Date: 3 October 2018

To: Eric A. House

From: Meredythe Durckel
Subject: Project #2 & Collaboration Reflection

SUMMARY
This memo provides an analysis of the project 2 documents through a comparison of the
audience and purpose influences on document design, followed by a summary of the project,
process, and learning objectives achieved. Appendices include:
1) Rhetorical Analysis Table 2) Task Schedule
3) Peer Evaluation Questionnaires 4) Team Member Evaluation Form
5) Self Evaluation Form.

Rhetorical Situation
The first three documents – proposal, team charter, and task schedule, were crafted by
individual authors, then edited collaboratively so that we, as a group, were “all on the same
page” with the purpose, context, and genre characteristics of this project. The audience for
these documents were our group members, you, the professor, and the scenario CEO of UA.
These documents contained rhetorical elements needed to persuade the CEO of our research
project, outline a schedule of tasks, and divide the workload among team members. One
constraint of the proposal genre is the one-page format – writing must be brief and informative.

The writing persona for these documents is a professional, informative construct in the context
of a business proposal. The last three documents – research report, tip sheet, and presentation
with handout, were constructed for the primary audience of the CEO, HR, and employees of the
company. These documents were crafted to be persuasive, explanatory, and emphasize
employee training information. The research reports are detailed and informative, allowing for
more in-depth analysis of information. Another affordance of these genres is the incorporation of
visual elements in presenting information with media delivery. Please see Appendix 1: Table 1:
Rhetorical Analysis.

PROJECT
In the scope of this project I am most proud of the final, polished layout I produced. This
involved the incorporation of images throughout the text, visual cues and bold headings to break
up the document sections, and the inclusion of hyperlinks for ease of navigation. If I had more
time, I would revise the written portions of the document to make it a more cohesive report.
Honestly it would have helped to have more time in the planning stages and have our questions
about the project answered by the professor before the final document was due. We had some
difficulties in the first few deadlines because we had not established individual responsibilities.

PROCESS
This process began with a hybrid meeting (in-person/online) through Skype. We reviewed the
project, created a prompt, and held a group discussion to complete the analysis portion of the
memo. Work completed is recorded in Meeting Minutes #1. The second on Sept 15 was
nonsynchronous where everyone checked-in on the document Meeting Minutes #2 in the
shared Google Drive, which helped us divide tasks and effectively collaborate.
We have not faced any collaboration difficulties, mostly by having open communication about
deadlines and workloads. I feel that keeping track of a task schedule and using text (instant
messaging) played motivational roles in our dedication to completing this assignment. The
greatest portion of my time has been spent revising everyone’s contributions, making changes
for conciseness, grammar, and standardizing the layout. I was also responsible for updating the
task schedule as each person contributed throughout the process. Please see Appendix 2: Task
Schedule.

Four course related work activities that helped with developing this project were:
1) DD6 HW 2 – Research Cultural Communications
2) DD7 HW1 – Draft Team Charter & Task Schedule (Individual)
3) DD7 HW2 – Start Your Shared Workspace
4) DD9 HW3 – Draft Your Formal Research Report (Group)

LEARNING
Three SLO’s met during this project were Collaboration, Info & Tech, and Ethics & Inclusion.
This project was independent of instructor supervision, tasks were delegated among team
members to work toward a finished project, meeting the collaboration requirements. Cultural
information was researched, analyzed, synthesized, and the presented in written, visual, and
presentation formats, meeting the Info & Tech guidelines. Ethical and inclusive issues were
addressed through the topic of global business communication, specifically Brazil, as well as
proving citations for facts and figures.

Technologies used to complete this project included instant messaging and email
communication, Google Drive for collaborative documents (Doc, Sheets, and PowerPoint), as
well as academic journal databases, which were appropriate for finding peer-reviewed, credible
sources. I learned a bit about document design and presenting formal research reports, in the
future I would include more images and charts in my reports. As a writer, I learned my surprising
strengths in editing my peer’s writings to create a more cohesive document. One weakness I will
continue working on is beating deadlines (turning in tasks ahead of time) rather meeting them.
APPENDIX 1: TABLE 1: RHETORICAL SITUATION ANALYSIS
Audience Purpose
Primary – UA CEO
Secondary –  Set up prompt with situational details
Project Employees, Clients  Outline body sections of Research Report
Proposal Tertiary - Public Health  Analysis of Rhetorical Situation (audience, author,
Professionals, purpose, context, genre, media/delivery)
Educational Institutions
 Provide framework for collaboration project:
 Broad team goals
 Measurable team goals
 Individual commitment
Primary – Team  Communication management methods &
Team Charter Members, UA CEO technologies
Secondary – Instructor  Collaborative writing technologies
 Other concerns
 Conflict resolution
 Missed deadlines
 Unacceptable work

 Evaluate milestones through the writing process

Primary – Team  Determine individual role assignments, division of
Task
Members, UA CEO labor
Schedule
Secondary – Instructor  Manage deadlines, communicate as team

Primary – UA CEO
Secondary –
Research Employees, Clients
Report Tertiary - Public Health
Professionals,
Educational Institutions
 Discussion of problem
 Method of finding and sharing the solution
 Details of where / how to conduct research
 Introduction of team members
 Process – intent to track time, energy, labor
 Focus on business, professional, and technical
communications in a specific region and/or culture
 Background constructs a rhetorical situation that
requires the research
 Problem statement and/or research questions
articulates a targeted research
problem/question/agenda

 Shared digitally or print, but not both

Primary - Employees in  Select from genre: brochure, FAQ, newsletter,
Tip Sheet infographic
the company
 Referenced and discussed in report

Primary – Company HR  Choose Primary audience – company HR dept.

Departmnet  Includes a 5-7-minute presentation, adapted from
Presentation Secondary – Public the research report (Script and video)
Health Professionals,  Handout is adapted from the research report, to
Educational Institutions be distributed to Primary audience
APPENDIX 2: TASK SCHEDULE FROM GOOGLE DRIVE
APPENDIX 3: PEER EVALUATION QUESTIONNAIRE

APPENDIX 4: TEAM-MEMBER EVALUATION FORM

APPENDIX 5: SELF-EVALUATION QUESTIONNAIRE