Individual Report

[Name of Topic]

[Name of the Student]

[Submitted to]

[Date of Submission]
 Table of Contents
Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 3

The Problem ........................................................................................................................ 4

The Solution ........................................................................................................................ 5

Learning .............................................................................................................................. 6

References ........................................................................................................................... 9

Appendices ........................................................................................................................ 11

Appendix 1 .................................................................................................................... 11

Appendix 2 .................................................................................................................... 13

Appendix ....................................................................................................................... 14

Appendix 4 .................................................................................................................... 15
Introduction

The group project was aimed at solving the problem of the people who do not want to

cook food at supper time due to their hectic routines. In this regard, a research was conducted to

understand the needs of the potential customers in the group project (Appendix 1 and 2). The

changes which I have made in relation with the group project are of removing the truck and the

warehouse for storage and using a small immobile shop or restaurant as the means of storage and

dining.

The identified problem was that the people are unable to cook food at their homes due to

their busy schedules due to which they opt for fast food which is unhealthy for them (Wolfson,

2015). The research showed that people are looking to have healthier food options due to the

increase in awareness regarding the harms of fast food (Kang, Jun, and Arendt, 2015). The

challenge was to identify a way through which healthy meal can be provided to the people in a

convenient, fast and cost effective manner so that the customers do not have to wait for long or

pay extra when they switch from fast food to healthy meal especially at supper. The previously

proposed design was convenient and fast but it was not cost effective. Therefore, the above

mentioned changes were made in the project so that the variable cost can be controlled and the

project can prove to be effective when the demand increases.

The process that I have adopted for the solution of the problem described in the group

project, has a different design as compared to the one mentioned in the group project. The new

design for solving the problem is chosen because the previous one contained some flaws. The

solution of the problem had to be based on three values i.e. a healthy meal solution, convenient

to customers and low cost. The solution mentioned in the group report does not provide all the

three values as it is not a cost effective solution. The use of mobile trucks and warehouse would
have made the cost of the meal to rise significantly and the trucks would not be able to

accommodate much people as compared to a small restaurant. Moreover, the vans would be able

to deliver more order at a time and in a much better way than e-bikes.

The Problem

The problem with the design process provided in the group project is that the use of

trucks is making the prices of the food to go up. The fresh and healthy food is already difficult

and costly to acquire and maintain (Marian et al., 2014). The addition of variable cost would

make it more costly which in turn affect the final price of the meal. The cost of logistics would

also increase as the trucks would not be able to hold enough material that can last for long so

they would be required to get a refill for the minimum of two times in a day.

In addition to this, the use of warehouse for the purpose of food storage and truck parking

is also issue. The problem identified in the use of warehouse is that it can only effectively serve

the trucks which will be in the nearby locations. The trucks which will be operating in the distant

areas of the city will find it difficult to get the stocks refilled. The addition of warehouses to cater

to this problem would also not be an effective way as it will make the costs to rise significantly

and most importantly, if we are talking about fresh and healthy food, then we cannot store food

items for long which makes the use of warehouses completely unnecessary (Kostecka,

Garczyńska and Pączka, 2018).

Finally, the trucks will make the use of e-bikes for the purpose of delivery. This also

raises a problem as the e-bikes will only be able to carry one or two order at a time and they can

only be able to deliver at a distance of 2 to 3 kilometres. This will significantly limit the

provision of our service as we will be able to cover a very short area by this method. All these
problematic areas identified can be framed down to the problem of cost effectiveness that can be

addressed by the proposed new design process.

The Solution

The path of determining the solution of the problem was undertaken and cross referneced

using the creative problem solving approach in order to understand the results of the proposed

solution (Laisema and Wannapiroon, 2014). The changes in the solution proposed in the group

project were made based on the identified problems in the process design of it. The new solution

of the problem requires the operations to be carried out from a small restaurant instead of a

mobile truck. The reason for this is that the restaurant will only require a fixed cost to setup

whereas the use of trucks would be adding a continuous variable cost to the total price of our

food. Moreover, the restaurant will also be able to give people a better environment than trucks.

Use of restaurant will also eliminate the cost of operating a warehouse, further reducing the cost

of the meal.

In addition to this, the order of the meals would be taken by the same methods as

proposed in the group project. However, the mode of delivery would be different as vans would

be used for delivery instead of e-bikes and the vans would have the environment that allows the

food to stay fresh in cases of distant deliveries. The vans would enable better, fast and distant

deliveries of the meal to the customers. The use of specialised vans would significantly increase

the scale of the delivery which would not be possible with the use of e-bikes and it would also

cost less in the long run.

The new proposed solution was generated by carrying out further research. The focus in

the new solution remained on the service of dinner due to the research findings which can be
seen in Appendix 3 and the menu of the diiner was also selected by making research as its basis

which can be viewed in Appendix 4. Different business models were also studied and literature

available online was reviewed. The analysis has shown that by using trucks, therewould be a

constant variable cost which we would have to bear. This would make the price of our food items

to go up. The research has also shown that the consumers are not willing to pay an amount which

is significantly higher than the cost of fast food, even if they are getting the benefit of having

healthy and fresh food (Hoek et al., 2017).

Learning

The two iterations of the design process have made me learn that the how a big project

can be bifurcated in to small manageable parts. The first exercise of the group project allowed

me to learn the effectiveness of team work and made me realise that how a big project can be

carried out easily and effectively by working in a team. Moreover, I also learned that how the

snowballing effect (Duraman, Shahrill, and Morsidi, 2015) takes place in a group discussion

which I only had studies in theory previously.

In addition to this, the both the iterations allowed me to think critically and relate the

theory with practice (Pearson, 2016). The individual project allowed me to learn the skill of re-

framing the problem and to think of a better solution. The design process of both iterations also

allowed me to learn the skill of carrying out research individually as well as in a group. It also

allowed me to learn the way of looking at a single problem from different angles before

proposing an effective solution. I also learned the importance of looking at a problem from

different perspectives in the design process (Payne et al., 2013).

 There were also some problems which were encountered in both the iteration of the

design process. The main problem was to carry out extensive research which was required for the

projects. Apart from this, carrying out a critical analysis and proposing a solution that is

convenient, reliable, fast and cost effective was also a challenge. The research showed us that the

cost of making fresh organic meals is high whereas the customers were not willing to pay a price

that is relatively much higher than the unhealthy meals available in the market. This finding also

posed a challenge as combining healthy food with low prices was difficult (Masset et al., 2014).

Another challenge that was faced in the group project was of managing conflicts. As we

all were doing brainstorming of the ideas so all of us were coming out with many ideas and there

were times when some ideas were creating conflicts among the team members. This problem

taught me the skill of managing conflicts with diplomacy (Sherif, 2015). Moreover, the iterations

also taught me the skill of presenting the idea based on evidences rather than basing the idea on

assumptions.

The project also allowed me to use a variety of published tools. Prior to this project, all

these tools were unknown to me and I did not know the proper usage of theses tools. However,

by doing continuous practice and progressing carefully forward in the completion of project, I

learned the usage of these tools through experience (Boud, Keogh and Walker, 2013). This

assimilates to the learning from experience theory where learning is gained through experience

and go hand in hand with each other.

To sum up, both the iterations of the design process proved to be of great learning for me

and provided me with a great experience. I not only learned to put an individualised effort

towards the completion of the project but also learned to put a team effort towards it. Although,

there were some problems which made the completion of the projects challenging and difficult,
but those problems provided an enhanced learning experience which would help me in my future

endeavours.
References

Duraman, H.S.A.H., Shahrill, M. and Morsidi, N.M.H., 2015. Investigating the effectiveness of

collaborative learning in using the snowballing effect technique. Asian Journal of Social

Sciences & Humanities, 4(1), pp.148-155.

Hoek, A.C., Pearson, D., James, S.W., Lawrence, M.A. and Friel, S., 2017. Shrinking the food-

print: A qualitative study into consumer perceptions, experiences and attitudes towards

healthy and environmentally friendly food behaviours. Appetite, 108, pp.117-131.

Instruments, D.P., 2011.Business model management.

Kang, J., Jun, J. and Arendt, S.W., 2015. Understanding customers’ healthy food choices at

casual dining restaurants: Using the Value–Attitude–Behavior model. International

Journal of Hospitality Management, 48, pp.12-21.

Marian, L., Chrysochou, P., Krystallis, A. and Thøgersen, J., 2014. The role of price as a product

attribute in the organic food context: An exploration based on actual purchase data. Food

Quality and Preference, 37, pp.52-60.

Masset, G., Soler, L.G., Vieux, F. and Darmon, N., 2014. Identifying sustainable foods: the

relationship between environmental impact, nutritional quality, and prices of foods

representative of the French diet. Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and

Dietetics, 114(6), pp.862-869.

Parboteeah, K.P., Hoegl, M. and Muethel, M., 2015. Team characteristics and employees'

individual learning: A cross-level investigation. European Management Journal, 33(4),

pp.287-295.
Payne, Troy and Gallagher, Km and Eck, John and Frank, James.2013. Problem framing in

problem solving: A case study. Policing An International Journal of Police Strategies and

Management. 36. 670-682. 10.1108/PIJPSM-01-2012-0081.

Pearson, A.T., 2016. The teacher: Theory and practice in teacher education. Routledge.

Plattner, H., Meinel, C. and Leifer, L., 2012. Design thinking research.Springer.

Sherif, M., 2015. Group conflict and co-operation: Their social psychology. Psychology Press.

Walumbwa, F.O., Hartnell, C.A. and Misati, E., 2017. Does ethical leadership enhance group

learning behavior? Examining the mediating influence of group ethical conduct, justice

climate, and peer justice. Journal of Business Research, 72, pp.14-23.

Wolfson, J.A., Bleich, S.N., Smith, K.C. and Frattaroli, S., 2016. What does cooking mean to

you?: perceptions of cooking and factors related to cooking behavior. Appetite, 97,

pp.146-154.

Boud, D., Keogh, R. and Walker, D., 2013. Reflection: Turning experience into learning.

Routledge.

Laisema, S. and Wannapiroon, P., 2014. Design of collaborative learning with creative problem-

solving process learning activities in a ubiquitous learning environment to develop

creative thinking skills. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, pp.3921-3926.

Appendices

Appendix 1

1. How old are you?

 Under 18
 18-24
 25-34
 35-44
 45-54
 55-64
 65+
2. What is your occupation
 Student
 employed
 between jobs
 freelancer
 retired
 housewife/househusband
3. What is your approximate average annual household income?
 £0-£24,999
 £25,000-£49,999
 £50,000-£74,999
 £75,000-£99,999
 £100,000-£124,999
 £125,000 and up.
4. How often do you cook for dinner
 Every day
 A few times a week
 A few times a month
 Not at all
5. Do you think the requirement of dinner is important?
 It's doesn't matter, just full.
 Yes, I hope it can be balanced; e.g., meats and vegetables
 Yes, I hope the dinner can be bland
 I like fast food
 Others__________________

6. How much would you expect to pay for dinner?

 £0-£5
 £6-£10
 £11-£20
 £21-£30
 £31-£40
 £40-£50
 £50 and up
7. If there is a new way to provide you a healthier dinner (ready to cook or cooked food ) that can
be delivered within a short time，would, you like to try it?
 Yes
 No
 Neutral
8. For ready-to-eat services, what you value most is that part？
 Price
 Nutrition Content
 Taste
 All
9. Which time do you prefer to use this service?
 Morning
 Lunch
 Dinner
10. Which type of cutlery that you prefer to choose？
 Disposable tableware
 Recyclable tableware
11. In our app, users can also share their healthy recipes, how satisfied are you with this
interaction?
 Extremely satisfied
 Very satisfied
 Somewhat satisfied
 Not so satisfied
 Not at all satisfied
12. We will launch an application that provides ready-to-eat healthy food called COOKLINK.
Would you like to try it?
 Yes
 No

Appendix 2

50% of people are office workers, and 62% of the annual household nnual income are about

£50,000-99,999. Therefore, most people are middle class.

78% of people do not cook regularly, but they still think that dinner is significant, and they want

to have a balanced dinner.

60% of people think that their price for dinner is 6-10 pounds.

90% of people think that, if there is a new way to provide the healthier dinner (ready to cook or

cooked food) that can be delivered within a short time, and they are willing to try.

36% of people believe that for ready-to-eat services, price, nutrition content, and taste are

significant. However, 32% of people believe that price is the most important.

A majority of people believe that they prefer to use this service at dinner time.

The number of people choosing disposable tableware and recyclable tableware is almost the

same.
Most people hold the opinion that in our app if users can also share their healthy recipes and they

will satisfy with this interaction。If someone launches an application that provides ready-to-eat

healthy food called COOKLINK, almost respondents are willing to try it.

Appendix 3

ANNUAL HOUSEHOLD INCOME

¨ £0-£24,999 ¨ £25,000-£49,999 ¨ £50,000-£74,999
¨ £75,000-£99,999 ¨ £100,000-£124,999 ¨ £125,000 and up

10% 6%
10%
12%

22%
40%

PREFER COOKLINK SERVICE

¨ Morning ¨ Lunch ¨ Dinner

2%
18%

80%
Appendix 4

(Source: HARDING, E. (2014) Can't cook won't cook Britain: Amount of time spent cooking in the UK has
HALVED since 1980s, and most people survive on diet of sandwiches. Daily Mail)