The most recent piece of work we have submitted was our mid-term delivery. As mentioned before it generally made up of our business case that we have been working on since October. Additional features such as Technical delivery, Functional specification, Project timeline and a responsibility matrix. Overall the work was a collaborative effort except for areas we wanted to gain experience in or areas we were most comfortable in.
I, myself, took the task of the project plan, timeline, and division of work. From this we allocated our individual time to each of the assigned technical deliveries features. The intended outcome of this task was to present a clear scope of our project from start to finish.
The business case was a collaborative effort, improving particular areas such as financial projections, marketing, and sales strategy. Other features added to our business case included:
Below is an image of the timeline used in our mid-term delivery.
We received a grade of 71%, overall we were very happy because we found working as a group of three can be difficult due to technical but also social aspects. That being said, I am grateful for this new experience when in comparison to my previous group work in college and team leadership in my job profession.
We met with our supervisor Maria, she expressed concern in certain areas of our work and presentation which we plan to change promptly so we are kept ahead of schedule with all submissions.
This post will only be a short entry, entirely dedicated to the the investor pitch which was the most nerve-wracking piece of work since the start of this project. The pitch was to be as professional as possible, following a Dragons Den approach. Among the panel was our lecturer Markus, our supervisor Maria and two others. Our aim was to showcase the idea in simple and clear manner in 10 minutes. We prepared a poster to represent the breakdown of the team, financial and our market. Prior to this we planned the presentation, each introducing ourselves discussing our skills and experiences then moving onto sections of our pitch. Prior to this we received a lecture from Terrence Browne, who works with DCU Alpha who clearly expressed the importance of a team dynamic in start-ups therefore we adopted this approach in our investor pitch.
The feedback wasn’t as positive as we would of liked but we gratefully took on board what the panel had to say. The main questions which were raised include:
- Is there a viable market vs current competition?
- Security Issues
- Idea motivation.
Other than these small issues, the feedback was still beneficial as our financials were better reformed and our business case was still on the right path, all we were told was to evaluate the idea again as it feels like we were still missing a particular something.
Below is an image of the poster we created and presented during the pitch.
We recently presented two sets of work which I mentioned in my previous post. Our entrepreneur module feedback was still quite vague, we were still missing something but we couldn’t put our fingers on it. Our idea was tailored for bridging the gap between virtual and physical gambling, in our minds it is clear what we are thinking but we are still struggling to physically describe this idea thoroughly. Overall we were happy with how the presentation went, Myself Luke and Michael are confident talkers and as long as we are comfortable with the work that has been done that we will try and discuss this thoroughly.
Our second presentation was in front of a panel of two, Cathal Gurrin and Paul Clarke who are lecturers, staff involved in EC4 projects. This presentation went quite well I felt, Luke took the introduction, Michael discussed the target market and I discussed the financial projections and how they relate to our market research. Overall the feedback was positive, we were asked a few questions on the business case, the security of this type of service and the motivation behind our idea. Also Paul gave us a rough work of potential questions we should ask ourselves before moving forward. We also submitted our initial proposal which will be graded alongside our presentation. Key aspects to this document include
- Project Summary
- Technical Delivery
- Financial & Market rationale
- Workload Distribution
We had a substantial amount of this workload done due to our entrepreneur module, I am grateful for the re-structuring of modules for this course as it helped with this heavy workload. We slightly adjusted the financial after some feedback, Luke was the most comfortable in this area therefore he headed this task. I, myself managed the timeline and structure of the project and the work which was to follow. Vizzlo charts are an easy, manageable application to use which I would recommend. Our workload distribution was decided on past experience and what skills best suited our team but keeping in mind we aim to collaborate our work extensively following a groupware concept. We await the marks for this so we can effectively assess our work but until then we are working on our next investors pitch.