1500 words
MKTG1101_Assignment1_Brief 2020 MKTG 1101 Assignment 1: Briefing (20%) 1 AssessmentDetails You are to choose ONE topic covered in week 2 and including week 4. Then choose four (4) academic articles (Emerald Library, EBSCO, ProQuest, WARC) and prepare a series of reviews on ONE topic of interest you have chosen. Remember you may explore the topic in different contexts, iemotivation in a selling context and in a behavioural context. The reviews should fully explore the theory underpinning and/ or illustrate how the theory has been applied in a specific context and whether the articles support/ refute the CB concepts/ theory in class. Assignment structure 2 The Topic Report should comprise of: A 250-word introduction for each of the four academic articles selected (4 x 250 = 1000words). A 500-word summary that provides a critical and analytical overview of the four reviewed academic articles in terms of the theory, concepts, themes and context. Total words = 1,500 (+/- 10%). Please note, your report will not be marked if you exceed the word count. Guidance 3 Points to Note: 1. It is important toadopt a critical perspective by providing an overview, analysis and interpretation and not merely regurgitate the contents of the existing research. A critical and analytical review of a journal article evaluates the strengths and weaknesses of ideas and content. 2. What are the author's central arguments or conclusions? Are they clearly stated? Are they supported by evidence andanalysis? 3. Is the research well-researched or is it unsupported? 4. How does the research support/ validate/ refute the theories discussed in class? 5. Ensure to provide correct citations for each article that is used in the review. More guidance 4 An example of critical analysis and synthesis of academic argument: The example chosen is Consumer Disposal/Disposition The basic disposition choices first theorised by Jacoby et al., (1977) and later built upon by Lastovika and Fernandez (2006), have not significantly changed but experienced modifications due to changes in consumer lifestyle and purchase habits. Whereas all such disposal choices are still viable to a contemporary consumer, it may give these new current buying situations that certain disposal options e.g. trade-ins have become more common in some product categories, and thus may well be a consideration for wider brand managers in the future. The existing literature on keeping items describes acute behaviours such as hoarding (Haws et al., 2012 p. 75), which is defined as ‘the acquisition of and failure to discard possessions that appear to be of limited or useless value’ as well as slightly less extreme motivations such as frugality or wasteavoidance. More guidance One alternative to keeping or hording is to move a possession on, within the family and friends' network or either to strangers via selling in a traditional offline context, such as in a garage sale. (Lastovika and Fernandes, 2005). The authors suggest that the process can take place via three routes – two that represent swapping the possession from ‘me’ to ‘not me’, and one where the seller and new owner understand that they have a shared self value of ownership of the item. A more up-to-date exchange is investigated by Cho and Koo (2012) who researched the high-tech markets and confirmed that there is now a new type of early adopter who buys products and resells them quickly in online and offline secondary markets. Such a phenomenon is driven by high-tech product short product lifecycles and inexpensive transaction costs via the internet. Cho and Koo (2012) conclude by stating that, given the speed of such transactions, one can no longer only consider primary purchase consumers in diffusion of innovation modelling. An example (Disposal) 6 So in this example the four papers under review alphabetically 1. Cho, Y., and Koo, Y. (2012). Investigation of the effect of secondary market on the diffusion of innovation, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 79 (7), 1362-1371. 2. Haws, K.L., Walker Naylor, R., Coulter, R. A., and Bearden, W.O. (2012). Keeping it all without being buried alive: Understanding product retention tendency, Journal of Consumer Psychology, 22 (3), 224-236 3. Jacoby, J., Berning, C. K., and Dietvorst, T. F. (1977). ‘What About Disposition?’ Journal of Marketing, 41(2),22-28. 4. Lastovika, J. L., and Fernandes K. V. (2006). Three Paths to Disposition. The movement of Meaningful Possessions to Strangers. Journal of Consumer Research, 31(4), 812-824. Rules: 7 1. Do not reference (use) any recommended class text. 2. Do not reference (use) the journals provided via Canvas and or in class 3. Choose current articles or most recent articles following on from a historic seminal paper. Assignment requirements 1. Individual assignment 2. Maximum 1500 words (+/- 10%)that excludes coversheet, title page, references, 3. A literature review style with academic writing 4. All sources of information used should be referenced. 5. Use Harvard reference style. Assignment submission: CHECKLIST : Duedate: Sunday 16th August 11.59 pm (end of week 4) 1. Signed RMIT Cover sheet 2. Your name ; Student ID ; TOPIC and WORD COUNT on a Separate Sheet . Submit via Turnitin and submit your similarity index (SI) which must be under 15% Pdf or word files to be submitted to Canvas Microsoft Word - MKTG 1101 Topic Report- Rubric 1 2019.docx 1 MKTG 1101 Consumer Behaviour FEEDBACK REPORT –Topic Report 20% Student Name Student ID CRITERIA Fail Pass Credit Distinction High Distinction Assignment Presentation Format 1. Paragraphing: Are there logical links between paragraphs? 2. Style: mechanics, clear sentence structure, spelling? 3. Referencing –In text and on reference list? 4. Overall Structure: presentation layout Information Content 1. A concise introduction of the research themes (500 words) Analysis and Evaluation of Articles (250 words per article) 2. Understanding of the arguments presented? 3. Evidence of critical analysis? 4. Evidence of interpretation? 5. Evidence of alignment to theory? (Support/ refute?) 40-45 45-49 50-55 56-59 60-65 66-69 70-75 76-79 80-85 86+ HD = HIGH DISTINCTION (80 - 100%) Outstanding work featuring originality, excellent critical analysis, detailed research and comprehensive coverage of relevant issues. Excellent attention to written presentation of the work, including appropriate referencing. D = DISTINCTION (70 - 79%) Superior work featuring originality, solid research, good critical analysis and well substantiated argument. Very good presentation of work, including appropriate referencing. 2 C = CREDIT (60 -69%) Above average work demonstrating an understanding of the concepts and their application. Good research and presentation. Good research and presentation of work, including appropriate referencing. P = PASS (50 - 59%) Work at or just above minimum standard. Tends to be more descriptive than analytical. Arguments not strongly supported. N = FAIL (0 - 49%) Work below minimum standard or failure to meet guidelines specified. Disorganised and with a lack of clarity and detailing the arguments presented. Poor research effort and presentation.