Applied Mixed Method

profileEvonth
assignment1guide.docx
Home>Business & Finance homework help>Marketing homework help>Applied Mixed Method

The Brief

Founded in 1984, ShopHere has grown from a single market stall to a national, multi-channel retailer. ShopHere sells high-quality products across 95 stores in Australia and through an e-commerce platform. In light of recent high-profile events, such as the Rana Plaza collapse in Bangladesh and the Uzbekistani cotton labour scandal, and subsequent consumer boycotts and public outcry, ShopHere has made a deliberate decision to move to ethically sourced products, particularly in their clothing lines, in order to meet the needs of the more ‘ethical consumer’.

They are now sourcing much of their cotton for their clothes from ethically traded and sustainably produced crops and have banned the use of fur within their products. They have also begun to implement processes to improve working conditions in their factories and ensure a living wage. They have many other products, such as cosmetics, accessories, and homewares, which are sourced ethically and sustainably, respecting the environments from which they are gathered and the people involved in all stages of the supply chain. However, some investors are questioning the viability of this strategy as they do not yet see a significant increase in revenue. They question the existence of a viable target market of ‘ethical consumers’.

The company has hired you as a consultant to conduct some research and deliver a series of recommendations. They wish to find out more about this target market of ‘ethical consumers'. To justify the intended business strategy, they want to know if people who say they are concerned about the ethics of consumption, actually turn these concerns into purchasing decisions. They also want to find out more about the viability of, and strategies for, increasing this target market.

You will need to present substantial evidence using primary and secondary research to back up your claims and recommendations, as the results from your research may impact the direction of ShopHere in the future.

Phase 2: Review the literature (individual assessment)

For this phase, you will complete a systematic literature review as an exploratory research technique. The systematic literature review is your first assignment and will be submitted individually.

Systematic literature review

1500 words (30%)

Individual submission

The main purpose of the literature review is to determine what has already been written about your topic. Reviewing the literature is an important part of the research process. If we are to research a topic systematically, we need to build upon what others have already learned. We need to know the current state of knowledge, critically engage with the literature and identify gaps in knowledge in order shed light on the management dilemma being faced by the client.

You will use this assignment to help you to design your research project and to analyse and interpret your data later in the trimester. If you are unsure of what you should be focusing on regarding the research agenda, you should read through the information in the previous sections again. You have been given a consultancy brief, and you should use this to direct your engagement with the literature.

A systematic literature review is a particular style of a literature review. The systematic review process, as the name suggests, is methodical in nature, with the reviewer following a prescribed set of steps to search the literature and identify relevant material for review. These steps are made explicit in the write-up of the review. Due to limitations regarding time and scope, for this assessment, the systematic review process has been simplified.

Learning activities designed to address the purpose and importance of the literature review should be referred to when completing this section of the project. A marking guide for the systematic review is also available on LMS and in this document.

It is crucial that your search process is systematic and replicable and that your review includes all the elements specified in these instructions.

The steps that you need to complete are outlined below.

1. Read an example systematic review

Read the following publication for an example of a systematic literature review. Pay particular attention to how the sections which outline the approach followed (pp. 135-7) and the themes found in the literature (pp. 140-4) are written. Remember that your systematic review will be a simplified and much shortened version of a complete review such as this.

Riebe, L. Girardi, A. and Whitsed, C. (2017). “Teaching Teamwork in Australian University Business Disciplines: Evidence from a Systematic Literature Review.” Issues in Educational Research. 27(1): 134-150.

2. Review learning materials relating to literature reviews

Read, watch and complete any readings, videos or learning activities that have been provided to help you to complete your systematic literature review.

3. Generate search terms

Develop a list of search terms (including different combinations of words) to use when completing your systematic search for literature. Make sure to keep a record of the searches you complete once you begin looking for literature to include. Remember that this process needs to be systematic and replicable.

4. Begin searching for articles

Begin to search for literature using your search terms and the following inclusion and exclusion criteria below. Download all articles which seem relevant and store these in a folder on your computer (refer to the flowchart on page 137 of the Riebe et al. (2017) article for an example of the literature selection process).

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

a) Limit your search to the database ProQuest.

b) Limit your search to articles published between 2017 and 2018. If you cannot find relevant literature within this timeframe, you should expand your search backwards by one year at a time.

c) Articles must be empirical, peer-reviewed and written in English.

5. Screen articles

Scan the articles titles and abstracts and discard those articles you deem irrelevant or unsuitable for your review.

6. Read and assess articles for suitability

Read the remaining articles and exclude any additional articles that you find to be irrelevant or unsuitable for your review. Your final review should include at least ten articles in total.

7. Prepare a summary table

Take extensive notes and prepare a summary table of the articles you have decided to include. See Table 1 on page 138 of Riebe et al. (2017) as an example. In addition to the categories included by Riebe et al. (2017), include columns for results/findings, argument and any other information you think will be useful. Information in the summary table should be paraphrased wherever possible, with any direct quotes indicated with quotation marks and page numbers.

Note that this step will take time, so make sure to get started as soon as possible. If done well, a good summary table and notes will be invaluable when you are writing up your review, and later in the teaching period when you are analysing your data and writing the final report.

8. Write your systematic review

You are now ready to write up your systematic literature review. Use your summary table to help you to write up a critical analysis of the articles you have chosen.

Your literature review must contain the following:

Introduction: A succinct introduction which includes your project aim, objectives and research questions and outlines the purpose and focus of the review.

Description of search process: A clear description of the search process used to conduct your systematic review. Your search process should be clear and replicable. If appropriate, use diagrams to illustrate your search process.

Critical analysis of the literature: This section should be organised by themes (see Riebe et al. 2017 to see how this should be written). This should make up most of your word count. Do not discuss each article individually (this is not an annotated bibliography) but rather synthesise the literature by comparing and contrasting the different articles, critically assessing their content, interpreting meaning and implications and drawing conclusions. A literature review is more than just description.

Implications and Conclusion: A succinct conclusion which identifies gaps in the literature.

A reference list: Include full bibliographic detail of the articles you have included in your review. This is not included in your word count.

A summary table: This is not included in your word count.

See Appendix F Marking Guide for Systematic Literature Review for the marking criteria for the systematic literature review.

Resources to assist you in completing your systematic literature review

Blumberg, B., Cooper, D. and Schindler, P. (2014). “Literature Review.” In Business Research Methods. 4th ed. 88-119. London: McGraw-Hill Education.

Creswell, J. (2014). “Review of Literature.” In Research Design. 4th ed. 25-50. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Easterby-Smith, M., Thorpe, R. and Jackson, P. (2015). “Reviewing the Literature.” In Management and Business Research. 5th ed. 13-44. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Easterby-Smith, M., Thorpe, R. and Jackson, P. (2015). “Writing up the Literature Review.” In Management and Business Research. 5th ed. 305-308.

Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Meriam Library (2010). Evaluating Information – Applying the CRAAP Test. Chico:

California State University.

Appendix F - Marking Guide for Systematic Literature Review

80-100

70-79 Very

50-59

Excellent

60-69 Good (C)

Acceptable (P)

49 Fail (N)

good (D)

(HD)

Outstanding

Evidence of

Evidence of

Incomplete and

Fails to identify

evidence of

very careful

some systematic

not systematic,

appropriate

systematic

reviewing, most

reviewing,

but adequate to

literature, little or

review process,

steps fulfilled,

possibly

identify useful

no evidence of

all steps fulfilled,

clearly

incomplete but

and appropriate

systematic

clearly replicable

replicable

using

literature.

approach,

Technical

process,

process,

appropriate

incomplete

evidence of

evidence of

approaches.

review.

approach to

multiple searches

multiple

systematic

across the

searches across

review

databases

databases,

specified,

good selection

excellent search

of search terms

terms with

and search

thoughtful search

combinations.

term

combinations.

Literature well

Literature well

Some attempt to

Limited

Literature not

synthesised.

synthesised.

synthesise

synthesis of the

synthesised.

Excellent level of

Evidence of

literature.

literature.

Little or no

critical evaluation

good analysis

Some evidence

Literature is

evidence of

and critical

of critical

developed and

presented

having read

evaluation of

evaluation of the

Synthesis and

justified own

uncritically, in a

papers cited

literature.

literature.

ideas, drawing

purely

completely.

evaluation of

Some evidence

from the literature

descriptive way.

literature

of developing

to make

Limited

own ideas and

conclusions.

understanding

drawing from

is evident.

the literature to

make

conclusions.

Evidence of

Evidence of

Evidence of a

Evidence of

Lacks evidence

comprehensive

very good level

good level of

limited

of knowledge

and detailed

of

factual and

knowledge of

relevant to the

Level of

understanding of

understanding

conceptual

the topic. Some

topic and

topic presented

of the topic and

knowledge and

use of

significantly

understanding

with depth and

an awareness of

use of

appropriate

misuses

rigour.

a variety of

appropriate

terminology.

terminology.

ideas and

terminology.

perspectives.

Fluent and

Language is

Language is

Meaning

Persistent writing

sophisticated

fluent.

mainly fluent.

apparent, but

problems. Needs

writing style

Grammar and

May have

language not

significant

appropriate to

spelling errors

occasional

always fluent.

proofreading.

Written

document.

are minimal. The

grammar or

Makes some

Frequent

expression

Writing concise

author often

spelling errors.

spelling or

ungrammatical

and direct.

presents ideas in

grammatical

Although some

sentences,

Grammar and

clear,

errors, but

parts of the

spelling errors,

spelling errors

lucid fashion,

writing readable.

review are clear

rare or absent.

making

and

The author

difficult ideas

persuasive,

Needs better

or convoluted

presents ideas in

accessible and

some may be

proofreading.

writing. Over

an accessible

explaining

hard to follow or

Over relies on

relies on

way with a sense

concepts and

convoluted.

quotation.

quotation.

of reader's need

arguments

for variety,

effectively.

examples, and

explanation.

Polished and

Very good

Good

Shows some

Shows no

imaginative

presentation.

presentation.

attempt at

attempt to

presentation.

Minor errors in

Some errors in

presentation, but

present

Clear, logical &

consistency or

consistency and

generally poor

appropriately.

formatting.

formatting.

presentation.

Significant

engaging

Clear, logical

Shows

Shows some

errors and

structure

structure

organisation

attempt to

inconsistencies

throughout the

throughout the

and coherence.

organise

in presentation.

review, with

review that is

Introduction and

logically.

Disorganised

effective

effectively

conclusion used

Review does

and incoherent.

introduction &

initiated in the

effectively,

have basic

Movement

Presentation and

conclusion.

introduction and

including

sense of logic,

between topics is

structure

Clever or

drawn to a

signalling the

but may have

random.

effective use of

conclusion.

primary contents

problem with

Significant

structure, such

Effective use of

of review, but

cohesion or

material is off

as cumulative

paragraphs,

may be overly

organization.

topic or

points, creative

sentence

plodding.

Introduction and

irrelevant.

structure and

development, or

conclusion not

Paragraphs

overall outline.

other effective

used effectively

poorly structured.

writing strategy.

or well

Strong, intriguing

organized.

introduction.

Author embeds

Author embeds

Quoted material

Quoted material

Quoted

quotations well

quotations well in

advances the

generally

material not

in his or her

his or her own

discussion and

appropriate

integrated or

own prose,

prose, integrating

author leads

although may be

poorly

effectively

concepts into the

into and out of

some lack of

integrated into

fit with

integrating

review. Cited

quoted material

review. Quotes

Integration of

discussion.

concepts. Cited

concepts are well

effectively.

do not say

cited material

concepts used

understood and

Author uses

Quoted material

what author

effectively and

used correctly.

concepts or

not well

suggests.

integrated into

creatively.

ideas correctly

Material not

the surrounding

from sources.

embedded or

text.

depended upon

too heavily.

Referencing

Referencing

Referencing

References

Little or no

consistently

mostly accurate

mostly accurate

meet minimal

referencing.

accurate.

but some minor

but some minor

standards,

Errors or

In-text citations

errors in

errors in

include

oversights in

& Reference List

consistency or

consistency or

complete

citations and

complete &

formatting. In-

formatting. In-

information,

Reference List.

appropriate.

text citations &

text citations &

and Reference

Incomplete

Author

Reference List

Reference List

List is complete.

reference

efficiently

complete &

complete &

Author includes

information. Use

Referencing

integrates

appropriate.

appropriate.

too much

of inappropriate

acknowledging

Author

Author

information in

sources.

efficiently

efficiently

paraphrase.

sources with

integrates

integrates

paraphrased as

acknowledging

acknowledging

well as quoted

sources with

the sources of

material.

paraphrased as

material.

well as quoted

material.