Assessment item 3
Markets segments and decision making
Due date: 04-Apr-2017
Return date: 02-May-2017
Length: 2500 words
Submission method options
Alternative submission method
The next stage of the marketing audit is for you to consider the market for your organisation and evaluate the opportunities and threats that exist for your chosen organisation. NB: if you have a number of markets it is a good idea to focus on just one.
Incorporating theoretical concepts into your discussion from chapters 2, 4, 5 and 6 (are these in relation to the new or the old version of the book) of the text, and with the use of other theoretical sources and secondary research, please discuss the following:
1. Briefly describe the industry market for your organisation and evaluate current trends in:
c. Macro environment ( PESTLE factor)
2. Outline and examine the major market segments for your organisation and identify your primary, and secondary target markets
3. Discuss the level of involvement your primary segment is likely to have towards your organisation in terms of the decision making .
4. Describe the nature of competition in your industry. Explain and analyse your organisation’s place in the market by comparing and contrasting its strengths and weaknesses to your main competitor.
5. Taking into consideration the primary segment, their level of involvement and the competition, create a positioning map for the market place.
More information on how to complete this assessment will be provided on Interact 2
This assessment assesses the following learning outcomes:
• be able to find relevant and important information about organisations, their industries and marketplaces from secondary sources;
• be able to evaluate the key marketing aspects of segmentation, targeting and positioning (STP) and be able to analyse an organisation's approach to STP.
Criterion :The various skills to be assessed Fail (0-49%) Pass (50-64%) Credit (65-74%) Distinction (75-84%) High Distinction (85-100%)
This is about the presentation of the work including: Structure, Format, Grammar, including images
Value 15% Poor grammar, spelling, punctuation, concepts were not clear, no paragraphs or formatting- no images, tables or illustrations
Some grammatical errors, sentences were clear and complete clear structure and formatting using headings, and sub headings, some illustrations and diagrams, but not explained and only decorative Minor grammatical errors, sentences were clear and complete, structure and format were used to aid the reader including diagrams, tables and images, that were relevant to argument, but were still not fully explained or described Free of grammatical errors
Structure and format were clear Sentences were well constructed. Language was concise. Excellent use of diagrams, images and tables that were both visually appealing as well as clearly relevant and explained Free of grammatical errors
Structure and format were clear, logical and consistent. Sentences were well constructed. Exceptional use of diagrams, images and tables, clearly relevant, explained and insightful links made
Theoretical analysis skills
This criterion is about defining, describing and evaluating the concepts that were found when researching the topic
Value 30% Concepts were not defined, described or evaluated, mainly listed without explanation
Concepts were defined, there was an attempt to provide descriptions with examples to explain, limited analysis Clear and relevant definitions and descriptions with examples, some attempt to develop analysis by comparing and contrasting of concepts Clear definitions, descriptions with examples and analysis of concepts with comparison, with clear evaluations and conclusions Clear definitions, descriptions with examples and analysis of concepts with highly insightful and perceptive comparisons, evaluations and conclusions
This criterion is about linking theory to a specific context, explaining how it relates to a product/company and making recommendations
Value 40% There was no or limited application to the case study, no examples provided no recommendations
Case study was described and identified. The context was connected briefly to theory, but the discussion was not well supported by arguments Case study was described and identified. The context was connected to theory with clear links. There were relevant market discussions
Case study described and identified and insightful evaluations were made. The context was connected to theory with clear, creative and logical links. There were relevant, well supported market discussions with explicit connections to theoretical arguments Case study described and identified and insightful evaluations were made. The context was connected to theory with exceptional, logical and imaginative links. The market discussions were highly relevant , realistic and supported with explicit connections to theoretical arguments
This criterion was about the application of APA 6th referencing
Value 15% There was limited or no attempt at in text or end of text referencing
There was an attempt to apply referencing, but style and application were inconsistent and some points remain unreferenced Referencing applied. However style/application was inconsistent with some errors in text/reference list
Both the in text and end reference list were consistent in terms of style and application of APA6. Both the in text and end reference list were consistent in terms of style and application of APA6. Referencing apparent in all places where expected.
Report format should be used for Assessment Two. However, you do not need to include an executive summary for the second assessment
Use an abbreviation of the questions as your section headings: i.e. (1) Industry trends, (2) Market segments overall, (3) Primary segment and decision making, (4) Competition, (5) Positioning map for organisation
Referencing should use APA 6th edition- see CSU library for tutorials and guide