Date: March 16, 2017
To: Tim Ericson, Zagster CEO
From: Yuxian Lei, Zhihao Tian, Yuqian Wang, University of Maryland, College Park
Subject: Proposal for the EcoHelmet dispenser at Zagster, College Park
Purpose
The purpose of our proposal is to request authorization to conduct a study to determine the best
course of action for introducing EcoHelmet dispensers to the Zagster city bike-sharing system.
Summary
There is a growing trend of bike use in College Park. Unlike decades before, nowadays people
have an alternative choice of cycling, which is using a shared bike. The bike-share systems are
increasing worldwide and about 50 of them are located in the United States (Kille).
However, with increasing number of bicyclers, there are more injuries and deaths, which is an
urgent problem needs to be solved. Fortunately, wearing a helmet can reduce the injuries to some
extent. Moreover, Maryland Law explicitly states that people under 16 are required to wear a
helmet while riding (“Maryland’s Bicycle Helmet Law”). But not many people do so because it
is inconvenient to carry a traditional helmet as it takes up space. On the other hand, people who
use a shared bike usually do not posses a helmet of their own because they do not use bicycles as
their main transportation method.
Therefore, we are introducing Eco helmet dispenser to the public. EcoHelmet is made of paper
and 100% recyclable. It protects brain perfectly and can be easily dispensed. By performing the
following tasks we will be able to pick the appropriate stations, collect people’s opinions on the
dispenser as well as the feasibility of our proposal.
If this proposal is approved, we would immediately begin our tasks, submitting to Mr. Ericson a
progress report one month later, and a recommendation report once we are done. The
recommendation report will include the details of our research and recommendations as well.
Introduction:
Bike-users are increasing nowadays. They use bicycles as transportation, for exercise, or for
entertainment. According to Larry Copeland, the number of people biking to work has increased
60% over the last decade in the United States (Copeland). In 2016, Americans riding bicycles on
a regular basis rose to 12.4% (Statistia).
With more bicyclers, bike-share systems are popular worldwide these years. A bike-share system
was just a thought a decade ago. At that time, no one would ever have believed that bikes would
be accessible around the city. Lyon, France is one of the first cities that introduced a modern
bike-share system (Kille). It had such a huge influence that it immensely reshaped people’s
transportation method. Ten years later, there are more than 850 public bike-share systems around
the world (Kille).
According to US statistics: 45,000 bicyclists were injured and 818 bicyclists died on US roads in
2015 (Mehan et al.). The injuries and deaths are increasing these years. Helmets are effective in
reducing the risk of severe, traumatic brain injuries caused by bicycle traffic accidents (ibid). But
90% of cyclers don’t wear helmets, especially city bike-users because they usually do not have
helmets of their own (ibid). Statistics show that wearing a helmet reduces the chance of injuries
by 85% (ibid). As cycling is always a popular form of transportation and exercise, this problem is
badly in need of a solution.
According to Maryland’s Bicycle Helmet Law, bicyclists under 16 years old are required to wear
a helmet when riding outside (“Maryland’s Bicycle Helmet Law”). This is made for the sake of
riders’ safety. Although there is no strict law for people who are 16 above, it is still strongly
recommended that they wear helmets (“Maryland’s Bicycle Helmet Law”). However, with a high
rate of injuries and death currently, this is an exigent problem to be researched and solved.
Zagster, the city bike-share program in College Park, is currently popular. City bike-users
comprise of a certain portion of cyclists in College Park. However, lacking available helmets for
users causes a high risk of injuries and death. To promote safety ride among these cyclists,
providing helmets while lending bikes out is necessary. To achieve this goal, we propose to
introduce EcoHelmet dispensers into Zagster city bike sharing program (“Zagster Brings Bike
Sharing to University of Maryland and College Park”).
Helmet dispenser systems have been established and run successfully in many cities in the world.
The typical example is the Melbourne bike-share system. As the state of Victoria, Australia,
requires all cyclists to wear helmets (Factory), Melbourne bike-share system provides easily
accessible helmets for cyclists by providing self-service bike-sharing along with self-service bike
helmet vending machines (Meddin). In addition, it has an agreement with 7-Elevens in
Melbourne to sell helmets to users for $5 and to accept recycle to the store for $3 cash back
(“Melbourne Bike Share”).
Different from helmets provided in Melbourn, as indicated in Figure 1, EcoHelmet is a higherquality helmet. It is an inexpensive folding helmet that can be purchased onsite and recycled
100% when at the end of the ride. “Constructed from the waterproofed recycled paper in a radial
honeycomb pattern, EcoHelmet absorbs blows from any direction as effectively as traditional
polystyrene. It folds flat for easy vending and fits most head sizes (“EcoHelmet”).” EcoHelmet is
designed to give cyclists the confidence they need to ride safely in the city.
We propose to establish EcoHelmet vending machines for the Zagster bike-share program. As
Zagster already has a mobile application and membership plans for lending bikes (“Mbike Zagster Bike Share for College Park”), we can combine EcoHelmet lending together with them.
To record EcoHelmets to be dispensed, we can print barcode on the helmets to track them in real
time. In addition, we can make EcoHelmet available at retail outlets across College Park to bring
convenience to our customers (Meddin).
Therefore, to determine the best approach to make EcoHelmets available to all city bike-users,
we develop a plan to perform eleven tasks, including online research on basic knowledge, costeffective and cost-benefit evaluation, field research on the selection of bike-share stations,
questionnaires, and interviews with customer analysis. By conducting the plan, we are
establishing convenient, effective, and cost-efficient solutions for EcoHelmet dispensing for
Zagster bike-share. In the following sections, we provide additional details about the proposed
tasks, schedule, as well as our works cited.
Proposed Tasks
With Mr. Ericson’s approval, we will perform the following eleven tasks to help determine the
best course of action for introducing EcoHelmet dispensers to the Zagster city bike-share system.
Task 1. Acquire a basic understanding of EcoHelmet
According to Maryland’s Bicycle Helmet Law, bicyclists under 16 years old are required to wear
a helmet when riding outside (Maryland’s Bicycle Helmet Law). This is made for the sake of
riders’ safety. Although there is no strict law for people who are 16 above, it is still strongly
recommended that they wear helmets.
EcoHelmet is a newly designed product by Isis Shiffer and won the James Dyson Award recently
(“EcoHelmet”). Shiffer says that the design of the helmet has been through three stages. At first,
the prototypes did not look good. After improvement, they looked better but they easily fell apart
(“EcoHelmet”). The EcoHelmet model released to the public now is the result of hundreds of
attempts during the third phase. Now it not only has an aesthetic appearance, functions like other
helmets, but passes the European standards as well. We will deliver the full findings in the
recommendation report.
Task 2. Select proper bike-share stations for the program
We searched on Zagster’s website to locate appropriate bike-share stations. Ideal stations should
be characterized by a sufficient number of city bike-users in the neighborhood. Therefore, we
will most likely choose stations in College Park, which is a city with a relatively dense
population. In our recommendation report, we will determine which stations will be the most
suitable for the EcoHelmet dispensers.
Task 3. Investigate people’s knowledge on EcoHelmet
As EcoHelmet is a relatively new product, not many people know about it. Therefore, it is
necessary to know how people think of it, especially cyclists. We decide to do field research to
give out questionnaires as well as conducting online surveys. We will obtain information on
people’s knowledge of EcoHelmet, their concerns about it as well as their attitudes towards it.
We will prepare questions like “how often do you wear a helmet when riding a bicycle” and
“what do you know about EcoHelmet”. We will perform this in detail in the future
recommendation report.
Task 4. Research existing Helmet Dispenser Systems in the world
We are going to do some research to see if there are already some cities having this program. By
learning their models and experiences, we are able to get a better idea of how this program works
in real life and if there is anything particular that we should pay attention to when enforcing it.
Task 5. Establish criteria to Evaluate the Helmets.
We have studied the EcoHelmet in detail to better propose this product and has placed a preorder
of it to have consumer experiences in person. Based on our preliminary researches, we designed
three criteria to better study the product.
1) Safety: Safety is the priority of our product. We will examine the safety criteria for helmets
made of different materials, especially test if EcoHelmet has the similar level of safety compared
to other helmets.
2) Cost: In addition, we will also establish the cost criteria for both producing the helmets and
for distributing them. We will find out if EcoHelmet has the competitive advantage over other
helmets or if it is a cost-efficient product.
3) Convenience: Furthermore, we find out that the convenience of EcoHelmet is one of its
selling points. However, it is important to verify the credibility of it, in particular, whether it is
convenient to carry as well as pressure-resistant. We will anticipate all the results of these three
criteria and generate a table to demonstrate them.
Task 6. Assess the properties of EcoHelmet
EcoHelmet proposed by us are made of 100% recyclable stretchy paper and thus, it conforms to
most head sizes and is fully recyclable. As the raw material is paper, EcoHelmet can fold flat and
can be produced for a fraction of the cost of a standard helmet. Constructed from the
waterproofed paper in a radial honeycomb pattern, EcoHelmet makes it through the crash test and
it absorbs blows like traditional styrofoam. Recognized by the James Dyson Award Organization,
it has an aesthetic appearance (“EcoHelmet”). We will deliver our full findings in the future
recommendation report.
Task 7. Compare effectiveness of EcoHelmet and other helmets
“EcoHelmet folds smaller (flatter) and costs less (only $5/helmet) to produce than any other
helmet on the market (“EcoHelmet”).” “While other paper helmets exist, they are coated in
plastic and use polystyrene elements making them hard to recycle (ibid).” “12-15 folded
EcoHelmets fit into a traditional helmet box, making shipping and vending exponentially
easier(ibid).” It takes more than 500 years for traditional styrofoam helmets to break down and
they never really decompose, but EcoHelmets have advantages to be recycled right away after
use because it’s made of paper.
Task 8. Establish lend-returning system of EcoHelmets
1) Vending machine, combined with the Zagster mobile app
For the existing Zagster mobile app, consumers use it to gain an unlock code for the bike. We
will add a function to this code -- to make it help customers to get an EcoHelmet from the
vending machine as well. After the ride, they can also use the same code to return the helmet to
the vending machine.
We will combine EcoHelmet with the existing membership and price criteria of Zagster, which
include one-time pass, one-day pass, one-month pass, six-month pass, and annual pass, In
addition, trips under one hour (three hours for weekends) are for free. Pricing comes from
Zagster website (“Mbike - Zagster Bike Share for College Park”).
2) Vending machine only for helmets
We propose to print barcode on each EcoHelmet. Customers will use cash or card to pay $5 for
borrowing an EcoHelmet. After the ride, they need to return the helmet to the vending machine
by scanning barcode, which tracks the helmet condition in real time.
Pricing: trips under one hour (three hours for weekends) are for free. $0.1 will be charged per
hour (up to $1 per ride).
3) Retail outlets
We propose to make EcoHelmets available at retail outlets across College Park city. We will
provide customers with locations of stores like 7-Eleven. A limit of 2 helmets per customer
applies.
Pricing: $5 per helmet. Customers will be restored $3 per EcoHelmet if they return EcoHelmets
for recycling.
Task 9. Collect data based on the customer segments
We will implement two phases of primary research to test the preference of EcoHelmet. The first
research will be implemented on the Surveymonkey. We will create an online survey with 10
questions to exam how different people feel about the EcoHelmet. The questions will touch on
the basic understandings about the EcoHelmet, the properties, the safety concerns and the
willingness to wear it.
The second phase of research will be the in-person interview with local customers. We will find
out what is the best distribution channel for EcoHelmets. We will provide several options for the
distribution channel, like vending machines for our customers.
Task 10. Analyze customers’ preference for different helmets
We will analyze the survey results to determine how many people know about EcoHelmet and
how they react to it. We will also finalize the way to distribute EcoHelmets based on the inperson interviews. We will demonstrate the raw data in the form of tables and diagrams to be
understood and accepted better by our clients (“Reusable Bike Share Helmets from a Dispensing
Machine”).
Task 11. Prepare a recommendation report based on results.
We will draft our recommendation report based on these result to make it more realistic. We will
then incorporate our colleagues’ suggestions and present a final report. We will generate our
presentation based on the content of this final report and then present to our clients. We will
deliver our full findings in the Recommendation Report.
Schedule
Works Cited
Fishman, Elliot. “Bikeshare: A Review of Recent Literature”, Transport Reviews. April 2015.
Leighton, Kille. “Bikeshare systems: Recent research on their growth, users’ demographics and
their health and societal impacts”. Journalist’s Report. May 6, 2015. Accessed at
Copeland, Larry. “Biking to Work Increases 60% in Past Decade”. USA TODAY. May 8, 2014.
Accessed at
“Statistics and Facts on Cycling”. Statistia. Accessed at
“EcoHelmet.” James Dyson Award. N.p., n.d. Web. 9 Mar. 2017. Accessed at
“Maryland’s Bicycle Helmet Law.” Maryland Department of Transportation - State Highway
Administration. N.p., n.d. Web. 9 Mar. 2017. Accessed at
“Mbike - Zagster Bike Share for College Park.” Zagster. N.p., n.d. Web. 9 Mar. 2017. Accessed
at
Meddin, Russell. “The Bike-Sharing Blog: Melbourne Gets on Top of Its Slow Moving BikeSharing.” The Bike-sharing Blog. N.p., 14 Oct. 2010. Web. 9 Mar. 2017. Accessed at
Mehan, T. J. et al. “Bicycle-Related Injuries Among Children and Adolescents in the United
States.” Clinical Pediatrics 48.2 (2008): 166–173. CrossRef. Web.
“Melbourne Bike Share | Home.” N.p., n.d. Web. 9 Mar. 2017. Accessed at
“Reusable Bike Share Helmets from a Dispensing Machine: Would You Use It?” Vancity Buzz.
N.p., 26 Feb. 2013. Web. 9 Mar. 2017. Accessed at
“Vancouver’s $50,000 Helmet Dispenser?” The Huffington Post. N.p., n.d. Web. 9 Mar. 2017.
Accessed at
“Zagster Brings Bike Sharing to University of Maryland and College Park.” Zagster. N.p., n.d.
Web. 9 Mar. 2017. Accessed at
Factory, Slow. “Slow Factory: Melbourne Bike Share: Helmet Dispensers, but No One to Help
Adjust Fit.” Slow Factory. N.p., 4 Nov. 2010. Web. 9 Mar. 2017. Accessed at
Audience Analysis Guideline for Proposal
I. Who is your reader?
We are sending this proposal to Timothy Ericson, who is the CEO of the Zagster bike share
system.
A. Reader’s education: The person’s degree(s) and when they earned their degree(s)
Ericson graduated from Drexel University, where he earned a bachelor’s degree in Business
Administration and a concentration in Legal Studies.
B. Reader’s job responsibility: Consider the reader’s major job responsibility and how your
document will help them accomplish it.
Ericson is the CEO of Zagster bike share system. Selling helmets near bike share stations could
in some way boost his business. This shows that the company is concerned with the safety of
people who are using their bikes and thus attract more people to use the bikes.
C. Reader’s personal characteristics: Age, disabilities, anything you think will influence the way
they read your document.
Ericson is an ambitious entrepreneur in the industry of business and technology. He in interested
in skiing, traveling, cooking, and cycling. As a person who loves cycling, he must acknowledge
the importance of wearing a helmet. We believe he would be interested in our suggestion.
D. Reader’s personal preferences: Could be beliefs, etc. Try to accommodate their personal
preferences.
It has been said that Mr.Ericson is a person who cares about the environment a lot. That is also
one of the reasons why Ericson starts the bike-share program. EcoHelmet is also an
environmentally friendly product.
E. Reader’s cultural characteristics.
Ericson is a native American, who grew up in Fair Lawn, NJ. Therefore, we are presenting our
proposal in English.
II. What are your reader’s attitudes and expectations?
A. Your reader’s attitude toward you
We have not met Mr.Ericson yet, but we think he would be interested in us and our project.
B. Your reader’s attitude toward the subject
We think Mr.Ericson will be interested in our proposal because he is a man who cares a lot about
other people and also the environment.
C. Your reader’s expectations about the document
Our proposal will help his company build a good reputation for caring clients’ safety as well as
the environment. We have a very detailed plan about how to bring this new product to the public
using a dispenser. There are some suggestions in our proposal which he could take into
consideration.
III. Why and how will your reader use your document?
A. Your reader’s reasons for reading your document
It is a topic that is relevant to their product and will help improve their business and build
company culture. Cycling is an environmentally friendly transportation method compared to
others. Using EcoHelmet also has the same purpose.
English 393X 1401
Assignment #6: Final Project
Length:
Due:
Format:
Audience:
30-40 pages total; use at least 15 total sources, including at least 10 primary
sources, at least two of which will be interviews (MLA documentation); use at
least four graphics
Draft 4/18, 4/20; Final 5/2
memo format (Ch. 13), double-spaced, with one-inch margins, using captions and
headings wherever appropriate; 12 pt. Times New Roman font; begin numbering
(Arabic numerals) with Glossary or Abstract
Client
The formal report is the logical culmination to the assignments you have had. Moreover, the
comprehensiveness of your formal report is a direct consequence of the thoroughness of
your techniques of research and the appropriateness of both the mechanical and graphical
elements you’ve used to simplify and unify the information gathered from your research.
Your report must include the following components in the following order:
Letter of transmittal (addressed to those who will act)
Title page
Table of Contents including List of Illustrations
Glossary of Terms (if applicable)
Abstract
Executive Summary
Body of Report
Introduction
Discussion: Research Methods/Results (subdivided by appropriate headings)
Conclusions
Recommendations
References (Using MLA or APA style)
Appendices (if applicable)
20 FAQ’s
Below is a discussion of the material required for the body of the final report. It is arranged
according to logical considerations rather than rhetorical ones, and the titles of each section
SHOULD NOT BE USED AS HEADINGS IN THE FINAL REPORT. Use the same
headings as the model in Ch. 13. You should adapt this discussion to suit the needs of your
individual topic/proposal.
1.
Demonstration that a problem exists
You will need to show that things as they are now are not the way they should be. How
much demonstration is needed depends on the obviousness of the problem and the
awareness of the audience, who may vary from complete ignorance to partial knowledge
to well informed. This can give an overall picture, provide statistics, and bring
generalizations alive with specific examples. It can arouse emotions as well as inform.
2.
Demonstration of the undesirable consequences
To show that a situation exists does not necessarily show that there is a problem. You
may have to show that the situation has undesirable consequences. If these consequences
are not obvious, you should certainly trace them for the audience.
3.
Causal analysis of the problem
Once we have shown that an undesirable situation exists, we might naturally ask, “How
did it get that way?” To answer that question is to find causes, and often to find causes
is to find a solution. It makes sense that one way to correct a situation is to attack the
causes that have produced it. Moreover, we may have to convince our audience that
we have identified plausible causes of a problem, or they won’t accept the solution
designed to change those causes. Thus, your report will have to incorporate causal
arguments here.
4.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION (taken from your previous documents)
5.
Discussion of Research
6.
Conclusions/findings from Research
7.
Proposed Solution/ or Recommended Alternatives (If you are doing a Suitability Study,
this material will essentially appear at the beginning of your report, since the purpose of
your project has been to demonstrate that the solution you suggested in your original
proposal is, in fact, appropriate.)
After you have roused your audience to the awareness of a situation, its negative
consequences, its causes, the next step is to suggest what should be done about it.
A solution usually requires detailed consideration of feasibility. An audience will be
more receptive to a proposed solution if it is convinced that the solution will work, and
that the money, time, and personnel required to implement it are available. Arguing
feasibility is often a matter of anticipating and then answering the questions a skeptical
reader is likely to ask, questions such as: Can we afford it? Can we find people who can
do it? What steps must we go through to get to the goal? What is the first step? Has
this solution been attempted before? If yes, where and with what success? If not, why
not? Who are you to make this suggestion?
You must also show the good consequences that will result. The promise of good things
to come can be substantiated with causal arguments which connect the solution with the
good results.
You may also want to remind your audience of the negative consequences that will be
avoided if your solution is adopted. This can be done briefly, or you may want to go into
a fuller discussion for the sake of enriching your appeal. If you’ve already thoroughly
traced the bad consequences of the current situation, repeating them here will not lend
any persuasive force to your argument.
Keep in mind again that you may have more than one type of reader for this report, and that
some information must be repeated at the outset of a section.
Purchase answer to see full
attachment