Background
Assessment 1 is a low value (10%), progress check-in on Assessment Item 2 – the innovation audit of your workplace or organisation of choice. It also provides the opportunity for you to share with your fellow students what you are learning about innovation as well as the background and capabilities of the organisation you are examining.
Understanding the focus of the various assessment tasks in MKT520
Assessments 1 & 2 and Assessment 3 & 4 are complementary. You can use the same organisation for all assignments but if you prefer you can choose a different organisation for the later 2 assignments.
My first piece of advice is to look at both sets of assignments together and see the clear differences. A2 has a focus on innovation (dealt with in the first half of the subject) whereas A3 has a focus on new product development practices. So please do not focus on the new product development process in assessment items 1 & 2.
Task
Your task is to create a webpage (using Padlet or Weebly*) that very clearly and concisely reports on selected aspects of the innovation capabilities of the organisation you will be critically evaluating in assessment 2.
On your webpage you should:
Consider whether any/all of your three identified issues are shaped by the context of your organisation- its size, types of products, types of consumers, nature of the industry etc.
Your webpage should be visually appealing. Consider how you can use multimedia (including images, charts or diagrams, videos and more) to represent your ideas or key issues clearly and concisely, but without oversimplifying NPD concepts. Your page should be informative and engaging, structured clearly to make it attractive and easily understandable by your audience.
Your webpage should stand-alone from your written report (Assessment 2), which is to be submitted at a later date. Referencing, where necessary, should be APA-6 Style. For details of referencing requirements see the user friendly CSU referencing guide https://apps.csu.edu.au/reftool/apa-6 Your reference list can be a created as a link from your main web page.
When working with images online it is also important that you respect copyright. This CSU library guide contains useful information for you on using images in your assessment items. libguides.csu.edu.au/using-images-at-university
To make your job easier, you can use your own images or do an advanced search in Google images so that you limit your search to images that are “free to use, share or modify, even commerically”. See details: https://webtegrity.com/our-blog/seo-tips/can-i-use-google-images-for-free-on-my-website-or-blog/ . When you select Images in a Google search – click on Settings (RHS under camera icon) select Advanced search and near the bottom of page you will see usage rights. Select for images that are free to use. (I also select for colour on this page if I am working for an integrated colour scheme!).
*Padlet and Weebly are easy to use tools for building a webpage (even if you have NO prior experience in creating a webpasge.. Instructions on how to use these tools (along with further advice on this assessment) will be available in the resources section of Interact by 12th February. If you wish to use an alternative tool, please discuss this with your subject coordinator prior to commencing your work.
Submission details
Via Turnitin
Getting started
Please note that different frameworks will be developed by different students but they will generally share some common elements.
This task ensures that you get to share your workplace learning and observe challenges in innovation management in a diverse range of organisations. You will also learn to use Weebly – a tool that allows you to create and creatively share your knowledge and enhance your digital literacy.
This task aligns with subject learning outcomes 1 and 2:
Criteria to be Assessed
|
HD 85-100%
|
DI 75-84%
|
CR 65-74%
|
PS 50-64%
|
FL 0-49%
|
Critical Evaluation
Value 50%
|
Identifies and insightfully explains three issues in innovation management, and how these issues are important to chosen organisation.
|
Identifies and comprehensively discusses three issues in
Innovation management and how these issues are important to the chosen organisation.
|
Identifies and explains three issues in
Innovation management, and how these issues are important to the chosen organisation.
|
Identifies three issues but presented with limited supporting argument from theory or organisational context.
|
Does not identify three issues or does not relate issues to the specific organisation being examined.
|
Presentation
Value 50%
|
Material is imaginatively presented resulting in clarity of message and information
|
Well structured and signposted presentation to topic and audience
Material is carefully
structured with clear message and visual effect
|
Material included is relevant to topic and audience and has been clearly structured. Visual aspect of presentation is limited
|
Material presented is relevant to topic and audience buy but lacks structure or visual impact
|
Uses only text and lack visual impact. Content that is poorly organised
|
|
|||||
PLEASE NOTE THAT DESCRIPTIONS ARE TYPICAL IN THE MIDDLE OF THE GRADE RANGE |
Your assessment will be marked out of 100% and you will be given a mark out of 10.
Requirements for presentation will be located in the resources section of the MKT520 Interact site.
Innovation is increasingly being considered as a core competency that organisations must develop. Companies that consistently innovate don’t rely on chance; they address innovation in a systematic way.
Your task is as follows:
Note: If your chosen organisation has a focus on services make sure that you choose literature that is appropriate for service innovation.
Getting started
Please note that different frameworks will be developed by different students but they will generally share some common elements.
* Word limit includes executive summary but excludes reference list and appendices. Students may submit work that is +/- 10% of the word limit.
Your work should be referenced using APA-6 Style. For details of referencing requirements see:
student.csu.edu.au/library/integrity/referencing-at-csu and the user friendly CSU referencing guide apps.csu.edu.au/reftool/apa-6
* Word limit includes executive summary but excludes reference list and appendices. Students may submit work that is +/- 10% of the word limit.
PLEASE SUBMIT YOUR WORK AS A WORD NOT A PDF DOCUMENT. THIS WILL MEAN THAT FEEDBACK CAN INCLUDE COMMENTS WITHIN THE TEXT OF YOUR ASSIGNMENT.
This assessment task is designed so that you can utilise your work experience in conjunction with your critical literature work on innovation to design a theoretical framework to conduct an audit of your workplace and make recommendations for change.
This task aligns with subject learning outcomes 1 and 2:
Criteria to be Assessed
|
HD 85-100%
|
DI 75-84%
|
CR 65-74%
|
PS 50-64%
|
FL 0-49%
|
Use of relevant innovation literature to design and justify innovation framework
Value 30%
|
Integration and originality in the selection and handling of relevant theory to build and justify framework. Wide range of sources integrated in systematic way.
|
Insightful and appropriate selection of theory from a good range of sources to systematically build and justify framework.
|
Good selection of theory from a range of sources to build and adequately justifies useful framework.
|
Framework developed but limited research or framework incomplete in areas. Lacks justification of choice of elements.
|
Inaccurate or inappropriate use of literature on innovation. Framework not developed.
|
Critical evaluation of chosen organisation
Value 30%
|
Identifies and insightfully discusses areas of strength and weakness in innovation capabilities. Strong links to organisational context and relevant theory in evaluation.
|
Identifies and clearly explains
areas of strength and weakness in innovation capabilities.
Links to organisational context and relevant theory in evaluation
|
Identifies and discusses areas of strength and weakness in innovation capabilities. Discussion of some relevant issues in theory and organisational content in evaluation.
|
Simple discussion of areas of strength and weakness in innovation capabilities. Works reflects limited engagement with organisational context or relevant theory. Not all aspects of task completed in sufficient detail.
|
Poor evaluation.
Significant gaps in knowledge of innovation and lack of understanding of company’s capabilities.
|
Recommendations to address areas of weakness
Value 30%
|
Excellent recommendations made, linked to the evaluation. Theory used in insightful way to justify recommendations and discuss enhancement of innovation capabilities
|
Very good recommendations made, linked to the evaluation. Used theory systematically to justify recommendations and discuss enhancement of innovation capabilities
|
Good recommendations made, linked to the evaluation results / may not have linked back systematically to relevant theory
|
Some recommendations made / not well linked to the results of the evaluation or relevant theory
|
No recommendations made / no justification
|
Referencing using APA
Value 5%
|
Highly accurate citations & reference list using APA-6
|
Mainly accurate citations & reference list using APA-6
|
Some inaccuracies in citations & reference list using APA-6
|
Makes attempt to provide citations & reference list using APA-6
|
Referencing is absent / not systematic
|
Presentation
Value 5%
|
Polished and imaginative approach / very professionally presented
|
Logically organised / professionally presented /
|
Shows organisation and coherence.
|
Attempted to organise in a logical manner
|
Disorganised / incoherent
|
Your assessment will be marked out of 100% and you will be given a mark out of 30.
Requirements for presentation will be located in the resources section of the MKT520 Interact site.
This task requires you to critically evaluate the new product development practice of your own organisation or an organisation that would like to work with. (If you do not have direct access to an organisation you can complete this task using secondary research).
Your task:
* Word limit includes executive summary but excludes reference list and appendices. Students may submit work that is +/- 10% of the word limit.
Your work should be referenced using APA-6 style. http://student.csu.edu.au/library/integrity/referencing-at-csu
Getting started: A good understanding of Topics 7 & 8 will provide you with a strong foundation for this assessment item. But don’t stop there. You will also need to draw on a range of topics and sources depending on the particular context and issues of your chosen organisation.
PLEASE SUBMIT YOUR WORK AS A WORD NOT A PDF DOCUMENT. THIS WILL MEAN THAT FEEDBACK CAN INCLUDE COMMENTS WITHIN THE TEXT OF YOUR ASSIGNMENT.
This assignment is designed to give you the opportunity to examine in detail how new product development works in practice. Focusing on a particular organisation gives you the opportunity to appreciate how the particular context that a business operates in will influence the way it conducts new product development.
This task aligns with subject learning outcome 3:
Criteria to be Assessed
|
HD 85-100%
|
DI 75-84%
|
CR 65-74%
|
PS 50-64%
|
FL 0-49%
|
Use of relevant literature on NPD or NSD models and factors for success
Value 30%
|
Integration and originality in the selection and handling of relevant theory. Wide range of sources integrated in systematic way.
|
Insightful and appropriate selection and use of theory from a good range of sources.
|
Good selection of theory from a range of sources in a systematic way.
|
Limited research – incomplete in some areas.
|
Inaccurate or inappropriate use of literature
|
Critical evaluation of chosen organisation
Value 30%
|
Identifies and insightfully discusses areas of strength and weakness in NPD practices. Strong links to organisational context and relevant theory in evaluation.
|
Identifies and clearly explains
areas of strength and weakness in NPD practices.
Links to organisational context and relevant theory in evaluation
|
Identifies and discusses areas of strength and weakness in NPD practices. Discussion of some relevant issues in theory and organisational content in evaluation.
|
Simple discussion of areas of strength and weakness in NPD practices. Works reflects limited engagement with organisational context or relevant theory. Not all aspects of task completed in sufficient detail.
|
Poor evaluation.
Significant gaps in knowledge of innovation and lack of understanding of company’s NPD practices.
|
Recommendations to address areas of weakness
Value 30%
|
Excellent recommendations made, linked to the evaluation. Theory used in insightful way to justify recommendations and discuss enhancement of NPD practices
|
Very good recommendations made, linked to the evaluation. Used theory systematically to justify recommendations and discuss enhancement of NPD practices
|
Good recommendations made, linked to the evaluation results / may not have linked back systematically to relevant theory
|
Some recommendations made / not well linked to the results of the evaluation or relevant theory
|
No recommendations made / no justification
|
Referencing using APA
Value 5%
|
Highly accurate citations & reference list using APA-6
|
Mainly accurate citations & reference list using APA-6
|
Some inaccuracies in citations & reference list using APA-6
|
Makes attempt to provide citations & reference list using APA-6
|
Referencing is absent / not systematic
|
Presentation
Value 5%
|
Polished and imaginative approach / very professionally presented
|
Logically organised / professionally presented /
|
Shows organisation and coherence.
|
Attempted to organise in a logical manner
|
Disorganised / incoherent
|
Your assessment will be marked out of 100% and you will be given a mark out of 35.
Requirements for presentation will be located in the resources section of the MKT520 Interact site.
Background
In Assessment tasks 2 and 3 you have focused on an organisation of your choice, often your own workplace. This has particular advantages for you including the potential for you to experience and understand subject content in the context of your own workplace, your access to key information to allow substantial analysis and the capacity for you to make a contribution to your workplace both now and into the future.
What you have not yet experienced is the opportunity to gain insights into how NPD or NSD is practiced in a range of different contexts and how context influences key considerations for companies in regard to new product or new service development.
Task
Assessment task 4 provides the opportunity for you to share findings from your assignments, gain further insights into NPD and NSD in a variety of contexts, and reflect on and consolidate your learning on new product development success factors. Participation is compulsory in Week 13 where you will discuss assessment item 4 with your peers.
There are two parts to this task:
Part A: Individual presentation 10%
Part B: Individual reflection 15%
Task 4A: Individual presentation – Value 10% – Due Monday 14th May (No extensions possible*)
Your task is to reflect on your experience in completing Assessment 3 (individual report on NPD practices) and draw out a number of key issues to present to your colleagues in a short, snappy but insightful presentation. This will be an in-class group presentation. Instructions regarding numbers in groups and makeup of groups will be provided in class.
Your presentation needs to include:
Format
Note: This format is modified version of a Pecha Kucha or PK presentation. Pecha Kucha means ‘chit chat’ in Japanese is designed to inspire rather than inflict “death by powerpoint” Further background, links and instructions will be available in resources on the MKT520 Interact site.
In preparing for Part B you should focus in detail on presentations of two other students. You will be provided with further direction in regard to this in class closer to the due date of assessment 4. This preparation will help form a solid foundation for completion of Task 4B.
* As other students will need to engage with your presentation, there can be no extensions on submission date for this task.
Part B: Individual reflection 15% – Tuesday 29th May – 700 words
Submission: Submit via turnitin
Your task in assessment 4B is to reflect on and write about how your understanding of new product or service development has been developed and/ or changed by the presentations (Task 4A) on new product development practices and success factors across a variety of organisations. Consider what you have become aware of/ or had reinforced by completing your own presentation as well as listening to those of others. Underpin you discussion with reference to relevant NPD theory.
Your reflection on NPD should focus on the differing perspectives and contexts provided by your class members (What did you learn from each other? What new insight or opinion was offered?), as well as similarities and differences in key aspects of new product development practice between the organisation you studied and the organisations studied by your fellow students.
You will need to include a short reference list in APA-6 style.This reference is not included in your word count. Note: Use of first person, e.g. “I was surprised to find…. “, is appropriate in this type of task.
This assessment task (parts A & B) have been are designed to help you consolidate your learning. You will do this by participating in a collaborative learning environment and considering alternative situations regarding NPD, based on different organisational and industry contexts.
This task aligns with subject learning outcomes 3 and 4:
4A Individual presentation – 10%
Criteria to be Assessed
|
HD 85-100%
|
DI 75-84%
|
CR 65-74%
|
PS 50-64%
|
FL 0-49%
|
Critical Evaluation
Value 70%
|
Identifies and insightfully explains three issues in NPD practice, and how these issues are important to success in chosen organisation.
Excellent recommendations that are specific and justified by relevant theory
|
Identifies and explains three issues in NPD practice, and how these issues are important to success in chosen organisation.
Very good recommendations made for each issue – well argued
|
Identifies and explains three issues in NPD practice, and how these issues are important to success in chosen organisation.
Good recommendations made but insufficient justification given
|
Identifies NPD three issues but presented with limited supporting argument from theory or organisational context.
General recommendations that are well supported
|
Does not identify three NPD issues or does not relate issues to the specific organisation being examined. Simplistic recommendations not linked to theory or organisational context
|
Presentation
Value 30%
|
Material is imaginatively presented (visually and verbally) resulting in clarity of message and information
|
Well structured and signposted presentation to topic and audience
Material is carefully
structured with clear message and visual effect
|
Material included is relevant to topic and audience and has been clearly structured. Visual aspect of presentation is limited
|
Material presented is relevant to topic and audience but lacks structure or visual impact
|
Uses only text and lacks visual impact. Content that is poorly organised
|
|
|||||
PLEASE NOTE THAT DESCRIPTIONS ARE TYPICAL IN THE MIDDLE OF THE GRADE RANGE
|
Your assessment will be marked out of 100% and you will be given a mark out of 15.
4B Individual reflection – 15%
Criteria to be Assessed
|
HD 85-100%
|
DI 75-84%
|
CR 65-74%
|
PS 50-64%
|
FL 0-49%
|
Linking theory and practice
Value 40%
|
Demonstrates an understanding of new product theory relevant to the area chosen for reflection. Able to meaningfully link new product practice to theory. Discussion of theory, reflection and practical examples is well integrated and cohesive.
|
Demonstrates an understanding of relevant theory. Able to clearly apply theory to new products practice. Discussion of theory, reflection and practical examples is cohesive and clearly expressed.
|
Demonstrates an understanding of relevant theory, though discussion may be slightly limited or shallow.
Applies theory to experiences of new product practice, with some issues in clarity.
Discusses theory, reflection and practical examples clearly.
|
Relates discussion to new product theory in a brief or inattentive way.
Links new product practice to theory at a surface level. Discussion has issues in clarity or structure
|
Does not relate discussion to theory at all. Shows poor consideration of new product practice and is unclear or confusing in expression.
|
Reflective skills
Value 40%
|
Provides insight into personal perception and learning. Demonstrates a meaningful change in way of thinking by identifying key turning point/s.
Shows deep consideration of alternate perspectives and provides relevant examples where necessary. Reflects an in-depth engagement with the subject.
|
Provides insight into personal perception and learning. Demonstrates a change in way of thinking and identifies key events that caused that change. Shows consideration of alternate perspectives and provides relevant examples where necessary. Reflects strong engagement with the subject.
|
Provides insight into the writer’s perception of new product development. Shows a change in way of thinking and briefly describes what led to this change. Makes note of alternate perspectives and provides examples where necessary. Reflects good engagement with the subject
|
Describes writer’s perception of new product development. Shows a minor change in thinking. May use examples of alternate perspectives, but does not reflect on these meaningfully. Shows a basic level of engagement with the subject
|
Does not consider how or why perception of new products may have changed. Engagement is minimal
|
Presentation
Value 20%
|
Reflection is original and engaging. Writing is coherent, expressive and shows good use of language and grammar.
|
Reflection is original and writing is clear and expressive. No errors.
|
Writing is mostly clear and descriptive. Ideas expressed are original.
|
Ideas expressed, but with minor issues in the clarity and articulation.
Some errors evident
|
Reflection has poor expression and multiple errors
|
PLEASE NOTE THAT DESCRIPTIONS ARE TYPICAL IN THE MIDDLE OF THE GRADE RANGE
|
Your assessment will be marked out of 100% and you will be given a mark out of 10.
Requirements for presentation will be located in the resources section of the MKT520 Interact site.