1
MANAGEMENT COMMUNICATION
Assessment 3 CASE STUDY
Document design Memo format
Due Date Friday 10th May 9.00AM (Syd
time)
Length 1000 words (+/- 10%)
Weight 35%
Assessment task
The objective of Assessment 3 is to understand the concept of ‘analysis’ and learn
how to analyse information efficiently and effectively using a case study. According
to Rosenwaser and Stephen (2009, p. 4), analysis is:
More than just a set of skills, analysis is a frame of mind, an attitude toward
experience. It is a form of detective work that typically pursues something
puzzling, something you are seeking to understand rather than something you
are already sure you have the answers to.
Analysis finds questions where there seemed not to be any, and it makes connections
that might not have been evident at first.
A business case study ‘is a description of an actual situation, commonly involving a
decision, a challenge, an opportunity, a problem or an issue faced by a person (or
persons) in an organization’ (Erskine, J.A. and Leenders, M.R., Learning with Cases,
© 1997, Richard Ivey School of Business).
Cases contain relevant data about the issue available to the key person in the case,
plus background information about the organisation.
The Qantas social media disaste
Companies around the globe are em
acing and adopting social media for many
different reasons, including: customer service, marketing, internal communications,
public relations, and corporate social responsibility. It is now a reality that social
media is changing the way stakeholders and companies communicate daily, providing
opportunities for collaboration, participation, interactivity, and engagement.
Your task is to analyse a business case study that chronicles one of the worst years for
Qantas. In 2011 Qantas faced a communication strategy that spiraled out of control.
According to Australia’s public relations watchdog, PRdisasters.com, Qantas not only
finished 2011 with the biggest PR disaster but three of its slip-ups made the top 10 list
for 2011. The top 10 list of PR disasters in Australia for 2011 can be obtained at the
following website: https:
prdisasters.com/2012/01/09/australias-2011-pr-disasters-
awards-announced/.
https:
prdisasters.com/2012/01/09/australias-2011-pr-disasters-awards-announced
https:
prdisasters.com/2012/01/09/australias-2011-pr-disasters-awards-announced
2
This case places you directly into the role of Olivia Wirth, executive of Government
and Corporate affairs at Qantas Airlines, who must devise a plan of action to respond
to the company’s failed and publicly scrutinised social media contest through Twitter.
You need to apply analytical, decision-making, creativity and communication skills to
create an effective strategy for Qantas management to implement. You also need to
take into consideration the series of events that have compounded over the past years
to negatively affect the public’s perception of Qantas. In response to the company’s
failed Twitter contest and mounting public animosity, what course of action should
Olivia Wirth recommend to Qantas management?
Please follow these guidelines to complete the assessment:
1. Use 3 to 4 relevant academic articles
2. Carefully read the Ivey Business School case: 'Qantas Airlines: Twitter Nosedive'.
Note: you will need to go onto the Ivey Business School website
https:
www.iveycases.com/ and purchase a copy of this case (approximately
A$5.00).
3. Read the case several times and answer the following questions in your analysis/
ecommendation(s):
a. What future actions can Qantas take to build a positive public perception of the
and? Be prepared to provide justification for your recommended actions.
. Identify three important factors for an organisation to consider when using
social media, such as Twitter, for contest or other public relations initiatives. Use
3-5 secondary sources to support your analysis.
c. Using the Communication Plan Template in the case (see Exhibit TN-1), devise
a course of action for Olivia Wirth to recommend to Qantas management.
Some important guidelines to consider when developing a recommended course
of action:
• The different stages of the communication plan template must fit together, if
they do not, adjustments must be made.
• The communication plan should be realistic and feasible.
• The various problems that Qantas has experienced publically over the past year
must be taken into account.
4. Please be aware that the writing quality and appropriate referencing will be marked as well
as the content.
5. Refer to the Marking Criteria Guide and Marking Ru
ic.
Note:
Remember a case study analysis requires you to investigate a business problem,
examine the alternative solutions, and propose the most effective solution using
supporting evidence.
https:
www.iveycases.com
3
1. Read and examine the case thoroughly
• Take notes, highlight relevant facts, underline key problems.
• Focus your analysis
2. Identify key problems
• Why do they exist?
• How do they impact the organisation?
• Who is responsible for them?
3. Uncover possible solutions
• Review course readings, discussions, outside research, your experience.
4. Select the best solution
• Consider strong supporting evidence, pros, and cons: is this solution realistic?
PRIOS/CDT
ief for Assessment 3:
a. Purpose: In response to Qantas' failed Twitter contest and mounting public
animosity, develop a course of action Olivia Wirth can recommend to Qantas
management.
. Reader: Qantas management (author: Olivia Wirth).
c. Information: Based on secondary sources.
d. Organisation: Direct order approach.
e. Style: Formal. Be sure to proofread carefully to ensure that there are no sentence-
level e
ors such as spelling mistakes, wrong word choice, inco
ect punctuation, etc.
f. Channel choice: written document.
g. Document design: Memo format.
h. Length: 1000 words.
4
Marking criteria/weighting
Evaluation
criteria
Task Weight
1. Format,
Introduction,
& Conclusion
Is the memo format used fully and appropriately?
Does the introduction, body and conclusion contain all the identifying
features?
Are the elements of the introductory and concluding paragraphs clear,
elevant and informative?
20%
Purpose &
Audience
Has the student understood the task and covered the key points?
Does the response adequately address the topic and task?
Does this document take into account the needs of the audience?
Does this document provide adequate information for the reader?
Does the writer thoroughly address any potential questions from the
eader?
15%
Credibility
Is the student able to convince the reader that they are knowledgeable
about the topic?
Are claims backed up?
Sources cited?
Are sources reliable and authoritative?
Does the student understand the proper attribution rules?
Do the appearance, accuracy and clarity of the writing give credibility?
Are three to five reliable sources used to evaluate three important factors
for an organisation to consider when using social media?
20%
Referencing
Has the SCU Harvard reference style been used?
Does every source have:
The name of the author(s)
The full title; and
Complete publication information?
Are sources cited in the body of the paper and in the reference list at the
end of the paper?
Are the right model citations used?
15%
Readability
Is there a clear structure to the response?
Do the paragraphs contain one main idea that is explored using relevant
evidence?
Is there cohesion between sentences?
Are internal headings clear and informative and enhance the readability
for the audience?
15%
Language
Is there a range of vocabulary?
Are sentences grammatically co
ect?
Are sentences accurate and complete?
Has a spell check been used?
Is spelling accurate?
15%
Fail Pass Credit Distinction High Distinction
< XXXXXXXXXX – XXXXXXXXXX – XXXXXXXXXX+
Multiple parts of the
assignment are
missing or
incomplete. Student
fails to answer the
question.
Essential elements
are imprecise or
absent. Work at a
level that would be
considered basic.
Key elements are
presented but could
e further
developed and
given more depth.
Most aspects
included in a final,
well-developed
form.
The assignment
contains all required
elements and is of
the highest order.
5
Criteria High Distinction
85 to 100 %
Distinction
75 to 84 %
Credit
65 to 74 %
Pass
50 to 64 %
Fail
0 to 49 %
Format,
Introduction,
& Conclusion
Weight 20.00%
Memo format is used fully
and appropriately.
Elements of the
Introductory and
Concluding paragraphs
are clear, relevant and
informative.
Memo format is used
appropriately. Elements
of the Introductory and
Concluding paragraphs
are clear, relevant and
informative. There may
e some minor
inconsistencies.
Memo format is used.
Most elements of the
Introductory and
Concluding paragraphs
are clear, relevant and
informative.
Memo format is used.
Some elements of the
introductory and/or
Concluding paragraphs
may be clear, relevant and
informative.
Memo format may not be
used. Elements of the
introductory and/or
Concluding paragraphs
may be missing and/or
i
elevant, and/or
unclear.
Purpose &
Audience
Weight 15.00%
The purpose of the
assessment is fully
addressed, and main ideas
are fully appropriate for
the audience.
The purpose of the
assessment is sufficiently
addressed, and main ideas
are appropriate for the
audience.
The purpose of the
assessment is addressed,
and most main ideas are
appropriate for the
audience.
The purpose of the
assessment is adequately
addressed, and some
main ideas are
appropriate for the
audience.
The purpose of the
assessment is not
adequately addressed,
and main ideas are
inappropriate for the
audience.
Credibility
Weight
20.00%
Main ideas are clearly and
sufficiently supported
using required case study
(see assessment details).
Three social media factors
are evaluated using 3-5
eliable and appropriate
sources to support the
analysis. Credibility is
enhanced by sufficient
and appropriate
Paraphrasing, Quoting,
Synthesising, and
Referencing.