Assessment 3 Information
Subject Code: MKT304
Subject Name: Strategic Marketing
Assessment Title: Individual Assessment 3 –Strategic Marketing Proposal
Weighting: Report – 40%
Word count 1500
Submission: PDF form via Turnitin.
Due Date: Week 13
You are the Marketing Development Team of a global organisation. Your team is to plan for an integrated marketing communications launch of a new product.
You are required to
1. choose a brand category you would like to represent and select one new product under the category
2. Choose at least 2 key marketing theories to discuss the new direction for the brand and integrate and discuss in depth in your report
3. Identify a new strategic brand position using Ansoff’s matrix and offer a new strategic marketing plan focussing on either offensive or defensive strategies
This is an individual assessment.
Some categories examples include:
(1) Convenience goods, (2) shopping goods and (3) specialty goods
The report files must be submitted by the due date as a ‘PDF’ document to avoid any technical issues that may occur from incorrect file format upload.
• Uploaded files with a virus will not be considered as a legitimate submission and regular penalties will apply.
• The Turnitin system will notify you if there is any issue within the submitted file.
• In this case you must contact your lecturer via email immediately and provide a brief description of the issue and a screen shot of the Turnitin message.
• You are also encouraged to submit your work well in advance of the time deadline to avoid any possible delay with the Turnitin similarity report or any other technical difficulties that may arise.
Late assignment submission penalties
Penalties will be imposed on late assignment submissions in accordance with Kaplan Business School policy.
Number of days Penalty
1 - 9 days 5% per day for each calendar day late deducted from the total marks available.
10 - 14 days 50% deducted from the allocated marks of the assignment.
After 14 days Assignments that are submitted more than 14 calendar days after the due date will not be accepted and the student will receive a mark of zero for the assignment(s).
Note Notwithstanding the above penalty rules, assignments will also be given a mark of zero if they are submitted after assignments have been returned to students
Assessment Report Marking Rubrics
Criteria Fail Pass Credit Distinction High Dist’n
Understanding of the project Key points left out. No grasp of issues that faced the client. Over reliance on notes. Includes some issues but analysis glossed over. Team seemed uncomfortable to go beyond key facts. Includes all issues, analysis and recommendations but with little elaboration. Not integrated with theory or are not justified. Builds convincing argument showing how key issues, analysis and recommendations are integrated together. Builds convincing argument showing how all key points are integrated together. Uses examples to elaborate the key points and theory.
Introduction / Conclusion
Introduction missing or underdeveloped. Reader has no idea what the assessment will be or was about. No conclusion. Assessment just finishes. Limited clarity of purpose / overview. Highlights key issues but interpretation of these. Conclusion weak. Doesn’t tie in with what was introduced. Provides purpose for assessment, highlights and interprets key issues to be addressed but recommendation but not integrated. As for level below plus shows consistency between marketing problem identification and final recommendations well established. Engaging conclusion clearly sums up assessment and relates back to the introduction.
Evidence of analysis and 3rd party support No references to any sources. Suggestions/recommendations just seem appear. Steps used in analysis shown but little justification why or how these are used to develop recommendations. Background research and analysis of this is clearly identifiable. Steps used are shown and some rationale for the development of recommendations provided. Evidence of extensive research and analysis: journals, prescribed text, other books, verified websites, primary research. Used references to justify analysis As for level below plus able to use references to back up claims and recommendations made.
Recommendations clear come from the analysis of the project.
Recommendations Recommendations missing Recommendations very general in nature – client would not be able to implement them without doing further analysis. Recommendations given in a way that they could be implemented but no justification given or benefits explained to the client Recommendations are logical and feasible. Timelines and justifications for these provided. Ties in with the clients brief. Recommendations can easily be implemented. Timelines, responsibilities and costs provided.
Organisation No structure to the assessment. Reader cannot follow sequence. No introduction or conclusion. Apparent that group is not working well together. Group members missing (without valid reason) or not contributing. Ideas not focused. Reader may have difficulty following argument. Main points difficult to identify. No transition between key points. Awkward transition between speakers. Assessment appears to be done by individuals rather than group. Main ideas presented in logical manner. Flow of assessment may be awkward. Group members demonstrate that they have worked on assessment as a whole.
All group members take equal share in assessment. Main ideas presented in logical manner. Flow of assessment smooth between speakers. Shows that the group has worked collaboratively Ideas clearly organised so Reader can follow easily. The purpose of the assessment is clear in all stages.
Seamless transition between speakers.