strangely productive meeting 29/4
gave them my CSR stuff a week ago.
HG was all over it. seemed to even like it . YAY.
some points made.
US has not come to dominate. it always has.
chronology not always clear.
need clarity about U-shape - where does detail come from? Is there evidence supporting this?
Need to look at the word 'contract' - does ASPIRATION play a role alongside CONTRACT?
Need to investaigate the viability of dual role.
Both XF and HG look to a 'rival' school of thought - led by Elkington - get his book. Also Bruntland. This is where the environment movement becomes a/ nay the major stakeholder group. They say that most authors may not be aware of the CSR arguement - and will be more aware of the env arguements.
Essential that this school of thought is acknowledged at least i nthe opening of chapter 3 (rt)
Need to get the Elkington book- on hold from Headingley.
also has sustainability.co.uk
Xavier big on 1% sample with JF. Need to get this moving.
Big drive to get moving on methods - danger that things will get lost. Xavier pointing to new environmental paradigm - Dunlop. Need to approach this methodology in the right way.
If i don't get this done, i may lose it. Why why why? Imperative that this is approached in the next 4 weeks.
Purpose - Aim
Process - aim - question
information needed for questions
questionnaire design
Need to suplpy timeline and timeframe.
where am i am on ethics???
Wednesday 29 April 2009
Friday 6 March 2009
meeting 6/3/09
brutal
so - movement on rt.com
hg calls jf - sorted. need to rethink and rework the questionaire a little,
but hopefully all a goer.
then. sweet Jesus. basically all needs rewritten. all in bits. slated everything.
the style, the chronology, bits and pieces flying everywhere, no thread, no poise, clearly been cobbled together from all over the pace.
need to build a solid foundation unpon which to build my study. at the moment, it is gash.
ai, ai, ai.
so back the drawing board.
feck
need to get a questionnaire to HG asap, he has a look and we meet on March 16th. He meet JF on 19th for lunch.
has to happen.
so - movement on rt.com
hg calls jf - sorted. need to rethink and rework the questionaire a little,
but hopefully all a goer.
then. sweet Jesus. basically all needs rewritten. all in bits. slated everything.
the style, the chronology, bits and pieces flying everywhere, no thread, no poise, clearly been cobbled together from all over the pace.
need to build a solid foundation unpon which to build my study. at the moment, it is gash.
ai, ai, ai.
so back the drawing board.
feck
need to get a questionnaire to HG asap, he has a look and we meet on March 16th. He meet JF on 19th for lunch.
has to happen.
Wednesday 25 February 2009
Targets.
Back. Still trying ways to eek more work out of myself.
today. trying to go through the 4 chapter outlines I have and fill in what I still need to do, and provide structure - especially for 3 and 4, which also have no content.
today. trying to go through the 4 chapter outlines I have and fill in what I still need to do, and provide structure - especially for 3 and 4, which also have no content.
Tuesday 10 February 2009
meet with the Font 10/2/09
we talked through the latest thinking
new layout for things which allows me to advence my draft to include methods chapter.
nothing too startling -- i think the discussion of what i think may come out of the model is key.
needs to be added and well developed.
gave a kind of breakdown of the methods chapter i need to develope quickly while i remember it and am on the same train of thought. essentially arriving at a model from the second chapter , after the first one is CSR and SATOs. and the third chapter in essence arrives at the instrument. the end of the second chapter also discusses why we are looking at the 3 (rt, loyalty , and exp.)
very valuable points arrived at- 1. rt and loyalty are not really expected to be directly linked.
2. experinece and loyalty are. 3. are exp and rt linked?
new layout for things which allows me to advence my draft to include methods chapter.
nothing too startling -- i think the discussion of what i think may come out of the model is key.
needs to be added and well developed.
gave a kind of breakdown of the methods chapter i need to develope quickly while i remember it and am on the same train of thought. essentially arriving at a model from the second chapter , after the first one is CSR and SATOs. and the third chapter in essence arrives at the instrument. the end of the second chapter also discusses why we are looking at the 3 (rt, loyalty , and exp.)
very valuable points arrived at- 1. rt and loyalty are not really expected to be directly linked.
2. experinece and loyalty are. 3. are exp and rt linked?
Monday 19 January 2009
Latest 19/1
need to get cracking then - formulate a detailed plan
with reference to what was agreed. detailed timetable.
first up timetable.
then rehash CSR.
then rehash Responsibility
then rehash experience.
then finish loyalty.
ideally before the end of the month. need to see if this is realistic.
i think it should be.
I need to be sure that there I am not spending time on something that going to be poopooed.
with reference to what was agreed. detailed timetable.
first up timetable.
then rehash CSR.
then rehash Responsibility
then rehash experience.
then finish loyalty.
ideally before the end of the month. need to see if this is realistic.
i think it should be.
I need to be sure that there I am not spending time on something that going to be poopooed.
Friday 16 January 2009
Supervisor meet 15/1
meet with HG and XF
not decided how constructive it was
it was the first meeting with HG in about 9 months
the focus was very much on him as opposed to XF
They had these three bits: CSP-FP, Experience, RT
HG had a real bee in his bonnet about CSR bit. He seemed to think I was missing the point. He sees what I am looking at as very distinct from the CSR debate. I don't really. He said to look at what Andreas did last Summer - and the CTI - whatever they do.
As far as I was concerned I was just highlighting the issues of trying to link social performance to financial performance throught the CSR way. Thereby signposting my way. Whatever I wanted to say, it obviously wasn't clear, as neither really got it. If I am going to critique them, then I have to critique them - HGs point was that they just look for links, not correlations - not causal relationships - do they? I was pretty sure they were looking for something - but ned to look at it again. Ultimately,need to secure in my mind why CSR is in there, given how complex the study is anyways. HG seems to be plotting a path of CSR which has splintered into all sorts of different areas, not particularly where I am going. I honestly don't know where CSR is at, but I know that there was a huge amount of attention to this CSR-FP link at one point.
Part of this is to re-highlight objectives.
To do list:
1. Rehash whole chapter
2. Objectives
3. Time line in months
4. Ethics
5.Get Jim straightened out
6. Word budgets
In terms of the RT stuff - HG again had a bit of a bee in his bonnet
Doesn't like the overall tone of my bit, because it just slates everything.
Need to take a slightly more nuanced approach - need to pick out what is useful and what is not - can't just say it is all rubbish.
HG suggests ditching the table. I agree.
Need to highlight what is supply and what is demand.
HG launched a defence of his aspirations - i am slill deeply sceptical, but acknowledge that I need to try to see some positives.
Look at populus surveys, and more closely at mintel demographic data.
Lots to do. I really feel I should pepper them with stuff. It will be like pingpong and a lot of work, but if I had all of this wit them in a week....
not decided how constructive it was
it was the first meeting with HG in about 9 months
the focus was very much on him as opposed to XF
They had these three bits: CSP-FP, Experience, RT
HG had a real bee in his bonnet about CSR bit. He seemed to think I was missing the point. He sees what I am looking at as very distinct from the CSR debate. I don't really. He said to look at what Andreas did last Summer - and the CTI - whatever they do.
As far as I was concerned I was just highlighting the issues of trying to link social performance to financial performance throught the CSR way. Thereby signposting my way. Whatever I wanted to say, it obviously wasn't clear, as neither really got it. If I am going to critique them, then I have to critique them - HGs point was that they just look for links, not correlations - not causal relationships - do they? I was pretty sure they were looking for something - but ned to look at it again. Ultimately,need to secure in my mind why CSR is in there, given how complex the study is anyways. HG seems to be plotting a path of CSR which has splintered into all sorts of different areas, not particularly where I am going. I honestly don't know where CSR is at, but I know that there was a huge amount of attention to this CSR-FP link at one point.
Part of this is to re-highlight objectives.
To do list:
1. Rehash whole chapter
2. Objectives
3. Time line in months
4. Ethics
5.Get Jim straightened out
6. Word budgets
In terms of the RT stuff - HG again had a bit of a bee in his bonnet
Doesn't like the overall tone of my bit, because it just slates everything.
Need to take a slightly more nuanced approach - need to pick out what is useful and what is not - can't just say it is all rubbish.
HG suggests ditching the table. I agree.
Need to highlight what is supply and what is demand.
HG launched a defence of his aspirations - i am slill deeply sceptical, but acknowledge that I need to try to see some positives.
Look at populus surveys, and more closely at mintel demographic data.
Lots to do. I really feel I should pepper them with stuff. It will be like pingpong and a lot of work, but if I had all of this wit them in a week....
Wednesday 7 January 2009
Update
Just on loyalty - had a bit of an overview while writing and it appears fairly straight forward.
There is a general acceptance that loyalty brings profit in some capacity.
The actual model is disputed, as usual.
Often the focus of research is not centred on loyalty but rather the driver of loyalty, satisfaction or customer service or experience.
The loyalty model can be very straight forward - just one item in many cases, or one behavioural item plus one attitudinal item (?) whatever that is.
More complex models use a number of different things, like WOM, switching, willingness to pay more, repeat purchase etc.
The real spanner, and what could drive the research agenda, is the psychological factor - a real relationship rather than a token reduction in price or whatever.
I need to explain that the deep psychological investigation is beyond the scope of this study, but could prove very interesting future research.
There is a general acceptance that loyalty brings profit in some capacity.
The actual model is disputed, as usual.
Often the focus of research is not centred on loyalty but rather the driver of loyalty, satisfaction or customer service or experience.
The loyalty model can be very straight forward - just one item in many cases, or one behavioural item plus one attitudinal item (?) whatever that is.
More complex models use a number of different things, like WOM, switching, willingness to pay more, repeat purchase etc.
The real spanner, and what could drive the research agenda, is the psychological factor - a real relationship rather than a token reduction in price or whatever.
I need to explain that the deep psychological investigation is beyond the scope of this study, but could prove very interesting future research.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
