STC 201 Case Analysis I (Individual) - Copyright 2020 Page 1 STC 201 PR Strategy Development Spring 2020 CASE ANALYSIS I (INDIVIDUAL) INSTRUCTIONS Purpose of the Assignment The purpose of this assignment is to help students further familiarize Smith’s ROPES process of public relations planning. In this assignment, you will explore how real-life public relations programs have either applied or not applied this process. You will have a chance to practice your planning skills by considering what you would have done differently to improve the case you study, i.e. make it adhere more closely to the Smith (2017) process. It also requires thoughtful case analysis expressed in a concise written format. It encourages your external research skills and critical-thinking skills. This assignment is worth 10% of your final course grade. Guidelines for the Assignment Step #1 Case Selection for Approval: Each student should select one published PR case from one of the following sources. Do NOT use any case in the Hendrix and Hayes’ “Public Relations Cases” textbook for this assignment. Do NOT use any case from STC 116 Principles of Public Relations for this assignment. • • • • Arthur W. Page Case Study Competition Winners between 2013 and 2019 (http://www.awpagesociety.com/study_competitions). PRSSA Bateman Case Study Competition Winners between 2013 and 2019 (http://prssa.prsa.org/scholarships-and-competitions/bateman-competition/) PRSA Silver Anvil Winning Cases between 2013 and 2019 (http://apps.prsa.org/awards/silveranvil/Search). PRSA membership and a “MyPRSA” account may be needed for your access to the case. If you have difficulties downloading the case, email me well in advance. In your email, specify: case title, year, outcome category, and industry category. Other sources you find appropriate and reliable. After identifying the case, each student should upload a two-paragraph summary of the case on Blackboard via a Microsoft Word Document: Go to the Assignment Tab → Click “Case Analysis I (Individual): Case Selection for Approval – by Jan. 30 at 11 AM.” Do NOT use other file formats for upload. Both the title and the source of the case should be listed in your summary. Do NOT proceed to write the full report of the case analysis without gaining the approval from the professor. Step #2 Full Report of Case Analysis I: Once approved by the professor, each student should submit a 5-page, double-spaced written analysis of the case. In addition to the 5-page analysis, please include a title page stating (1) the student FULL name, (2) the date, (3) the title of the case and (4) its source. A reference page using APA style (6th ed.) is also required. So, basically, I am looking for a 7-page document: one title page, 5-page analysis, and one reference page. Both a hard copy AND an electronic copy of the assignment should be submitted by the deadlines listed below. STC 201 Case Analysis I (Individual) - Copyright 2020 Page 2 The written analysis should cover all the parts listed on pages 3 and 4 (see “Outline of the Assignment”) and follow the formatting requirements on page 2 (see “Format Requirements.”) The bulk of the analysis must be in the student’s own words. Simply a great recap isn’t an A. Paraphrase and use quotes sparingly. Quotation marks and attribution must be included when “using” words from any sources. Students are responsible for searching, selecting, and obtaining sufficient information to facilitate the case analysis, both from the source listed on page 1 and from other credible sources. Two deadlines. a. Case Selection for Approval: By 11: 00 AM on Jan. 30, under Blackboard’s Assignment tab b. Full Report of Case Analysis I: An electronic copy under Blackboard’s Assignment tab by 11: 00 AM on February 18. PLUS, a hard copy to the professor by the start of Feb. 18’s class. IMPORTANT: No makeup assignments. Late assignments will receive a grade of zero. Format Requirements. All written assignments MUST be submitted in computer-generated, typed format. NO handwritten material or materials with handwritten corrections will be accepted. CAUTION: One of the kisses of death in public relations practice is sloppy work, especially incorrect use of the language, misspelled words, incorrect punctuation, and poor presentation. PROOFREAD and fix mistakes before you turn in the assignment. The easiest way to lose points on any assignment is to include grammar/spelling/punctuation errors. The second easiest way to lose points is to fail to follow the directions for the assignment. The following format should be used for all submitted written assignments. Failure to follow the format will result in grade deduction: • • • • • • • APA Style 6th edition for in-text citations and references Microsoft Word Document file (Do NOT use Mac’s Pages App) Times New Roman font 12-point type 1-inch margins Double-spaced Stapled (for the hard copy) STC 201 Case Analysis I (Individual) - Copyright 2020 Page 3 Outline of the assignment Please follow the outline below when writing your case analysis: 1. Overview (5 points): Summarize the case in one paragraph. Introduce the organization/agency. Explain what actually happened and who was affected (or targeted): background of the case and target publics. Be very concise and brief for this part. 2. Research (15 points): • • What research did the organization conduct to address the situation/issue? What types of research? Primary or secondary? Informal or formal? Report the research type/method and discuss the findings. Is the research appropriate or adequate? Why/why not. If not, what research should have been done by the organization? Recommend several research methods to study the target publics and/or the issue or situation. 3. Objectives (20 points): • • • • Summarize what the organization wanted to achieve. What goals/objectives did it set for this campaign? Give examples. Which objectives are impact objectives (awareness/acceptance/action-oriented)? Which are output objectives (distribution/execution of program materials)? Give examples. Critique the writing of the objective statements. Did they include all necessary elements (e.g., an infinite verb, a target date, etc.)? Did they meet the standards of good writing? If not, correct at least one poorly written objective. Are these objectives consistent with the research findings obtained by the organization from the previous step? Why/why not? If you cannot find original objectives in the case, make educated estimates based on what they communicated and the other info you have. Recommend several objectives that the organization should have developed to manage the situation or issue: at least one awareness, one acceptance, and one action objective. Use your best judgment in devising a hypothetical time frame and desired level of measurement. Be very specific when writing the objectives. 4. Programming (20 points): What specific communication strategies and tactics did the organization use to execute on its objectives and address the issue/situation? Highlight the main strategies and tactics used. Were these strategies and tactics tied to the objectives? Give examples. 5. Evaluation (15 points): • • What evaluative research was conducted? Did the evaluative research verify each objective? Was the evaluation appropriate and adequate? Why or why not? If not, recommend evaluative techniques that match with the (estimated) objectives. You will probably suggest research techniques such as content analysis, focus groups/interviews, and/or surveys to measure the objectives. I am also interested in the specific kind of information you would ask/seek to learn when using the recommended research method(s). STC 201 Case Analysis I (Individual) - Copyright 2020 Page 4 6. Stewardship (10 points): Was there a stewardship component in the case? If not, recommend stewardship strategies/tactics to the organization. You will need to read Kelly’s (2001) article on stewardship to complete this part. Kelly’s (2001) reading has been posted under the “Required Supplementary Readings” tab on Blackboard. You will need to cite her article both in the main body of your analysis (i.e., in-text citation) and in your reference page: Kelly, K. S. (2001). Stewardship: The fifth step in the public relations process. In R. L. Heath (Ed.), Handbook of public relations (pp. 279–289). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. 7. Critique (10 points): Provide critiques on the way the organization/agency handled the situation/issue. Don’t say that the organization handled everything flawlessly and you wouldn’t change a thing! Even award-winning cases have room to improve. 8. References (5 points). Follow the APA style (6th ed.) for in-text citation and when writing your reference page. Grading The eight parts of the outline weigh differently, as shown in the parentheses above. The professor will evaluate how well you answer the listed questions and expand the listed areas associated with these eight parts. Simply recapping or paraphrasing the case is NOT acceptable and will result in a LOW grade. A high grade is often given to students who demonstrate excellent critical thinking, analytical thinking, and writing skills in their analysis. Be concise, accurate, rigorous, and coherent. Note: The two-paragraph case summary that you submit at Step #1 (see page 1) will NOT be graded. It is for gaining approval from the professor so that you can proceed to write your full report. However, failure to submit the summary by its deadline or failure to follow the case selection guidelines listed in Page 1 will result in a grade of zero for the entire Case Analysis I (Individual) assignment.
Purchase answer to see full attachment