Reflection Learning Launch “ Hand luggage at the gate ” 

 Challenge 

 I am working as an operations manager for a European airline . The challenge for our team is to   improve the passenger flow in the aircraft during the boarding process to increase the punctuality   of departing narrow body aircraft . In the current situation there is a problem with the amount and   volume of hand luggage that passengers carry with them when they show up at the gate for   boarding . Most of the passengers ( around 75 % ) are so called transfer passengers that have   arrived with a long - haul flight in a wide body aircraft ( often operated by a partner airline with less   stringent rules for hand luggage ) to our airport . They typically transfer to a short haul flight which   is operated with a narrow body aircraft . These aircraft have a more limited luggage capacity in the   overhead bins compared to the wide body aircraft and when the departing narrow - body flights are   fully booked the total amount of hand luggage of all passengers does not fit in the overhead bins .   This does not only lead to discussions with the crew on board of the aircraft , it also delays the   boarding process and thus the departure of the flight as the overflow of hand luggage needs to be   removed from the passenger cabin , brought to the ramp where it gets loaded in the belly of the   aircraft . 

 Selection 

 The tool our team selected to explore and test ideas to improve the situation is the “ learning   launch ” tool . This design tool is focused on doing fast and cheap experiments ( so called learning   launches ) to test hypothesis and obtain data to determine whether key assumptions are true and   learn if ideas are good . 

 The reason we selected this tool is that it is relatively easy and effective to apply in our situation .   We realized we could do cheap experiments by applying small modifications to our boarding   process to test our hypothesis with real customers with a small group of gates / flights . And we can   evaluate the results by comparing it with similar flights applying the unmodified / standard   boarding process . This way we can objectively see what works and what does not work . 

 Application 

 How did we apply the learning launch tool ? With a small team of employees , we first observed   the current boarding process of several departing narrow body flights to identify what we believed   were the key problem areas . This gave us a better understanding of the key issues that we   believed led to delays in the boarding process . 

 The next thing we did with the team was generating ideas how we could potentially streamline the   boarding process by attacking the key issues we observed . In a couple of hours , we came to a   list of around 10 ideas that we thought would be interesting . To validate our ideas and the   underlying assumptions we decided to test them in practice one by one by applying small process   changes and observe the effect in practice . 

 As an example , we learned from observing the regular boarding process that most passengers   do not realize that smaller carry - on luggage items can be placed under the seat in front of them in   the cabin . We assumed that by making passengers more aware of this option we could change   their behavior and increase the use of this solution which would leave more space available in the   overhead luggage bins for the larger items . 

 We decided to test this hypothesis by pro - actively approaching passengers waiting in the gate   area before boarding to explain our test and request them to put their smaller items under the   seat in front of them once they arrived at their seat in the aircraft . To increase their awareness   and remind them of this option , we created special blue colored labels which we attached to   those smaller hand luggage items that would fit underneath a seat . We tested this on 20   departing flights and noticed an average reduction of the overall boarding process lead - time with   5 minutes ( compared to similar flights using the standard boarding process ) due to a better flow   in the aircraft . Based on this successful experiment we decided to scale the use of the special   blue hand luggage label on all our departing narrow body flights . This solution is still in use today   and works very well . 

 Insight 

 The learning launch tool worked very well in this situation . We were able to quickly test our   hypothesis in practice and observe the effects of our process modifications in real time . We   realized that using the gate area environment is actually a very practical and cheap way to create   our own “ test laboratory ” . For some reason we had never thought of this option before . In   addition , passengers found it very interesting to participate in the experiments we did because   they fully recognized the pain points we tried to solve and felt recognized as valuable customers . 

 What turned out to be difficult in this set up was to get quick feedback from passengers on how   they experienced the process modifications . Soon after they boarded the aircraft the aircraft   doors were closed , and the aircraft left . Of course , we could have asked them to fill in a   questionnaire on board of the aircraft ( with assistance of the cabin crew ) but that would have   created quite an administrative burden and would not lead to a quick feedback process . 

 Approach 

 What we did not realize at first , is that it would have been interesting to use the same learning   launch tool but actively involve passengers more upfront in the process during brainstorming on   ideas to improve the situation . This would probably have taught us quicker which process   modifications would be embraced by the passengers easily , and which modifications would   probably be more challenging to implement or even would not lead to success . This could have   saves us from doing some experiments that turned out not be successful after all . 

 So , in a next round of learning launches we will involve customers in the early stages of our   experiments to identify those ideas that have the highest probability to be implemented   successfully . 


EMAIL: 
ID_NUM: 
NAME_STUDENT: 
PHONE_NUM: 
STREET_ADDRESS: 
URL_PERSONAL: 
USERNAME: 

### Task: You are a PII (Personal Identity Information) Detection. Given a essays written by students, you have to identify ONLY the following:
NAME_STUDENT - The full or partial name of a student that is not necessarily the author of the essay. This excludes instructors, authors, and other person names.
EMAIL - A student’s email address.
USERNAME - A student's username on any platform.
ID_NUM - A number or sequence of characters that could be used to identify a student, such as a student ID or a social security number.
PHONE_NUM - A phone number associated with a student.
URL_PERSONAL - A URL that might be used to identify a student.
STREET_ADDRESS - A full or partial street address that is associated with the student, such as their home address.
### Input: Reflection Learning Launch “ Hand luggage at the gate ” 

 Challenge 

 I am working as an operations manager for a European airline . The challenge for our team is to   improve the passenger flow in the aircraft during the boarding process to increase the punctuality   of departing narrow body aircraft . In the current situation there is a problem with the amount and   volume of hand luggage that passengers carry with them when they show up at the gate for   boarding . Most of the passengers ( around 75 % ) are so called transfer passengers that have   arrived with a long - haul flight in a wide body aircraft ( often operated by a partner airline with less   stringent rules for hand luggage ) to our airport . They typically transfer to a short haul flight which   is operated with a narrow body aircraft . These aircraft have a more limited luggage capacity in the   overhead bins compared to the wide body aircraft and when the departing narrow - body flights are   fully booked the total amount of hand luggage of all passengers does not fit in the overhead bins .   This does not only lead to discussions with the crew on board of the aircraft , it also delays the   boarding process and thus the departure of the flight as the overflow of hand luggage needs to be   removed from the passenger cabin , brought to the ramp where it gets loaded in the belly of the   aircraft . 

 Selection 

 The tool our team selected to explore and test ideas to improve the situation is the “ learning   launch ” tool . This design tool is focused on doing fast and cheap experiments ( so called learning   launches ) to test hypothesis and obtain data to determine whether key assumptions are true and   learn if ideas are good . 

 The reason we selected this tool is that it is relatively easy and effective to apply in our situation .   We realized we could do cheap experiments by applying small modifications to our boarding   process to test our hypothesis with real customers with a small group of gates / flights . And we can   evaluate the results by comparing it with similar flights applying the unmodified / standard   boarding process . This way we can objectively see what works and what does not work . 

 Application 

 How did we apply the learning launch tool ? With a small team of employees , we first observed   the current boarding process of several departing narrow body flights to identify what we believed   were the key problem areas . This gave us a better understanding of the key issues that we   believed led to delays in the boarding process . 

 The next thing we did with the team was generating ideas how we could potentially streamline the   boarding process by attacking the key issues we observed . In a couple of hours , we came to a   list of around 10 ideas that we thought would be interesting . To validate our ideas and the   underlying assumptions we decided to test them in practice one by one by applying small process   changes and observe the effect in practice . 

 As an example , we learned from observing the regular boarding process that most passengers   do not realize that smaller carry - on luggage items can be placed under the seat in front of them in   the cabin . We assumed that by making passengers more aware of this option we could change   their behavior and increase the use of this solution which would leave more space available in the   overhead luggage bins for the larger items . 

 We decided to test this hypothesis by pro - actively approaching passengers waiting in the gate   area before boarding to explain our test and request them to put their smaller items under the   seat in front of them once they arrived at their seat in the aircraft . To increase their awareness   and remind them of this option , we created special blue colored labels which we attached to   those smaller hand luggage items that would fit underneath a seat . We tested this on 20   departing flights and noticed an average reduction of the overall boarding process lead - time with   5 minutes ( compared to similar flights using the standard boarding process ) due to a better flow   in the aircraft . Based on this successful experiment we decided to scale the use of the special   blue hand luggage label on all our departing narrow body flights . This solution is still in use today   and works very well . 

 Insight 

 The learning launch tool worked very well in this situation . We were able to quickly test our   hypothesis in practice and observe the effects of our process modifications in real time . We   realized that using the gate area environment is actually a very practical and cheap way to create   our own “ test laboratory ” . For some reason we had never thought of this option before . In   addition , passengers found it very interesting to participate in the experiments we did because   they fully recognized the pain points we tried to solve and felt recognized as valuable customers . 

 What turned out to be difficult in this set up was to get quick feedback from passengers on how   they experienced the process modifications . Soon after they boarded the aircraft the aircraft   doors were closed , and the aircraft left . Of course , we could have asked them to fill in a   questionnaire on board of the aircraft ( with assistance of the cabin crew ) but that would have   created quite an administrative burden and would not lead to a quick feedback process . 

 Approach 

 What we did not realize at first , is that it would have been interesting to use the same learning   launch tool but actively involve passengers more upfront in the process during brainstorming on   ideas to improve the situation . This would probably have taught us quicker which process   modifications would be embraced by the passengers easily , and which modifications would   probably be more challenging to implement or even would not lead to success . This could have   saves us from doing some experiments that turned out not be successful after all . 

 So , in a next round of learning launches we will involve customers in the early stages of our   experiments to identify those ideas that have the highest probability to be implemented   successfully .
### Output: 