Journal of Marketing Education

http://jmd.sagepub.com

A Case Study of Teaching Marketing Research Using Client-Sponsored Projects: Method, Challenges,
and Benefits
Liliana L. Bove and W. Martin Davies
Journal of Marketing Education 2009; 31; 230 originally published online Sep 23, 2009;
DOI: 10.1177/0273475309344999
The online version of this article can be found at:
http://jmd.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/31/3/230

Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:
Marketing Educators Association

Additional services and information for Journal of Marketing Education can be found at:
Email Alerts: http://jmd.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts
Subscriptions: http://jmd.sagepub.com/subscriptions
Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav
Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
Citations http://jmd.sagepub.com/cgi/content/refs/31/3/230

Downloaded from http://jmd.sagepub.com at University of Melbourne Library on April 8, 2010

A Case Study of Teaching Marketing Research

Using Client-Sponsored Projects

Journal of Marketing Education

Volume 31 Number 3
December 2009 230-239
2009 Sage Publications
10.1177/0273475309344999
http://jmd.sagepub.com
hosted at
http://online.sagepub.com

Method, Challenges, and Benefits

Liliana L. Bove
The University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia
Australian Red Cross Blood Service

W. Martin Davies
The University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia
This case study outlines the use of client-sponsored research projects in a quantitative postgraduate marketing research subject
conducted in a 12-week semester in a research-intensive Australian university. The case study attempts to address the dearth of
recent literature on client-sponsored research projects in the discipline of marketing. Evaluation results provided from students
in a 3-year period indicate support for the use of client-sponsored projects because they provide a number of benefits. In particular, students feel that such projects give invaluable opportunities to develop consulting and research skills that are highly
sought after by industry. However, despite the advantages of the client-sponsored research projects, the quantitative nature of
the marketing research subject is still an impediment to attaining high student quality teaching scores. Furthermore, there can be
problems if students lack basic statistical knowledge, do not practice SPSS outside of class, and segment project tasks within the
team. Finally, although client-sponsored marketing research projects can improve the profile of marketing research courses, they
demand high levels of energy by the lecturer, a small class size (up to 35 students), and are dependent on a strong degree of
client commitment.
Keywords: client-sponsored projects; marketing research; case study; implementation; SPSS

n the past 30 years there has been increasing interest in

client-sponsored projects in marketing research courses.
The impetus for this has been a perceived gap in the perceptions of practitioners of marketing and marketing academics in terms of the relative importance placed on marketing
theory and its practical applications (Stern & Tseng, 2002).
Academics have been accused of emphasizing theory in
marketing courses at the expense of practice (de los Santos
& Jensen, 1985). Claims have been made that this ill prepares students for a career in the marketing profession
(Day, 1979; MacKay, 1979; Marshak & De Groot, 1978;
Osthiemer, 1977; Peters, 1980).
This theoryapplication expectations gap is not unique
to marketing (Stern & Tseng, 2002). It is also found in areas
as diverse as accounting (Gribbin, Karnes, & King, 1995),
senior management (Aiken, Martin, & Paolillo, 1994), personnel (Lewis & Ducharme, 1990), management information systems (Ahmadi & Brabston, 1997-1998), and
productions and operations management (Levenburg, 1996).
However, it is in marketing where this issue is perhaps most
acute because it is an applied discipline that students need to
practice to become proficient (Stern & Tseng, 2002).
230

Marketing, the discipline, is defined as the activity, set

of institutions, and processes for creating, communicating,
delivering, and exchanging offerings that have value
for customers, clients, partners, and society at large
(American Marketing Association, 2008). Thus, when
theoretical approaches to the teaching of marketing are
used, they are invariably designed to meet intrinsically
practical ends. Case-based examples in marketing are a
typical way of bridging the gap between theory and practice. However, traditional case studies are often seen as
static, one dimensional, and inadequate simulations of realworld problems that occur in the marketing profession
(Burns, 1990).
Another more robust way of meeting the needs of both
academics and practitioners is to introduce client-sponsored
projects (Humphreys, 1981; Lopez & Lee, 2005; Ramocki,
1987). These have all the advantages of case-based examples with the added advantage that they are live and, hence,
more realistic and relevant to students. Sometimes referred
to as client-initiated or live-case projects, they require an
organization to sponsor or commission a group of students
to complete a market research study in an area in which the

Downloaded from http://jmd.sagepub.com at University of Melbourne Library on April 8, 2010

Bove, Davies / Client-Sponsored Projects 231

organization has a vested interest. In essence, the client

organization initiates the project, supports the research
(often financially), and provides feedback on the research
outcomes. Normally, client-sponsored research projects
involve the production of a report that is submitted to the
client upon completion, but they may also involve a presentation. In exceptional cases, the client-sponsored project
becomes a critical part of the decision-making processes
of the organization that commissioned it (Browne, 1979;
Jones, 1982; Richardson & Raveed, 1980). In this way, the
practical as well as theoretical aims of a marketing research
course are satisfied.
Taking an educational point of view, client-sponsored
projects have a number of advantages. Burns distinguished
between ruleg and egrule teaching approaches and
claims that live case studies combine the advantages of
both (Burns, 1990; Ward & Rudelius, 1987). The former
involves teaching rules and principles and providing specific examples to which the rules can be applied (lectures
are an example of this). The latter involves providing specific examples to students from which they are expected to
discover the appropriate principles themselves (traditional
case studies are an example of this). Both approaches involve
inductively generating patterns from information provided.
By contrast, live case studies such as client-sponsored projects involve thrust[ing] the student into a specific business
problem where rules apply, and it is incumbent on the student to identify the proper rules to use and apply them to
the situation (Burns, 1990, p. 201). Unlike traditional case
studies, which are static and one dimensional, this approach
has the advantages of being more realistic and dynamic. As
Burns (1990) noted, The key ingredient in live case studies
is realism. There is a real company with real products, real
competitors, real decision-makers, real employees, and a
real problem (pp. 202-203). Client-sponsored projects
thereby provide a conduit between theoretical and applied
perspectives (de los Santos & Jensen, 1985; Richardson &
Raveed, 1980).
Another advantage of client-sponsored projects is that
they can act as an alternative to the case examples that are
often used as integrating devices at the ends of chapters in
marketing textbooks. As well as helping students to integrate
the material taught, client-sponsored projects provide continuity and show how research is an active process as opposed
to a collection of isolated techniques to be passively learned
(Gremler, Douglas Hoffman, Keaveney, & Wright, 2000;
Humphreys, 1981; Razzouk, Seitz, & Rizkallah, 2003). When
incorporated into the curriculum, client-sponsored projects
have the added advantage of being consistent with students
perceptions about the discipline of marketing, that is, they
appear interactive, real world, and creative (Bridges, 1999).
Client-sponsored projects can also foster employmentrelevant skill development in areas such as critical thinking

as well as communication and teamwork (Barr & McNeilly,

2002; Kennedy, Lawton, & Walker, 2001). A number of
writers have recently noted the benefits of client-sponsored
projects in the marketing context from the points of view of
student, instructor, and client (Dommeyer, 1986; Easterling
& Rudell, 1997; Elam & Spotts, 2004; Goodall & Kraft,
1991; Gremler etal., 2000; Haas & Wotruba, 1990; Kennedy
et al., 2001; Linrud & Hall, 1999; Lopez & Lee, 2005;
Razzouk etal., 2003).
In addition to the specific benefits for disciplines such
as marketing, there are more general educational advantages. These advantages transcend the specific aim of
bridging the theoryapplication expectations gap:
Educational research suggests that motivation can
direct student learning behavior (Bandura, 1989;
Calver & Scheier, 1998; Kuh, Kinzie, Schuh, Whitt,
& Associates, 2005). Motivation is a function of
students interests, beliefs, goals, and aspirations.
One very compelling motivating factor during tertiary studies in marketing is the possibility of future
employment (Bridges, 1999, p. 59). A real-life, clientsponsored project is more motivating for students
than an abstract academic project is by virtue of
its approximation to employment-related skills
(Goodall & Kraft, 1991).
Research also suggests that meaningful engagement is a critical factor in deeper learning. When
students are meaningfully engaged, they form longer
lasting knowledge representations in memory
(Craik & Lockhart, 1972). Client-sponsored projects
promote deeper engagement because they involve
the application of real-life skills to an employmentrelated problem. Others have argued that because
they provide opportunities for more meaningful
engagement, client-sponsored projects enhance
students ownership of the learning process (Lopez
& Lee, 2005, p. 172). This means students are more
interested and have a genuine desire to learn.
The way students organize knowledge in terms
meaningful relationships can determine how well
they retrieve and apply knowledge to future situations (Holyoak, 1984; National Research Council,
2000). As noted, client-supported projects involve
key concepts from academic studies used in the context of genuine employment-related problems. Being
engaged in such projects means that students are
more likely to apply deep as opposed to surface
learning techniques (Entwistle & Waterston, 1988).
In doing so, they develop learning representations
that are more easily retrieved and remembered.
Educational research also suggests that goal-directed
or targeted feedback is crucial to learning. Students

Downloaded from http://jmd.sagepub.com at University of Melbourne Library on April 8, 2010

232 Journal of Marketing Education

learn better when feedback is provided in a timely,

frequent, and constructive manner (Wiggins, 1998).
Client-sponsored projects often provide opportunities for ongoing, task-specific feedback during different phases of completion of a project culminating
in the very motivating feedback of the client.
Finally, students learn better when they develop
emotionally, socially, and intellectually (Pascarella
& Terenzini, 1991). Client-sponsored projects offer
the opportunity for holistic personal development
because they typically involve teamwork in the production of a single key assessment task.

Given the clear advantages of client-sponsored

research projects, it is surprising that they are not adopted
more widely. However, whereas their advantages are
often mentioned, the literature seldom measures their
effectiveness (Henke, 1985; Ramocki, 1987) or outlines
challenges in their use. Burns (1990) stated that limited
empirical attention has been placed on the learning
effects of live case studies versus alternative pedagogies (p. 206) and noted that of the studies that do exist
they exclusively deal with attitudinal effects. Others
have noted this deficit in the literature (Goodall & Kraft,
1991, p. 32; Ramocki, 1987).
In one study involving the cross-tabulation of survey
results from clients and a group of 43 students, findings
indicated support for the educational value of such projects (Ramocki, 1987). It was claimed that client-sponsored
research projects result in improved overall research
abilities and self-confidence. Other studies have demonstrated that student satisfaction is higher for live case
studies in terms of project, course, and instructor
(Dommeyer, 1986; Hafer, 1984; Hoover, 1977). However,
although there are a number of studies outlining the
advantages of client-sponsored projects, empirical studies such as these are rare. In the marketing context they
are virtually nonexistent. Lopez and Lee (2005) provided
a reason why there might be a general neglect in the
implementation of client-sponsored projects:
Despite support among marketing educators for the
value of client-based projects, many instructors avoid
integrating them into their courses. Some of the reasons for this hesitancy include struggles or uncertainties finding good clients, challenges grading projects
that require so much feedback, and concerns about
the considerable time commitment. . . . Essentially,
some instructors avoid CBPs [client-based projects]
because they view them as just too big to manage and
not worth the trouble. (p. 172)

This case study evaluates the extent to which this

remark is true and adds to the literature by outlining the
method of implementation and feedback received for a
series of trials of client-sponsored research projects
developed in one postgraduate subject: Marketing
Research (325-680) at the University of Melbourne, a
research-intensive Australian university. The aims of this
case study are to describe how client-sponsored research
projects can be successfully integrated in a marketing
research course and to highlight the perceived challenges
and outcomes for stakeholders. This article is less concerned with a justification of such a research method, as
it is with contributing to literature that provides practical
advice on the implementation of client-based research
projects (Lopez & Lee, 2005) or live case studies (Elam
& Spotts, 2004).
We begin by describing the six phases of client-sponsored
project implementation. We then present student quality of
teaching scores over the 3-year trial period. We discuss
these results and outline the perceived challenges and
benefits of the method. We end with practical recommendations for marketing educators who may want to try
such a method.

Method
The methodology of the project involves six distinct
phases:
1. Sourcing the client,
2. Writing the research proposal,
3. Designing the questionnaire and plain language
statement,
4. Collecting the data and entering it in the SPSS master spreadsheet,
5. Writing the research report, and
6. Presenting the report to the client.

Each of these stages is described below.

Phase 1: Sourcing the Client

The initial stage of the experiential learning involves
recruiting a suitable client that provides a workable managerial problem and is willing to sponsor the costs of conducting the research, student prizes, and a debriefing lunch.
This client can be sourced from an auxiliary service within
the university (e.g., a health service or student union service)
or a body external to the university. There are advantages
and disadvantages for each. Sourcing a client from within
the university allows the commerce or business faculty to

Downloaded from http://jmd.sagepub.com at University of Melbourne Library on April 8, 2010

Bove, Davies / Client-Sponsored Projects 233

provide valuable information that will improve decision

making for a department or service that may otherwise go
without marketing research because of lack of funding.
However, students prefer to serve the needs of an industry
client because funding is more liberal and there exists the
possibility of a job offer at the end of the project.
How does one source an industry client? Most business
schools or departments have external publications directed to
industry or alumni. These offer useful vehicles to communicate marketing research courses and provide opportunities
for industry or alumni to participate. However, the best
source of clients to date have been postgraduate alumni
who have done the course themselves and would this time
like to play the part of the client (i.e., the buyer of research)
rather than the student (i.e., the supplier of research).
Once the client is sourced, the lecturer arranges a meeting whereby the managerial problem is discussed and its
feasibility is assessed. This briefing meeting is held about a
month or two before the subject is to commence so that the
projects details can be written up for publication in a
course guide. The research problem that is provided must
lend itself to descriptive research so that survey methodology and SPSS can be used. This satisfies the academic
requirements of the marketing subject and distinguishes
the research generated in a client-sponsored project from
typical corporate research projects. One of the crucial aims
is to educate students in appropriate research methodologies and statistical software use. Dual aimsacademic
and commercialare usually not hard to meet (given the
availability of an interested client participant) but they do
require some careful planning.
It is also at this meeting that the lecturers expectations
of the client are clearly defined. The clients time commitments include a 1-hour research brief to the students,
answering the lecturers questions within 24 hours,
and attendance at a student prize-giving and debriefing
event. The clients financial commitments include all costs
associated with the survey, prizes for the winning student
teams final report (these normally range between A$200
and A$500 per student), and the funding of a student
lunch.
The subject is structured around the successful completion of the clients commission as well as satisfactory
completion of academic assessment tasks. Over the 12-week
semester, the students acquire the required knowledge and
skills through lectures interspersed with SPSS workshops.
The course is held for one 3-hour block per week in a computer lab. Prior experience in coordinating the subject has
shown that this is preferable to a 2-hour lecture block and a
1-hour computer lab session. One location allows a variety
of teaching formats to be used (lecturing, discussions,
presentations, demonstrations and SPSS practice, roleplaying), keeping the class interactive and engaged.

During the semester there are four discrete assessment

phases (excluding the final exam). These include (a) the
research proposal, (b) questionnaire design and plain language statement, (c) data collection and entry, and (d) the
final research report. All are formative assessment tasks
designed to build students research skills. They collectively
contribute to 50% of the final grade for the subject and
coincide with Burns and Bushs (2006) 11-step marketing
research process.

Phase 2: Writing the Research Proposal

The first assessment is due in Week 4. By Week 3 the
students have formed teams, each consisting of no more
than four students. Before the client arrives, the students are
coached by the lecturer as to how to write a research proposal. One member per team is advised to make a recording
of the clients brief. All students are encouraged to ask the
client questions. The client normally makes a formal presentation and the slides are placed on the subject Web page. The
students are directed to post further questions that may arise
following the research brief using the Online Tutor available
on the subject Web page (this is a service provided at the
University of Melbourne; The Online Tutor, 2008). In this
way, the client is only contacted by the lecturer rather than
the students. Furthermore, the use of the Online Tutor allows
the answers to be viewed a number of times by all students
enrolled in the subject, thus expediting knowledge transfer.
To satisfy the assessment requirements of the subject,
the student teams are required to submit a competitive proposal. They are encouraged to strive to win the tender and
hence compete against the other teams. This simulates the
real world of competitive marketing research. Much effort
is placed on the presentation of the written proposal. The
lecturer decides on the winning team and gives out a token
prize to each winning team member. The winning proposal
is posted on the subject Web page for other students to
view. The lecturer then provides a list of five to seven
research objectives derived from a number of proposal
submissions. This list is used to guide the next piece of
formative assessment.

Phase 3: Designing the Questionnaire

and Plain Language Statement
The students are free to disband their team and regroup
following each piece of formative assessment. Interestingly,
this freedom virtually ensures that there are no free riders.
In cases where a student is expelled from the team, this
person is allowed to do the assessment alone because he or
she is normally not invited into another team. There is a
sizable literature on this approach to team building by means
of expelling or divorcing group members. Some studies

Downloaded from http://jmd.sagepub.com at University of Melbourne Library on April 8, 2010

234 Journal of Marketing Education

suggest that it forces group members to face problems

in their group and do something about them (Strong &
Anderson, 1990).
The student teams construct the plain language statement and questionnaire. It is only after this exercise that
students realize how challenging it is to design a good questionnaire through question wording, order, format, and
scale decisions. The lecturer chooses the best team questionnaire and edits it using the soft copy submitted by the
teams. This master questionnaire becomes the draft for the
class to administer in the field.
Following feedback with the class and some pretesting
of the master questionnaire with a small sample of the
population of interest, changes are made. The client is then
asked for timely feedback. Once agreement has been
reached, students are allocated between 10 and 20 questionnaires to conduct, depending on the difficulty anticipated in
obtaining the convenience sample.

Phase 4: Collecting the Data and Entry in the

SPSS Master Spreadsheet
After the students have role played the personal administration of the questionnaire, they have a 2-week period to
collect their data and input it into the SPSS master spreadsheet. Normally there are no difficulties in collecting the
allocated sample; however, the administration of the master
spreadsheet does need cooperation from the staff of the
student computer lab. The lecturer supplies the computer
lab staff with the following: (a) folders to file the completed
questionnaires, (b) a record sheet whereby students record
the SPSS spreadsheet rows that correspond to their sample,
and (c) the SPSS spreadsheet on a USB disk. The students
book an appointment to enter their questionnaires in the
SPSS master spreadsheet stored on the USB at the lab.
After data entry they then return the USB to the computer
office, sign off on the record sheet, record the spreadsheet
rows, and file the questionnaires in order only after having
hand numbered them according to the spreadsheet row.
After each student returns the USB, the computer lab staff
member on duty checks the spreadsheet for errors before
making a copy.
No grades are given to this exercise, although grades (up
to five) are deducted from the total subject score if this
exercise is not done. In the 3 years of the trial, all students
collected and entered their data. This is probably because
students are encouraged by the lecturer to assist each other
within their team if difficulties are experienced in acquiring
the sample or entering the data. When data entry is completed, the lecturer checks the master spreadsheet for discrepancies or missing values and attempts to clean it up
using the filed hard copy of questionnaires provided. This
cleaned spreadsheet is provided to the class.

Phase 5: Writing the Research Report

The team has only 4 remaining weeks of semester to
analyze and write the research report. Of those weeks, 2 are
dedicated to analyses (i.e., chi-square analysis, t tests and
analysis of variance, correlation, and multiple linear regression analyses). Prior to data collection, the students learn
how to assess the quality of their multi-item measures using
reliability and factor analyses. They also learn how to summarize their data using descriptive statistics. Following a
theoretical discussion, each type of analysis is demonstrated using SPSS and then students complete an illustrative exercise on their own using test data. Furthermore, the
relevance of the statistical test is discussed in relation to the
client project data and an example is demonstrated with the
master data. The students are strongly encouraged to keep
abreast of the content of the workshops and apply the learnt
analyses to the client-sponsored project before the next class.
In addition to completing the statistical tests, the students
are shown how to use the graphical and table functions of
SPSS to enhance the presentation of their results.
Two weeks before the report is due, the lecturer offers a
30-minute consultation session to each student team. This is
not compulsory but all teams avail themselves of this offer. It
is during this time that the team is encouraged to show the
lecturer sample analyses and draft presentations of their
results. This consultation time functions as a checking procedure for both students and lecturer. It ensures that each team
makes a reasonable start to the research report and understands the correct use and interpretation of statistical tests.

Phase 6: Presenting the Research

Report to the Client
The lecturer grades the research reports and selects the
best report. All reports that are well written and make a
unique contribution to the project are forwarded to the client.
However, before this is done, the students are asked to
make the suggested corrections by the lecturer. The lecturer
then arranges printing and binding of the reports. This is
normally done at least 1 week before the prize-giving
debriefing luncheon because it gives the client an opportunity to read and review the reports and prepare a response.
The end-of-course event is well attended by students
because it offers some closure to the project. The students
are also very interested in hearing what the client has to say
about their findings and recommendations and what marketing strategy the client intends to adopt.

Results
Table 1 shows Quality of Teaching (QOT) survey results
conducted by administrative staff in class during Week 11

Downloaded from http://jmd.sagepub.com at University of Melbourne Library on April 8, 2010

Bove, Davies / Client-Sponsored Projects 235

Table 1
Mean Quality of Teaching Scores for Marketing Research (MR) and
Service Marketing (SM) 20052007 (Student Numbers 28-38)

2005

2006

2007

MR

SM

MR

SM

MR

SM

Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q5
Q6
Q7
Q8
Q9
Q10

3.7
4.0
3.8
3.9
4.1
4.0
4.2
4.0
3.8
3.8

4.2
4.6
4.4
4.2
4.5
4.2
3.8
3.8
4.4
4.1

4.1
4.2
4.6
4.2
4.5
4.5
4.6
4.1
4.3
4.4

4.2
4.5
4.1
4.0
4.3
4.1
3.7
3.8
4.2
3.9

4.2
4.3
4.0
4.1
4.4
4.2
4.5
4.2
4.1
4.4

4.5
4.6
4.4
4.3
4.5
4.3
3.9
4.0
4.4
4.1

Clear expectation of me in subject

This subject was well taught
Subject was intellectually stimulating
Received helpful feedback
Teacher showed interest in my academic needs
Felt part of the group
Effective use of computer-based materials
Web-based materials were helpful
Overall satisfied with the quality of learning
Helped me develop my skills of analysis

or 12 of the semester in the absence of the lecturer. The

QOT survey contains nine core university questions and an
additional question asked by the department. The scores are
based on a Likert scale; the end points are 1 (strongly
disagree) and 5 (strongly agree). These scores are compared to those obtained by the same lecturer during the
same semester in another marketing subject, Service
Marketing (325-662), which is directed to a similar postgraduate cohort as defined by entry criteria stipulated by
the Faculty of Economics and Commerce. If we examine
Question 2 (This subject was well taught)which tends
to be the main focus of administrators of this surveyit can
be seen that the QOT score achieved in Marketing Research
is consistently lower than those achieved for Service
Marketing. Notwithstanding this, it is still higher than
Q2 results achieved by department during the same period
(3.9, 3.8, and 3.9). Furthermore, although the trends in
other questions were not consistent, Marketing Research
outscored Service Marketing in Question 7 (Effective use
of computer-based materials) and Question 8 (Web-based
materials were helpful). The scores improved following
the 1st year of the client-sponsored project trial. This was
because refinements were made based on feedback received
in the open-ended additional comments section of the QOT
survey. Generally, positive feedback centered on the lecturers
style of delivery, the real-time/real-life assignment experience, and the perceived relevance and usefulness of the
subject. Negative feedback centered on the difficulties of
the subject given its quantitative nature and the perceived
short semester time period given the workload required.

Discussion
A number of challenges were identified in the 3-year
trial period. These were not solely based on the use of clientsponsored projects but were related to the difficulties in

teaching a quantitative subject to marketing students. In

general, marketing students find quantitative subjects less
appealing than theory-driven subjects. This was reflected
by the lower QOT score for the same lecturer. There is
empirical evidence elsewhere that quantitative subjects
score lower than do nonquantitative subjects. Feldman
(1978), for example, found that humanities and arts subjects received higher ratings than social science courses
did and that these, in turn, received higher ratings than
mathematics-type courses. Others have found similar
results (Braskamp & Ory, 1994; Cashin, 1990; Centra,
1993; Marsh & Dunkin, 1992; Neumann, 2000; Sixbury &
Cashin, 1995a, 1995b). There are different interpretations
of these findings. Cashin (1990), for example, argued that
students quantitative skills tend to be less well developed
than their verbal skills.
The 12-week semester time restriction was likely to also
contribute to the lower QOT score because both students
and the lecturer found it stressful to complete required
tasks. Furthermore, unlike simulated research projects, the
lecturer cannot plan or predict the nature of the results or
the behavior of the client. In some client-sponsored research,
the lecturer serves only in the limited capacity of sorting out
technical problems. No guarantee of usable results is made
to the client (Humphreys, 1981). This may be contrasted to
these trials where the lecturer takes an active consulting
role in the process and involvement with the client is high.
With input from students, the lecturer contributes intellectually to the project and acts as a leader of the subjects
macro team.
Proficiency in statistics was not a prerequisite for the
postgraduate marketing research subject, yet the students
and lecturer felt it ought to be. Some have argued that for
this reason academically oriented research projects are more
suited to developing the technical and statistical skills than
client-sponsored projects because they allow for detailed
inculcation of such skills, especially at the undergraduate

Downloaded from http://jmd.sagepub.com at University of Melbourne Library on April 8, 2010

236 Journal of Marketing Education

level. They also avoid inevitable compromises between the

clients needs and the academic objectives of teaching
decision-making technologies such as SPSS (Hershey &
Smith, 1991).
Other challenges identified relate to the implementation
of the client-sponsored project. They include the creation of
the master SPSS data spreadsheet, the practice of SPSS,
allocation of tasks within the team, and the requirement for
a small class size. The co-ordination of student data entry
to construct the master SPSS spreadsheet, although achievable, presents some problems. First, the students complain
that they have to wait too long for their turn to input the
data (students seem to pick the same times). Second, some
students make mistakes when entering their data. Third,
students do not check previous values in the Variable View
of the SPSS spreadsheet when categorizing their responses
for open-ended questions or other options given in their
questionnaire. This results in some questions with more
than 50 unique values that the lecturer has to tediously
consolidate before the master spreadsheet is delivered to
the class. Furthermore, although students received SPSS
handouts (defining step-by-step instructions for analyses),
illustrative SPSS outputs with written comments, in-class
demonstrations, and the opportunity to practice, they still
felt more SPSS support was needed. It appeared that few
students practiced the exercises out of class time even when
strongly encouraged to do so.
Some student teams persisted in allocating team members to discrete tasks. For example, two members of the
team would do all the analyses and the other two members
would write the report. This segmentation of tasks results in
team members not practicing all the skills that are tested in
the final exam. Given that task allocation is likely to occur,
regardless of how strongly this is discouraged, one recommendation is that teams divide up the five to seven research
objective(s). In this way each team member will get the
opportunity to practice the required analyses and presentation skills.
The final issue concerns resource availability. Given the
3-hour block format per week, the number of students that
can be comfortably accommodated in the subject is about
35. This number gives each student access to a computer
and allows the lecturer to manage the SPSS workshops,
ensuring that students receive assistance if they experience
difficulty without undue delay of the rest of the class. This
number also allows for a workable discussion forumfor
example, when attempting to improve the draft questionnaire. It also restricts the number of assignments (approximately eight teams) per assessment task. This is important
because the lecturer has to grade each task within 1 week.
Unfortunately, the ideal class number of 35 is seen as too
low to be economically viable in Australia. Unlike classes
in the United States, typical postgraduate enrolment quotas

at the University of Melbourne (and similar institutions)

aim for 70 students per class. This, in turn, favors a lecturestyle delivery, not discussion forums.
Notwithstanding the above challenges, client-sponsored
projects in the marketing research subject provide a
number of benefits for stakeholders. The lecturer benefits
in that the project can be exciting, novel, and therefore,
intellectually stimulating to facilitate. The students are
engaged and interested, and class attendance is very high
(close to 100% for most weeks). However, although
reasonable QOT scores are achieved, it appears that there is
an enduring value of the experiential learning process that
is only recognized post hoc for the majority of students;
they tend to recall their experience favorably. Whereas
positive feedback from students should necessarily be
interpreted with caution, the following illustrative written
feedback by a student is suggestive of such a view:
The market research subject coordinated by [lecturers
name] was a subject I undertook during my time at
Melbourne University that involved direct work with
a client. This real world interaction was precisely the
type of activity I had been seeking when I enrolled in
the MAC (Marketing) course. The assignment gave
me the opportunity to directly apply the theory I
learned to a real life situation, the experience of which
is now firmly ingrained in my mind. The knowledge
that my work could have a profound effect on the
future direction and success or failure of a company
gave me great incentive to produce a high quality
report that was meaningful and of value to the company. I found myself thinking constantly about what
my recommendations meant for the company, the
potential impacts to their business, and all the associated risks. With my background of work experience, I
can say that this type of work is exactly what graduates will be experiencing in their careers and is therefore the ideal opportunity for students to get as close
to work experience as possible whilst still in the safe
confines of a university subject. All in all, I learnt a
great deal from this subject and was extremely pleased
with the opportunity to truly test my capabilities.

Another student, who gained employment from the

client, recalled her experience with the client-sponsored
project:
[The product] being a new to the world service was
an interesting live case study, which in many ways
challenged conventional marketing approaches.
I found it intriguing and perhaps the reason why I like
marketing and why I am now working for [the client

Downloaded from http://jmd.sagepub.com at University of Melbourne Library on April 8, 2010

Bove, Davies / Client-Sponsored Projects 237

firm]. The market research project gave me the oppor

tunity to evaluate the market potential of the product
myself as I interviewed potential end-users. My interaction with the founder allowed me to gain insights
about the company, its vision and its people. In fact,
the positive feedback from my lecturer about the
people of the company was a major reason why I was
comfortable in accepting the job without actually
meeting the rest of the team (as I was on an overseas
exchange program). All these would not have happened
if there wasnt [a product] project to work on in the
first place. I wouldnt even know [the product] existed.
Doors would not have opened if I didnt get the opportunity to prove myself and create an impression.

As noted by Humphreys (1981), the experiential learning

process gained through the client-sponsored project is
highly motivating to students, encouraging then to
become active rather than passive participants in the
learning process (p. 7).
The client sponsor also benefits through its participation because it receives a report of high quality at a fraction of the cost of that charged by a commercial market
research firm. This can be seen from the following client
feedback:
The report from the winning group was far more
insightful than commercial market research from a
leading market research agency who specialise in the
telecommunications field. It was one of those reports
which is a joy to read. The other two [reports] were
probably slightly (not much) behind the commercial
research. And all were more thorough.

Although the final reports are the source of main benefit

to the client, enjoyment is also derived from the student
experience, as seen from a clients comments below:
I was amazed at the response from the students; they
appeared very interested in the project, an ambitious
brand extension, and the [general music instrument]
industry in general. The final submissions from the
students were of the highest quality, and the opportunity to meet with the class and interact with the students during the course of the project proved highly
rewarding and personally very satisfying.

Students from the course acquire skills that busi

nesses consider to be intrinsically valuable. These include
the ability to conceptualize and define marketing research
problems; to design research projects; to collect, analyze
and interpret data; and to present the findings in a way

that is attractive to managers. Indeed, the final report

serves as evidence of many of the above skills, and
graduates have taken this report to job interviews. In the
3 years that the subject has been run, four students have
been directly recruited by marketing research firms
because of the skills they acquired in the subject and a
number of requests have been made for graduates who
have completed the subject. One senior executive from
DBM Consultants commented about her experience with
a graduate of the subject:
DBM Consultants employed a past graduate in early
2007 who had recently completed the Market[ing]
Research course at Melbourne University. The
employee has shown great initiative and has become
a valued member of the research team in a short space
of time. Her key strengths are the ability to think conceptually and to grasp complex information quickly
and take it to the next level, thereby adding real value
to the research findings. She also has excellent visual,
perceptual and qualitative analytical skills, which
meant that she was able to produce high quality
qualitative reports in under 12 months (which is quite
exceptional by industry standards). Apart from her
technical skills, the employees positive and enthusiastic approach to everything, underpinned by a strong
work ethic, meant that she was much in demand
among senior researchers to support their clients
projects. Her practical tertiary studies undoubtedly
contributed to her success as a project manager, as
evidenced by her speed at completing tasks and managing multiple projects/tasks at the same time on her
own. All in all, a highly valued member of the
research team who has the potential to become a leading qualitative researcher.

Conclusion
This case study shows that there is value in client-sponsored projects used in teaching marketing research. The
case study has provided qualitative data to show that the
use of this approach generally enhances student experience
of the subject. This is clear from the favorable QOT scores
from student participants. The case study also suggests that
client-sponsored projects can help achieve reasonable
QOT scores by providing relevant, real-life, job-ready tasks
that promote active student participation and engagement
both of which are laudable educational aims. The clientsponsored research project also offers a vehicle by which
students can gain conceptual and analytical skills that are
highly valued by potential employers. This article, therefore,
supports the use of client-sponsored research projects.

Downloaded from http://jmd.sagepub.com at University of Melbourne Library on April 8, 2010

238 Journal of Marketing Education

However, it is noted that before embarking on clientsponsored projects the lecturer must ensure that he or she
has the energy to tackle client problems and has the ability
to grade student assessments quickly, especially in largeclass environments such as those found in Australian universities. As noted elsewhere, careful planning is critical
in client-sponsored and other live case study projects
(Goodall & Kraft, 1991; Razzouk etal., 2003). The lecturer
must, in addition, ensure that the marketing research problem defined lends itself readily to a survey methodology
preferably a convenience sample that is simple for students
to acquire. This article, therefore, concurs with the view of
others that the client-sponsored project needs to be workable and needs to fit specific course constraints (Lopez &
Lee, 2005). In the case described, the lecturers experience
in teaching this subject was influenced by the students
base-level knowledge of statistics. We recommend that
such skills be a prerequisite of the subject in the future or in
any similar implementation elsewhere. The success of clientsponsored research projects are also greatly influenced
by the clients co-operation and support; thus, client commitment is essential. Therefore, a number of external and
internal constraints need to be satisfied if client-sponsored
research projects in subjects such as Marketing Research
(325-680) are to be as fulfilling for the lecturer as they are for
students and other stakeholders (i.e., the client and the marketing research industry). In conclusion, whereas there are
sound educational reasons for providing a client-sponsored
research project to students in marketing, there is a need for
care in its implementation.

Acknowledgment
Authors are listed in alphabetical order; each made an
equal contribution to this article.

References
Ahmadi, M., & Brabston, M. (1997-1998). MIS education: Differences in
academic practice and business managers expectations. Journal of
Computer Information Systems, 38(2), 18-24.
Aiken, M. W., Martin, J. S., & Paolillo, G. P. (1994). Requisite skills of
business school graduates: Perceptions of senior corporate executives.
Journal of Education for Business, 69, 159-162.
American Marketing Association. (2008). Definition of marketing.
Retrieved May 12, 2009, from http://www.marketingpower.com/
AboutAMA/Pages/DefinitionofMarketing.aspx
Bandura, A. (1989). Self-regulation of motivation and action through internal
standards and goal systems. In L. A. Pervin (Ed.), Goal concepts in personality and social psychology (pp. 69-164). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Barr, T. F., & McNeilly, K. M. (2002). The value of students classroom
experiences from the eyes of the recruiter: Information, implications
and recommendations for marketing educators. Journal of Marketing
Education, 24, 168-173.

Braskamp, L. A., & Ory, J. C. (1994). Assessing faculty work: enhancing individual and institutional performance. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Bridges, E. (1999). Experiential learning and customer needs in the
undergraduate marketing research course. Journal of Marketing
Education, 21, 51-59.
Browne, W. G. (1979). Using corporate sponsored marketing management projects. Journal of Marketing Education, 1, 39-47.
Burns, A. C. (1990). The use of live case studies in business education: Pros,
cons, and guidelines. In J. W. Gentry (Ed.), Guide to business gaming
and experiential learning (pp. 201-215). London: Kogan Page.
Burns, A. C., & Bush, R. F. (2006). Marketing research & SPSS 13.0.
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Calver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (1998). On the self-regulation of behavior.
New York: Cambridge University Press.
Cashin, W. E. (1990). Students do rate different academic fields differently. In M. Theall & J. Franklin (Eds.), Students ratings of instruction: Issues for improving practice: New directions for teaching and
learning (pp. 113-121). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Centra, J. A. (1993). Reflective faculty evaluation: Enhancing teaching
and determining faculty effectiveness. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Craik, F. I. M., & Lockhart, R. S. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal
Behaviour, 11, 671-684.
Day, G. S. (1979). When do the interests of academics and managers
converge? Business Horizons, 22(3), 49-50.
de los Santos, G., & Jensen, T. D. (1985). Client-sponsored projects:
Bridging the gap between theory and practice. Journal of Marketing
Education, 7, 45-50.
Dommeyer, C. J. (1986). A comparison of the individual proposal and the
team project in the marketing research course. Journal of Marketing
Education, 8, 30-38.
Easterling, D., & Rudell, F. (1997). Rationale, benefits and methods of
service-learning in marketing education. Journal of Education for
Business, 73, 58-61.
Elam, E. L. R., & Spotts, H. E. (2004). Achieving marketing curriculum
integration: A live case study. Journal of Marketing Education,
26(1), 50-65.
Entwistle, N., & Waterston, S. (1988). Approaches to studying and levels
of processing in university students. British Journal of Educational
Psychology, 58, 258-265.
Feldman, K. A. (1978). Course characteristics and college students
ratings of their teachers: What we know and what we dont. Research
in Higher Education, 9(3), 199-242.
Goodall, P. W., & Kraft, F. B. (1991). Issues on the use of client projects
in marketing education. Marketing Education Review, 1(4), 32-44.
Gremler, D. D., Douglas Hoffman, K., Keaveney, S. M., & Wright, L. K.
(2000). Experiential learning exercises in services marketing courses.
Journal of Marketing Education, 22, 35-44.
Gribbin, D. W., Karnes, A., & King, J. (1995). Accounting practitioners
views of the relative importance of teaching and research in accounting education. Journal of Education for Business, 70, 215-219.
Haas, R. W., & Wotruba, T. R. (1990). The project approach to teaching the
capstone marketing course. Journal of Marketing Education, 12, 37-48.
Hafer, J. C. (1984). A comparison of the effectiveness of the small
business institute case method. Journal of Marketing Education,
6(Spring), 43-49.
Henke, J. W. (1985). Bridging reality to the introductory marketing
student. Journal of Marketing Education, 7, 59-71.
Hershey, L., & Smith, P. (1991). Client sponsored versus academically
oriented projects: Integrating decision technologies into the undergraduate marketing research class. Proceedings of the Midwest
Decision Sciences Institute, 188-190.

Downloaded from http://jmd.sagepub.com at University of Melbourne Library on April 8, 2010

Bove, Davies / Client-Sponsored Projects 239

Holyoak, K. L. (1984). Analogical thinking and human intelligence. In R.
J. Sternberg (Ed.), Advances in the psychology of human intelligence
(Vol. 2, pp. 199-230). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Hoover, J. D. (1977, April). A live case approach to the business and
society course. Paper presented at the meeting of the Association for
Business Simulation and Experiential Learning, Wichita, KS.
Humphreys, M. A. (1981). Client-sponsored projects in a marketing
course. Journal of Marketing Education, 3, 7-12.
Jones, A. D. (1982). Student research in marketing. Journal of Business
Education, 57(2), 60-62.
Kennedy, E. J., Lawton, L., & Walker, E. (2001). The case for using live
cases: Shifting the paradigm in marketing education. Journal of
Marketing Education, 23, 145-151.
Kuh, G. D., Kinzie, J., Schuh, J. H., Whitt, E. J., & Associates. (2005).
Student success in college: Creating conditions that matter. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Levenburg, N. M. (1996). General management skills: Do practitioners
and academic faculty agree on their importance? Journal of Education
for Business, 72(1), 47-51.
Lewis, D. A., & Ducharme, R. E. (1990). The education of business
undergraduates: A gap in academic/practitioner expectations? Journal
of Education for Business, 72(1), 47-51.
Linrud, J. K., & Hall, M. C. (1999). Integrating the business practitioner
into marketing coursework. Marketing Education Review, 9(2), 15-21.
Lopez, T. B., & Lee, R. G. (2005). Five principles for workable clientbased projects: Lessons from the trenches. Journal of Marketing
Education, 27, 172-188.
MacKay, D. B. (1979). Professors of marketing: Necessary luxuries?
Business Horizons, 22(3), 42-47.
Marsh, H. W., & Dunkin, M. (1992). Students evaluations of university
teaching: A multi-dimensional perspective. In J. C. Smart (Ed.),
Higher education: Handbook on theory and research (pp. 143-234).
New York: Agathon.
Marshak, S., & De Groot, J. (1978). Marketing: Who should teach what
to whom? Journal of Advertising Research, 18(2), 17-20.
National Research Council. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience and school. Washington, DC: Author, National Academy Press.

Neumann, R. (2000). Communicating student evaluation of teaching

results: Rating interpretation guides (RIGs). Assessment & Evaluation
in Higher Education, 25, 121-134.
The Online Tutor. (2008). Retrieved July 30, 2008, from http://tlu.ecom
.unimelb.edu.au/online/tools/online_tutor.html
Osthiemer, R. H. (1977). The two worlds of marketing. Journal of
Advertising Research, 17(1), 7-11.
Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (1991). How college affects students.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Peters, W. H. (1980). The marketing professorpractitioner gap: A possible solution. Journal of Business Education, 2(2), 4-11.
Ramocki, S. P. (1987). Measured effectiveness of client-sponsored consulting. Journal of Marketing Education, 9, 24-30.
Razzouk, N. Y., Seitz, V., & Rizkallah, E. (2003). Learning by doing:
Using experiential projects in the undergraduate marketing strategy
course. Marketing Education Review, 13(2), 35-41.
Richardson, N., & Raveed, S. (1980). A live-case program for teaching
marketing research. Journal of Marketing Education, 2, 38-42.
Sixbury, G. R., & Cashin, W. E. (1995a). Description of database for the
IDEA Diagnostic Form. In Center for Faculty Evaluation and
Development, IDEA paper, vol. 9. Manhattan, KS: Kansas State
University.
Sixbury, G. R., & Cashin, W. E. (1995b). IDEA technical report 10:
Comparative data by academic field. Manhattan: Center for Faculty
Evaluation and Development, Kansas State University.
Stern, B. L., & Tseng, P. D. (2002). Do academics and practitioners agree
on what and how to teacher the undergraduate marketing research
course. Journal of Marketing Education, 24, 225-232.
Strong, J. T., & Anderson, R. E. (1990). Free riding in group projects:
Control mechanisms and preliminary data. Journal of Marketing
Education, 12, 61-67.
Ward, J., & Rudelius, W. (1987, November). Using discovery techniques
to teach marketing: Evaluation and prospects. Paper presented at the
conference of the American Marketing Educators, Toronto.
Wiggins, G. (1998). Effective assessment: Designing assessments to
inform and improve student performance. San Francisco: JosseyBass.

Downloaded from http://jmd.sagepub.com at University of Melbourne Library on April 8, 2010