Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM

Copy

Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.

DeleteCancel

Chatsworth - the adventure playground decision

No description
by

KE WU

on 8 December 2016

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of Chatsworth - the adventure playground decision

Concept
Outline
• Introduction

• Issues

• Analyses

• Recommendations

• Conclusion

Introduction
Background infomation

Historical site

Question 1


Definition
- To understand what is this comprise
- How does this works

Question 2
Core element in product design
Package
Benefits
Features
...
the entire package of elements defines the product/service.

Identified Issues:
'coming to the end of its life'
considerable maintenance cost
no longer attract visitors
behind safety standards
four options:
Analysis
Remove it !
Feasibility- feasible option, but possible technical problem: the fund, manpower and skills .
Acceptability- acceptable option, yet may be giving up potential profits.
Vulnerability- safe opti
on
, however, it is hig
hly steady and
predictable: les
s visitors with
young children
and less revenu
e

Process
... defines the way in which the component services and products will be created and delivered
Chatsworth - the adventure playground decision
Family Playground
What comprise of concept package and process for the adventure playground?
A. remove it
B. do nothing
C. replace with similar
D. replace with substantially better
Analysis
B. Do nothing
Feasibility- the most feasible option, the business can achieve this with its current resources.
Acceptability- not acceptable, cost increasing amount of maintenance every year.
Vulnerability- not acceptable, is not financially
wise at
all.

Analysis
C. Replace with similar
Feasibility- moderate option.
Acceptability-moderate option, bring new hardware in compliance with safety standards.
Vulnerability- High option, the risk for this choice is too high.

Analysis
D. Replace with substantially better !
Feasibility- low option, From the perspectives of costs and budgeting, this is not attractive at all.
Acceptability- high option, bring a 'state-of-the-art' playground and improved farmyard water system & growth in visitor number.
Vulnerability- high option, The 'very conservative' estimation about recovering the investment is 7 years.


Recommendations
The ultimate choice is option D that spend $250,000 to build the best, however, this choice exists uncertainty;
The safest option is option A - remove it,because it does not lose money.
My advice is the choice should depend on whether the company want to make money or be secure.
the manager can use a more reliable way to estimate the profit, not only depends on imagination without any references.

Question 3
... the concept of interactive design means for a services in the adventure playground ...
Issue 1:
"... the little shuffles or the great leaps forward", but “few major changes” have not been found until 25 years later ...
Analysis
What the few major changes are ?
No
What do we find ?
The facilities aging
Maintenance costs increasing each year
Why did the situation happen ?
there is no simultaneous work on each stage.

Recommendations
Employ simultaneous development where design decisions are taken as early as they can be, without necessarily waiting for a whole design phase to be completed.
Issue 2
Conclusion
Reference
Voss, C, Tsikriktsis, N. & Frohlich, M., 2002, "Case research in operations management", International Journal of Operations & Production Management, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 195-219.

Slack, N., Chambers, S., & Johnston, R. (2001). Operations Management 3 ed. Harlow, England: Pearson Education Ltd.

Abbie Griffin, 1996, ‘Obtaining Customer Needs for Product Development’, in ‘The PDMA Handbook of New Product Development, M. Rosenau, A. Griffin, G. Castellion, and N. Anscheutz, eds.’, John Wiley, New York, pp. 153-166.

Crawford, M, Benedetto, A, 2014, ‘New Products Management, 11th edition’, McGraw Hill, Sydney, pp. 21, pp. 31-35

Cathy A. Enz, 2009, ‘Hospitality Strategic Management: Concepts and Case, 2nd edition’, John Wiley, pp. 245-246

Thank you for listening ...
Questions & Answers ...
S2879065 WAN XU
S2796316 ZIRUI HAUNG
S2829472 DINGXIN XU

“remove it, do nothing, replace with similar, replace with
substantially better”

Analysis
The choosing option process reflects the advantages of early conflict resolution have been better embodied in whole phase.
Recommendation
The early conflict resolution, which happens to the design team managers, make a contribution to reduce contentious decisions to be solved in the early design phase, therefore avoids to cause confusion if disagree emerge in later phase.


Issue 3
Using project-based organizational structures in the process of developing concepts through to market.
Analysis
There is a focused and coherent teamwork between companies and Chatsworth’s designers.
Chatsworth and the company would have equal part to play an important role in making decisions, which reducing the product’s overall time to marketing.

Recommendation
Use a project-based organizational structure which can ensure that a focused and coherent team of designers is dedicated to a single design or group of design projects.
'Substantially better' proved to be the most effective way of four potential options that dealing with the unpleasant current situation of the playground in terms of its high status in feasibility, acceptability and vulnerability

Clear understand for innovation and design in products and service
Full transcript