DESIGN MANAGEMENT

PART-A

1
 Table of Contents
Part 1..........................................................................................................................................3

SMART Analysis of Fitness Tracker.....................................................................................3

Strength and weakness of SMART Analysis.........................................................................3

1. Identification of the “decision-maker”...............................................................................4

2. “Alternative” Course of Action..........................................................................................5

3. Attributes into decision-making system.............................................................................6

4. Performance measurement.................................................................................................8

5. Weight determination for each attribute...........................................................................11

6. Alternatives analysis.........................................................................................................11

7. Provisional decision (graph).............................................................................................14

8. Sensitivity analysis...........................................................................................................15

Conclusion............................................................................................................................15

Reference list............................................................................................................................16

2
Part 1

SMART Analysis of Fitness Tracker

In modern life, people are becoming more health-conscious as they want to stay fit and
healthy to live a better life. Due to the advancement of technology, managing health has
become easier as many companies have come up with exceptional fitness tracker. Being a
health-cautious person, I like to track my workout routine and to measure my calories while
staying healthy and buying a fitness tracker, I can measure my health and become healthier
which is the motto of the fitness tracker. A fitness tracker can help me to set my goals of
fitness and help me to stay healthy and fit as it can check my heart rate, track my sleeping
patterns and help me to eat healthily (Schaben and Furness, 2018). That is why I have
decided to buy a fitness tracker within my budget so that I can get the best deal and in doing
so, I have decided to implement SMART Analysis that can help me to find the suitable watch
according to my budget.

Strength and weakness of SMART Analysis

SMART analysis can help in understanding the required goals while translating them in a
clear and reachable way which is further impactful for fulfilling the required needs of a
person. Since I want to buy a fitness tracker within budget, SMART analysis helps me to
analyse my goals while dividing them into specific, measurable, achievable and relevant
along with time-bound goals and make me understand the best options (Tuzovic et al. 2017).
It further can help me focus on my goals and enhance my abilities to reach them. I can easily
use it without having any specific knowledge and it encourages and motivates me to reach
them. However, I want to reach my goals of buying the fitness tracker within short-term as
the SMART analysis does not go well with long-term goals. It further can lack flexibility and
made the goals challenging as one can lack commitments and clarity once short-term goals
converted into long-term ones, which further can influence the decision of buying the fitness
tracker (Kao et al. 2019).

3
 Weakness Strength

Lack flexibility Focus on goals

Lack commitments Encouragement

and clarity and motivation

Does not go well

Fulfilling the
with long-term
required needs
goals

Figure 1: Strength and weakness of SMART analysis

(Source: Tuzovic et al. 2017)

1. Identification of the “decision-maker”.

Decisions are an essential part of creating SMART objectives and based on the decision goals
and objectives are made. Therefore, it cannot be denied that making decisions is essential as
it further can help in reaching the ultimate goals. As per the opinion of Gallivan et al. (2018),
it is essential to make complex and easy decisions every time and the decision-makers are the
people to take decisions and stick to them to fulfil the required needs and requirements. A
decision-maker must generate decisions while looking for different options before choosing
the best one and that too within the shortest period of time. Moreover, it is the duty of
decision-makers to frame the options separately and from them take the best option while
looking at all the risk factors, analysing them and mitigating them efficiently. That way, a
better decision can be taken and a person can reach its desired outcome. The decision-maker
here is me as I want to purchase the fitness tracker. Therefore, it can be said that “Myself
Decision-Maker”. Hence, while making the final decision, I will look for several options and
reach the final ones while analysing different factors such as the quality of the product, price
of the product and features and attributes of the product. Apart from that, design aesthetics
and wearability of the fitness band also can influence the choice of the product (Muller and
de Klerk, 2020).

4
 Quality of
the product

Price of the
Wearability
product

Features
Design and
aesthetics attributes of
the product

Figure 2: Features before taking the final decision

(Source: Muller and de Klerk, 2020)

Therefore, based on the SMART objectives, I can say that my goal is to buy a fitness tracker
that can have essential features such as heart rate monitoring, sleep measurement, workout
plan, diet plan and that I can purchase within £100 which further can enhance my heath by
25% within one year.

2. “Alternative” Course of Action

Since there are various fitness trackers available in the market, I need to decide my budget
before choosing the best one as there are various ranges of fitness tracker available in the
market and I need to choose the best option within the price range. As per the view of Messer
(2020), while creating a budget, one can make a decision regarding the way they want to
move forward while fulfilling their objectives. Since I have decided to implement SMART
analysis, therefore, implementing a SMART budgeting system can help in gathering essential
information regarding the product of fitness tracker and create a budget that can suit the
requirements of personal needs. That way, not only a better decision can be made, at the same
time, a profitable decision without any compromise can be achieved. The budget for buying a
fitness tracker is £100, as within the budget it is expected that the best quality fitness tracker
with all relevant requirements can be availed and the best fitness band can be bought. In order
to achieve so, it is essential to create a list that can help n deciding all possible good options

5
for the product within the budget. Therefore, through the alternative course of action,
different fitness trackers are evaluated and the best products are listed within the table with
the exact price, which has been collected from the websites of various brands.

Brand Name Price

Garmin Vívosmart £ 99.99
Fitbit Charge 4 £ 99.99
Amazfit Bip £ 100
Moov Now £ 41.80
Honor Band 5 £ 35.99
Table 1: Fitness Trackers brands with prices

(Source: Self-made)

3. Attributes into decision-making system

With the evolvement of technology, the increasing needs of improving the technology of
fitness trackers are also evolving. Nowadays people want the best fitness tracker at a lower
price than further can help them to stay healthy and improve their overall activities.
Therefore, according to Becker et al. (2017), while making the purchasing decision, apart
from the price range, it is essential to look for wearable technologies that can be effective in
measuring different health parameters and give better options to become healthy. Based on
the requirements some of the common and essential features that every fitness tracker within
the price range needs to proved are discussed.

Distance tracker

Any fitness tracker needs to have the ability to counting steps and distance one covers, which
further help the one to understand the distance one covered and the way fitness can progress.
The feature is also essential to guide the people towards reaching the goals of their fitness as
it influences them to reach their goals and motivate them to achieve more.

Calorie tracker

Another main attribute of a fitness band is to measure the amount of calorie one takes within
a day. Also, it helps a person to track the amount of calorie shed within one day while
exercising (Wong et al. 2021). Therefore, that way one can compare the calorie they intake
and calorie they shed within the same day, which further can help them they need to improve
their fitness regime.

6
Sleep monitor

Another essential part of the fitness tracker is to measure the sleep monitoring system of a
person’s health. It cannot be denied that sleep is essential for the health as the lack of it can
adversely affect health and lower fitness rate. Therefore, measuring the sleep monitoring
process is essential as it can help in gathering a better understanding of health.

Heart rate monitoring

Another essential feature of the fitness band is that it helps in monitoring the heart rate, which
is essential to understand the heart health of a person. Measuring heart rate is essential as it
further can help in generating a better understanding of the health and having a fitness tracker
can further understand the health parameters effectively (Bender et al. 2017).

GPS and smartphone integration

Another essential element of fitness trackers is GPS and smartphone integration. This further
can help in generating a better understanding of GPS and help in mapping the distance
covered by one. Moreover, through smartphone integration, one can easily take calls and
messages.

Sleep
monitor
Calorie Heart rate
tracker monitoring

Attributes GPS and

Distance of Fitness smartphone
tracker Tracker
integration

Figure 3: Features of fitness trackers

(Source: Bender et al. 2017)

7
4. Performance measurement

Performance measurement is an essential part of decision-making and it further can help in

creating better control over the operations. In agreement with Ersoy (2017), through the
adaptation of performance measurement, different performance information can be gathered
and better decisions can be made, which is essential to fulfil the SMART objectives.
moreover, analysing strategic decision can further help in evaluating better results while
achieving a better understanding of the product and can help in generating better results.
Therefore, it can be said that by implementing the performance measurement, the
performance of the fitness trackers can be measured based on three criteria which are the
price of the products, distance and calorie measurements and heart rate and other activities
measurement.

Price rank

Brand Name Price

Amazfit Bip £ 100
Garmin Vívosmart £ 99.99
Fitbit Charge 4 £ 99.99
Moov Now £ 41.80
Honor Band 5 £ 35.99
Table 2: Price rank

(Source: Self-made)

While analysing the price range, it can be seen that all the fitness bands are within the price
limit set by me, which makes it effective and efficient. However, from the price angle, it can
be said that Honor Band 5 is the best option as it further can help me to save money, which is
way lower than my budget and can fulfil the basic requirements of having a fitness band and
use it based on the needs of my fitness regime. As suggested by Bender et al. (2017), it can
be said that consumers like to invest in the device that fulfils their main requirements which
are providing them with better quality at a lower rate. From this angle, Honor Band 5 seems
to be the best option.

Distance and calorie measurements

Brand Name Score Quality

Garmin Vívosmart 100 Best
Fitbit Charge 4 90 -

8
 Amazfit Bip 80 -
Honor Band 5 50 -
Moov Now 40 Poor
Table 3: Distance and calorie measurements

(Source: Self-made)

100
100
90
90
80 80
70
60
50 50
40
30 40

20
10
0
Garmin
V í vos m a rt F i t bi t
Cha rg e 4 A m a z fi t
Bip Honor
B a nd 5 Moov Now

Figure 4: Distance and calorie measurements

(Source: Self-made)

While analysing the above section, it can be said that Garmin Vívosmart is the best option
while taking the main features, which are distance and calorie checker as it can provide a lot
of data that are essential to measuring the ultimate outcome of the fitness activities (Liu et al.
2019).

Heart rate and other activities performance

Brand No.of activity Tracker and Scale

Score
Fitbit Charge 4 60 modes:100 Best
Garmin Vívosmart 20 modes: 50 -
Amazfit Bip 18 modes: 40 -
Moov Now 15 modes: 20 -
Honor Band 5 Five modes: 0 Poor
Table 4: Heart rate and other activities performance

(Source: Self-made)

9
 120

100
100

80

60
50
40
40

20
20

0
0
Fitbit Charge 4 Garmin Vívosmart Amazfit Bip Moov Now Honor Band 5

Figure 5: Heart rate and other activities performance

(Source: Self-made)

While analysing the factor, it can be said that Fitbit Charge 4 is the best option as it further
can help in gaining a better understanding of heart rate and also has GPS facilities which are
essential to track places (Estrada-Torres et al. 2018).

Battery life

Brand Days Scale and Score

Garmin Vívosmart 20 Best: 90
Fitbit Charge 4 15 Better: 80
Amazfit Bip 9 Good: 60
Moov Now 5 Average: 20
Honor Band 5 3 Poor: 10
Table 5: Battery life

(Source: Self-made)

10
 Scale and Score Days
100
90
90
80
80
70
60
60
50
40
30
20
20
10
10
0
Garmin Fitbit Charge 4 Amazfit Bip Moov Now Honor Band 5
Vívosmart

Figure 6: Battery life

(Source: Self-made)

While analysing the whole performance features, it can be said that Garmin Vívosmart id the
best option as it has all the required facilities that one needs in the fitness tracker.

5. Weight determination for each attribute

While determining the weight it can be said that three major factors are taken into
consideration which are battery life, activity trackers and smartphone integration based on
which attributes are determined.

Attribute Original Weight Normalized Weight

Price 50 15
Activity tracker 100 60
Battery life 40 25
Total 190 100
Table 6: Attribute determination

(Source: Self-made)

Average has been determined as “(100/190)*100” = 52%.

6. Alternatives analysis

Attributes Value Weight Value X Weight

Activity Tracker 100 60 6000
Battery Life 20 25 500
smartphone 100 15 1500
integration

11
The total is 8000.

Table 7: Garmin Vívosmart

(Source: Self-made)

Attributes Value Weight Value X Weight

Activity Tracker 20 60 1200
Battery Life 90 25 2250
smartphone 50 15 750
integration
The total is 4200.

Table 8: Amazfit Bip

(Source: Self-made)

Attributes Value Weight Value X Weight

Activity Tracker 50 60 3000
Battery Life 60 25 1500
smartphone 80 15 1200
integration
The total is 5700.

Table 9: Fitbit Charge 4

(Source: Self-made)

Attributes Value Weight Value X Weight

Activity Tracker 40 60 2400
Battery Life 10 25 250
smartphone 0 15 0
integration
The total is 2650.

Table 10: Moov Now

(Source: Self-made)

Attributes Value Weight Value X Weight

Activity Tracker 0 60 0

Battery Life 0 25 0

smartphone 30 15 450

12
 integration
Total is 450.

Table 11: Honor Band 5

(Source: Self-made)

Attribute Weight SMARTWATCHES

Garmin Fitbit Amazfit Moov Honor
Vívosmart Charge 4 Bip Now Band 5
Activity 60 100 20 50 40 0
Tracker
Battery 25 20 90 60 10 0
Life

smartpho 15 100 50 80 0 30
ne
integratio
n
Average 80 42 57 26.50 4.5
benefits
Table 12: Aggregate

(Source: Self-made)

40

100

50

20

Garmin Vívosmart Fitbit Charge 4 Amazfit Bip

Moov Now Honor Band 5

Figure 6: Graph of Average benefits

13
 (Source: Self-made)

7. Provisional decision (graph)

While analysing the provision decision graph, it can be said that aggregate benefits, contrary
to cost reflect that Garmin and Honor can be considered non-dominant fitness trackers as they
depend on the important frontier, against Fitbit, Amazfit and Moov, which further are
governed (Blythe and Johnson, 2018).

Garmin Vívosmart against Honor Band 5.

Enhancement of benefits after the analysis is 80 - 42 = 38

Difference of price: £99.99 - 35 = £ 64.99

Increase of one benefit point cost: 38/64.99 = £.58

Aggregate benefits,

= {(0.6*100) + (0.25*100) + (0.15*100)}

= (60 + 25 + 15)

= 100

New aggregate benefit of Honor Band 5

= 100 - 42 = 58

Hence, the Garmin Vívosmart is providing more benefits.

8. Sensitivity analysis

The sensitivity analysis is considered while examining the robustness in terms of choices as it
provides alternatives while changing figures (VanderWeele and Ding, 2017). The analysis is
further essential to evaluate all the choices to take the final decision while considering
changes in figures if required.

14
 90

80 80

70

60
57
50

40 42

30
26.5
20

10
4.5
0
Garmin Vívosmart Fitbit Charge 4 Amazfit Bip Moov Now Honor Band 5

Figure 7: Sensitivity Analysis for buying a Smart Watch

(Source: Self-made)

Conclusion

In conclusion, it can be said that while performing SMART analysis, different attributes and
features came to light, which further showed the effectiveness of using the fitness trackers in
real life. In summary, it also came to light that activity trackers are the most desired features
in a fitness tracker which further is accompanied by battery life and smartphone integration of
the product. Therefore, while implementing the SMART analysis, a compare and contrast had
been done among all the selected products and the features compared to value is considered.
Based on that Garmin Vívosmart has been selected as the desired fitness band. It shows that
the tool is effective in analysing the features and taking the best decision while fulfilling the
SMART objectives.

15
Reference list

Becker, M., Kolbeck, A., Matt, C. and Hess, T., 2017. Understanding the continuous use of
fitness trackers: A thematic analysis. In Pacific Asia Conference on Information Systems
(PACIS). Association For Information Systems.

Bender, C.G., Hoffstot, J.C., Combs, B.T., Hooshangi, S. and Cappos, J., 2017, March.
Measuring the fitness of fitness trackers. In 2017 IEEE Sensors Applications Symposium
(SAS) (pp. 1-6). IEEE.

Blythe, J.M. and Johnson, S.D., 2018. The Consumer Security Index for IoT: A protocol for
developing an index to improve consumer decision making and to incentivize greater security
provision in IoT devices.

Ersoy, N., 2017. Performance measurement in retail industry by using a multi-criteria

decision making methods. Ege Akademik Bakış Dergisi, 17(4), pp.539-551.

Estrada-Torres, B., del-Río-Ortega, A., Resinas, M. and Ruiz-Cortés, A., 2018, June. On the
relationships between decision management and performance measurement. In International
Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering (pp. 311-326). Springer, Cham.

Gallivan, J.P., Chapman, C.S., Wolpert, D.M. and Flanagan, J.R., 2018. Decision-making in
sensorimotor control. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 19(9), pp.519-534.

Kao, Y.S., Nawata, K. and Huang, C.Y., 2019. An exploration and confirmation of the
factors influencing adoption of IoT-based wearable Fitness trackers. International journal of
environmental research and public health, 16(18), p.3227.

Liu, H.J., Love, P.E., Sing, M.C., Niu, B. and Zhao, J., 2019. Conceptual framework of life-
cycle performance measurement: Ensuring the resilience of transport infrastructure
assets. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 77, pp.615-626.

Messer, R., 2020. Budget Management Decisions. In Financial Modeling for Decision
Making: Using MS-Excel in Accounting and Finance. Emerald Publishing Limited.

Muller, C. and de Klerk, N., 2020. Influence of Design Aesthetics and Brand Name On
Generation Y Students’ Intention to Use Wearable Activity-Tracking Devices. International
Journal of eBusiness and eGovernment Studies, 12(2), pp.107-121.

16
Schaben, J.A. and Furness, S., 2018. Investing in college students: the role of the fitness
tracker. Digital health, 4, p.2055207618766800.

Tuzovic, S., Kuppelwieser, V. and Bianchi, C., 2017. Adoption of smart health wearables: An
empirical analysis in Chile and the US. In International Research Symposium on Service
Excellence in Management (pp. 1-3).

VanderWeele, T.J. and Ding, P., 2017. Sensitivity analysis in observational research:
introducing the E-value. Annals of internal medicine, 167(4), pp.268-274.

Wong, R.C.P., Yang, L. and Szeto, W.Y., 2021. Wearable fitness trackers and smartphone
pedometer apps: Their effect on transport mode choice in a transit-oriented city. Travel
behaviour and society, 22, pp.244-251.

17