Appendix 3: Appendix 3: Perfect Pizza 1994 volume planning
2. The main design issues for the design of the BA London Eye
Many students living in the United Kingdom or continental Europe will be familiar with the now famous landmark of the BA London Eye, and a proportion will have personal experience of a 'flight'. These can be a useful source of input to any class debate on this question, but are not essential. Hopefully, some students will have looked at the web site, and others may have read the British Airways London Eye (B) case in Chapter 16 of the textbook. Given this basic knowledge of the wheel, it should be possible to tackle this first question with sufficient background knowledge amongst the class groups.
(a) The initial design concept
This was totally the brainchild of two young London architects who wanted to create something very special and spectacular for London to celebrate the millennium. Their concept was to build the world’s largest diameter passenger-carrying wheel. But it was to be totally different from a normal Ferris wheel in several main ways … these should be easily identified by the students;
• The cabins were always to remain outside the wheel rim structure, to improve visibility, so could not be conventionally 'hung' between two rim elements.
• They would be fully air-conditioned, fitted with high-quality audio systems, and would have a high-tech stylish appearance.
• They would have unusually large areas of laminated, curved glass to provide the widest possible viewing angles, and a sense of flying.
• The wheel was to be supported on one side only.
• The supporting structure (an A-frame) was to be cantilevered out at an angle over the Thames.
• (Later addition to the concept) The rim of the structure would be supported by tensioned steel cable spokes, eliminating the need for a mass of rigid steelwork lattices within the wheel. Because the cables are relatively thin, the rim would appear (particularly at night) to float in the air with very little support.
• The wheel would rotate continuously, NOT stopping for passengers to board or disembark.
This dictated the speed of rotation, and hence the flight time for the initially proposed diameter; about thirty minutes per rotation.
Clearly, the main design objectives of the architects were to create a unique, aesthetically pleasing but a practical tourist attraction, and to provide a spectacular new London landmark.
But the final product also had to be effective as an operations technology, processing millions of customers a year. Consideration therefore had to be given to the needs of the customers (passengers), for example:
• Explicitly safe (there can be 800 customers on board … 2 Boeing 747s!)
• Easy to board (e.g. good customer flow)
• Enough time to enjoy the view and listen to guide
• Performs well (e.g. air conditioning and audio always working)
• Potentially delights, exceeds expectations
• Reasonable cost
• Completed, and in operation by 31 December 1999.
(b) Trade-offs in the design
To achieve all design objectives simultaneously, there are usually many trade-offs, and students can easily identify some of these. For example:
• For a given diameter, the rotation speed affects the capacity (passengers per hour). Faster rotation will increase capacity, reducing the cost per passenger (most operating costs are fixed), but will reduce the journey time and make boarding marginally more difficult, particularly for old and/or disabled people.
• For a given rotation speed, more capsules (e.g. 64, as originally conceived by the architects) would provide greater capacity, without the disadvantages described above.
However, because of the complexity and sophistication of the capsules, this would very significantly increase the capital cost of the project, and would have required a stronger, heavier and more expensive wheel structure. This would have affected the aesthetics of the wheel, and would have created a narrower vertical viewing angle for the passengers at certain points in the flight.
• Underlying these decisions is also a question of what the demand levels will become; there is little point in providing more capacity if there will only be sufficient demand to fill the BA
Nigel Slack, Stuart Chambers & Robert Johnston, Operations Management, fifth edition, Instructor’s Manual
105
© Nigel Slack, Stuart Chambers & Robert Johnston 2007
London Eye capacity on a few days a year. (This is a long-term capacity issue discussed in Chapter 6.)
• Although the large areas of glass in the capsules would provide the best possible view, this would be an expensive choice of material compared with the more rectangular and largely metal-based construction of conventional Ferris wheel 'gondolas'. However, the high-tech aesthetic design should enhance the public image of the wheel, increasing demand and improving value … perhaps allowing higher ticket prices.
• There may be extra capital costs involved in completing the project by a totally fixed target date. Project objectives are discussed in Chapter 16. However, since this is a 'millennium' project, there is high value to the main sponsor (British Airways) of completing on time.
Conversely, there could be adverse publicity associated with project failures and late completion, as discussed in BA London Eye (B).
(c) Operations-based design objectives
The above design objectives for the BA London Eye could also be re-classified into the five operations performance objectives. Examples are shown in Table 1 below:
Table 1 Examples of Design objectives for BA London Eye
Performance
objective Design of the product/service Design of the process Quality • Exceptional aesthetics
• Strong, durable
• Good, uninterrupted views
• Unquestionably safe
• Comfortable ride (no sway)
• Resembles air travel
• Professional, smart staff
• Informative
• Capsules regularly cleaned
• Clear reservation system Speed • Short lead time for the design and
construction • No long queues
• Clear, fast and fair flows boarding/disembarking Dependability • Available as advertised
• Completed by target date
• Boarding as per timed ticket
• No unscheduled downtime Flexibility • No product flexibility required
• Volume flexibility to cope with seasonal demand
• Caters for all ages/abilities
• Individual questions answered Cost • Affordable, good value • Low operating costs
(d) Process design principles
The BA London Eye was designed as a high volume, low variety, high variation, and high visibility service operation. The process design implications are therefore that a mass service will be required with the following characteristics:
• There will need to be a great emphasis on process design, including such elements as the 'timed admissions booking system', customer flow management around and onto the 'flight', the service processes during the flight, cleaning routines, and so on.
• The processes will be highly standardized, with little opportunity (or time) for customization.
• Flow (of customers) will be continuous, and is in reality a circular product layout. There are no alternative routes; every customer will be forced to follow the same sequence of events.
No time is lost at changeovers (unlike conventional Ferris wheels which stop for customer unloading/loading).
• Dedicated process technology: the BA London Eye was designed for one purpose only and is not adaptable.
• The staff can be trained with the skills needed to operate the prescribed system. There may be significant division of labour and specialization (e.g. flight attendant). All eventualities, including emergencies, are rehearsed.
Variation in demand would be anticipated for any tourist leisure attraction, although London is a popular destination throughout the year. Shorter-term weather conditions will influence levels of casual demand. The operation, therefore, must be able to operate to the same quality standards even when demand is significantly below the design capacity. Conversely, demand levels must be managed to avoid excessive queues forming and blocking access to the customers who have made a reservation.
The particular skills required for running such an operation were provided by a specialist leisure company, Tussauds.