WEEK 4

CONTENT SUMMARY

This week was our presentation week where each group had to present their presentations to the class, while the class wrote feedback during each groups presentation. Most groups talked in front of the class with accompanied PowerPoint slides while one group presented a video presentation. Most of the groups had the required amount of information in their presentation with a decent visual amount of visual media to support.

Our group was the last to present and we used Google slides to present the information we had collated while we spoke in front of the class. We didn't manage to practice our presentation so we went over time when presenting. Peter did make a small comment saying for the next project we need to make sure our presentation within the time limit as he will be marking us on that as well going forward. Prior to leaving Peter instructed us to research the 3 topics:

• Porter's 5 forces.

• SWAT analysis.

• Porter's 3 generic strategies.

POST CLASS REFLECTION - INDIVIDUAL PROGRESS

Bryce dropped out of the unit halfway through this project which shifted his workload to me and some parts to Cody. That put me in an awkward spot, as I had to research more information before this week's presentation. It was fortunate I had already completed my research and write up for the PEST analysis as it would of been difficult to gather information for both at the last minute. I was also lucky enough to pick up off where Bryce had finished in regards to the history of Auto-Tune. It was just as simple as filling in the gaps and continuing from where Bryce had left it which was around 25% mark.

Using the research I had gathered from the PEST analysis helped a lot with the completion of the history section. All the information for the presentation was collated the night before so we had no time to practice. One thing I would of done differently would be going through my PEST analysis write up and condensing the information into a much more concise and better flowing speech because there were times I stuttered and struggled to read what I had wrote. My part wasn't as long as Kieran's but it was definitely a big chunk of the presentation and because of that I started to rush through assuming we were short on time which lead me to bury my face in my phone and barely come up for air. Personally I don't want to shift the blame to Bryce dropping out, but if he hadn't we may have had time to practice prior.

POST CLASS REFLECTION - GROUP DYNAMICS

Considering we had not practiced our presentation and due to some minor setbacks, we did manage to deliver on what was asked from the project. We went WAY overtime which lead to us rushing in some places and slower in others. Just one practice prior to the presentation would of been enough to gauge where we were falling short and how time issues. There was also duplicate information being presented as well, for instance some of what was said at the beginning was also said in the middle and the end as we hadn't yet realized that some of us collected the same information. This would of been picked up with just one run through practice prior to the presentation because out information was top tier but there was definitely some inconsistencies in the delivery.

As I previously stated, I took up a good chunk of the time with my part of the presentation but Kieran took up a lot more of the time than we had originally thought. As Kieran didn't have an actual script/text to read off he did go off topic with some of the points which collectively probably doubled our talked time as he had 8 slides worth of information to sift through. Personally, I thought that could of been condensed into 4 or so slides and delivery shortened considerably.

This left Jack and Cody with the least amount of talk time, which in my opinion worked out better for them as they had a much more direct and engaging part of the presentation. Jack had palm cards which helped him with his delivery and Cody was able to deliver a good flow with the small amount of dot points to cover (some of them being the PEST analysis points I collected).

We got relatively positive feedback from Peter and the rest of the class, however Peter did touch on how we need to watch the time next time and that choice of background template wasn't his favourite (my choice). Most of the class's reception was positive, with one comment saying they didn't think I was engaged as much as I was reading from my phone. Surprisingly, they all enjoyed the background template and found the presentation to be very informative. With this feedback it's probably best that we take our time limit and my delivery style into consideration for our next project.

With all this said and done, I do think we met the project brief as we covered every single requirement that was laid out in the project brief, so Peter can't mark us down for not having enough information which is the main bread and butter of the project. For the next project we should take in the feedback and low points of this project and apply them to Project 2.