CEE 215 Group Project Assignment
Winter 2008
This document details each of the CEE 215 Group Project Assignment’s three parts:
1) Group Presentation
2) Group Submission (to be posted to the wiki)
3) Individual Reflections (to be submitted to coursework)
The project is structured: it has required elements, and strives to achieve specific goals.
However, the project also allows room for innovation and creativity; some of the
requirements are open-ended. We intend the outline below to be instructive, and not to
prevent you from innovating or improving based on your project results. Please ask for
additional information or feedback, or make suggestions, if you are unclear about any of
the specific requirements.
1. Group Presentations: In class on Tuesday 3/11/08, Thursday
3/13/08
Sign-up for a specific time at http://cgi.stanford.edu/~class-cee1151076/wiki_win08/index.php?n=Main.Projects
The goal of the Group Presentation is to share, in a succinct, informative, and thought
provoking manner, the major findings and insights of your group project.
You will have 10 minutes to present and 5 minutes for Q&A.
Visual aids for the presentation are at the discretion of the group. Two (side-by-side)
Video Projectors, both with Internet connections, will be available. Please ensure all
members attend on time, and check for technical issues prior to your presentation (i.e. If
you are using the wiki make sure the links are working, all of the images appear-- on a
PC, etc.) Because the time spent dealing with technical issues will be taken out of your
presentation time, you should be prepared to begin speaking without slides if necessary.
2. Group Submittal: Due Thursday 3/13/08, 8:30am
The goal of the Group Submittal is to share (in an organized and transparent form) the
work your group has performed throughout the quarter, highlighting the major findings
and insights gained.
Your submittal should be accessible under your group number on the course wiki:
http://cgi.stanford.edu/~class-cee115-1076/wiki_win08/index.php?n=Main.Projects
In addition to the decision title and team member names, the Group Submittal should
include the following four elements (which the subsequent text details):
2.1) Current State Narrative and descriptions
2.2) Future State Narrative and descriptions
2.3) MACDADI models and descriptions
2.4) Innovation
1
2.1) Current State Narrative Summary
A Current State Narrative describes the information and processes executed or likely to
be executed to make the design decision(s) on your project. This model should
demonstrate how your decision of interest is being made on projects today, and should be
based on your observation of current practice. Please include these parts:
A. Narrative Visual representation on wiki and link to on-line version.
B. Description Text description of what your narrative represents.
C. Methods Text discussion of how you built it (using what methods- what
combination of document review, interviews, and other means).
D. Insights Text discussion of your observations and insights from the model
development exercise.
2.1.A. Narrative Below is a sample of how a Current State Narrative might look.
NOTE: In addition to providing the image of the Narrative on the wiki as shown below,
also save and post a version of the Narrative to the web. To do so:
1. Open the Narrative in Narrator. In the green menu choose the “Export for Web”
command, and save the file as yourNarrativeName.zip.
2. Upload this zip file to:
https://www.stanford.edu/group/narratives/cgi-bin/uploads/upload-narratives.php
3. Place the link to the url returned by the browser into wiki as shown below:
[[https://www.stanford.edu/group/narratives/community/ABC%20Hospital%20Structural
%20Design%20Process/|Click here to view the ABC Hospital Structural Design
Narrative]]
2.1.B. Description This sample explains the narrative illustration’s meaning:
“Figure 2.1.a: Current State Narrative (read from left to right) a) during the project
definition phase, various stakeholder define project requirements and assumptions; b)
during pre-design phase, architects and engineers begin preliminary design c) preliminary
2
analyses of structural system cost is performed while architect continues to gather
information d) early in conceptual design the design team selects a structural system, e)
architect tries to coordinate service lines with structural system; and critique of decision
process is performed….”
2.1.C. Methods This sample explains how one Current State Model was created:
“…Members of our group attended two design team project meetings. In addition we
conducted three phone interviews (with 2 decision makers, 1 designer.) Through
observation and discussion we were able to create a basic diagram of the decision
process. We then showed this diagram to one of the decision makers previously
interviewed. He confirmed the diagram looked accurate, and provided additional
information about the owner’s project goals (see project goals node.) We found most of
the project documents on the project “workplace” website which is an one-line repository
for project….”
2.1.D. Insights This sample explains the novel ideas this exercise produced:
“…One of the biggest insights our group observed was a noticeable lack of
communication between the architectural team and the engineering team. While parallel
studies were on-going, the engineer created structural options and analyzed these options
without contextual information available to the architects about specific site conditions.
We were surprised to see that the team never generated any project specific designs or
analyses for the structural system decision, but rather seemed to rely on generic data. The
structural decision was made independently from understanding of the site; as a result,
the site conditions were made to fit the structural choice rather than the structural choice
accommodating the pre-existing site conditions….”
2.2) Future State Narrative Summary
Goal: A Future State Narrative critiques the Current State Narrative by proposing an
improved process by which to make the decision. We expect each of these Future State
Narratives will include a MACDADI enabled process. Please include:
A. Narrative Visual representation on wiki and link to on-line version.
B. Description Text description of what your narrative represents.
C. Methods Text discussion of how you built it (using what methods- what
combination of document review, interviews, and other means).
D. Insights Text discussion of your observations and insights from the model
development exercise.
2.2.A. Narrative Below is a sample visual representation of a Future State process for a
hospital project.
NOTE: In addition to providing the image of the Narrative on the wiki as shown below,
also save and post a version of the Narrative to the web, and give a link here. See above
for instructions. Relevant portions in the online version of your Future State Narrative
should reference (link to) pieces of the MACDADI model, described below.
3
2.1.B. Description This sample explains the narrative illustration’s meaning:
“Figure 2.2.a: Future State Process Diagram (read from left to right) is similar to the
Current State Process Diagram (Figure 2.1a) with the addition of an intervention of
applying MACDADI. The green nodes denote the elements that are new with this
intervention. The red Project Preferences node denotes that we did not model project
level preferences for this project, rather we focused on creating a set of preferences for
the structural decision. ...”
2.2.C. Methods and 2.2.D. Insights The discussions for the Future State Model may be
similar in form to the examples provided for the Current State Model above. Additional
information may be included. See Lecture 1/19/08 (slides 13-16 for additional examples)
(http://www.stanford.edu/class/cee115/wiki/uploads/Main/Schedule/Lecture%202A_Narr
atives.pdf)
2.3) MACDADI Model, including information (models) for your project and
specific decision
Goal: The goal is to explain the MACDADI model your team constructed, as intended to
help build and maintain consensus from project inception to clearer, better decisions. For
additional information, see MACDADI Lecture 1/19
(http://www.stanford.edu/class/cee115/wiki/uploads/Main/Schedule/Lecture%202B_MA
CDADI.pdf)
4
Figure 3: Structural Analysis MACDADI. The items below describe each model in more
detail.
A. Organizations (Visualization and description) See Lecture 1/17
Show a visualization of the various organizations (stakeholders, decision makers, and
designers) involved in your decision:
2.3.A.1.
The stakeholder
hierarchies presented in class are
a basic method of illustration.
2.3.A.2.
Here is a sample
discussion of how the model was
built:
“…At a team meeting on Dec
12th, twelve team members
brainstormed a list of project
stakeholders. This brainstorming
session was organized by one of
our team members into an Excelbased spreadsheet organization
chart with three levels of
distinction. Additional input was
received directly from the Project
Team to define Owner individual
5
owner representatives as well as specific design team representatives….”
Note: Narratives can also show how the hierarchy was assembled, as in the following
sample visualization for Organizations:
2.3.A.3 Here is sample discovery or insight
“…By collecting and organizing this model, we realized how a hospital project has an
unusually high number of stakeholders involved. In addition, we realized that occupants
of a hospital facility consist of both doctors (long-term) and patients (short-term); this
creates an usual dynamic and results in the building’s “user” group(s) representing a
particularly diverse clientele…”
Visualization and discussions for the items below may be similar in form to the examples
provided for those above (2.3.A.1-3).
B Goals (see Lecture 1/17)
1. Visual representation
2. A discussion of how the model was built
3. A discovery or insight
C Preferences (see Lecture 1/31 and Lecture 2/14)
1. Visual representation
2. A discussion of how the model was built
3. A discovery or insight
D Options (see Lecture 2/21)
1. Visual representation
2. A discussion of how the model was built
3. A discovery or insight
E Analyses (see Lecture 2/21)
1. Visual representation
6
2. A discussion of how the model was built
3. A discovery or insight
F Weights (Optional, see Lecture 2/12)
1. Visual representation
2. A discussion of how the model was built
3. A discovery or insight
G Value (see Lecture 2/12)
1. Visual representation
2. A discussion of how the model was built
3. A discovery or insight
2.4)
Innovation
The goal of an innovation is to identify and implement an opportunity for improvement
on Standard MACDADI in one or more of the above areas.
An innovation could occur at any part or level in the above outline. It is recommended to
call out an innovation visually and to provide a brief description of how the innovation
works and why it is an improvement (if possible, provide specific metrics by which you
measure your innovation’s improvement upon the original method).
3 Individual Write-up, Due Thursday 3/13/08, 8:30am
In approximately 500 words, provide your personal reflections on the following
questions.




What were the strengths and weaknesses of your team’s MACDADI and
Narrative implementations?
How would you enhance the project submission if you had more time and
resources?
What do you feel are the strengths, and ways of improving, the use of MACDADI
and Narratives to assist sustainable design decision-making?
What do you feel are the strengths, and ways of improving, the use of MACDADI
and Narratives to assist education about sustainable design decision-making?
Please submit this write-up on coursework under the assignment entitled “Final Personal
Reflection.”
Grading
We will evaluate Group Presentation and Group Submittal using the following criteria:
 Comprehensiveness
 Precision
 Transparency
 Systematicity
 Innovativeness
7
As a self- check, first ask your team and yourself whether each portion of the submittal
meets these criteria. Next, improve the model or document its shortcomings to your best
ability. For example:




Are the organizations defined comprehensively, or is there an important
stakeholder group missing?
Are the goals defined precisely, or do they leave terms (e.g., “better acoustics”)
open to different interpretation by different stakeholders/designers (e.g.,
professors’ voices should carry only from the lecture hall podium)?
Are the options defined systematically, or is there an option with no
corresponding analysis?
Are the analyses defined transparently, or do they use terms that only specialists
will understand?
Grading of the Individual Project Write-ups will be based on the clear presentation of
thoughtfulness in your reflections on this quarter’s work.
8