Week eight

Four weeks in Semarang have already passed and one is still to go. So far, the interview sessions are doing great and I have got the feeling to be really on the track of something. Every appointment gives me new insights on the project’s bottle-necks, which are not always documented, sometimes even not acknowledged. In my opinion, every situation and problem has multiple influences. So approaching them from every influence’s perspective will give me the needed ingredients for understanding. After that it is up to me to make the main course out of them; the solution.

Every appointment is seized by the interviewees to give their view of the case; the indication of problems as well as the suggestion of a solution to them. Especially the key stakeholders; they have great experience on the project and therefore are dying to share their opinions with me. To me this information is very useful, since I am investigating the process and looking for possible improvements.
The data I am working with is very qualitative and therefore considered soft. The main advantage of this type of data is its multilateral character; the data are concerning several aspects of engineering and really specified towards one project. The absences of clear definitions and strict boundaries enable assimilation beyond existing limits. Doing this, however, requires the ability to abstract everything on a higher level. Staying at the lower conceptual levels gives you an understanding of the separated aspects, but disables you to put two and two together, which is essential for understanding, defining and solving in complex environments. I like struggling with these complex problems and regard it as travelling without knowledge on origin, destination and means of transport. The only certainty is the fact that there is going to be travelled, the rest is up to you…

One of the difficulties that come in to play when analyzing qualitative data is the lack of criteria. This is due to the fact that the data has no units and no standards. Every situation has to deal with different magnitudes, which need to get a chance in different proportions. So how do you define wrong from right? For answering that question I use a tactic, which I derived from The Delphi Method. The goal is to reach consensus among stakeholders on the topics discussed. The assumption hereby is that once everybody agrees, the opinions can be considered proper. I try to reach the consensus by taking the findings from one interview session into next. This way the findings will be approached from multiple perspectives and iteratively fine-tuned. So far this tactic has provided me with a lot of results, so it is definitely worth a recommendation. It is, however, important to be constant on guard, since stakeholders could be opposing each other. Feeding them with each other’s arguments could raise the existing conflict, making even it worse off. So a cautious and neutral approach in this matter is required.

This week I also became known with the academic world in Indonesia. Semarang has got three universities: the Catholic Unika, Islamic Sultan Agung and the state university called Undip Diponegoro. During my stay in Semarang I got in touch with several persons from these universities, varying from lecturers to professors and even the vice-rector. They all invited me to their campuses and offered me feedback on my research and findings. All offers that cannot be denied, so easily accepted.

During my visits to the universities I noticed that the set-ups of them are actually quite similar to the UTwente’s; a combination of educational, leisure and managerial buildings, which are located within walking distance, and a nice vivacious atmosphere. The students were either working hard or enjoying their time in one of the parks. The condition of the facilities themselves was different, more elder; They still made use of old wooden desks, sometimes transparency slides and even good old blackboards. The student themselves were wearing uniforms, something you do not see often in the Netherlands, but which does make sense in the hierarchical Indonesia.

Furthermore, the hosts: Mister Wayudi from Sultan Agung, Mister Darsono and Misses Lie from Diponogoro and Mister Setianto from Unika, were all very kind to take some time and correct my work. Together with them I discussed my findings and conclusions so far. Their expert’s opinions enriched my research with some interesting adjustments. Especially their comments on the social aspect of strategic planning were very useful. On top of that, they offered me to keep in touch for future feedback. Concluded can be that these appointments were very successful and definitely worth a sequel.

Another spin-off I discussed with them was the possibilities of future collaborations between the UTwente and theirs. I’m very enthusiastic about that, since it can help other students to experience a great adventure abroad. I think helping create those opportunities would mean a great deal to other students, since the chances for internships abroad are gradually decreasing. Also the common problems like arranging accommodation, setting up researches and communication on long distance could be surmounted. For the universities themselves this could be major opportunity to gain knowledge by exchange. So all in all a win-win solution for everybody.

Thanks again for reading my blog. Next week I will be having feedback sessions with my Dutch supervisors. This will be the first real contact of sub and substance with them since my arrival in Indonesia, so I am wondering what their reactions will be… I will let you know!

Wim