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.