I think that a path to better assess the contribution of each member should be useful, even if everybody agreed upon and collaborated to the final work, that could have been better developed and more carefully revised if there was a positive climate of collaboration. I am available for a meeting to examine in depth the case if required. However, I have just written in depth the appraisal as I think that a real understanding of the group dynamics is important and learning objectives of the assignment should comprehend team working …show more content…
I have shared many ideas for the creative strategy (headlines, concepts and visual design – some of them attached to the Appendix), even if as a non-native speaker I had some language obstacles to explaining my ideas to be understood by the group. I have always provided feedback to the ideas of the group, explaining my point of view, supporting it with a reason and giving suggestions to improve them (also offering practical help – e.g. I helped with the choice of the font and, in the magazines’ double page ad with the layout and the logo design). The concept and design suggestions provided in the magazines’ single page ad, which I would have liked to show to have a coordinated image in term of visual and a more coherent, powerful and replicable concept, have been refused by all the members of the group. That is to say, I tried to improve the concept already improved by Victoria Papanastassis starting by Trent Dyer’s suggestion (which has not been considered adapt for the campaign by the other three members - it is attached to the Appendix with a description provided by Trent), but also suggesting other concepts, which in my opinion better suited the communication objectives chosen. By the end, just the logo has been accepted, with Trent’s insistence prevailing, with the support of the passiveness of Victoria and Madu – the first one