Evaluation TIL IP Group RST
Project members:
 Martijn van den Driest
 Rob van der Feltz
 Bas van Noortwijk
 Jayant Ramautarsing
1148079
1131087
1180673
1115030
Supervision:
 M.W. Ludema
 J.H. Weelink
Project
This part examines the way we perceived the project itself. Different subject related to the project
will be handled in a chronological order: starting with the first phase of the project. This first phase
focused on exploring the subject and setting the scope of the project. Exploring is conducted by
literature studies and interviews with a vehicle transporting company and researchers in the field.
Thereby lots of information sources have been found; ranging from specific detailed data to
conceptual frameworks. No major contradictions have been found in these information sources,
except for the costs involved current transport practices. Costs found in the literature did not match
the costs from the real practices. This difference in costs was caused by a misunderstanding in
terminology. Though this gave us new insights in the decomposition of the market price for transport
of new passenger vehicles.
Based on the information found the scope of the project had to be determined, resulting in the main
design objective of this project. Scoping the project involved choosing a perspective from which the
project is being conducted. We have chosen the perspective of a shipping company that search for
investors for the transport concept. Based on this choice other actors in the surrounding are
identified, which gives a better view on the arenas the project is involved in. Taking these actors and
their perceptions into account a better result can be achieved. After setting the scope of the project,
decomposition into functional parts has been made. Each of these parts handles their own specific
subject, but a methodology provides good insight in the relations between the parts. By making this
decomposition it was possible for each project member to work parallel on a subject that fitted his
knowledge and interest.
Each of the project members possessed own specific methods and tools for research and design.
During the first phase these different method and tools resulted in a broad range of perspectives and
information involving the river sea concept and one strategy how to deal with this project. Based on
the functional decomposition, each of the project members was able to apply their own research and
design methods. Though everybody was continuously updated by each other about the subjects they
worked on that moment. This provided every project member a complete view on the processes and
results.
During the design of the concept, the perspective of the shipping company was kept in mind. This
reminded us that the concept to be designed should be financial feasible and an attractive
alternative for new vehicle transport. This gave us also insight in the fact that it should be a tough
assignment to design an optimal solution. It is hard to optimise each aspect of the solution, with
taking into account the different perceptions of each stakeholder involved. Therefore a satisfying
solution is the result of this project; this result has been optimised for several factors but not all.
With designing an attractive alternative for new vehicle transport, we committed ourselves to look at
the market as well. A feasible and attractive solution can only be achieved when there is a market it
can serve. Therefore an in depth market analysis has been conducted, which resulted in a corridor
choice and a choice for a type of product to be shipped with our concept.






Research and design methods and tools
Decomposition in good parts
Deliverables in perspective of client and other actors
Optimum and satisfying solution
Design solution as part of design space in problem situation
Assumptions
Group
The project group as a whole experienced very little difficulty with its internal project processes in
retrospect. At the start of the project the project members had not previously cooperated as they
would during the interdisciplinary project. As with any project group the first week of project work
also had the function of starting to know each other. In general all team members, probably
unconsciously, seemed to be striving for a common goal. The fact that it can be called a common goal
follows from conversations about our personal project views towards the end of the project. Since
much feedback was received from external parties which were interested in our research and
findings, the group had an extra impulse to cooperate effectively. Combined with the fact that on a
personal level we did not experience any animosity on a personal level, the goal of successfully
finishing the TIL5050 course was a given.
From the start of the project it was indicated that all members had to fulfil the role of chairman at
least once. During the project this role was roughly fulfilled for two weeks by each member.
Documentation on task fulfilment by the chairman was not kept as such. The relative small group size
guaranteed that task execution was checked by other team members. This was supported by the fact
that after task allocation these were executed in project rooms. For some parts of the research
teams of two were formed to focus on certain parts of the analysis. The group tried to work together
as much as possible to ensure the possibility of quick feedback. This ensured efficient research and
reviewing conditions. Although working together as much as possible has many advantages, it also
demands more focus from the group members. At the end of the project maintaining steady
concentration levels became more difficult than at the start. Latter however did not noticeably affect
the end product.
The first part of this evaluation mentioned tools and methods which were used to perform analyses
by the project members. Next to these research related tools and methods we also used aids to help
with the project processes. The TIL5050 course provides some online disk space through the
Blackboard environment to maintain project documentation. During the course of a intensive project
like TIL5050 this environment lacks flexibility in some areas. A main deficiency would be the lack of
the possibility to cooperate and edit in a central environment. We set up a Wiki to support our group
processes and more efficient report content editing. The Wiki in the end was the main reason that
there were no difficulties in report editing. A second important factor was the minimization of time
loss due to email contact between project members. All documents were kept online at all times, and
by strategic use status indicators all members could see who was working in and on what part of the
report. The group strongly advises to provide TIL5050 groups with online wiki space, or let them get
acquainted with free of charge online wiki space providers. These free wikis can often be set up in a
matter of hours, but the time invested repays itself during the course of the project. These benefits
grow with larger groups, since the amount of communication between members will intensify with
the use of traditional email or Blackboard space.


Collaboration
o Allemaal op een lijn
Role playing



Managing a project
Working together as much as possible
Wiki
Supervision
 Report and communicate the results of intermediate meetings
 Planning of meeting
 Facilities/harddrive to store data

De boot missen
Tussen wal en schip belanden
Buiten de boot vallen
Iets overboord werpen
Beste stuurlui staan aan wal
CARrier