Who: The people that I am attempting to serve are the students and faculty who either have no time to go to a coffee shop or those (ex: news room and radio workers) who's hours are not in sync with their waking and working hours.
What: The need for coffee here is different as it is a specialized need for coffee where time and convenience are important to the point where customers are willing to pay for it.
Why: This group of people are outside the normal range of coffee drinkers as they are fast, and in need of 24/7 access to coffee.
| Inside the boundary | Outside the boundary |
| Early risers,late night owls, and those in a hurry | Those who have their own coffee or have the time to wait for coffee |
| The need is speedy constant access to coffee. | The need isn't just coffee it's the convenience of the machine. |
| This need exists as students and faculty are overworked and on a strict schedule. | They simply don't want coffee of any kind. |
For my interviews I stopped and asked many of the students and faculty I work with/for throughout my day for their insight into a coffee vending machine. I interviewed 5 people (3 students 2 faculty) and 3 of the 5 would like a coffee vending machine for its convenience. The ones that were not interested were a student who doesn't drink coffee and a faculty member who's boss buys them coffee anyway and thus has no need. Overall my feed back on the concept was well received but made me realize just how niche this product could be.
Connor,
ReplyDeleteYou did a really good job on revisiting your hypothesis. I would've really liked to see the other interviews laid out more. Without seeing the interviews I am having trouble deciding whether or not your solution can help your hypothesis as a whole. Other than that good job!
Connor,
ReplyDeleteYou nailed the who, what, and why part of this assignment. Your chart was well thought out too. I think that your explanation of people inside and outside the boundary was spot on. The only thing I would change is the interviews. There is room to go into a little more detail on the interviews to further support your hypothesis, but you did a good job.