University of Economics, Prague
Faculty of Business Administration
Master's thesis evaluation by the opponent
Title of the Master's thesis:
Author of the Master's thesis:
Objectives of the Master's thesis:
Criteria (max. 10 points per category) Points awarded
1. The objectives of the thesis are evident and accomplished 10
2. Demands on the acquisition of additional knowledge or skills 10
3. Adequacy and the way of the methods used 10
4. Depth and relevance of the analysis in relation to objectives 10
5. Making use of literature/other resources, citing 10
6. The thesis is a well-organised logical whole 10
7. Linguistic and terminological level 9
8. Formal layout and requirements, extent 9
9. Originality, i.e. it is produced by the student 10
10. Practical/theoretical relevance/applicability 9
Total score in points (max 100)
97Final grading
Excellent (1)Overall evaluation and questions to be answered in the course of the defense:
Name of the Master's thesis opponent:
Occupation of the Master's thesis opponent:
August 31, 2020
Signature of the Master's thesis opponent
3D printing implementation in food industry
Alena Zhylinskaya
The aim of the DT is to analyze current trends in the 3D food printing, in particular what are the potential applications that can modify traditional business models. Additionally, it aims to develop a framework that can assist companies to
effectively adopt evolving 3D food printing technologies into business model.
E V A L U A T I O N O F T H E M A S T E R ' S T H E S I S
The topic of the DT has an important relevance. Additive manufacturing is changing the manufacturing paradigm towards high individualisation. Then, the topic of 3D printing food follows that trend. The aim of the DT comprises the analysis of 3D food printing current trends, the business model, and the proposal for companies. The aim is fulfilled. The literature review, consequent research methodology, and results provide essential insights to understand the current trends. Chapter 4 contains several models that successfully implement the findings and possesses options for business models and
proposal for companies. The limitations of the research are clear. In general, I suggest writing about additive
manufacturing rather than 3D printing. I just want to remark that there is a mistake in the table of content at the final document: chapter 3 is there two times. Moreover, this DT fulfills its aim and the faculty request. Good job!
For the defence, please present the information on table 10 as a supply chain schema or process mapping on which the final consumer is identified. From it, answer the question: What are the possible merges upstream or downstream of this business sector?
Ing. Felipe Martínez., PhD.
KM
I honestly declare that I am not in any allied relationship with the author of this Master's thesis.
