Chapter 34 — Group project II: deliver
Lesson map
Lesson 34 published. Map, example, EX100.
flowchart TD
N0["Learning outcomes"]
N1["34.1 Delivering"]
N2["34.2 Measuring impact"]
N3["34.3 Client feedback"]
N4["34.4 Teamwork reflection"]
N0 --> N1 --> N2 --> N3 --> N4
N4 --> EX["Worked example"]
EX --> Q["Exercise EX100"]
Logical drawing
flowchart LR
N0["Learning outcomes"]
N1["34.1 Delivering"]
N2["34.2 Measuring impact"]
N3["34.3 Client feedback"]
N4["34.4 Teamwork reflection"]
N0 --> N1 --> N2 --> N3 --> N4 --> Q["EX100"]
[Learning outcomes]
|
v
[34.1 Delivering]
|
v
[34.2 Measuring impact]
|
v
[34.3 Client feedback]
|
v
[34.4 Teamwork reflection]
|
v
[Worked example] --> [Exercise EX100]
Learning outcomes
You will (1) deliver a project to a client; (2) measure campaign impact; (3) reflect on teamwork.
34.1 Delivering
The group delivers materials: a poster for branches, a leaflet included with statements, an email to online members and a script for staff to use at counters. The marketing manager approves them after one round of changes, simplifying wording for clarity. The campaign runs for four weeks. Aisha coordinates timing so all formats appear in the same week, reinforcing the message. Branch staff practise the counter script in a short session before the campaign starts, and they report that members respond well when staff mention the message during ordinary conversations about their accounts.
34.2 Measuring impact
The measurement plan compares synthetic figures for the four weeks before and after the campaign: member calls to Ashfield reporting suspicious contacts, and fraud losses from code-sharing scams. Reports of suspicious calls rise noticeably, suggesting members recognise scams more often. Losses fall, but the numbers are small. Aisha reports that the evidence is encouraging but cannot prove the campaign caused the change, because scam activity also varies. The group presents both figures with their weeks shown side by side, so the client can see the size of the changes and how small the loss numbers are.
34.3 Client feedback
The marketing manager says the campaign was clear and practical, and asks the group to recommend how to repeat it. They suggest an annual campaign with refreshed examples and including the message on the online banking login page permanently. Aisha notes that the client valued the measurement plan most, because it showed a way to judge future campaigns. The group also writes a short guide explaining how Ashfield can repeat the measurement itself next year, using the same weeks and the same definitions, so the results can be compared fairly between campaigns.
34.4 Teamwork reflection
Aisha reflects on teamwork. The weekly check-ins kept work on track, but one deadline slipped when the client was ill. The group adjusted by moving the delivery plan earlier. The teammate with a part-time job contributed strongly through flexible scheduling. Dr. Carrow asks each member to write an individual reflection. Aisha notes that clear agreements at the start made later problems easier to solve without conflict. Her reflection also notes that she could have delegated more of the report writing, and she plans to practise this in future teams.
Worked example
Aisha's group delivers four campaign formats, measures a rise in suspicious-call reports and a small fall in losses, reports limits and reflects on teamwork.
Synthetic case. Results are synthetic.
Errors and limits
A before-and-after comparison cannot by itself prove a campaign caused a change.
Exercises
- EX100 — Campaign formats. Name one campaign format. Rubric: 3 = branch poster;; 2 = one;; 1 = vague;; 0 = none.
- EX101 — Impact limit. Why can't the group prove causation? Rubric: 3 = scam activity also varies;; 2 = partly correct;; 1 = vague;; 0 = none.
- EX102 — Client value. What did the client value most? Rubric: 3 = the measurement plan;; 2 = partly correct;; 1 = other;; 0 = none.
Continue studying — lesson 34 (chapter 34 of 40)
← Chapter 33 · Course chapter index · Chapter 35 →
Continue to the next authored lesson.