COPYRIGHT AND CITATION CONSIDERATIONS FOR THIS THESIS/ DISSERTATION

o Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if
changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that
suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.

o NonCommercial — You may not use the material for commercial purposes.

o ShareAlike — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your
contributions under the same license as the original.

How to cite this thesis

Surname, Initial(s). (2012) Title of the thesis or dissertation. PhD. (Chemistry)/ M.Sc. (Physics)/
M.A. (Philosophy)/M.Com. (Finance) etc. [Unpublished]: University of Johannesburg. Retrieved
from: https://ujcontent.uj.ac.za/vital/access/manager/Index?site_name=Research%20Output (Accessed:
Date).
 Optimizing functions of engineers working in the SA
Didactic Market.

A Minor Dissertation Submitted in partial fulfilment of the Degree of

MAGISTER PHILOSOPHIAE

in

ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT

at the

FACULTY OF ENGINNERING AND THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT

of the

UNIVERSITY OF JOHANNESBURG

By

SERGE EMMANUEL MOUAFO TANKAM (216073758)

November 2017

SUPERVISOR: DR BAREND BOTHA

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to thank the Lord Almighty for good health, perseverance, determination
and the time to pursue this endeavour.

Many people have contributed directly and indirectly to the development of this
research study.

A special thank you to my family and friends for their constant and continuous support
throughout this journey.

I would like to express my sincere gratitude and acknowledgement to Dr B.W Botha

for reading and evaluating this document and for providing guidance along the way.

Final thanks to my colleagues at FESTO SA for their valued input and support during
the planning, preparation and writing of this work.
Contents
List of Figures .......................................................................................................................................... 6
List of Tables ........................................................................................................................................... 7
Acronym Definition ................................................................................................................................. 8
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (ABSTRACT) ...................................................................................................... 10
Chapter 1: The introduction.................................................................................................................. 11
1.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 11
1.2 Problem statement ..................................................................................................................... 12
1.3 Aim .............................................................................................................................................. 12
1.4 Research objectives .................................................................................................................... 12
1.5 Literature review ......................................................................................................................... 13
1.6 Research methodology ............................................................................................................... 13
1.7 Data collection methods and tools ............................................................................................. 14
1.8 Data analysis ............................................................................................................................... 14
1.9 Research limitations .................................................................................................................... 14
1.10 Chapter Overview ..................................................................................................................... 14
1.11 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................. 15
Chapter 2: The literature review........................................................................................................... 16
2.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 16
2.2 Didactic engineering and the Didactic market ............................................................................ 17
2.2.1 Main global players .............................................................................................................. 18
2.2.2 Main local players in South Africa ........................................................................................ 20
2.3 Didactic solutions engineer ......................................................................................................... 21
2.3.1 Festo Didactic South Africa. ................................................................................................. 22
2.3.2 Sales as a function of a Solutions Engineer. ......................................................................... 23
2.4 Systems engineering methods .................................................................................................... 24
2.5 Systems engineering applications ............................................................................................... 26
2.6 Systems engineering framework in optimizations...................................................................... 27
2.7 Festo Didactic .............................................................................................................................. 28
2.7.1 Festo Didactic Scope of equipment ..................................................................................... 30
2.7.2 Festo South Africa Geographical Area of Coverage ................................................................. 31
2.8 Conclusions ........................................................................................................................... 32
Chapter 3: The research process .......................................................................................................... 33
 3.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 33
3.2 Rationale for the study ............................................................................................................... 33
3.3 The research design .................................................................................................................... 34
3.3.1 Type of research................................................................................................................... 34
3.3.2 The Participants. .................................................................................................................. 36
3.3.3 Current Festo Didactic SA Organizational chart and reporting structure ............................ 36
3.4 The research instruments ....................................................................................................... 38
3.5 The research tools ....................................................................................................................... 41
3.5.1 Data collection /Administration and collection of the questionnaire ................................. 42
3.5.2 Data analysis ........................................................................................................................ 43
3.5.3 Validity and reliability of data .............................................................................................. 43
3.6 Ethical consideration ................................................................................................................... 43
3.7 Limitations and De-limitations of the study................................................................................ 44
3.7.1 Limitations............................................................................................................................ 44
3.7.2 De-limitations ....................................................................................................................... 44
3.8 Eliminations of bias ..................................................................................................................... 45
3.9 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................... 45
Chapter 4: The body (framework) ........................................................................................................ 46
4.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 46
4.2 The respondents ................................................................................................................... 46
4.2.1 Job Title or Function ...................................................................................................... 47
4.2.2 The scope of the respondent’s Coverage ..................................................................... 47
4.3 Research findings .................................................................................................................. 48
4.3.1 Identify needs findings .................................................................................................. 48
4.3.2 Defines requirements findings. ..................................................................................... 48
4.3.3 Performances specifications findings ........................................................................... 49
4.3.4 Analyse and optimize findings ...................................................................................... 49
4.3.5 Design and solve findings .............................................................................................. 49
4.3.6 Verify, test and report the solution provided findings ................................................. 49
4.3.7 Other findings ............................................................................................................... 50
4.4 Findings coding and analysis ................................................................................................. 50
4.5 Data coding and analysis ....................................................................................................... 51
4.6 Data analysis results and interpretation. .................................................................................... 52
4.7 Current tools available to the Didactic engineer ........................................................................ 53
 4.8 The future ................................................................................................................................... 53
4.9 Major references projects and lessons learned .................................................................... 54
4.9.1 AIDC: Automotive Industrial Development Centre (2015 to 2017) ..................................... 54
4.9.2 EEC: Ekurhuleni East College (2016 ongoing) ............................................................... 55
4.9.3 Kenya (Multimedia University Nairobi and Mombasa University 2016 ongoing) ........ 55
4.9.4 Pirep Maputo Mozambique .......................................................................................... 55
4.9.5 FACT (Festo Accredited and Certified Training) centre Dar Es Salam Tanzania............ 56
4.10 Proposed new organogram for Festo Didactic SA ................................................................ 56
4.10.1. Product based organogram .............................................................................................. 57
4.10.2. Region based organogram ................................................................................................ 60
4.10.3 People at the centre of the process .............................................................................. 60
4.11 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................. 60
Chapter 5: Conclusion ........................................................................................................................... 61
5.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 61
5.2 Summary of Findings ................................................................................................................... 61
5.3 Conclusions ................................................................................................................................. 62
5.4 Recommendations ...................................................................................................................... 62
REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................................... 64
APPENDICES .......................................................................................................................................... 67
Appendix A: The questionnaire used for Data collection ..................................................................... 67
Appendix B: Breakdown of Technologies area and series of Festo Didactics equipment (Didactic,
2017). .................................................................................................................................................... 79
List of Figures
Figure 2.1 Eight steps for a quality dissertation literature review (Randolph, 2009) ........................... 17

Figure 2.2 Lucas Nuelle product range (Nuelle, 2016) .......................................................................... 20

Figure 2.3 Pert Industrials product range (Pert Industrial Press Office , 2015) ................................... 21

Figure 2.4: Didactic Solutions Engineers Functions .............................................................................. 22

Figure 2.5 Decision tree for assigning sales activities from (Arndt & Harkins, 2013) ........................... 24

Figure 2.6 ICSM from (Lane & Koolmanojwong, 2014)......................................................................... 26

Figure 2.7 Industrial V-Model from (Sanders & Klein, 2012) ................................................................ 28

Figure 2.8 Festo Didactic Customer Worldwide ................................................................................... 29

Figure 2.9 Festo vision for training ....................................................................................................... 30

Figure 2.10 Technologies areas and series of Festo Didactics Equipment ........................................... 31

Figure 2.11 Festo Didactic South Africa Geographical Business Coverage from (map studio, 2017) ... 32

Figure3.1 The grounded theory process (Charmaz, 2006) ................................................................... 35

Figure 3.2 Current Festo SA Didactic Department Organigram ............................................................ 37

Figure 3.3 The Systems Engineering Methods (Magerholm FET, 1997) ............................................... 39

Figure 4.1 Distribution of respondents per months of work at the current position. .......................... 47

Figure 4.2 Proposed framework to optimize the functions of the Didactic solutions engineer adapted
from (Forsberg & Mooz, 1992) and modified for the Didactic Solutions Engineer .............................. 54

Figure 4.3 Proposed Product-based Organigram.................................................................................. 58

Figure 4.4 Proposed Geographic-based Organigram ............................................................................ 59

List of Tables
Table 3.1 Qualitative vs. Quantitative Research Techniques (Cooper & Schindler, 2008) ................... 34

Table 3.2 Advantages and disadvantages of standardized questionnaires. ......................................... 42

Table 4.1 finding coding and analysis ................................................................................................... 51

Table 4.2 Interpretation of the research finding and analysis .............................................................. 52

Acronym Definition
3D: 3 Dimensions

AC/DC: Alternative Current/ Direct Current

AIDC: Automotive Industrial Development centre

CAD: Computer Aid Drawing

CNC: Computer Numerical Control

Edukit: Educational Kit

EduTrainer: Educational Trainer

EDS: Environmental Discovery Systems

EEC: Ekurhuleni East College

EMS: Electro-Mechanical Systems

ERP: Enterprise Resource Planning

FACT: Festo Accredited and Authorized Training

FET: Further Education and Training

HVAC: Heat Ventilation and Air Conditioning

IA. Industrial Automation

ICSM: Incremental Commitment Spiral Model

KW: Kilo Watt

LEAD: Leader in Electrical Automation and Didactic

LCMS: learning Content Management Systems

LS: Learning Systems

MPS: Mobile Production Systems

OEM: Original Equipment Manufacturer

PA: Process Automation

PLC: Programmable Logic Controller

PMO: Project Management Office.

SADC: Southern African Development Community

SFA: Sales Force Assistant

SAP: Systems Applications and Products in Data Processing

STEM: Science Technology Engineering and Mathematics

T&C: Training & Consulting

TNA: Training needs Analysis

WBT: Web Based Training

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (ABSTRACT)
Didactic Solutions Engineers are engineers who are involved in providing sales, marketing,
training, and customer solutions of learning systems in an organization. The complexities
attached to the nature of Didactic Solutions Engineers functions within an organization often
create a sense of exhaustion, thus reducing their productivity and efficiency. The challenges
are increasingly intensified by the rate of development of new technology. In less than a
century, technology has evolved from the first industrial revolution to the fourth. Didactic and
Learning Systems companies are growing part of the industrial business industry. Didactic
focussed companies design, build and distribute learning systems equipment to address the
skills gap in the engineering and technology field. The increased need for technological sales
teams and client needs to stay abreast of technological development result in more pressure.
Companies’ sales teams are put under pressure due to few resources resulting from the global
economy and the subsequent increases in the footprint area that needs to be covered.

Systems Engineering is an interdisciplinary approach that aims to solve complex problems by

combining systems, subsystems and their components. Through a series of well-defined steps,
Systems Engineering defines the customer needs and progresses further towards design
synthesis, realization, optimization and validation of systems. Systems Engineering tools and
methods can be used in different fields to optimize the outcome of a process, by the fact that
attention is devoted to the entire life cycle of the systems. Traditionally, Systems Engineering
has evolved independently and there are numerous tools and techniques available to address
systems design issues.

This research study seeks to investigate the experiences of didactics companies outside South
Africa and look at the daily activities of Solutions Engineer within Festo SA. A framework to
optimize the function of a Solutions Engineer in didactic market will be designed based on
those findings using Festo South Africa (SA) as a case study. For the derivation of the
framework, data was collected using questionnaires that helped obtain relevant information on
daily activities (sales, exhibition, marketing, tenders, project and technical solutions) from
Solution Engineers within Festo SA and other didactic companies in the world. The collected
data was analysed. Systems Engineering tools and methods were applied and from that, a
framework was proposed to help Solutions Engineers with their daily work. In addition, two
new alternative organograms were proposed in this study to be adapted to the proposed
framework for future implementation to help the Solutions Engineers.
Chapter 1: The introduction

1.1 Introduction
The saying goes that “Didactics is as old as times”. The need to learn and transmit the
experience of previous generations to the next is an important pursuit for the development of
society. In general, when one person teaches another person, this situation already suggests
didactics (Tchoshanov, 2013). Didactic Engineering can be described as the design and
experimentation of teaching sequences, adopting an internal mode of validation based on the
comparison between a priori and posteriori analysis within a framework of the theory of
didactical situations (Michele Artigue, 2013). Didactic Solutions Engineers are engineers who
are involved in providing sales, marketing, training and customer solutions of learning systems
in an organization. These complexities attached to the nature of Didactic Solutions Engineers
functions within an organization often create a sense of exhaustion, thus reducing their
productivity and efficiency. These challenges are increasingly intensified by the rate of
development of technology, the number of potential clients from a wide geographic area
including a wide range of products from all engineering sectors. Utilising systems engineering
can address these challenges in the engineering and technology field.

Systems Engineering is an interdisciplinary approach that addresses complex problems by

combining systems, subsystems and their components. Through a series of well-defined steps,
Systems Engineering defines the customer needs and progresses further toward design
synthesis, realization, optimization and validation of systems. Systems engineering originated
in the defence industry from the development of large, complex, operational systems with
generally well-defined objectives. Anderson et al indicate that the shear duration and budgets
of these projects make the stakes high offering potential for good systems engineering. This is
not the case in general for commercially driven research and development programs. Such
projects typically emphasize creative discovery governed only by general goals and relatively
limited budgets (Anderson & Nolte, 2005). Application of systems engineering processes and
procedures developed for the large, requirements oriented programs to smaller, exploratory
programs usually produces poor results, if any. For an exploratory program to benefit from the
knowledge embodied in systems engineering processes, an understanding of the basic
principles is necessary (Krueger, Kevin, David , R. Douglas, & Cecilia, 2010) in order to
customize the process that suits the intended purpose.
1.2 Problem statement
At Festo, the Didactic Solutions Engineer plays a multitask role (marketing, sales, consulting,
training, etc.). The current structure of the company is constantly evolving to adapt to the
market growth demand, technology complexity and competition. Moreover, the Didactic
Solutions Engineer does not have a well-defined role thus often resulting in the individual
having to develop proposals and tender documents, work on marketing and exhibition content
as well as being the technical product trainer and the support technician. This results in an
inefficient system which leaves room for improvement.

Investigating the challenges and how to optimize this function into a well-defined role to
improve the efficiency of the Didactic Solutions Engineer within the current structure of the
company will therefore be both beneficial to the employees and the company. However, in
order to improve efficiency, it is pivotal to understand the unique challenges Solutions
Engineers face when performing their daily activities.

1.3 Aim
The aim of this mini-dissertation is to develop a proposal for a framework to improve the
efficiency of Didactic Solutions Engineers through the application of a systems engineering
process. The scope will be limited to the development of the framework only. Verification of
the effectiveness of the framework will be excluded from the scope due the associated time
frames. It will be based on a case study investigating the role of the Didactic Solutions Engineer
working at Festo South Africa and the specific challenges they face in their daily activities in
a small poorly defined structure resulting in a sense of exhaustion and lack of support.

1.4 Research objectives

The main research objectives of this study are to:

➢ Understand the specific challenges faced by Didactic Solutions Engineers during their
daily activities in a small, poorly defined structure resulting in a sense of exhaustion
and lack of support.
➢ Determine what Didactic Solutions Engineer do in other parts of the world, both within
Festo Companies as well as other main players in the same market.
➢ To determine requirements for the role of didactic engineering by using Systems
Engineering principles.
 At the end of this study, the results will be used to propose the model derived within the
company to obtain better resource utilization.

1.5 Literature review

Literature review focuses on summarizing and assessing the existing work in the field of
research. The objective is to define the research project, put together in the context and
background and to provide insight into previous work (Blaxter, Christina, & Malcolm, 2010).

According to the key idea of social constructivism (Vakhtina & Vostrukhin, 2014), which lies
in the fact that knowledge cannot be transferred to the student in finished form, and you can
only create pedagogical conditions for their successful mastering. The training environment
shapes these conditions together with the systematic designing which is implemented by the
didactic multidimensional technology (Vakhtina & Vostrukhin, 2014). Therefore, companies
designing didactic equipment need engineers to fulfil the customer expectations. Engineers,
analysts and managers are often faced with the challenge of making trade-offs between
different factors in order to achieve desirable outcomes. Optimization is the process of
choosing these trade-offs in the best way. The presence of different factors means that there
are different possible solutions and the notion of achieving desirable outcomes means that there
is an objective of seeking improvement on how to find the best solution (Onwubolu & Badu,
2004).

In order to successfully conduct this study, the recent publications on systems engineering
application with the problem addressed, their shortcomings, and their methodologies were
carefully examined.

1.6 Research methodology

A qualitative case study approach was selected to conduct this research in order to obtain
detailed information and in a flexible semi-structure interview format (questionnaires).
Therefore, complex interactional variable that typically occur in a solution engineering learning
systems environment will be considered. The logic and power of purposeful sampling lies in
selecting information-rich cases for study. Information rich cases are those from which one can
learn about issues of central importance to the purpose of the research (Patton , 1990). Four
tools are used:

• Questionnaires,
 • Personal informal interview of colleagues Solutions Engineers,
• Analysis of data collected,
• Application of Systems Engineering principles on the analyse data to derive a
framework.

1.7 Data collection methods and tools

This study investigated the suitable methods to gather information from Didactic Solutions
Engineers in different Festo companies around the world (such as Festo SA, Festo Brazil, Festo
Canada) and some other pertinent didactic SE companies tied with Festo.

1.8 Data analysis

The qualitative data will be studied and analysed, then systems engineering methods will be
applied to the data analysed (optimization, resources utilization and cost analysis) which will
be used to propose a framework for the future functions of the Didactic Solutions Engineer.

1.9 Research limitations

Festo is a global leading supplier of training equipment. As such, the company has a global
footprint with a presence in 70 countries. Since the study was within Festo as a global player,
it was pivotal to keep that in context. The limitation of the research is strictly within Festo
Didactic South Africa, Festo Didactic Canada and Festo Didactic Brazil. Some Festo South
Africa colleagues were used to collect data and questionnaires were given to them. Other main
companies such as Lucas Nuelle from Germany and DeLorenzo from Italy were also part of
this study.

1.10 Chapter Overview

This research study investigates the use of systems engineering principles to optimize the
functions of a Solutions Engineer at Festo SA. The chapter of this study is summarized below:

Chapter 1- Introduction: in this chapter, the motivation of the study was provided, then the
statement of the problem was explained, after that the research questions were asked, followed
by the research objectives, and this research limitation.

Chapter 2- Literature review: in this chapter, in-depth literature review will be provided on
Didactic engineering and the market, followed by literature on the didactic solutions engineers’
functions. Thereafter, literature review on systems engineering methods and application to
optimization follows. The chapter will finish with literature on systems engineering
frameworks and their application at Festo didactic.

Chapter 3- The Research methodology: in this chapter, the methods that will be used to
investigate the research problem will be highlighted. The chapter will start with the rationale
for the study, then the research design, followed by the research process, ethical considerations
and finally by limitation and delimitations.

Chapter 4- The body (framework): in this chapter, the respondents to the questionnaire will
be highlighted and the research findings will be provided. The chapter will also show how the
research findings will be analysed and then a framework will be proposed to address the
research questions. The chapter will conclude with a future and state some reference projects
that can be used as a base for future research.

Chapter 5 – Conclusion: in this chapter, the research findings will be summarized and
contextualized against the objectives of the study. The limitation of the study will be discussed
and recommendations will also be provided.

1.11 Conclusion
Optimization is about improving a process to yield the best or improve results using minimum
resources. This is often done using mathematical models or qualitative studies. It directly leads
to obvious economic benefits, technique value and management benefits. From the definition
of optimization, applying those mentioned words to the function of the didactic solutions
engineer in Festo South Africa would create a benefit to both the employer and the employees.

Systems engineering on the other hand introduces a top-down technical control to problem
solving. Systems engineering is about understanding the holistic picture, what needs to be
achieved (problem to be solved) and defining a suitable means of doing it. By operating from
the top down, systems engineering determines the specification of the high-level system based
on a set of stakeholder and derived requirements, and controls the decomposition and allocation
of requirements and the definition of interfaces. This forces the bottom up engineering process
to produce constrained results ( Pennocka & Wade, 2015). By using systems engineering
methods, a framework to optimize the functions of the Didactic Solutions Engineer in Festo
SA will be explored in this research study.
Chapter 2: The literature review

2.1 Introduction
Chapter 1 introduces this study and states the problem to be solved. Literature review is about
summarizing and assessing the existing work in the field of research. The objective of literature
review is to define the research project, to put together in the context and background and to
provide insight onto previous work (Blaxter, Christina, & Malcolm, 2010).

In his highly appreciated work, Randolph looks at and summarizes some pivotal information
on how to write high quality dissertation literature review (Randolph, 2009). His works start
with a discussion of the purpose of literature review and later presents taxonomy of literature
review and finally discusses the steps in conducting a quantitative or qualitative literature
review. He mentions an eight-step framework to complete a quality and well-designed
qualitative literature review based on previous research by Ogawa and Malen (Ogawa &
Malen, 1991).

The literature review in this research study is based on the suggestions and findings by
Randolph (Randolph, 2009) as summarized by eight steps in Error! Reference source not f
ound. below.

Caillaud et al investigate the diversity in the objectivity and the research method in research
topic undergone under systems engineering. They looked at the research objectives, the
methods used and the validation with great care. Their academic exercise presented different
approaches followed in related disciplines to systems engineering and they proposed a first
guide to validate the different research works in systems engineering (Caillaud, Rose, &
Goepp, 2016). They also found that the limits of validation are clearly on the human
appreciation to evaluate quantitative but especially qualitative criteria. However, their work
was realized only based on a bibliographical study and their experience in research.
 • Create an audit trail
step1:

• Define the focus review

step2:

• Search for relevant literature

step3:

• Classify the documents

step4:

• Create summary databases

step5:

• Identify constructs and hypothesized casual linkages

step6:

• Search for contrary finding and rival interpretations

step7:

• Use colleagues or informants to corroborate findings

step8:

Figure 2.1 Eight steps for a quality dissertation literature review (Randolph, 2009)

2.2 Didactic engineering and the Didactic market

Vakhtina & Vostrukhin indicate that knowledge cannot be transferred to a student in the
finished form. The educational system can only create pedagogical conditions for the
successful mastering of concepts through the training environment (Vakhtina & Vostrukhin,
2014). Companies designing didactic equipment for the engineering industry therefore need
engineers to translate the customer expectations into the required need for didactic equipment.
Engineers, analysts and managers are often faced with the challenge of making trade-offs
between different factors to achieve desirable outcomes. Optimization is the process of
performing these trade-offs in the most suitable way. The notion of different factors means that
there are different possible solutions and the notion of achieving desirable outcomes means
that there is an objective of seeking improvement on how to find the best solution (Onwubolu
& Badu, 2004).

Artigue et al introduces the concept of didactic very early and analyses the gap between
research and action in educational systems (Artigue & Perrin-Glorian, 1991). They use
effective methodology based on didactic engineering to develop technology products in the
early age of didactic and information technology. Their studies were limited on a sample of
elementary schools and on mathematics as a subject. Their results show that didactic cannot be
directly transposed into means of actions on the educational systems without further studies.

Su et al, in their review (Sun, Kramer, Li, & Stuart, 2014), summarizes products information
from the major manufacturers and suppliers of didactic and learning systems equipment used
in the training of renewable energy professionals (Artisans, technicians, technologists and
engineers). They made uses of the information technology forum “Listserv” where they posted
the relevant question. They received multiple responses from 18 institutions using those
learning systems and four equipment suppliers. They compiled their data based on those
responses and additional research. However, their investigation focuses on renewable energy
didactic and learning systems manufacturer while further research could have revealed that
most of those manufacturers have a broad base of engineering disciplines thus rendering the
daily job of their Solution Engineers tedious (Sun, Kramer, Li, & Stuart, 2014). The importance
of learning systems equipment in lecturing and different manufacturers is presented in the work
done by Ochs et al (Ochs & Miller , 2012). They looked at the organization, the pedagogical
approach, and the goals of a new course on power electronics with renewable energy
application. A summary of the equipment needed for the course, two sample labs and a final
project are presented as well. Four undergraduate students and one graduate student have
completed a first iteration of this new course and their feedback is presented in the study.

2.2.1 Main global players

German technology is well known worldwide. That is not different on the didactic front, with
most world leading suppliers coming from Germany. Didacta, a German association of the
education industry, represents their interests. The goal is to represent the interests of businesses
and organisations within the Didactic industry in Germany and abroad. This also includes
promoting high-quality teaching and learning materials and ensuring that all places of learning
have the equipment and resources that they need (Didacta, 2017). Members inter- alia include:

• Rexroth (Bosch Group)

• Christiani
• Festo Didactic
• LD Didactic
• Lucas Nuelle
• The cool tool Education
• Gunt

Main suppliers outside Germany include:

• DE Lorenzo from Italy

• Terco from Sweden
• Vtech from China
• Amatrol from the USA
• Edibon from Spain
• Dolang China

2.2.1.1 Lucas Nuelle Germany

Lucas Nuelle as a company pride themselves to be a forty-three-year-old company that stands
for the development, manufacturing and marketing of high quality state-of-art training systems
and education equipment for the advancement of technical, engineering and vocational
education. They also in their portfolio, offer courses covering a wide range of technologies
from basic to advanced materials, project oriented and didactic training exercises with special
focus (Nuelle, 2016). They offer learning systems and training in different fields of technology
and engineering as presented in Figure 2.2 below.
Figure 2.2 Lucas Nuelle product range (Nuelle, 2016)

2.2.1.2 DE Lorenzo Italy

DeLorenzo is the leading Italian company and among the first in the world in the design,
development and production of technical and vocational training equipment. They have existed
since 1951 and leverage the numerous milestones that have marked their history and on
numerous successful projects implemented in more than 140 different countries (De Lorenzo,
2016). Their technical fields in which De Lorenzo has developed individual equipment or full
laboratories and the range includes, but not limited to: electrical engineering, electrical power
engineering and smart grid, electronics, power electronics, industrial electronics,
telecommunications, pneumatics, hydraulics, automation, automotive technology,
thermochromic, fluid mechanics and other technical disciplines which are studied in the
technical/vocational institutes and in universities all over the world.

2.2.2 Main local players in South Africa

In South Africa, there are three main suppliers of Didactic equipment addressing the specific
needs of the local market and neighbouring countries which are following the South African
standard:

• Vulindlela- Sunrise Technical Solutions: Focuses on electrical trade test training

equipment.
 • Amtec Techniquip: Manufacturer and imports of educational, industrial and workshop
equipment.
• Pert industrials

Pert industrial has been present in the market for more than four decades and has been
developing and manufacturing engineering training equipment for technical schools, colleges
and universities. They are positioning themselves now as an international player with projects
in some Africans countries such as Namibia, Botswana and Zambia. They have recently
partnered with KVD technologies, a leading producer of science exhibits for expanding science
centres of the world (Pert Industrial Press Office , 2015). Their range of offering is wide and
they aim at increasing their market share in the continent.

Figure 2.3 Pert Industrials product range (Pert Industrial Press Office , 2015)

2.3 Didactic solutions engineer

Across many companies and learning system manufacturers and suppliers, the functions of the
Didactic Solutions Engineer can be summarized in Figure 2.4 below.
Figure 2.4: Didactic Solutions Engineers Functions

However, looking at how the market is evolving, the range of equipment in different
engineering fields and the dynamics of different structures, the day to day roles can be different
and not as well structured around the functions presented in Figure 2.4 above.

2.3.1 Festo Didactic South Africa.

At Festo South Africa, due to the size of the business, the economic conditions and the large
geographical area they cover (South Africa, SADC Countries, and East African Countries),
they can add the following functions to the above-mentioned ones:

• Project management for big sales

• Product training in different technologies
• High level engagement with policy decisions makers

The current structure of Festo South Africa, where the didactic engineer operates within a small
structure and is always having to adapt to the market demands (total staff: six Solutions
engineers, two areas managers, two sale supports technician, and one business process
manager), results in reduced efficiency when performing the indicated functions. There is a
need to develop a comprehensive framework in order to optimize their daily functions to both
the satisfaction of the employer and employees.
2.3.2 Sales as a function of a Solutions Engineer.
As shown above, sales appear to be a major component and the main measurable output of the
didactic Solutions Engineers activities and therefore take priority over other tasks. In their
work, Arndt et al indicate when it is appropriate to provide dedicated support for a sales activity
(Arndt & Harkins, 2013), and in cases where support is desirable to explore the choice between
core team support and external support. Their methodology focuses on sales transactions that
typically require a diverse range of sales activities, including customer contact, scheduling
appointments, internal meetings, processing orders and preparing financing applications. Their
research develops a framework for understanding how to structure sales support for specific
sales activities. Their findings can be summarized as: Each sales activity has four dimensions

• workload
• customization
• complexity, and
• Prequalification risk.

The support structure (self-support, core team support, and external support) moderates the
influence of the four sales activity dimensions on sales activity performance and salesperson
role stress. These in turn impact overall sales performance. Their research is however, limited
on a broad conceptual model of sales support structures. Further research should test this
framework in the didactic environment using empirical data. Practical implications –
Normative recommendations are made for managers about how to allocate sales activities to
sales support. The value of their work is shown in Figure 2., and is broadly discussed since they
propose four relevant dimensions of sales activities that should be considered when allocating
sales activities to members of the selling centre.
Figure 2.5 Decision tree for assigning sales activities from (Arndt & Harkins, 2013)

2.4 Systems engineering methods

Systems engineering is a multidisciplinary means of obtaining efficient and effective solutions
through the integration of systems, subsystems and components together. Systems engineering
defines the stakeholder needs and progresses further toward design synthesis, realization,
optimization and validation of systems. The existing conventional systems engineering has
evolved independently and there are numerous tools and techniques available to address system
design issues ( Sreeram & Thondiyath, 2015). One advantage of the engineering of systems is
the attention devoted to the entire life cycle of the system (Buede , 2009).

Work done by Khalid (Khalid, 2013) investigates Systems Engineering graduate research as
part of curriculum summary. The study focuses on what students are required to investigate as
a discipline-related topic in Systems Engineering in the form of a capstone project. Their
methodology focuses on performed project and the use of Systems Engineering methods and
applications. In their study, they also tabulate most Systems Engineering methods currently
used. Their results show consideration for submission to an academic conference or journal in
the field. However, they are limited to enumeration without proper implementation.

Sreeram et al presented a generic framework combining Six Sigma, Lean system and Systems
Engineering concepts for the design of complex systems ( Sreeram & Thondiyath, 2015). In
their work, by combining those concepts, they show that the design process becomes much
more flexible and adaptable for a range of design scenario. The Deming’s Plan-Do-Check-Act
is presented as the basis of the used framework. Three case studies were presented to evaluate
the application of this framework in the context of Systems Engineering design. The limitation
is on the scalability of the approach for large systems where complex interactions exist. Also,
the application of negotiation techniques for more than three persons poses a challenge from a
mathematical context on their work.

Boehm et al, in their paper propose several iterations in developing a compact set of four key
principles for successful Systems Engineering (Boehm, Koolmanojwong, Lane, & Turner,
2012). They name them respectively as:

1. Stakeholder Value-Based system definition and evolution.

2. Incremental commitment and accountability.
3. Concurrent multidiscipline system definition and development, and
4. Evidence-based and risk-based decision making.

They advocate that the four key principles of the Incremental Commitment Spiral Model
(ICSM) enable the applicant to adapt to the changes and perform successful Systems
Engineering and development. They used case studies to show that projects yield satisfactory
results when they have a successful usage of the four principles mentioned above and they also
show on the other hand that the failed case studies failed to apply one or more of the principles.
They end their work by comparing their four ICSM principles (refer to Figure 2.) with different
sets of principles such as Lean Systems Engineering and others. However, their study shows
little focus on human behaviour (therefore less suitable in didactic sales where a lot of human
interaction is required) and the impact on the implementation of the ICSM.
Figure 2.6 ICSM from (Lane & Koolmanojwong, 2014)

2.5 Systems engineering applications

More research was done by Locatelli et al (Locatelli, Mancini, & Romano, 2014) on Systems
Engineering to improve the governance in complex project environment. Their assessment
looks at how to address the project deliverables which are often too late, over budget and also
provide fewer benefits than expected using a System Engineering approach. The result of the
technique used is focused on the most relevant deliverables for project management,
governance and stakeholder management. Their approach, however, does not address the
leverage of Systems Engineering (SE) for a more efficient system reuse in other deliverables
of a project.

Magerholm et al presented systems engineering as a holistic approach to life cycle design by

addressing the problem of environmental effect from shipping in maritime industry to external
stakeholder that lack holistic approach (Magerholm, Aspen, Ellingsen, & Margrethe, 2013).
Their methodology use environmental assessment tools and Systems Engineering as a holistic
approach on how life cycle begins. Their results were presented as a framework and they also
presented how the proposed framework can contribute to improving the environmental
performance in a systematic and well-structured way. However, their work is limited since the
combination of methods has only been demonstrated in the maritime sector.

Dombrowski et al continues process identification for customer service in the field of the after
sales services as a basis for lean after sales services (Dombrowski & Malorny, 2016). They
looked at the noticeable increasing pressure in the after sales services to optimize the customer
services-processes. They looked at the processes to satisfy the customers need, and found that
they are challenging and difficult due to no valid framework concerning the general
conditioning and the general objectives of customers. Their methodology focuses on
implementation of lean principles that integrate framework identification of general conditions
as well as a holistic process structuration in customer service. Their result shows a methodical
approach for OEMs that will be able to create a structure process landscape. However, their
work did not use lean management principles applications to evaluate customer satisfaction.

2.6 Systems engineering framework in optimizations

Systems engineering offers a basis to act as integrator between engineering and business to
achieve organizational goals with performance, schedule and cost as main topic of focus (Botha
, 2016). This is being realized increasingly as companies are aligning different functions to
work together to the benefit of the company (Dwight & El-Akruti, 2009).

Another attempt to use a framework with Systems Engineering tools was proposed by Sanders
et al in Systems Engineering framework for integrated product and industrial design including
trade study optimization (Sanders & Klein, 2012). They attempted to address the problem of
affordability issues in aerospace and defence systems on the decision in supply chain and
Systems Engineering. In their methodology, they design a framework that provides a structured
hierarchical concurrent engineering approach to balance conflicts, performances and
productivity requirements that impact systems affordability at each stage in the system design
and development process. That resulted in a proposed novel approach for integrating
manufacturing and supply chain considerations into the Systems Engineering process through
the development of an industrial V-model which mirrors the conventional Product V-model as
presented in Figure 2.7 below.
Figure 2.7 Industrial V-Model from (Sanders & Klein, 2012)

2.7 Festo Didactic

Today, the world lives in a knowledge economy and in the age of global networking.
Knowledge is a resource that gives a decisive advantage in international competition, and is a
guarantor of success especially in demanding industry segments. Production locations and jobs
can only be maintained if all employees have access to the best possible basic and further
training.

In many cases, an employee’s original expertise will no longer be sufficient to keep up with
the latest development in the working environment. Investing early pays off in every possible
way. The promotion of lifelong learning thus becomes the most productive long-term
investment for the future. The aim of Festo Didactic is therefore, to maximize the potential of
learning in schools and training centres and to develop skills sustainability in industrial
companies around the world (Didactic, 2017).

As a leading global partner for companies and educational institution, and as a family owned
company, Festo is deeply committed to contributing to the development of education and
learning environment and the worldwide transfer of knowledge as shown in Figure 2.8 below.
Figure 2.8 Festo Didactic Customer Worldwide (Didactic, 2017)

Festo pride themselves as the driving force in technical and vocational education. The company
covers a full spectrum of engineering disciplines and supplies learning labs with all the
necessary technologies regardless of the vocational field involved. As a driving force and
leading supplier in the field, Festo Didactic also knows the technologies and competencies that
will be required in the future, such as Industry 4.0 and Aquatronic (waste water treatment) and
how to implement them through teaching (Didactic, 2017).

Festo Didactic, the training and education arm of the automation company (Figure 2. explained
the company vision), has introduced a suite of enhanced tools for customers including new
hardware and software products, portable hands-on training hardware solutions, a new
catalogue and a special UK equipment website aimed expressly at colleges and universities.
(New real & virtual training tolls from Festo didactic, 2002).
 Industry Companies Education

Figure 2.9 Festo vision for training

2.7.1 Festo Didactic Scope of equipment

Festo Didactic as part of the Festo group with the LEAD vision (Leader in Electrical
Automation and Didactic) purchased another well establish Didactic Company named Labvolt
in 2014. The merger between the two companies, was not only aligned with the vision to
dominate the didactic market and to position Festo didactic as one stop solutions provider in
engineering learning systems equipment, but resulted in a significant increase in the scope of
areas in engineering that need to be covered by the Solutions Engineers working at Festo
(Didactic, 2017).

Festo Didactic Solutions Engineers now need not only to understand and be able to provide
solutions based on Labvolt series equipment, but also integrate them into the current offers
where they can complement each other, or base their solutions to the customer solely on
Labvolt series (Inc, 2017).

As a result of the merger and as summarized in Appendix B, Festo Didactic is now the world-
leading provider of equipment and solutions for technical education. The product and service
portfolio offers customers holistic educational solutions for all areas of technology in factory
and process automation, such as pneumatics, hydraulics, electrical engineering, production
technology, mechanical engineering, mechatronics, CNC, HVAC and telecommunications
(festo Didactic, 2017).
Figure 2.10 Technologies areas and series of Festo Didactics Equipment

2.7.2 Festo South Africa Geographical Area of Coverage

Festo South Africa Business footprint covers South Africa, SADC countries, East Africa
Countries and Africans Island on the Indian Ocean (see Map in Figure 2.11 below). The current
structure is based on six solutions engineers, two areas managers and the department manager.
Festo Didactic South Africa operates within the Festo group in South Africa where they share
the building with their industrial automation colleagues and other entities of the business
(marketing, order fulfilment, finances).
Figure 2.11 Festo Didactic South Africa Geographical Business Coverage from (map studio,
2017)

2.8 Conclusions
In this chapter, current literature in the subject of systems, engineering, Systems Engineering
tools to process optimizations and Didactic Solutions Engineer’s roles were looked at. Also, a
presentation of Festo Didactic as the leading provider for learning systems globally was
covered. Related work and relevant analysis was scrutinized to address the subject at hand.
Despite all work done in literature, little or no work has been done in optimization of the
function in didactic solution engineering, in this view, the study will endeavour to study the
optimization of the function using Festo SA as a case study.
Chapter 3: The research process

3.1 Introduction
In Chapter 2, the literature review around the topics Systems Engineering application,
optimization, didactics and learning systems were covered. The purpose of this research study
is to attempt to optimize the functions of the Didactic Solutions Engineers within Festo South
Africa using systems engineering tools and principles. In this section, the research
methodology used in this study is presented. In order to obtain detailed information, a
qualitative approach was used and a flexible standardized questionnaire interview format was
distributed to the respondents with the goal to allow for complex interactional variables that
typically occur in a solution engineering learning systems environment to be taken into
account.

The logic and power of purposeful sampling lies in selecting information-rich cases (the
respondents to the questionnaires are solutions engineers) to study in-depth. Information rich
cases are those from which one can learn a great deal about issues of central importance to the
purpose of the research (Patton , 1990). This research study methodology relies on the use of
the following four tools:

• Informal personal interviews of colleagues (Solutions engineers working at Festo SA)

• Questionnaires
• Analysis of data collected and
• Presentation of the result from the analysis, and to derive a framework.

3.2 Rationale for the study

Looking at the current organogram of the company and the job description of the Didactic
Solutions Engineers, the current global and local economic situation leading to less resources
available, it could easily be concluded that the workload of a Didactic Solutions Engineer in
South Africa if not addressed, may result in inefficiency and poor results. By just looking at
the number of potentials clients, the wide geographic area and the different range of products
on their portfolio, it was pivotal to comprehend the unique challenges related to their daily
activities to attempt to propose a framework using Systems Engineering tools to optimise their
functions.
3.3 The research design
The research design refers to the general technique or techniques used to examine the
dissertation statement. This study evaluates the types of research design available based on the
problem statement and justify the use of one research design for this case study.

3.3.1 Type of research

There are mainly two techniques used for data analysis namely: quantitative and qualitative
techniques. For this research study (mini-dissertation), the technique used for data analysis is
determined by the type of data collected. The differences and features of the two techniques
are presented in the Table 3.1 (Cooper & Schindler, 2008).

Table 3.1 Qualitative vs. Quantitative Research Techniques (Cooper & Schindler, 2008)
Description Qualitative Quantitative
Focus of research Understand & Interpret Describe, explain and predict
Researcher involvement High researcher is participant & Limited, controlled to prevent bias
catalyst
Research purpose In-Depth understanding theory Describe or predict build and test
building theory.
Sample size Small Large
Research design May evolve or adjust during the Determined before the project.
course of the project. Consistency Consistency is critical
is not expected
Data Analysis Human analysis following Computerized analysis- statistical
computer or human coding methods dominate.
primarily non-quantitative. Analysis maybe on-going during
Force researcher to see contextual the project
framework of the phenomena
being measured
Data Type and Verbal or pictorial descriptions. Verbal descriptions
Preparation Reduce to verbal code. Reduce to numerical code

From Table 3.1, one can see that the only research technique that is most suitable for this study
is qualitative research. The focus of the research is to understand and interpret the answer of
the questionnaires from the small sampling group, and to build in-depth theory of Systems
Engineering application to optimizations. Therefore, this study data analysis is based on
questionnaire findings, on coding of the findings, interpretation of the findings and presentation
of the results on a writing format with little pictorial description.

The inductive method (grounded theory analysis) was used as the basis to analyse the collected
data. The process is explained in Figure 3.1.
Figure3.1 The grounded theory process (Charmaz, 2006)

From (Strauss, 1987) it can be said that the defining components of the grounded theory
practice include but are not limited to:

• Simultaneous involvement in data collection and analysis.

• Constructing analytic codes and categories from data, not from preconceived logically
deduced hypotheses.
• Using constant comparative method, which involves making comparison during each
stage of the analysis.
• Advancing theory development during each step of data collection and analysis.
 • Memo-writing: to elaborate categories, specify their properties, define relationships
between categories and identify gaps.
• Sampling aimed toward theory construction and not for population representativeness.
• Conducting the literature review after developing an independent analysis.

3.3.2 The Participants.

Festo Didactic as the world-leading provider of equipment and solutions for technical
education – your global partner for competence development (Didactic, 2017). It was important
to address the problem at hand with that global presence in mind while not only focusing on
Festo, but also looking at what other leading suppliers are doing. Although it was planned to
gain information from as many suppliers as possible, it was only possible to get suppliers that
partner with Festo in a certain project to participate in this study, that resulted in a restricted
group of participants.

For this study, the participants are divided into five categories:

• Four Festo SA Didactic Solutions Engineers

• One Global Product Manager from Festo Didactic Canada
• One Festo Brazil Didactic Solutions Engineer
• One DeLorenzo Italy Area Manager Africa
• One Lucas Nuelle Germany Area Manager for Africa
These restricted participants could provide valuable data on this research topic.

3.3.3 Current Festo Didactic SA Organizational chart and reporting structure

The purpose of this study was to use systems engineering methodologies to propose a
framework to optimize the functions of the Didactic Solutions Engineer within Festo South
Africa. That can only be done in an effective manner by looking at the current structure of the
department, and by investigating the daily activities of the respondents (the Solutions Engineers
working for Festo). Since findings from this research and the resulting proposed framework
could impact on the structure of the department within the company, it was pivotal to start by
looking at the current structure.

The current organogram of the department is presented below in Figure 3.2

 Didactic Manager

Area Sales Area Sales Automation Skills Automation Skills Business Process Marketing Training and
Manager Manager Consultant Consultant Coordinator Coordinator Consulting Admin

Training and
Sales Engineer Sales Engineer Free Lance Lecturer FreeLance Lecturer
consulting assistant

Sales Engineer Sales Engineer Free Lance Leturer Free Lance Lecturer

Sales Engineer Sales Engineer

Logistics and Learning Systems

Installation sales Support
Technician Technician

Figure 3.2 Current Festo SA Didactic Department Organigram

3.4 The research instruments
The research instruments and tools used for gathering the data are pivotal to any research study
and should be able to address the type of data in the research undertaken. Generally, there are
various procedures of collecting data. The main instruments used in the mixed method research
consist of closed-ended, open-ended questionnaires, interviews and classroom observations.
These different ways of gathering information can supplement each other and hence boost the
validity and dependability of the data. In the main, the quantitative data is obtained through
closed-ended questionnaires and the qualitative data through open-ended questionnaires,
interviews and classroom observations (Zohrabi, 2013). In this study, the primary research
instrument used is a questionnaire. The justification of using the questionnaire relies on this
study research methodology and the research question. This research is a qualitative research
which involves open ended questions to gather relevant information from a small sample group.

3.4.1 Questionnaire construction

The questionnaire construction is based on the objective of this research. This research intends
to define a framework to optimize the functions of a Didactic Solutions Engineer using Systems
Engineering methods.

Systems Engineering (SE) is often said to be the framework for bringing a system into being.
This can be achieved stepwise by combining the process, products and management tools
already introduced. SE is therefore often introduced as a holistic methodological approach
(Magerholm FET , 1997); (Magerholm Fet, Schau, & Haskins, 2010) and constitutes a robust
framework that can incorporate life cycle thinking, market share retention or penetration impact
assessment and stakeholder views. This methodological approach is introduced here by the six-
step SE-methodology as shown in Figure. 3.3.

This methodology is a simplification of SE in general (Magerholm FET , 1997)] and it builds

upon the SE-models introduced by Blanchard et al and Asbjornsen (Blanchard & Fabrycky,
1990) (Asbjornsen , 1999). However, before the engineering of a system takes place, it is
important to have a good understanding of the objective of the client and the budget available.
 STEP 1: Customer’s
Identify Needs Requirement

STEP 2: Define Additional

Requirements Research

STEP 3: Specify
Performances

STEP 4: Analyse
and Optimize

STEP 5: Design,
Solve and
Improve

STEP 6: Verify
Test and Report

Figure 3.3 The Systems Engineering Methods (Magerholm FET, 1997)

Figure 3.3 which is a System Engineering process (Magerholm FET , 1997), is used as a
framework for setting the questionnaire in this study. The blocks in Figure 3.3 are described as
follows:

Step 1: Identify needs

First, the clients or the potential client needs should be identified. That was done via different
channels such as trade shows, telephonic conversation, walk-ins or customer visits. FET
colleges, training centres and university bodies may be seen as primary stakeholders as they
are the main clients for learning systems and didactic equipment and solutions. Banks and
cooperatives organization such as GIZ, Don Bosco are also important factors that may have
preferences pertaining to different standards and the performance levels. The Didactic and
learning systems equipment in Africa most of the time require external funding than normal
states funding. Therefore, donors and organization with focus on education are always
stakeholders in major projects.

Step 2: Define requirements

Based on the identified needs, the requirements for learning systems performance should be
defined. Requirements may be expressed qualitatively for example, by requiring the latest
technology to be employed or to comply with relevant regulation, or quantitatively by number
of learners or students to be trained and the system lifetime.

Step 3: Specify performances

After the requirements have been defined, the learning systems performance should be defined.
A quantitative approach to measure performance levels should be chosen to the extent possible
in order to facilitate precise analyses and comparison of alternatives. Quantitative information
can be obtained from previous similar projects.

Step 4: Analyse and Optimize

To compare the performance of design alternatives in various scenarios, additional modelling

and simulation techniques may be employed. The analysis and optimization phase often
demands trade-offs between alternative solutions, which can be done for instance by Monte-
Carlo simulations. A challenge is often to derive weight factors that reflect real situations, and
that are simple to use in a decision situation under time constraints. Identification of weights
should be done by referring to the stakeholder involvement processes and surveys performed
in Steps 1, 2 and 3.

In the search for better alternatives, multi-variable problems often occur and the different
parameters therefore need to be weighed according to their significance. In the optimization
process, various alternatives may thereby be used as evaluation parameters. Once the criteria
and weighing scheme have been established, the scores along various criteria for any
alternative should be identified and taken into the design step. There often is uncertainty in the
weight and the objective functions that are used in the optimization process should therefore
mirror the uncertainty. In a typical didactic solutions engineering, the timing to take into
considerations is that customer constrains (budget, delivery time, competition offers, space...)
result often in an optimization exercise.

Step 5: Design and Solve

In this step alternative solutions should be introduced based upon the findings from the
previous steps. The solutions might be new solution or an improvement of an existing solutions
or even customization to client needs so that the initial needs and requirements are met with an
optimized solution. It might also be managerial solutions for the implementation of strategic
decisions to achieve sustainable solutions, which might come out as the most beneficial, seen
from a market share retention, market penetration or even profit margin.

Step 6: Verify, test and report

It is necessary to verify and test whether the initial needs and requirements are met. Thus,
considerations for tests and evaluation are innate from the beginning. Improvements of learning
system scenarios performance should be verified according to initial requirements for example
by means of the optimization parameters. A database must be created for future references.

3.4.2 Questionnaire items

The questionnaires items below are built based on the systems engineering methods of
(Magerholm FET , 1997) and their purpose is to generate good enough data and findings that
will be analysed and are further detailed in Appendix A.

Step 1: Identify needs

Step 2: Define requirements

Step 3: Specify performances

Step 4: Analyse and Optimize

Step 5: Design and Solve

Step 6: Verify, test and report

Step 7: Other questions?

3.5 The research tools

The research process looks at the uses of the research instruments, the analysis of the collected
data and finally the validation and reliability of the collected data. Qualitative data differs
considerably from quantitative data. Its form will be a result of the selected methods, which
are influenced by a researcher’s theoretical orientation. In this way, data is associated with the
motivation for choosing a subject, conducting the study and ultimately the analysis (Berg,
2007). In this study, the method chosen to collect data is a questionnaire. Thus, the sub-section
below focuses on the administration of the questionnaire, the collection of the answers, the data
analysis and the validity.

3.5.1 Data collection /Administration and collection of the questionnaire

Questionnaires are research instruments used for direct elicitation of information from the
person or people who are presumed to have the required information. A formal standardized
questionnaire is a survey instrument used to collect data from individuals about themselves, or
about a social unit such as a household or a school. A questionnaire is standardized when each
respondent is to be exposed to the same questions and the same system of coding responses.
The aim here is to try to ensure that differences in responses to questions can be interpreted as
reflecting differences among respondents, rather than differences in the processes that
produced the answers. Standardized questionnaires are often used in the field of educational
planning to collect information about various aspects of school systems. The main way of
collecting this information is by asking people questions either through oral interviews (face to
face or telephone), or by self-administered questionnaires or by using some combination of
these two methods.

There are many reasons to choose or select a formalized questionnaire as the instrument for
data collection in qualitative research. The Table 3.2 below (Debois, 2016) summarizes the
attributes of a standardized questionnaire.

Table 3.2 Advantages and disadvantages of standardized questionnaires.

Advantage Disadvantages
Cost efficient Dishonesty
Practical Lack of conscientious responses
Speedy result Differences in understanding and interpretations
Scalability Feelings and meanings unable to be conveyed
Author do not need to be a Some questions are difficult to analyse
scientist
Scientific analysis and Respondents may have an hidden agenda
prediction
 User anonymity Lack of personalization
No pressure Skipped questions
Can cover all aspect of the Accessibility issues
topic being investigated or
researched

From the table above it is clear that the advantages of the standardized questionnaire outweigh
the disadvantages for the type of research used in this study. Since standardized questionnaires
have an important strength regarding scientific analysis and prediction and are cost effective.
It is also important to note that, to improve functions in any environment there is a need to
understand change strategy. Therefore, in a highly competitive market such as didactic, it was
difficult to get more participants, as they were not willing to share inside information.

3.5.2 Data analysis

The data gathered from all respondents of the standardized questionnaire was codified and the
findings explained. Respondent answers were analysed using Systems Engineering principles
identified in the research objectives of this study (section 1.4). More explicit results with a
graphical representation are shown in the research finding section (next chapter) of this study.

3.5.3 Validity and reliability of data

The questionnaire used to gather data for this research is presented partially above (in section
3.2) and in detail in Appendix A. Systems Engineering methods (Magerholm FET , 1997) was
used as the guideline for the questionnaire design. The main purpose was to ask respondents
about the functions of a Didactic Solutions Engineers and the challenges they face in the daily
activities and the process difficulties they would like to have implemented to render their daily
function more efficient or improved for the least.

3.6 Ethical consideration

Based on the ethical guide from the university and Festo SA confidentiality and trade secrets,
the condition and guarantee of the respondents are stated as follows:

1. All participations are offered the opportunity to remain anonymous.

2. All information gathered from the questionnaires as well as any additional information
from the respondents will be treated with the strictest confidentiality.
 3. Participants will receive a copy of the final report.
4. The research is to be assessed by the university for examination purposes only, but
should the question of publication rise later, Festo SA and the respondents’ permission
will be asked.
5. The research will attempt to propose a framework to optimize the functions of the
Didactic Solutions Engineer within Festo SA. It is hoped that the final report may be
beneficial to Festo SA and the respondents.

3.7 Limitations and De-limitations of the study

It was very humbling and empowering at the same time to realize critical restrictions
encountered when conducting this research. Simon defines limitations as potential weaknesses
in a study. Limitations are found in almost everything we do (Simon, 2011). “The delimitations
are those characteristics that limit the scope and define the boundaries of your study. The
delimitations are in your control”. The research constraints of this study are:

• Limitations
• And delimitations

3.7.1 Limitations
The main limitation of the research was the use of only non-confidential data from Festo South
Africa. Another main limitation was the unwillingness from other main didactic companies to
participate in the research such as local layers (PERT Industrial and Amtec Techniquip and
Vulindlela Sunrise). The result was analyzed based on their answers only with no input from
management. Also, business process flow as an internal constraint was not considered for this
research study.

3.7.2 De-limitations
The delimitations on this research study are on the data collection methods, the analysis and
the participants. Open ended structured, standardized questionnaires and informal interview
with the colleagues were used. The focus was only on companies willing to share information.
Another limitation was the inability to broaden the scope to include customers’ perspectives
when gathering information.
3.8 Eliminations of bias
Open-ended questions used in this research study as the data collection instruments offer two
distinct advantages compared to closed-ended questions (Manfreda, Hlebec, & Vehovar,
2003):

1. Help to elucidate the response that individuals give spontaneously.

2. To avoid the bias which may result from suggesting responses to individuals.

Open-ended questions offer the benefit of not constraining responses and allowing respondents
to freely answer and elaborate upon their responses. It is also important to highlight that open-
ended questions are burdensome to answer and suffer from high rates of items not responded
to.

Therefore, for this study, our choice to use open-ended questions as the instrument for data
collection was strictly motivated by the objective of the research and also by the fact that open
ended questions offer the opportunity to the respondents to supply motivating details thus
reducing ambiguity or bias.

3.9 Conclusion
In this chapter, the method used to gather information on the didactic solutions engineer
function and the methodologies used to conduct this research in order to attempt to optimize
their role based on Systems Engineering principles were presented. The chapter is emphasizing
on different techniques of research methods such as: types of research, data collection methods,
ethical considerations, limitation and delimitation of the methods and validation of the data
collected. In the next chapter, the findings from the data collected will be presented and the
coded data will also be shown. That will be followed by the data analysis and the proposed
framework will be presented to optimize the functions of the Didactic Solutions Engineer based
on Systems Engineering principles.
Chapter 4: The body (framework)

4.1 Introduction
In Chapter 3, the detail about the research process, the research approach and research tools
were presented. In this chapter, the respondents of the questionnaires are presented, the findings
from the questionnaire are revealed, the analyses of the finding are presented and finally the
sub-conclusions are drawn.

The objectives of this study were:

• To determine what other Didactic Solutions Engineers, do in other parts of the world,
both within Festo Companies and other global Didactic Companies.
• To determine a framework to optimize the Didactic Solutions Engineers function within
the South Africa market
• To propose the model derived from this study to be use within the company in order to
obtain better resource utilization.

Questionnaires were given to respondents with direct knowledge of the problem being
addressed. The nature of the problem to be addressed required broadening the respondents to
other companies within the didactic environment willing to offer information. The respondents
accepted to answer the questions and a duly authorized form was received from the Didactic
manager of Festo South Africa acknowledging the company support for the study.

The qualitative data from the questionnaires was analysed.

The questionnaires were divided into two sections:

• Section A: Personal (biographical) data

• Section B: Working conditions and information of the structure

4.2 The respondents

In this study, eight respondents were administered questionnaires. All the respondents at the
time of the study were all solutions or sales engineers from didactic company around the world
(see section 3.3.2). It was also important to understand the distribution of the respondents based
on gender, age and their months of experience in their role as presented in Figure 4.1.
 Distribution of respondents per Gender and Months of
experiences months of works
160
143
Months of experiences at current possition

140
125
120

100

80
62 61
60

40
22
18
20 9 6
1
0
male male male male male male male male
FZA1 FZA2 FZA3 FZA4 FCA FBR LN DL
Gender and Company Position

Figure 4.1 Distribution of respondents per months of work at the current position.

4.2.1 Job Title or Function

Six types of respondents were given open-ended questionnaires during this research study:

• Four didactic solutions engineers from Festo South Africa.

• One Global Product Manage from Festo Didactic Canada.
• One didactic solutions engineer from Festo Brazil.
• One Area Manager Africa Lucas Nuelle Germany.
• One Area Manager Africa DeLorenzo Italy

4.2.2 The scope of the respondent’s Coverage

The scope of the questionnaire was focused on the main activities of a Solutions Engineer
namely:

• Sales
• Exhibitions
• Projects
 • Marketing
• Market penetration and retention
• Tenders and
• Technical Solutions
• Also on the company organogram and business processes

4.3 Research findings

Below are the findings from the questionnaire distributed to the respondents. The reason to
group the findings by categories was to be able to propose a framework that will be specific
enough to tackle the challenges discovered at each sub-section of the questionnaire.

4.3.1 Identify needs findings

Each sales engineer does identification independently (there is no standard tool such as survey
or questionnaires), based on his own experience and his abilities. Those who attended the
internal fit for change training at Festo SA used knowledge gained from that experience. The
current structure relies on the ability of the Solutions Engineers to communicate and collaborate
with their colleagues. Also, prior to the implementation of SFA and SAP, the process was
highly manual. At Lucas Nuelle Germany however, there is a team having access to one email
and can consistently monitor, evaluate and interact with the products manager. At DeLorenzo
they rely on well-trained dealers and partners to help in that regard. At Festo, globally, there is
no standard since countries differ in dynamics and tend to be closer than other suppliers because
of the proximity they have from sharing the office with colleagues from industrial automations

4.3.2 Defines requirements findings.

Again, each sales engineer focuses on their own experience and their current knowledge of the
varieties of solutions the company can offer. If they want, they can get advice from other
colleagues and their line manager. Custom made solutions are available from the company
internal tools, but most of the Solutions Engineers need training on the solutions to meet
customer expectations. A well-defined training is required from someone with expertise in the
domain (usually a line manager or an experience Solutions Engineer, or even the global product
manager).
4.3.3 Performances specifications findings
This is usually done based on the Solution Engineer’s knowledge on didactic equipment and
advice from colleagues and line manager. Research is also done on competitors offering and
partners. At Festo Canada, they rely on a good database of previous projects and the knowledge
from the business analyst and product managers. Currently, that database and a share-point are
being rolled out globally where information on products can be found and used.

4.3.4 Analyse and optimize findings

Each Solutions Engineer relies on his personal knowledge and experiences and if he wants, he
can rely on advice from colleagues and his line manager. Usually parameters to consider when
optimizing the solutions include:

• Pricing
• Relationship with the customer
• Geographical locations
• Market penetration strategy
• Local expertise on the product and the solutions
• Global strategy

4.3.5 Design and solve findings

The Solutions Engineer decides based on company target margin and available resources to
complete the project. Also, they can rely on partner companies. At DeLorenzo and Lucas
Nuelle they focus on their products only and allow their dealers and partner on those countries
to take the risks. The fact that Festo SA is offering global quality products in a locally driven
market also creates a design challenge. Once again, trade-offs and partnerships need to be
considered when designing and solving customer needs (e.g. is the German quality competitive
or a local partner can offer the solution at a competitive price)

4.3.6 Verify, test and report the solution provided findings

No real system is in place, but the company is currently implementing SFA (Sales Force
Assistant) and SPM (Sales Process Management) as a tool going forward to optimize business
process and data processing. In Festo Canada, they currently have an SFA and DeLorenzo also
have SFA.
4.3.7 Other findings
Better processes need to be put in place and a new structure needs to be put in place to allow
the Solutions Engineers to optimize their potential and function and to be utilised to the fullest
of their abilities without feeling too much pressure, frustrations and lack of support.

4.4 Findings coding and analysis

A lot of texts are produced during qualitative research and to draw conclusions, a technique
called coding is used. When conceptualizing data; Coding is the general term used thus. Coding
includes raising questions and giving provisional answers (hypotheses) about categories and
about their relations. A code is the term for any product of this analysis (whether category or a
relation among two or more categories) (Strauss, 1987). Although open-ended questions
provide richer and more valuable information than closed-ended questions, they are also
important source of insight since they can generate information that was not anticipated.
Despite the above-mentioned values, open-ended questions also have some drawbacks. They
make the task of reading and coding of the respondent’s responses tedious and also very much
time consuming, especially when you deal with a lot of questions. There is software available
for text coding such as QDA miner and WORDSTAT (provali research, 2012).

To manually code, the following tasks need to be performed:

1. Reading though all the responses to familiarize with the range of topic mentioned
2. Create a codebook (that can also be done before or during the coding process)
3. Read each response and manually apply one or several codes for every text response
4. To achieve high quality coding, the researcher should have multiple coders reading and
applying codes to the same responses. This allows one to establish clear coding rules
and achieve a common understanding of the coding frame. It also allows monitoring
the level of agreement amongst coders.

Although the software is available, Microsoft Excel offers a cheaper option for open-ended
question analysis as shown in the work done by Palanca (Palanca, 2012). For this research
study, we used Microsoft Excel for data coding and analysis. Table 4.1 below summarizes the
finding coding and analysis.
4.5 Data coding and analysis
The data coding and analysis performed on the answers from the questionnaires submitted to
the respondents as shown in Table 4.1.
Table 4.1 finding coding and analysis
Procedures Aspects
Step 1: • Sales interaction
Identify Needs • Research
• Customer visit
• Trades show
• Inbounds calls
Step 2: • Personal
Define requirements • Define steps
• Available tools
Step 3: • Personal expertise
Specify performances • Advices from colleagues
• Line manager inputs
Step 4: • Previous solutions
Analyse and Optimize • Advice from line manager
• Market strategies
Step 5: • Previous solutions
Design and Solve • Advices from line manager
• International help
• Quotation
• Follow up
Step 6: • Possibility to demo the Use available
solution simulations tools
Verify, test and report.
• Availability of equipment
Step 7: • Structure
Other questions? • Business process
Analysis
Sales interaction and research
and the primary sources to get
customer needs followed by
leads generated by trade shows
and inbounds calls.
Usually requirements are done
based on the Solutions Engineer
abilities and knowledge on the
products and using design tools
available
The performance specifications
are done based on the solutions
engineers expertise and/or will
collaboration with line
managers and other colleagues
The solutions engineers rely on
either proven working
solutions, advice from line
manager or colleagues and
market penetration strategies
Use the tools available to quote
and request help if needed
demo or
Need to relook, the current
structure and the business
process
4.6 Data analysis results and interpretation.
To be able to finalize this study it is pivotal to interpret the data from the analysis summarized
in section 4.5. The interpretation is represented in Table 4.2.

Table 4.2 Interpretation of the research finding and analysis

Questions Interpretation
Step 1 Identify Needs Doing sales marketing activities identifies opportunities. Research
on typical customer strategic move and decisions. Record findings
on customer and interaction in SFA and when interaction
opportunities arise get as much as possible information such as
future plans, budget on equipment, training, availability and
interests.

Step 2: Define requirements
Understand the training needs and vision of the customer. Look at
the geographical location and create visit. Advise as much as
possible not only on learning equipment but also on building
structure. Then assess also if the customer can plug and play the
requested equipment or will need training. Try and bind the
customer with a long-term partnership (FACT) if possible and
record all interaction on SFA

Step 3: Specify performances Assessing the proposed solutions vs, the requirements of the
customer. Use colleague’s technical ability and experiences to
optimize the solutions. Liaise with the project management office
to get cost and other estimations right.

Step 4: Analyse and Look at competition offers. Add killing features to eliminate the
Optimize competitions. Look at the global market penetration strategy as a
tool to optimize the cost and position yourself with turnkey
solutions. Consider country legislation.

Step 5: Design and Solve
Generate quote as soon as customer specifications are met and the
solution is optimized to meet budget and be competitive.
Research if competitors are working on the same project. Do
follow-up calls and visits if necessary. Liaise with line manager
and discuss the strategy going forward. Record all interaction on
SFA
 Step 6: Verify, test and Demo the proposed solutions if possible to the customers. Involve
report. the line manager and record all interaction in SFA

7 other questions? Inclusive strategic meeting and planning needs to be in place

(involving Solutions Engineers). A new organogram with didactic
learning systems and support services need to be created to handle
big project and play the application centre and logistic role.

4.7 Current tools available to the Didactic engineer

Currently Solutions Engineers used their technical and sales knowledge advice from
experienced colleagues and advice from their line manager to put solutions together. Although
internal tools are available to guide them when configuring difficult product lines few of them
actually use them on a daily basis and have not yet mastered the use of them. Also, the current
ERP (SAP) is not fully functional and need to be reengineered to include the specificity of the
didactic department. A clear training strategy and plan need to be put in place to get them to
master all the tolls available to them.

4.8 The future

Based on the research finding the framework below is proposed and results from the analysis
and interpretation from the results. The framework is derived on the VEE model from (Forsberg
& Mooz, 1992), adapted and it is proposed as a guideline to help Solutions Engineer in
addressing their daily tasks. Further to that, for the proposed framework in Figure 4.2 below to
be exploited to its full potential and to yield the results expected, two structures will be
proposed for the future as part of the optimization of the Solutions Engineers functions.
Figure 4.2 Proposed framework to optimize the functions of the Didactic solutions engineer
adapted from (Forsberg & Mooz, 1992) and modified for the Didactic Solutions Engineer

4.9Major references projects and lessons learned

4.9.1 AIDC: Automotive Industrial Development Centre (2015 to 2017)

The project was awarded to Festo Didactic South Africa in 2014. The project was for supply,
deliver, installation commissioning and training of automotive training equipment to address
the shortage of skills in the sector. The project involved 40% Festo didactic line of products
and 60 % buyouts. The buyouts were further divided into 40 % local buyouts and 20% buy
outs from another German Didactic Company.

The solutions provided were of quality and up to tender specifications. The execution was well
planned and training systems were performing to the customer specification. The delivery
scheduling, installation and training was also well executed and the power of teamwork in the
department was demonstrated during the project. The auditing was poor and created delay on
payment. Moreover, the fact that the company was working with government institutions
demonstrate the need to fully understand stakeholder requirement and budget for delay on their
side. The lesson learned was the need for a Project Management Office (PMO) within the
Didactic department with the responsibility to plan and execute big projects and to handle the
marketing and exhibitions activities.

4.9.2 EEC: Ekurhuleni East College (2016 ongoing)

The tender was awarded to Festo Didactic South Africa in 2016 for the supply, delivery,
installation, commissioning and training of Electrical Dual program training equipment. Once
again, poor planning and lack of use of project management tools created some frustration. In
addition, the necessity of a proper PMO was highlighted. As with Government organizations,
the lack of urgency on the customer side also created some frustrations.

4.9.3 Kenya (Multimedia University Nairobi and Mombasa University 2016

ongoing)
The tender was divided into multiple lots from different universities in Kenya. Festo Didactic
through a local partner was awarded two lots (lot 10 for Mombasa University and lot 28 for
Multimedia University in Nairobi.)

The partnership with the local company was proven to be successful in the execution of the
project for the supply, delivery, installation, commissioning and training of electrical,
mechanical and mechatronics training equipment. However, some challenges are still being
experienced in terms of invoicing and payment.

4.9.4 Pirep Maputo Mozambique

A World Bank support for education in Mozambique fund was provided in 2014 and Festo
Didactic bid on two lots for the supply, delivery, installation, commissioning and training of
electrical and fluidic power training equipment. The project was well executed, but, as always,
due to cross country business, some delays were experienced in the payment and many trips
were later organized to finalize new equipment commissioning.

4.9.5 FACT (Festo Accredited and Certified Training) centre Dar Es Salam
Tanzania
The Fact centre was a joint venture between the government of Tanzania and Festo Didactic.
Part of the equipment was donated and the Tanzanian government purchased part of it through
a local company. The aim of the training centre was to serve the educational sector and the
Tanzanian industry. The Dar Es Salaam Institute of Technology will use the new facilities for
the students. The following labs were supplied, installed and commissioned to be used as a
Festo FACT centre:

• Mechanical workshop
• Basic Automation lab
• Hydraulics lab
• Electrical engineering lab
• Automated systems lab
• Mechatronic.

As shown in each of the cases mentioned above, the relevance of improving the structure to
adapt to the always evolving market need to be addressed. One way to do that is to reorganize
the current organogram to incorporate a PMO, align and equip the current workforce with all
necessary skills to remain very competitive.

4.10 Proposed new organogram for Festo Didactic SA

It was pivotal to implement the new framework to get the most out of the Solutions Engineers
technical abilities and sales qualities. However, as shown above, the proposed framework will
not yield the expected results with the current structure of the department without proposing a
new organogram to match the skills and expertise of the Solutions Engineer for effective and
efficient implementation of the new proposed framework.

The proposed two organograms are presented below and are necessary to the successful
implementation of the framework.

• Product based organogram

• Region based organogram
4.10.1. Product based organogram
In the product-based organogram, the Solutions Engineers will focus on a range of product
directly aligned with the Global Product manager and be the champions both on the technical
sales, technical support and product development to match local market specification and
product management and marketing for the whole area of operation of Festo South Africa. That
will streamline his load and give him more time to focus on his product line and develop skills
for the local market and penetration strategy. The drawback of this proposed structure is that
certain products will not be in demand for some period and that will render the job of the
Solutions Engineer during the low demand period at risk since it will not bring any income.
 Didactic Manager

Area Sales Manager Area Sales Manager Automation Skills Automation Skills Business Process Marketing
Labvolt Series Festo Series Consultant Consultant Coordinator Coordinator

Solutions Enginer HVAC Soltutions Engineer

Learning Systems
and Process Mechatronics and Free Lance Lecturer FreeLance Lecturer
assistant
Automation Factory Automation

Soltuions Engineer Soltutions Engineer

Training and Consulting
Electrical, Renewable Mechanical, Free Lance Leturer Free Lance Lecturer
Assistant
and Industrial Trades Mechatronic and STEM

Solutions Engineer
Soltutions Engineer
Electronics and
Industry 4.0 and CNC
Telecoms

Didactics Support Didactic Support

Technician and Logistics Technican and Logistics
and interns and interns

Figure 4.3 Proposed Product-based Organigram

 Didactic Manager

Learning Systems
Area Sales Area Sales Automation Skills Automation Skills Business Process Marketing
Support and
Manager Manager Consultant Consultant Coordinator Coordinator
Project Manager

Logistic Free Lance FreeLance Learning Systems

Sales Engineer Sales Engineer Tecnical Suports
Coordinator Lecturer Lecturer assistant

Training and
Free Lance Free Lance
Sales Engineer Sales Engineer Intern Electrical Consulting
Leturer Lecturer
Assistant

Sales Engineer Sales Engineer Intern Mechanical

Intern
Mechatronics

Figure 4.4 Proposed Geographic-based Organigram

4.10.2. Region based organogram
In the region-based organogram, the current structure can be kept but there will be a need for
a product management and learning systems support service in the team. The role of that office
will be to support the current structure with in-depth technically, after sales support and project
management. The technical sales support and logistic technicians will report to that office and
the Solutions Engineer will only focus on sales marketing solutions, first level technical
services, market retention and penetration.

4.10.3 People at the centre of the process

From the finding and analysis, the current company strategy is based on the top-down
management approach and top-down pricing structure. The market areas however differ
completely from one country to another. The solutions engineers should therefore be allowed
to give inputs in strategic decision such as pricing structures and be allowed to be flexible based
on the situation they face and the type of customer.

4.11 Conclusion
This chapter discussed the distributed questionnaire, data analysis and interpretation looking at
the literature review. The objective of this study was to look at how Didactics Solutions
Engineers currently operate within Festo South Africa. Another objective is to investigate how
operations are done in other didactics companies both within the Festo group and other main
suppliers of didactic equipment. This study sought to learn and compare from the information
gathered and a framework to optimize the didactic Solutions Engineers function within the
South African market by using systems engineering principles was deduced. Moreso, it
emerges that for proper implementation of the deduced framework, a structural change needs
to happen. The main findings of the questionnaire were summarized in each section above.

Chapter 5 concludes this study, discusses the limitations and recommendation for further
research and implementation for the framework.
Chapter 5: Conclusion

5.1 Introduction
The purpose of this study was to determine what other didactic Solutions Engineers do around
the world, understand how Festo Didactic SA is handling day to day operations, collect relevant
information and propose a framework based on systems engineering principles that can be used
as a guideline to the daily activities of Didactics Solutions Engineers within Festo South Africa.

A questionnaire based on open-ended questions was distributed to eights persons, divided as

follows:

• Four Didactics Solutions Engineer within Festo South Africa

• One Area Manager Africa for DeLorenzo Italy
• One Global Product Manager within Festo Didactic Canada
• One Didactic Solutions Engineer within Festo Brazil
• One Area Manager Africa from Lucas Nuelle Germany

This chapter reports the conclusions and recommendations that resulted from this study.

An open-ended questionnaire was designed using a systems engineering tool derived from
(Magerholm FET , 1997) and was administered to the respondents. Each questionnaire was
divided into two main sections: (Section A personal data and section B research data.) as
indicated in Appendix A.

The research questions were formulated with the daily activities of Solutions Engineers as the
target function to optimize; with the objectives in mind to comprehend the unique challenges
they are facing in order to collect the relevant data.

5.2 Summary of Findings

The findings reveal the following information:

• The current structure is a well-defined with clear reporting hierarchy. Conversely, in

future, the challenges encountered by the Solutions Engineers need proper attention.
Implementing a more effective and efficient structure which can be based on specific
skills or specialization of each Solution Engineer can be of greater advantage to
optimize the daily activities
 • Since didactic Solution Engineers are often involved in multiple activities (marketing,
technical supports etc). The job performance evaluation scheme used in evaluating
didactic engineer should be designed and customized to match their specific working
environments within the company
• Aligning the focus of Solution Engineer areas with a specific technology area, aligned
with global product manager portfolio, could assist in enhancing the productivities of
Solution Engineers within the geographic region.

5.3 Conclusions
Understanding the daily challenges faced by the Didactic Solutions Engineer within Festo
South Africa was the central leitmotiv for this research study. This study analysed and
comprehended some other unique challenges by looking at operations elsewhere (other Festo
company in the world, other main Didactic company in the world) and a framework to address
those unique challenges was proposed. Systems Engineering methods and tools were used as
guiding principles to get and optimize the framework. Magerholm designed a questionnaire
using systems engineering framework (Magerholm FET , 1997).

The questionnaires were sent to the respondents with the focus on obtaining rich qualitative
data. The obtained data was coded, analysed and finally interpreted. From the interpretation of
the obtained data, a new framework was proposed and recommended for use as a guideline to
optimize the function of Didactic Solutions Engineers within Festo Didactic South Africa
(Forsberg & Mooz, 1992). Thus, to implement the newly proposed framework effectively and
efficiently, it is strongly suggested that the current structure of the department be re-organized.
This research study revealed the need to be constantly dynamic and consider the whole business
process model in future.

In conclusion, this study has shown that although the current structure and mode of operations
can achieve company financial and strategic target, the market dictates the necessity to improve
the system by utilizing efficient and effective approach in doing things such as putting people
at the centre of the process.

5.4 Recommendations
The following recommendations are suggested from this research study:
• To look at project and tender selection methods using engineering economics models
• Implement the framework and analyse the improvement.
• Use the framework as the initial step and further this study with customer participation
• To look at tools for management in high skills environment with a variety of challenges
• To investigate product based organogram versus region based organogram.
• Another research can be done on the same topic integrating the ERP (Enterprise
Resources Planning) business processes for Learning Systems and Training and
consulting activities
REFERENCES
Anderson, N., & Nolte, W. (2005). Systems Engineering Principles Applied to Basic Research and
Development. Atlanta: Space Systems Engineering conference .

Arndt , A., & Harkins, J. (2013). A framework for configuring sales support structure. Journal of
Business & Industrial Marketing, 28(5), 432.443.

Artigue, M., & Perrin-Glorian, M.-J. (1991). Didactic Engineering, Research and Development Tool:
Some Thoretical Problems Linked to this Duality. For the Learning of Mathematics, 11(1), 13-
18.

Asbjornsen , O. (1999). Industrial Ecology and Systems Engineering- a Perfect Match? INCOSE
International Symposium, 9, 22-28.

Berg, B. (2007). Qualitative Research Methods for the Social Sciences (6 ed.). San Francisco: Pearson.

Blanchard , B., & Fabrycky, W. J. (1990). Systems Engineering and Analysis (fourth ed.). Pearson
International Edition.

Blaxter, L., Christina, H., & Malcolm, T. (2010). How to Research (Fouth Edition ed.). Berkshire: Open
University Press : McGraw-Hill Education.

Boehm, B., Koolmanojwong, S., Lane, J., & Turner, R. (2012). Principles for successful Systems
Engineering. Procedia Computer Science, 297-302.

Botha , B. (2016). Systems Engineering as integrator between engineering and business. Erie, PA:
Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE) , 2016 IEEE.

Buede , D. (2009). The Engineering Design of systems : Models and Methods 2nd edition. New jersey:
wiley.

Caillaud, E., Rose, B., & Goepp, V. (2016). Research methodology for systems engineering: some
recommendations. Science Direct IFAC, (pp. 1567-1572).

Charmaz, k. (2006). Constructing Grounded Theory- A practical Guide Through Qualitative Analysis.
London: Sage Publications Ltd.

Cooper, D., & Schindler, P. (2008). Business Research Methods (10 ed.). McGraw-Hill.

De Lorenzo. (2016, 10 18). Delorezo . Retrieved from Delorezo Global:

http://www.delorenzoglobal.com/about-us.php

Debois, S. (2016). www.surveyanyplace.com. Retrieved march 19, 2017, from

https://surveyanyplace.com/questionnaire-pros-and-cons/

Didacta, V. (2017, 01 30). didacta. Retrieved from didacta.de: http://www.didacta.de/en/3430.php

Didactic, F. (2017). Festo Didactic. Retrieved from (http://www.festo-didactic.com):

(http://www.festo-didactic.com)

Dombrowski, U., & Malorny, C. (2016). Proces Indentification for Customer Service in the field of the
After Sales Service as a Basis for "Lean After Sales Service"s. Precedia CIRP, 47, 246-251.
Dwight, R., & El-Akruti, K. (2009). The role of asset management in enterprise strategy success.
ICOMS , Asset Management Conference, (pp. 68-76).

festo Didactic. (2017). Retrieved from www.festo-didactic.com: http://www.festo-didactic.com/int-

en/company/?fbid=aW50LmVuLjU1Ny4xNy4xMC4zNDQ0LjQxNDE

Forsberg, K., & Mooz, H. (1992). The relationship of systems engineering to the project cycle.
Engineering Management Journal, 36-43.

Inc, 2. F. (2017, july 30). Labvolt. Retrieved from labvolt.com: https://www.labvolt.com/Website/

Khalid, A. (2013). Systems Engineering Graduate research as Part of Curriculum - Summary of

Research. Procedia Computer Science, 16, 967-975.

Krueger, M., Kevin, F., David , W., R. Douglas, H., & Cecilia, H. (2010). Systems Engineering
Handbook: A guide for System Life Cycle Processes and Activities (3.2 ed.). San Diego:
INCOSE.

Lane, J., & Koolmanojwong, S. (2014). The Incremental Commitment Spiral Model: Principles and
Practices for successful Systems and Software. Addison-Wesley Professional .

Locatelli, G., Mancini, M., & Romano, E. (2014). Systems Engineering to improve the governance in
complex environments. International Journal of Project Management, 32(8), 1595-1410.

Magerholm FET , A. (1997). Systems Engineering Methods and Environmental Life Cycle Performance
Within Ship Industry. Trondheim: PHD Thesis, Norvegian University of Science and
Technology, Norway.

Magerholm Fet, A., Schau, E. M., & Haskins, C. (2010). A framework for environmental analyses of
fish food production systems based on systems engineering principles. INCOSE, 13(2), 109-
118.

Magerholm, F., Aspen, A., Ellingsen, H., & Margrethe, D. (2013). Systems Engineering as a holistic
approach to life cycle designs. Ocean Engineering, 62(1 April), 1-9.

Manfreda, U., Hlebec, V., & Vehovar, V. (2003). Open-ended Vs Close-ended Questions in Web
Questionnaires. Developments in Applied Statistics, 19.

map studio. (2017). Retrieved from www.mapstudio.co.za:

http://www.mapstudio.co.za/product/sadc-businessmans-wall-map/

New real & virtual training tolls from Festo didactic. (2002). Assembly Automation, 22(2).

Nuelle, L. (2016, 10 20). Lucas-Nulle GmbH. Retrieved from Lucas-nuelle.com: https://www.lucas-

nuelle.com/300/Products.htm

Ochs, D., & Miller , R. (2012). Development of a power electronics Lab Course with Renewable
Energy Applications. ASEE Annual Conference . American Society for Engineering Education.

Ogawa, R., & Malen, B. (1991). Towards rigor in reviews of multivocal literature: Applying the
exploratory case method. Review of Educational Research, 61, 265-286.

Onwubolu, G. C., & Badu, B. (2004). New Optimization Techniques in Engineering (1st ed.). Berlin:
Springer.

Palanca, R. (2012). Excel tool for Coding. Sas Global Forum , 67.
Patton , M. (1990). Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods (2nd ed.). Beverly Hills: Thousand
Oaks US : Sage Publications.

Pennocka, M., & Wade, J. (2015). The Top 10 Illusions of Systems Engineering: A Research Agenda.
Conference on Systems Engineering Research. 44, pp. 147-154. New York: Procedia
Computer Science.

Pert Industrial Press Office . (2015). Biz Community. Retrieved from Biz Community Press Office:
http://www.bizcommunity.com/PressOffice/AboutUs.aspx?i=208017

provali research. (2012, May 02). Retrieved from www.provaliresearch.com:

provaliresearch.com/solutions-2/applications/open-ended-questions-analysis/

Randolph, J. (2009). A Guide to Writing a dissertation literature Review. Practical Assessment

Research & Evaluation, 14.

Sanders, A., & Klein, J. (2012). Systems Engineering Framework for Integrated Product and Industrial
Design Including Trade Study Optimization. Procedia Computer Science. 8, pp. 413-419.
Phoenix: ELSEVIER.

Simon, M. (2011). Assumptions, Limitations and Delimitations. Seattle: Dissertation Success, LLC. .

Sreeram, T., & Thondiyath, A. (2015). Combining Lean and Six Sigma in the context of Systems
Engineering design. International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, 6(4), 290-312.

Strauss, A. L. (1987). Qualitative analysis for social scientists. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Su, Y., Li, T., wang, D., & Liu, X. (2012). Modeling and optimization in complex systems. Kybernetes,
41(9), 1235-1243.

Sun, W., Kramer, B., Li, Z., & Stuart, J. (2014). A Review of the Commercial Trainers and Experiment
Kits for Teaching Renewable Energy Manufacturing. Joint International Conference ISBN
978-1-60643-379-9.

Tchoshanov, M. (2013). Engineering of Learning: Conceptualizing e-Didactics (Svetlana Knyazeva,

UNESCO Institute for Information Technologies in Education ed.). Moscow: UNESCO institute
for information Technolgies in Education.

Vakhtina, E., & Vostrukhin, A. (2014). Didactic Designing of Resource Support For Training
Environment. International Journal "Information Technologies & Knowledge", 8(3), 255-263.

www.mapstudio.co.za. (2017, February 15). Retrieved from Map Studio:

http://www.mapstudio.co.za/product/sadc-businessmans-wall-map/

Zohrabi, M. (2013). Mixed Method Research: Instruments , Validity, reliability and reporting findings.
Theory and practice in Languages Studies. 3, pp. 254-262. Findland: Academy Publisher.
 APPENDICES

Appendix A: The questionnaire used for Data collection

Serge E. Tankam

Didactics Solutions Engineer

Easter and Southern Africa

Festo South Africa

May 01, 2017

Dear colleague,

I am trying to assess the current structure we are operating in, and looking forward to use your
answers as a basis for a framework to optimize our daily functions within Festo SA. As stakeholders
for this study, your opinions and recommendations are important as this study will probably impact
and beneficial on the way we operate going forward.

There are seven focus areas that will need your inputs:

• Customer needs Identification.

• Customer Requirements Definitions.
• Customer specifications performances
• Customer specifications analysis and Optimizations
• Customer solutions design and solve.
• Customer Solutions Verification, report and test.
• And any specific inputs from your side

All personal and company information obtained will be kept anonymous as well as confidential and
will be used for analysis purpose only.

A summary of results will be available on request when this study is finalized.

Thank you for your time

Sincerely,
 Framework to optimize the solutions engineer functions in the
didactic market using S. E principles
Questionnaire on the didactic solutions engineer functions

The following questionnaire will be used to define a framework to optimize the functions of
the didactic solutions engineer at Festo SA

Background Name:

Today's date:

Address:

City, state, zip:

Telephone: home ( ) _________ Work ( ) _________ -

Sex:

Please indicate your current position:

How old are you?

What is your gender?

How long have you been working for Festo or your current company?
Step 1: Identify needs

What governs your day to day work?

Who is the customer?

How do you record the customer requirements?

How do you know if the customer is replacing existing equipment or upgrading them?
How do you know if the customer is starting and new field of knowledge or new training
centre?

Step 2: Define requirements

How do you define customer requirements?

How to decide on a customer Visit?

Do we have to advise on the building?

How do you test if the customer needs product training or designed courses?

When do you sense and opportunity to propose a FACT Centre?

How you will demonstrate that you have met requirements?

How do the customer requirements is captured?

Step 3: Specify performances

How do you specify the performances of the systems based on the customer requirements?

When do you decide to brainstorm the customer requirements with the colleagues?

When do you look if we have someone in the team that is a specialist or familiar with the
requirements?

How will you manage this project?

Step 4: Analyse and Optimize

In our ranges our equipment what will best satisfy the customer requirements and
performances?

Who is the main competitor in the region?

What can the competitor offer?

What features do we offer, and what will be the deal breaker/ clincher?
Is our price competitive?

When do you decide to involve the GPS or the Product manager?

When do you take into considerations the customer constrains (budget, space...)?

When do you look at Festo Constraints (Not in our portfolio of offers ...?)
Step 5: Design and Solve

When do you decide to generate the quote?

How do you know if the quotation is complete?

When do you look at features that can be added in the quote?

When do you enquire if the customer needs support after the warranty?
How do you structure the program to meet customer requirements and manage risk
(competitor’s offers)?

What is your contingency plan, if there is a counter offer from competitors?

When and how do you seek for the product Specialist advice?
Step 6: Verify, test and report.

How do you report all the interaction with the customer?

Do we have a demo version of the proposed solutions available to test with the customer?

When do you involved your line Manager?

7 other questions?

Do you believe a customer solutions and application centre will be of help in your daily routine?

Do you believe a Project Manager should be part of the team?

Any others suggestion from your side?

This year do you have any particular goal, when it comes to your job as Didactic solutions
engineer at Festo?

Do you have a project selection strategy in place?

Appendix B: Breakdown of Technologies area and series of
Festo Didactics equipment (Didactic, 2017).
From Table 2.1 we can further breakdown Festo didactics equipment below.

Engineering Discipline Festo series Labvolt Series

Lab Furniture’s Learn Line, S-Top A-Frame Different set for all Learning
Swing Panel Programmes

Blended Learning Platform Tesch2Screen, Web based Mind Sight LCMS

and WBT training in many disciplines

Simulations Software’s CIROS, Fluidsim LVDAC-EMS, LVHVAC,

LVCT, LVDAC-ANT…. All
Linked to Purchased
Hardware and available free
to download from
www.labvolt.com

Fluidic Power Pneumatic, Hydraulic Pneumatics, Hydraulics,

Sensors

Electrical Engineering TP101x (fundamentals Facet, EMS 2KW, EMS 0.2

Protection and machines) KW, Dissectible Machines,
Motor Winding Kit, Magtran
Trainer, Industrial Control

Mechatronics MPS, Edu trainer and PLC AC/DC Trainer, PLC

Applications, PLC Trainers,
Advanced PLCs Trainers

Robotics and CNC Robotic Amr, Mobile Robot Servo Robot Systems, CNC
(Robotino) and Robotic Light Duties Lathes and
Vision Cell Mills

Process Automation Edukit P.A, MPS P.A Industrial Instrumentation

Compact Station, MPS P.A and Process Control, Process
Compact Station. Control Trainers.
STEM MecLab, Bionics Lab, • Mechatronics,
Pneumatic Starter Kit Automation &
Robotics

• Electronics/Electricity

• Pneumatics

• Engineering & Stress

Analysis

• Plastics

• CNC Mill/Lathe

• CAD with 3D
Printing

• Environmental/Water

• Alternative Energy

• Bionics

• Biotechnology

EDS Water Management EDS Water Management

Green and Renewable Solar Trainer, Wind trainer,

Energies Solar Thermal, Nacelle Wind
Power Generation, Hydrogen
Fuel Cell, Geothermal
Trainer

HVAC Refrigeration Systems

Demonstrator, Refrigeration
Training Unit, Heat Pump
Training Systems,
Refrigeration training
systems with Data
Acquisition, Manual Skills
Trainers ( wiring, piping,
 heat pump, beverage cooler,
dual cooler etc..) HVAC-R
control Training Systems

Industrials Maintenances Mechanical Trainers,

Industrial Wiring, Pumps
Trainers, Piping trainers,
Rigging Trainer

Telecoms Radar Training Systems,

Microwaves Training
systems, Satellites
Communications Training
systems, Communications
Technologies Training
systems , Antenna
Technologies , Telephony
Training Systems

Solutions Centres Providing customer specific Post-sales support for

learning systems and warranties, repairs,
solutions Installation.

Very high level of expertise Extended warranty options

in technical education: And On-site Equipment
Process Automation, Calibration and preventive
Mechatronics, Factory maintenance
Automation

Training and Consulting Services to industrial Training and train the trainer
customers and organizations On-site or at-the-factory
to improve their Customer training, which can
productivity be when they receive the
Training: equipment, or with a re-
training contract each year if
needed for their new teachers
Standard public courses (x
days)

Customized trainings
tailored to customer needs

Competency development
programs for specific job
profiles

Simulation games

Consulting

Train-the-trainer programs
and curricula development

Industrial services to
improve customer’s
productivity

Certification of customers’
training environment