September 1, 2009
The first report our group reviewed was Cougar Communication Solutions’ (CSS) work on
Washington State University’s Education Abroad Program.
by incorporating enormous
amounts of information, created a vast source of information that can provide multiple paths to
Unfortunately, this much general data can also hide key points under mountains of
secondary or irrelevant data. A good example is CSS’s inclusion of multiple large appendices.
it is good to include these reports, relevance must be considered. Quantitatively, CSS’s report would
benefit from a more structured layout of vital statistics.
Arranging data in a systematic order
would allow the numbers of the report to flow smoothly, much like the qualitative aspects.
Specifically, CSS’s report can be improved in a number of different ways.
groups, CSS did not utilize a random sample in recruiting participants.
This introduces a level
of bias that can mask the true thoughts and feelings of the focus group subjects.
In regards to
conclusions about the collected data, CSS should hone the insights derived from their various
For example, instead of presenting verbatim quotes from the focus groups, it would have
been better to identify key themes that ran across all subjects.
Conversely, CSS’s proposed
strategies and tactics would benefit from a more hierarchical approach.
For example, their
campaign objectives could be broken down into a step-by-step process, where a firm would not
advance from one step to the next without the completion of every facet of the previous step.
On the other hand, CSS did have a few strong points within their report.
Starting off, their
was well put together and accurate.
Along with their executive summary, CSS
presented a succinct SWOT analysis that allowed for a quick overview of the current situation.
CSS’s survey results were also presented in a readable, non-intimidating manner.
It was also a smart
move to acknowledge their research limitations, in order to counter possible criticism of the proposed
The second project we looked at was the project on the Media Outlet Group.
There were two
purposes for their research.
The project tested for the level of satisfaction with the communication
system and for job satisfaction of the North Florida Evaluation and Treatment Center.
and surveys were used.
Their research project used five other research companies, totaling to 39 researchers. We felt
that while it was important to collect a large amount of data, the project involved too many
researchers. There were discrepancies throughout the research project regarding how many
employees responded to the survey. In the background information, the project indicated that 246
responded to the survey, while the sample size said 276 responded.
With 435 total employees, this
is almost a 50% response rate. The fact that their research findings contain multiple errors