Tag Archives: with

HOW DID THE FINDINGS FROM THE INTERVIEWS ALIGN WITH THE THEORIES MENTIONED IN THE LITERATURE REVIEW

Leave a reply

The literature review discussed several relevant theories pertaining to motivation, morale, job satisfaction and employee retention. Self-Determination Theory posits that there are three innate psychological needs – autonomy, competence and relatedness – that must be satisfied for people to feel motivated and fulfilled. Relatedness Need Theory suggests that developing strong relationships and a sense of belonging is critical for well-being and engagement. Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs proposes that fulfilling basic needs like safety and esteem is necessary before motivation can occur. Equity Theory looks at perceptions of fairness in the workplace.

The interviews conducted with employees across different departments and experience levels generally supported and aligned with these theories. In terms of autonomy, many interviewees expressed a desire for more control and input over their roles and how they do their work. Those who had greater flexibility and independence reported higher levels of motivation compared to those in more strictly controlled roles. This supported Self-Determination Theory which emphasizes the importance of autonomy.

In relation to relatedness and connection, interview responses suggested that developing strong bonds with coworkers and managers enhanced morale and satisfaction. Employees who felt isolated or lacked opportunities for collaboration were less engaged. Those who discussed work-related issues and had an encouraging working environment appeared happier. This echoed Relatedness Need Theory about the motivational impact of belongingness.

When asked about competency and growth, interviewees frequently discussed the impacts of training and developmental opportunities. Feeling capable and constantly improving skills were tied to greater motivation. A lack of challenges or chances to expand responsibilities diminished motivation for some. Maslow’s idea that competence must be fulfilled prior to higher-level motivation was supported.

Several interviewees expressed concerns regarding equitable compensation, workload distribution and recognition policies. Perceived unfairness damaged their job outlook even if other factors like autonomy were present. Those who felt respected and that contributions were acknowledged were more positive. This aligned with Equity Theory’s propositions about the role of fairness perceptions in the workplace.

Basic needs like pay, benefits, workload and safety also emerged as factors influencing morale according to many interview responses. Those satisfied with these basic necessities were readier to engage more deeply while deficiencies hindered motivation. This paralleled Maslow’s foundational Hierarchy of Needs model.

Areas where interviews diverged somewhat from expectations involved relationships with managers. While connection to coworkers aided motivation per the literature, some manager interactions did not foster relatedness as much as anticipated. Barriers here included inconsistent communication, lack of appreciation shown and too little trust granted. Positive supervisory bonds paralleled the theories as expected based on comments.

The literature guided expectations of theoretical drivers of motivation in useful ways. With some nuances, findings from staff interviews tended to corroborate the importance of autonomy, relatedness/connection, competence, fairness/equity and fulfillment of basic needs as presented in the reviewed motivation/retention theories of Self-Determination, Relatedness Needs, Maslow and Equity. This provided confidence that the selected literature provided a relevant lens for comprehending factors shaping employee engagement uncovered through discussion. The alignment reinforced utilization of these concepts as a framework for analysis and recommendations going forward.

There was considerable coherence between what the literature predicted would influence workplace motivation and job attitudes according to established theories, and the experiential perspective gleaned from interviewing employees across levels and functions. Most findings resonated well with propositions regarding the impact of autonomy, relatedness, competence, fairness and satiation of basic requirements. This convergence supports having selected literature addressing the right theoretical constructs and confirms its utility as a basis for interpreting and responding to motivation and retention issues raised through the research process.

WHAT ARE SOME POTENTIAL CHALLENGES IN INTEGRATING PREDICTIONS WITH LIVE FLEET OPERATIONS

Leave a reply

One of the major challenges is ensuring the predictions are accurate and reliable enough to be utilized safely in live operations. Fleet managers would be hesitant to rely on predictive models and override human decision making if the predictions are not validated to have a high degree of accuracy. Getting predictive models to a state where they are proven to make better decisions than humans a significant percentage of the time would require extensive testing and validation.

Related to accuracy is getting enough high quality, real-world data for the predictive models to train on. Fleet operations can involve many complex factors that are difficult to capture in datasets. Things like changing weather conditions, traffic patterns, vehicle performance degradation over time, and unexpected mechanical issues. Without sufficient historical operational data that encompasses all these real-world variables to learn from, models may not be able to reliably generalize to new operational scenarios. This could require years of data collection from live fleets before models are ready for use.

Even with accurate and reliable predictions, integrating them into existing fleet management systems and processes poses difficulties. Legacy systems may not be designed to interface with or take automated actions based on predictive outputs. Integrating new predictive capabilities would require upgrades to existing technical infrastructure like fleet management platforms, dispatch software, vehicle monitoring systems, etc. This level of technical integration takes significant time, resources and testing to implement without disrupting ongoing operations.

There are also challenges associated with getting fleet managers and operators to trust and adopt new predictive technologies. People are naturally hesitant to replace human decision making with algorithms they don’t fully understand. Extensive explanation of how the models work would be needed to gain confidence. And even with understanding, some managers may be reluctant to give up aspects of control over operations to predictive systems. Change management efforts would be crucial to successful integration.

Predictive models suitable for fleet operations must also be able to adequately represent and account for human factors like driver conditions, compliance with policies/procedures, and dynamic decision making. Directly optimizing only for objective metrics like efficiency and cost may result in unrealistic or unsafe recommendations from a human perspective. Models would need techniques like contextual, counterfactual and conversational AI to provide predictions that mesh well with human judgment.

Regulatory acceptance could pose barriers as well, depending on the industry and functions where predictions are used. Regulators may need to evaluate whether predictive systems meet necessary standards for areas like safety, transparency, bias detection, privacy and more before certain types of autonomous decision making are permitted. This evaluation process itself could significantly slow integration timelines.

Even after overcoming the above integration challenges, continuous model monitoring would be essential after deployment to fleet operations. This is because operational conditions and drivers’ needs are constantly evolving. Models that perform well during testing may degrade over time if not regularly retrained on additional real-world data. Fleet managers would need rigorous processes and infrastructure for ongoing model monitoring, debugging, retraining and control/explainability to ensure predictions remain helpful rather than harmful after live integration.

While predictive analytics hold much promise to enhance fleet performance, safely and reliably integrating such complex systems into real-time operations poses extensive technical, process and organizational challenges. A carefully managed, multi-year integration approach involving iterative testing, validation, change management and control would likely be needed to reap the benefits of predictions while avoiding potential downsides. The challenges should not be under-estimated given the live ramifications of fleet management decisions.

HOW DO POLYTECHNICS IN DIFFERENT COUNTRIES COLLABORATE WITH INDUSTRIES AND GOVERNMENTS

Leave a reply

Polytechnics, also known as universities of applied sciences, play an important role in job training and workforce development. By collaborating closely with industries and governments, polytechnics can help align their educational programs with the needs of the real world. This ensures students gain skills that are in demand. There are various models of collaboration used around the world.

In Germany, polytechnics have a very strong partnership with industries and regional governments. Each German state has its own polytechnic system and helps facilitate connections between schools and local businesses. Dual education programs are common, with students splitting time between classroom learning and on-the-job training internships provided by industry partners. Companies provide funding, equipment, and work placements. Curricula are also developed with industry input to focus on applicable skills. This close industry-education integration allows German polytechnics to achieve exceedingly high employment rates for graduates.

In Switzerland, each canton has a polytechnic that works directly with the regional government and economy to develop tailored programs. Joint research projects between polytechnics and companies are widespread. For example, the Lucerne University of Applied Sciences and Arts runs a Center for Innovation that helps local small businesses with product development services and applied research. Students also complete internships in industry. The Fachhochschule Nordwestschweiz operates several thousand square meters of laboratories that are made available for both research and training purposes to companies in the region.

Singapore has a nationally coordinated system where the five polytechnics specialize in different industry sectors, such as engineering, business, or healthcare, to supply skilled workers to Singapore’s targeted economic clusters. Each polytechnic has dedicated industry liaison offices connecting them to sector-specific companies, trade associations, government research institutes and other partners. Working groups made up of polytechnic faculty, companies and government agencies ensure curricula are synchronized to skill needs. Internships, apprenticeships and other industry exposure opportunities are abundant. Major firms like Hewlett-Packard Enterprise and Philips even cosponsor diploma programs with the polytechnics.

In the United States, community colleges and vocational schools have programs providing workforce credentials and training tailored to regional economies. For example, Central Piedmont Community College in North Carolina provides customized training for local manufacturers. Companies work with the college to design certificate programs focused on their specific skill requirements, which are taught at the companies’ work sites. Funding comes from state grants as well as the businesses themselves. In other areas, industry advisory boards comprised of company leaders help technical colleges keep their programs attuned to evolving employer needs. Dual enrollment opportunities allow high school students to earn technical college credit and work experience simultaneously.

In the United Kingdom, further education colleges collaborate with governments and industries through a number of channels. Many have employer-designed “Professional and Technical Qualifications” that substitute for parts of conventional academic courses. Some colleges operate technical training centers hosting joint apprenticeship programs run with employer consortiums. University technical colleges bring together secondary and post-secondary technical education with employer involvement. Local Enterprise Partnerships coordinate regional skills strategies and help match further education provision to priority industry clusters. Government skills bodies like the Institute for Apprenticeships & Technical Education also ensure frameworks remain current.

Effective polytechnic-industry-government models around the world typically involve mutually beneficial collaborations on curriculum design, applied research and development, work-based learning opportunities, and responding nimbly to transforming skill needs. With dedicated coordination and strong relationships grounded in partnership rather than hierarchy, polytechnics can truly power the workforce pipelines many modern economies require. Though forms of collaboration may differ across borders, the goals of applying education to real need and driving sustainable prosperity through skill-focused innovation remain universal.

DO YOU HAVE ANY ADVICE ON HOW TO SELECT A TOPIC FOR A CAPSTONE PROJECT THAT ALIGNS WITH MY INTERESTS

Leave a reply

Choosing a topic for your capstone project that aligns with your personal interests and passions is key to remaining motivated throughout the intense research and writing process. With so many potential options it can be difficult to narrow down exactly the right focus. The following steps can help guide you to select a topic that you will find truly engaging and fulfilling.

Start by brainstorming a wide list of potential topics without censoring any ideas no matter how broad or obscure they may seem. Write down everything even remotely related to your major field of study or other academic interests that spark your curiosity. Reviewing hobbies, extracurriculars, jobs/internships, areas of the world, people, or time periods that fascinate you can spark new topic ideas. At this stage, go for quantity of ideas rather than worrying if each one is too big or narrow in scope.

Once you have an extensive list, analyze it for common themes or connections between certain topics. Group related ideas together into overarching categories to help narrow the focus. For example, if you enjoy history and have interests in both ancient Rome and Victorian London, you could potentially design a comparative study of those two time periods. Identifying logical similarities between broad topics can lead to more defined potential research areas or questions.

Assess each general topic area for feasibility within the parameters of a capstone project. Consider if there is enough available research on the subject to support extensive analysis within the required timeframe and page limit. You’ll want a topic that has depth and breadth of existing literature without being too vast. Checking with your academic advisor, librarians, and even reviewing bibliographies of previous students’ projects can help gauge feasibility. Very novel topics with little previous work carry more risk of not having adequate research to draw meaningful conclusions.

Evaluate your topic ideas based on how intrinsically engaging and inspiring you find the subject matter. A compelling personal passion will sustain the long hours of research required. Consider which topics continue interesting you the more you think about them versus ones that seem exciting in the moment but hold less fascination over time. Reflect on topics that make you want to keep learning more versus feeling like checking them off a list. Intrinsic excitement, not extrinsic goals or expectations, should drive topic selection.

Review your list of narrowed topics and consider real-world applications or ways any of the potential areas could create positive change. Having a sense of purpose behind your work can make the process even more valuable and rewarding. For example, a healthcare administration student passionate about mental health may choose to analyze ways to improve access to counseling services on college campuses. The potential for applied research outcomes to benefit society can further distinguish inspiring options.

As appropriate for your field of study, evaluate topics that may have career relevance in the future. While interest should be the primary driver, considering long-term implications can add practical value to your work. For example, an engineering student aiming for machine learning roles post-graduation may opt for a capstone proposal related to predictive data analytics applications. Career direction need not define the topic, but relevance can enhance your professional portfolio.

Once you have a shortlist of two to three options that meet criteria for feasibility, engagement, and application, discuss them candidly with your capstone instructor and academic advisor. Unbiased experts can provide insightful perspectives on logistics, literature quality, and strengths or limitations of each idea. Their questions may also uncover new angles to consider that had not yet occurred to you. Incorporating this critical feedback before deciding allows refining potentially promising concepts into the optimal research focus.

With open communication between yourself, instructors, and librarians, as well as an unwavering commitment to personal interests as the driver, following this exploratory process will lead to selecting a capstone topic that aligns passion and purpose. Choosing the right focus anchored intrinsically by what inspires your curiosity establishes an engaged mindset crucial to completing a compelling and impactful final research project. With this guidance, you are empowered to craft impactful work through diligent pursuit of your genuine academic passions.

WHAT ARE SOME COMMON CHALLENGES IN COORDINATING ELICITATION EFFORTS WITH STAKEHOLDERS

Leave a reply

One of the biggest challenges is scheduling availability and finding times when key stakeholders are available to participate in elicitation sessions. Stakeholders often have very busy schedules with competing priorities and demands on their time. As a result, it can be difficult to schedule elicitation activities when all important stakeholders are present. There are a few things that can help address this challenge. First, elicitation activities need to be planned out well in advance so stakeholders have as much notice as possible to allocate time. It also helps to understand stakeholders’ schedules and find times that are relatively less busy if full availability is not possible. Another option is to conduct elicitation in shorter iterative sessions if multi-hour sessions are not feasible.

Ensuring participation from the full range of important stakeholders can also be difficult. Not all stakeholders view requirements engineering as a top priority and some may be reluctant to participate. Senior management support for the elicitation process is important to secure involvement from those who may not see direct value. It also helps to socialize the elicitation approach across stakeholder groups in advance and explain how their input will be used and how the final system may impact their work or needs. Making the process as inclusive as possible and valuing all perspectives can encourage participation. One-on-one interviews may be needed in some cases to elicit relevant information from reluctant stakeholders.

Gaining a shared understanding of problems, potential solutions, and key requirements among diverse stakeholder groups can also pose coordination challenges. Stakeholders often have very different backgrounds, domain expertise, priorities, and opinions that must be reconciled. During elicitation, facilitation is important to ensure all views are heard and understood and to guide the discussion toward consensus where possible. Mapping how different requirements interact and impact one another can help stakeholders develop a system-level perspective. Iterative elicitation allows refining understanding over time as viewpoints evolve. Having stakeholders from different backgrounds jointly analyze case studies or user scenarios can foster collaboration.

Eliciting an appropriate level of detail without over-specifying certain requirements or leaving others too vague also requires careful coordination. Doing too much detailed analysis too soon may overlook important high-level needs, but insufficient detail leaves room for misinterpretation later on. An incremental, iterative approach helps address this by first focusing on core needs before delving into specifics. Allowing flexibility to revisit requirements as understanding improves is also important. Soliciting examples and metrics where applicable helps add precision without being overly constraining prematurely. Continued involvement of stakeholders throughout the project will also aid balancing levels of detail as needs evolve.

Perspectives often change over time as various project-related uncertainties are resolved and new insights emerge. Maintaining current, traceable requirements becomes an ongoing coordination effort. Updating stakeholders on project progress helps ensure their needs and priorities are still accurately reflected in requirements. Periodic review and refinement sessions with key stakeholders can help validate requirements remain relevant and complete any gaps. Changes in organizational strategy or the introduction of new technologies may also necessitate revisiting certain requirements. Having processes for change requests, version control, and impact analysis supports coordinating an evolving set of requirements aligned with changing needs.

Successfully coordinating elicitation efforts requires addressing challenges related to scheduling, participation, reconciling diverse views, balancing levels of detail and ensuring requirements stay up-to-date. With careful planning, open communication, an iterative approach and ongoing involvement of stakeholders, these challenges can be overcome to develop a shared understanding of user needs and a comprehensive set of well-coordinated requirements. Continual coordination throughout the project helps validate requirements maintain strategic alignment as projects evolve.