MARK3054, T3 2024

1

Critical Thinking and Reflection Instructions

Description

Critical thinking and reflection is an individual report that consists of two components.

(1) The critical thinking component requires you to reflect on a business context, analyse

the situation, and provide well-justified suggestions on how marketing analytical

tools can help address a realistic marketing problem.

(2) The reflection component requires you to reflect on the learning journey throughout

the teamwork and effectively communicate this to the reader.

Both critical thinking and individual reflection are Assurance of Learning (AoL) tasks.

Critical Thinking Component

The critical thinking task requires you to utilise the analytical tools to help address a

problem in a business context, at a high level. The emphasis is not on how to run a model or

read the results, but on (1) what needs to be done to utilise analytical tools in the particular

context, (2) possible benefits that the analytical tools may bring, and (3) associated cost,

limitations, and possible issues the managers need to be aware of in the implementation.

This task intrinsically links to your understanding of the analytical tools you learn in this

course, i.e., what the tools are capable of, what business settings are needed to apply the

tools (e.g., getting the data and applying the results), and limitations associated with the

tools. On top of understanding the tools, you also need to analyse the business context and

find a good match between the context and the tools.

You can almost think of this task as a question you encounter in your job interview. How

can you impress your interviewer? It is an opportunity for you to demonstrate your high- level understanding of analytical tools and how to implement them in a certain business

context, and an opportunity for you to demonstrate your ability to identify and critically

analyse issues and develop well-justified conclusions.

MARK3054, T3 2024

2

The managerial problem

Cause-related marketing is a strategy where businesses align themselves with social issues

or causes that resonate with their brand values. This approach allows companies to

demonstrate social responsibility while raising awareness for a particular cause. The intent

behind cause-related marketing is to build stronger connections with customers by linking

the brand to meaningful societal issues, such as environmental sustainability or social equity.

However, one core challenge remains: despite numerous experiments conducted by senior

marketing managers, there is little consensus on the effectiveness of cause-related

marketing in enhancing brand identity. Moreover, the data collected in support of these

campaigns are often inadequate or not specific enough to offer actionable insights. In the

electric goods sector (e.g., products such as televisions and laptops), these issues are

exacerbated due to the high product turnover and technological advancements, making it

difficult to assess the long-term impact of such marketing initiatives.

Your task

Please reflect on this problem and propose strategies to help the brand managers of electric

goods improve customer engagement and increase brand profitability using cause-related

marketing.

Your report should consist of three parts:

(1) Critically analyse the nature of the problem and the analytical tools you have, and

propose what you recommend for marketing managers. Your recommendation has

to utilise the power of analytical tools and roots in the given product category (e.g.,

electric goods such as TVs and laptops). It should not be some general ideas without

taking the category features into consideration. You can include the “ideal” type of

data for the analytical tools that you propose to use.

(2) Detail the possible benefits that your recommendation may bring. The benefits have

to be well justified. You will NOT be marked on how good you say the benefits are

but on how well you justify your recommendation. Even a small benefit, as long as it

is well justified, could persuade a manager, but “big” benefits in imagination will not.

(3) Critically think through the implementation of your recommendation and put down

the associated costs, limitations, and possible implementation issues. No method is

limitation-free. You will be marked on how well you can identify them so that

managers can think in advance and try to prevent the caveats.

MARK3054, T3 2024

3

Reflection Component

The purpose of this task is to assist with cultivating reflective leaders who are (1)

enterprising, innovative and creative; (2) collaborative team workers; and (3) professionals

who are capable of independent, self-directed practice. It helps to develop important skills

which employers look for in graduates, including the ability to honestly reflect on and

analyse your own performance in order to improve your practice.

The report on the reflection should have the following two parts:

1) Analyse and evaluate your own team participation.

Thinking about the following questions may help direct your reflection.

• How did you contribute to the group’s teamwork processes and to the group’s

achievement of the task?

• What were your strengths (and weaknesses) as a collaborative team member?

What did you learn about yourself as a team player?

• What would you do differently or better next time you work in a team?

2) Analyse the team’s processes.

Thinking about the following questions may help direct your reflection.

• How did your team operate? What processes did you use (e.g. for planning and

allocating tasks, monitoring progress, meeting and keeping in touch, producing

the completed work)?

• What were the strengths of your team? What worked well?

• What issues/problems (if any) did your team encounter? How did the team

address them?

• How could this particular teamwork experience have been improved?

• How could you improve team processes next time you work in a team?

You will be marked on the honesty and quality of your reflective analysis and learning

from this teamwork experience, NOT on how well you say you or your team performed.

Revealing the problems you had will also NOT get you penalised.

MARK3054, T3 2024

4

Format

• The report must be in MS WORD format, NOT hand-written. Format requirements:

12pt, at least 1.5 lines spacing, at least 2.5cm margins on all sides.

• The report of both components should not exceed 3 pages in total.

• No appendix is allowed.

• It is not a requirement that you search for other people’s work to complete this

assignment. Given the nature of this assignment, most of the contents in your

submission should come from your own thoughts. Extensively quoting other people’s

ideas is discouraged. However, if you do use other people’s work, you should provide a

reference list (the reference list is not included in the 3-page limit).

Submission

• A soft copy is due by 16:00 on 18 Nov (Week 11 Mon), to be submitted on Moodle.

• Use document title: “MARK3054_Individual Report_[Tutorial class] _[Tutor’s

name]_[Your zID]_[Your Name]”. For example,

“MARK3054_ Individual Report_w14A_SunAh Kim_z1234567_Kelly Smith”.

• Allow at least 1 hour for submission. Technical problems always tend to happen if you

submit in the last 10 minutes, and having technical problems is not an acceptable

justification for an extension of the deadline.

Marks

• This report is worth 10% of your overall course grade. Each component is worth 5%. The

marking criteria for the two components are provided in the next two sections.

• Exceeding the word limit or not applying the required format attracts a penalty of 10%

of the percentage weight of this assessment component.

• Late submission attracts a penalty of 5% of the percentage weight of this assessment

component thereof per day (including weekends) after the deadline and will not be

accepted after 5 days.

• Absolutely NO plagiarism - you must acknowledge all sources of any facts ideas that are

not your own. Correct referencing is essential; please read the online Referencing Guide:

http://www.lc.unsw.edu.au/onlib/ref.html. Either Harvard or APA style can be used for

references.

• Absolutely NO aid or use of generative AI tools was provided.

MARK3054, T3 2024

5

Critical thinking marking criteria (rubrics)

Criteria <50% (Fail) 50% - 74% (Pass-Credit) ≥ 75% (Distinction-HD)

Identify and critically

analyse a problem or issue

(50%)

• Does not clearly or correctly

identify or define/explain an

issue or problem.

• Does not provide a sound

analysis of a problem / issue

using appropriate marketing

knowledge.

• Identifies (and explains where

necessary) key elements of a

problem or issue, but may not

cover all relevant aspects or

convey its complexity.

• Provides a sound analysis of a

problem or issue using some

relevant marketing knowledge.

• Clearly identifies (and accurately explains

where necessary) all relevant, key aspects

of a problem or issue, and conveys its

complexity.

• Effectively analyses an issue or problem,

applying and synthesising (and critically

evaluating where necessary) a range of

appropriate marketing knowledge.

Develop well-justified

conclusions or solutions

(50%)

• Does not propose appropriate

analytical tools.

• Does not develop a sound,

well-justified conclusion or

solution.

• Proposes sound analytical

approaches, but may contain

some weakness matching the

business context.

• Develops a sound conclusion or

solution, but may contain some

weaknesses or limited

justification.

• Proposes analytical approaches that

match the business context well.

• Presents an insightful/strategic conclusion

or solution, well-supported by

justification.

• Considers and evaluates differing

perspectives and alternative strategies (if

appropriate), and acknowledges

limitations and constraints of own

conclusion/solution.

MARK3054, T3 2024

6

Reflection marking criteria (rubrics)

Criteria <50% (Fail) 50% - 74% (Pass-Credit) ≥ 75% (Distinction-HD)

Analyses and evaluates own

team participation (50%)

• Describes some aspects of own

role or contribution, but does

not analyse or evaluate own

strengths or weaknesses as a

team player.

• May make some suggestions

for future improvement, but

these are not based on

analysis.

• Describes some aspects of own

role and contribution to

teamwork, and offers some

analysis and evaluation of own

participation, including strengths

and weaknesses.

• Makes some suggestions for

improvements to own future

teamwork practice, but these

may not be fully justified by

analysis.

• Insightfully analyses and evaluates own

team role and participation, including

strengths and weaknesses.

• Suggests realistic and thoughtful

improvements to own future teamwork

participation, justified by analysis.

Analyses the team’s

processes (50%)

• Does not analyse the team’s

collaborative processes– may

just describe some incidents or

action/behaviour by others.

• May make ad hoc suggestions

for improvements to future

teamwork processes, but these

are not based on analysis.

• Analyses some aspects of the

team’s processes and identifies

some positive aspects as well as

some issues encountered and

how these were addressed.

• Makes some suggestions for

improvements to future

teamwork processes, but these

may not be fully justified by

analysis.

• Insightfully analyses and evaluates the

team’s processes, identifying strengths

and weaknesses, any issues encountered

and how they were addressed.

• Suggests feasible, thoughtful

improvements to future teamwork

processes, justified by analysis.

51作业君版权所有