DM5552 Design Research Assignment: Critique

Buy ready-to-submit essays. No Plagiarism Guarantee

Note: Every paper is crafted by human writers to ensure authenticity and originality.

DM5552 Design Research Assignment: Critique

DM5552
Design Research
Assignment: Critique
Dr Youngok Choi
Brunel Design, College of Engineering, Design and Physical Sciences
Brunel University London
Youngok.Choi@brunel.ac.uk
Critique two articles
• Set: Thursday 21st October 2021
• Submission: Tuesday16th November 2021
• Feedback: Thursday 9th December 2021
• Weighting: 100%
MA Design Strategy and Innovation
• Choi, Y., Na, J., Walters, A., Lam, B., Boult, J., Jordan, P. and Green, S. (2018) Design for social value:
using design to improve the impact of CSR. Journal of Design Research, 16 (2), pp 155 – 174.
• Selloni, D. and Corubolo, M. (2017) Design for Social Enterprises: How Design Thinking can support
social innovation within social enterprises. The Design Journal, 20(6), pp775– 794.
J. Design Research, Vol. 16, No. 2, 2018 155
Design for social value: using design to improve the
impact of CSR
Youngok Choi*
Department of Design,
College of Engineering, Design and Physical Sciences,
Brunel University London,
Uxbridge, Middlesex, UB8 3PH, UK
Email: youngok.choi@brunel.ac.uk
Corresponding author Jea Hoo Na Manchester School of Art, Manchester Metropolitan University, R1.07 Righton Building, Cavendish Street, Manchester, M15 6BG, UK Email: j.na@mmu.ac.uk Andrew Walters PDR, Cardiff Metropolitan University, Western Avenue, Cardiff, CF5 2YB, UK Email: atwalters@pdronline.co.uk Busayawan Lam and John Boult Department of Design, College of Engineering, Design and Physical Sciences, Brunel University London, The Design Journal An International Journal for All Aspects of Design ISSN: 1460-6925 (Print) 1756-3062 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rfdj20 Design for Social Enterprises: How Design Thinking Can Support Social Innovation within Social Enterprises Daniela Selloni & Marta Corubolo To cite this article: Daniela Selloni & Marta Corubolo (2017) Design for Social Enterprises: How Design Thinking Can Support Social Innovation within Social Enterprises, The Design Journal, 20:6, 775-794, DOI: 10.1080/14606925.2017.1372931 To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/14606925.2017.1372931 Published online: 17 Oct 2017. Submit your article to this journal Article views: 731 View related articles View Crossmark data MA Design and Branding Strategy • Choi, Y., Na, J., Walters, A., Lam, B., Boult, J., Jordan, P. and Green, S. (2018) Design for social value: using design to improve the impact of CSR. Journal of Design Research, 16 (2), pp 155 – 174. • Garas, S., Mahran, A and Mohamed H. (2018) Internal corporate branding impact on employees’ brand supporting behaviour. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 27 (1), pp79 – 95. J. Design Research, Vol. 16, No. 2, 2018 155 Design for social value: using design to improve the impact of CSR Youngok Choi
Department of Design,
College of Engineering, Design and Physical Sciences,
Brunel University London,
Uxbridge, Middlesex, UB8 3PH, UK
Email: youngok.choi@brunel.ac.uk
*Corresponding author
Jea Hoo Na
Manchester School of Art,
Manchester Metropolitan University,
R1.07 Righton Building,
Cavendish Street, Manchester, M15 6BG, UK
Email: j.na@mmu.ac.uk
Andrew Walters
PDR, Cardiff Metropolitan University,
Western Avenue, Cardiff, CF5 2YB, UK
Email: atwalters@pdronline.co.uk
Busayawan Lam and John Boult
Department of Design,
College of Engineering, Design and Physical Sciences,
Brunel University London,
Internal corporate branding impact on
employees’ brand supporting behaviour
Sally Raouf Ragheb Garas
Pharos University in Alexandria, Alexandria, Egypt, and
Amira Fouad Ahmed Mahran and Hassan Mohamed Hussein Mohamed
Cairo University, Giza, Egypt
Abstract
Purpose – This paper aims to study the effect of internal branding on brand supporting behaviour (in-role and extra-role) of bank employees in
Egypt. It proposes a model which examines the relationship between internal branding and employees’ brand supporting behavior, mediated by
employees’ role clarity, affective commitment and continuance commitment, to provide insights into the way in which employees can become brand
champions.
Design/methodology/approach – A single cross-sectional descriptive research was employed. A questionnaire was used to collect data from 400
frontline bank employees. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to test the validity of the scales, and structural equation modelling was used to test
the research hypotheses.
Findings – The results showed that internal branding did not have a direct significant impact on employees’ in-role and extra-role behaviour.
However, that impact only took place through employees’ role clarity and their affective commitment.
Practical implications – The findings suggest that banks can differentiate their offers and build powerful corporate brands through their
employees’ brand supporting behaviour. Therefore, bank managers need to consider internal branding within the context of a corporate marketing
orientation. Moreover, enhancing employees’ role clarity and affective commitment will ensure sustainable brand supporting behaviour.
Originality/value – This research is the first quantitative study to examine the impact of role clarity and continuance commitment as possible
mediators to the proposed relationship. It further adds up to the internal branding literature, which is mostly qualitative or conceptual and thus
suffers from limited conclusive evidence in terms of internal branding benefits and practical implications.
Keywords Banking, Internal branding, Brand performance, Corporate brands, Brand supporting behaviour
Paper type Research paper

1. Introduction
   The intense competition nowadays has made customers
   approach many mature products as commodities (Ferrell and
   Hartline, 2008). More companies are now faced with difficulties
   in differentiating their offers, especially service companies where
   managers find themselves challenged by the intangibility,
   inseparability and variability of services (Wallace and de
   Charnatony, 2009). However, service variability can be
   considered as both “a cure and a curse” for the service company
   (Zeithaml and Bitner, 2003): a cure, because it can be used in
   differentiating organisational associations, building strong
   corporate brands and winning competition; a curse, due to the
   difficulties of branding intangible offers (Aaker, 2004;
   Papasolomou and Vrontis, 2006).
   Generally, organisational associations define any corporate
   brand, associations in terms of its heritage, ability to deliver
   customer value, employees, brand values (priorities) and
   performance records (Aaker, 2004). More specifically,
   corporate brands can be viewed as a group of functional and
   emotional benefits (Balmer, 2001). In today’s competitive
   environment, providing functional benefits only (e.g. self-
   service technology) is no longer a source of sustainable
   competitive advantage; hence, organisations tend to focus on
   the emotional benefits of their value propositions, such as
   employees’ skills, knowledge, interactivity and on-going
   relationships. These benefits are derived from the buying
   experience (Aaker, 2004; Balmer, 1995; Harris and de
   Chernatony, 2001; King and Grace, 2010). Consequently,
   employees are considered the foundation of the corporate
   brand (Aaker, 2004). In fact, they are the service brand
   (Wallace and de Charnatony, 2009), as they have a major role
   in translating the corporate identity, in the short run, into image
   and, in the long run, into reputation (Balmer, 2013;
   Halliburton and Bach, 2012). Alternatively, they can reduce
   the credibility of the advertised message if their behaviour does
   not reinforce the communicated corporate brand values (Harris
   and de Chernatony, 2001).
   Admittedly, corporate branding literature, from early on, has
   The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on
   Emerald Insight at: www.emeraldinsight.com/1061-0421.htm
   Downloaded by OPEN UNIVERSITY At 11:20 30 September 2018 (PT)
   You have to deliver
   Overall critique of each paper
   • What is this paper all about?
   • What is the essence of the article?
   • What is the value of the overall argument?
   (maximum 200 words for each paper)
   1.
   Critical examination of each paper on the following aspects:
   • Originality
   • Quality of the Research
   • Usefulness
   • Quality of the Presentation
   (total maximum 400 words for each paper)
   2.
   Originality
   • Is it original? What is original or not original about it?
   • Does it offer new idea(s)?
   • Is it different from other material that you have come across?
   Provide two references (at least) for comparisons.
   Quality of the Research
   • Is this research of high quality?
   • What evidence or studies has the author(s) used to support their claims?
   • Would you consider their research to be reliable and rigorous?
   • Would you consider their choices of research tools to be appropriate?
   Provide two references (at least) for Justifications.
   Usefulness
   • Would you consider the article to be useful?
   • Would you consider the outcomes to be relevant to current professional
   and industrial needs?
   • Would you consider the study make a significant contribution to knowledge?
   Provide one reference (at least) for Justifications.
   Quality of the Presentation
   • Does it provide a complete picture of the subject area(s)?
   • Does it have a good structure?
   • Is it easy to follow?
   Paraphrase more from sources
   rather than quote directly.
   (You keep the meaning of the original text, but
   do not copy its exact wording.)

DM5552 Design Research Assignment: Critique