Essay BUSM1534 – Market Intelligence Report – Management Assignment Help

Assignment Task

Your purpose: to discover what is known about the priority of needs of founders from secondary sources and to compare this with the understanding that founders have about their perception of their priority of needs. To do this you acknowledge that an inductive approach to gathering primary data is required such that your analysis reflects how founders view their own lives. By comparing founders understanding of their priorities you aim to learn about the priorities of needs that they consider important and ensure that the program that is designed is founded upon needs that founders consider highly relevant to them (rather than rely on what objective research knowns is important for their well-being). (In other words you want to design a program that founders feel is worth their while attending, based on addressing what they consider important.)

What you explored:
-Secondary Research: a combination of limited secondary research i.e. six peer-reviewed journal articles (located from the RMIT Digital Library database – e.g. ABI/Inform, Proquest, or IBIS World selecting peer reviewed articles only) and three general articles (located from same database or other internet searches).
-Primary Research: You employed inductive analysis using an existential approach, where your aim was to allow the voice (and perceptions) of the founders you spoke with to rise to the surface so that you captured their understanding of their reality.
-You may have conducted three interviews initially, combined insights with your group members and then returned for a second interview from each of your respondents. Or you may have re-interviewed just one of your original respondents and conducted two new interviews (the method chosen is up to you – there is no correct way. You merely need to in your method section explain why you chose your particular approach (e.g. convenience, or you felt more was to be learned by re-interviewing and/or seeking a fresh respondent).

Your finding/highligh is:
-This includes the priority order of anchors that your collective group arrived at, and
-how this compared and contrasted to both your individual priority of anchors and
-the priority of anchors suggested by the secondary research you read.

Your conclusion is:
(for example) You may conclude that collective group interviews enabled an inductive understanding, such that the priority of needs (anchors) for founders is (2, 3, 1, 4)
compared to your individual interviews, which found the priority order to be 3, 2, 1, 4), which differed from existing secondary research (1, 2, 3, 4).