infographic. These included key and
noteworthy facts about each participant and
their washing rituals, how they viewed their
washing machine, and their likes and dislikes.
By analyzing this data, four additional themes
were identified that gave relevant insights for
the development of new circular washing
machine services. These were: 1.) user’s
(innate) needs, frustrations, and desires, 2.)
their issues surrounding repairs, 3.) the
underlying concerns, and 4.) underlying
opportunity spaces that emanated from what
participants said during the session.
Additionally, a list of similarities and differences
between participants was compiled and then
narrowed down. This was done by iteratively
identifying and testing key contrasts that were
applicable across the sample and were
capable of being placed against each other on
a scale. These were implemented in the
infographics to give a quick overview of key
differences between participants and included:
their emotions towards different steps of the
laundry practice, who in their household did the
laundry, whether they were more focused on
the function the washing machine delivers or
(owning) the washing machine itself, where
they based their decision to do laundry on
(convenience or capacity), smartness and
division of control between themselves and the
washing machine, and whether they found the
feedback on the costs in pay-per-use models
confrontational or helpful.
Consecutively the first author went through the
recordings again to select transcribed quotes
to include in the infographics. Two examples of
the infographics can be found in figure 1.
807
3rd PLATE Conference Berlin, Germany, 18-20 September 2019
van Dam S.S., Bakker C.A., Hazenoot T.D., Miheli A.
Co-creating Circular Product-service Systems for Long-lasting Washing
Machines.
Figure 1. Infographics.
808
3rd PLATE Conference Berlin, Germany, 18-20 September 2019
van Dam S.S., Bakker C.A., Hazenoot T.D., Miheli A.
Co-creating Circular Product-service Systems for Long-lasting Washing
Machines.
These infographics where then presented to
the design team at the company. To initiate the
design process, a first workshop was held
together with the design team and all partners
of the ReCiPSS project. During the workshop,
each team, consisting of 4 people, selected an
infographic. During 15 minutes, they
brainstormed on new services for the person
portrayed in the infographic, after which they
rotated. The process of developing new PSS
ideas was then continued by the design team
in the following months.
Results: benefits of using co-
creation
This following section will explain the key
benefits of using co-creation for the
development of circular PSS’s and exemplify
them with citations from users. These were
extracted from the co-creation process and the
subsequent data analysis.
Benefit 1: creating added value for PSS
Offering products-as-a-service or access
models rather than traditional ownership
models gives unique opportunities to provide
services that would otherwise not be possible.
It does require significant changes in the
behavior of users and therefore needs have
benefits in comparison to the current situation
for users to gain interest in it (Selvefors et al.,
2019). In this study, the use of co-creation
revealed several areas that can make such a
service relevant to users.
One example is in the area of service and
repairs, where the quickness of repairs or even
complete replacements could be part of the
service package. As one participant stated: “I
would be willing to pay some more if I know for
sure that the same day, when it breaks down,
a mechanic arrives at the door to fix it.
Because that’s the issue with repairs... Before
you have an appointment, then the gentleman
comes over for an initial check. That whole
service model that just doesn’t go quick
enough. So, when I get that certainty: that the
same day someone comes over... It is a kind
of security. Insurance.”
Another example is the opportunity PSS’s give
to provide relevant and timely information and
feedback: “I miss the email that the laundry is
finished very much. [the email] is very nice to
know. At my place [the washing machine] is in
the pantry. I press start. I do not have a mental
clock saying, Ok, 2/12 hours, then it’s done.”
Benefit 2: Ability to develop attractive
payment and contract options
A long-lasting washing machine is a durable
good that can (potentially) have a lifespan of
20 or even 30 years. While durability in itself
may be attractive, the length of time can give a
certain rigidity that may not be attractive to
(younger) users who value flexibility. One
PPU-user described the appeal of PPU as
follows: “Not having to pay upfront costs. You
don’t need to pay for a washing machine. You
are not stuck to it. For example, if you move to
another country, you aren’t left with a washing
machine that you need to get rid of”. The
lifespan of the washing machine may also
mean that a classic ownership model is less
suitable than an access-model which can be
adapted or tailored to phases of life, e.g. in the
size of the machine, payment options and
flexibility of contracts: “When the little one was
not here, the laundry was easier to manage. At
a certain moment that possibility is no longer
there, no longer so opulent: the choice to leave
the laundry for a while. It just has to be done.
Then I feel confronted: The fact that I press the
start button costs me €1.20.” Or, as a second
parent said about the extra laundry loads that
are sometimes inherent to having children: “I
would feel hindered when having to pay per
wash “I would think every time ka-ching, ka-
ching Possession in itself is not important,
but the freedom it offers.”
Benefit 3: Finding unique value
propositions
For companies it is essential to find unique
value propositions for the proposed circular
PSS, particularly when they are not the first on
the market to offer access models. Co-creation
can identify opportunities to differentiate
themselves from competitors. For example,
the value proposition could be in providing
washing machines with smart technology that
is desired by users but would otherwise be
financially out of their reach, like providing wi-fi
enabled intelligent maintenance or remote
access to information and control mechanisms
concerning when the program will actually
finish. As a user explained: “I would probably
get a subscription just because of this”
Benefit 4: Identifying potential user
concerns
The co-creation session intentionally combined
users with a pay-per-use washing machine and
users with a classic ownership-model washing
809
3rd PLATE Conference Berlin, Germany, 18-20 September 2019
van Dam S.S., Bakker C.A., Hazenoot T.D., Miheli A.
Co-creating circular Product-service systems for long-lasting washing
machines
machine. This approach brought to light certain
reservation that users might have including
issues surrounding freedom, control, privacy,
distrust, and (hygiene) perceptions. An example
of this is several users who were very aware of
hygiene issues and therefore (very) wary of
(re)used and shared washing machines:
“because my sister is studying biology,
microbiology and she scared the shit out of
me... there was a study that the bacteria actually
that live in the washing machine can actually be
harmful to you” Another example was lack of
choice “I would want to choose, what [the
washing machine] looks like, what it can do. I
find it important that it can open, so that I can
add forgotten socks, after the program has
started I would have real problems with ‘oh,
you get this concept and this is the machine.
Then I would think hmmmm”
Benefit 5: Assist company with internal shift
from product- to service-orientated
Shifting towards circular economy strategies
requires significant changes within companies
and co-creation can be beneficial in this
process to bring different departments on
board. The design team was very positive in
hindsight about the co-creation process and
saw clear benefits for their company. They
stated that it “greatly exceeded their
expectations” and that they were now pursuing
new ideas and avenues that they would
otherwise never have considered.
Benefit 6: Identify cultural differences
Holding co-creation sessions in different
cultural settings, and particularly using a first
session as input for a second session in a
different culture, can identify cultural
differences. One example of this is that
Slovenian participants seemed more prone to
question guarantees and be wary of ‘empty
promises’: “I would probably go for the
cheapest one just because I don’t know how
they can guarantee that that one is really going
to last so much longer.”
Discussion
While there are clear benefits to implementing
co-creation within circular product development
it also raises a number of questions. A key
question is whether the suggested opportunities
and barriers also contribute to a prolonged
lifetime of the product?
Furthermore, in these two cultural contexts
there seemed to be little interest in (long-term)
shared-services for washing machines. This
begs the question: What would it take to
normalize this model in other cultures and what
are the underlying cultural values that impede
this process? In Scandinavia this model is far
more common and Mont (2004) suggests
several factors that are at play including
regulatory and normative institutional
arrangements, the design and application of the
PSS and societal socio-cultural background.
Likewise, in how far are perceived barriers
going to be actual barriers? Hygiene seems to
be a key barrier to several classic business
model users. Nonetheless, some of these
same users seemed not to be aware that the
washing machines that came with their (rental)
apartment was likely used by a previous tenant
and therefore prone to the same issues.
A further consideration is how to implement
the results from the co-creation sessions. A
logical approach to hygiene concerns might be
to provide a certificate of cleanliness
guaranteeing the washing machine is ‘as good
as new’. However, previous research suggests
that this could be counterproductive saying:
“Reassurances that it is as ‘good as new’ just
lead to more processing of the fact that it is
contaminated.” (Ackerman & Hu, 2017).
Positive marketing communications (e.g. ‘as
good as new’) on used or remanufactured
products tend to make consumers less -rather
than more- favorable towards these products
(Ackerman & Hu, 2017; Mugge et al., 2018).
Care should therefore be taken how to apply
the results.
Conclusions
This case study shows that there are clear
benefits to co-creating circular PSS’s. It is an
advantageous approach that merits more use
within the field of circular economy. However,
the results should be implemented with careful
consideration to avoid having
counterproductive effects, e.g. with regards to
hygiene. Furthermore, the ideas generated
within this process need to be weighed as to
their effect on the overall sustainability of the
product.
Acknowledgments
This project has received funding from the
European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and
innovation program under grant agreement No
776577-2
810
3rd PLATE Conference Berlin, Germany, 18-20 September 2019
van Dam S.S., Bakker C.A., Hazenoot T.D., Miheli A.
Co-creating circular Product-service systems for long-lasting washing
machines
References
Ackerman, D. S., & Hu, J. (2017). Assuring me that
it is as ‘Good as New’ just makes me think about
how someone else used it. Examining consumer
reaction toward marketer-provided information
about secondhand goods. Journal of Consumer
Behaviour, 16(3), 233-241.
doi:doi:10.1002/cb.1631
Cherry, C., & Pidgeon, N. (2018). Why Is
Ownership an Issue? Exploring Factors That
Determine Public Acceptance of Product-Service
Systems. Sustainability, 10(7), 2289. Retrieved
from http://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/7/2289
Holmlid, S., Mattelmäki, T., Visser, F. S., &
Vaajakallio, K. (2015). Co-creative Practices in
Service Innovation. In R. Agarwal, W. Selen, G.
Roos, & R. Green (Eds.), The Handbook of
Service Innovation (pp. 545-574). London:
Springer London.
Lofthouse, V., & Prendeville, S. (2018). Human-
Centred Design of Products And Services for the
Circular Economy – A Review. The Design
Journal, 21(4), 451-476.
doi:10.1080/14606925.2018.1468169
MacArthur, E. (2013). Towards the Circular
Economy. . Retrieved from https://www.ellen-
macarthurfoundation.org/assets/downloads/public
ations/Ellen-MacArthur-Foundation-Towards-the-
Circular-Economy-vol.1.pdf
Mont, O. (2004). Institutionalisation of sustainable
consumption patterns based on shared use.
Ecological Economics, 50(1), 135-153.
doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2004.03.030
Mugge, R., de Jong, W., Person, O., & Hultink, E. J.
(2018). ‘If It Ain’t Broke, Don’t Explain It’: The
Influence of Visual and Verbal Information about
Prior Use on Consumers’ Evaluations of
Refurbished Electronics. The Design Journal, 1-
22. doi:10.1080/14606925.2018.1472856
ReCiPSS. (2018). Retrieved from www.recipss.eu
Sanders, E. B.-N., & Stappers, P. J. (2008). Co-
creation and the new landscapes of design. Co-
design, 4(1), 5-18.
Selvefors, A., Rexfelt, O., Renström, S., &
Strömberg, H. (2019). Use to Use–a User
Perspective on Product Circularity. Journal of
Cleaner Production.
