ASSESSMENT BRIEF 3
Subject Code and Title MKT101A - Marketing Fundamentals
Assessment Part A: Marketing Strategy Presentation
Part B: Peer Review
Individual/Group Group of 4
Length Part A: 20 minutes presentation and 10 minutes Q&A (Maximum of 25 slides)
Part B: Group peer review: 500 words +/- 10%
Learning Outcomes a) Reflect on the evolution of the marketing concept
b) Outline the elements of the marketing process.
c) Analyse the social, cultural, global and environmental responsibilities of the professional marketer.
d) Demonstrate an understanding of analysis, problem solving and communication skills in Marketing.
e) Describe key marketing metrics used to evaluate the effectiveness of a marketing plan.
Submission Part A: Presentation submission due by Sunday 11:55 pm AEST/AEDT Module 6 (Week 11) for Online students
Part B: Peer Review due by 11:55pm AEST/AEDT Sunday of Module 6 (Week 12)
Weighting Part A: 25%
Part B: 10%
Total Marks Part A: 100 marks
Part B: 100 marks
The aim of this assessment is for you to demonstrate both your understanding of, and ability to identify the key components of a Marketing Plan for a product or service.
Based on the Product/Service identified in Assessment 2, groups are to conduct a full analysis of the current target market and marketing strategy through the application of theory presented and discussed in this subject.
Group presentation should include:
1. A brief background Information on the Company and selected Product/Service
2. The brand’s target market analysis that includes:
i. Segmentation analysis
ii. Targeting strategy
3. The positioning strategy that includes the possible positioning statement
4. Marketing mix variables that include:
i. Product mix strategy:
(a) The three levels of product.
(b) Brand strategy decision: line extension, brand extension, multi- brand and new brand.
ii. Pricing strategy:
(a) Pricing option: value-based, competition-based and cost plus.
(b) Price adjustment strategy iii. Placement:
(a) Marketing/distribution channel strategy
(b) Distribution coverage strategy iv. Promotion:
(b) Personal selling
(c) Sales promotion
v. Extended marketing mix variables:
(c) Physical evidence
5. A brief conclusion that includes the key findings.
6. The relevant concepts that have been explained and used.
Your Team is required to:
• Submit the presentation using the submission link for Part A of this assessment
• Upload the presentation also in Module 6 (Week 11) discussion forum
Your team will then be assigned a peer group presentation to be reviewed for Part B of this assessment by your facilitator from all the uploaded presentations. However, you are encouraged to view all the presentations uploaded in the discussion forum and put your feedback and comments.
Online students must submit an audio video version of their presentation. Tools like powerpoint or prezi are ideal to make presentations. Develop the presentation as a group but select one member to narrate the presentation. Also nominate one member to submit the presentation on behalf of the group
Information on using PowerPoint to create video presentations is available here:
Part B: Peer Review (10%)
The presentation prepared in Part A of this assessment is shared by the group through the discussion forum with your peers.
In this part B, your group will be assigned another group presentation for scrutiny and review .
Your Group :
• Is required to review and comment on another group’s presentation using the ‘Part A: Presentation – Learning Rubrics provided below’ (The same rubric is used by your facilitator to mark your own group presentation as a guide).
• Your aim as a group is to comment on the effectiveness of the marketing of other group presentation assigned for your review.
• Apply the marketing concepts discussed through the term to summarize the strengths and weaknesses of the other groups’ presentation
Your instructor will then:
1. Compare the marketing strategy presentation you reviewed with the result of your peer marking using the same Learning Rubrics provided below, and
2. Grade each group’s performance as reviewers.
It is expected that the group will provide meaningful and useful review and comments on the work done by another group. This is critical as review marks are assessed based on how well your comments reflect the group’s understanding of the marketing concepts as applied to the other group presentations being reviewed.
Online Students: Using the Module 6 (Week 12) discussion forum, take the opportunity to ask questions and clarify with the presenting team you are assigned to. Your final review of their presentation is due by Sunday Midnight of Module 6 (Week 12). Submit your review both into the Module 6 (Week 12) discussion forum and peer review submission link.
*One group peer review submission is to be provided per group by the group leader.
Marketing Strategy presentation learning rubric is listed below. Also below is the Learning Facilitators marking guide for assessing the Peer Review.
Part A: Marketing Strategy Presentation - Learning Rubrics
Assessment Attributes Fail (Unacceptable) (0-49) Pass
(75-84) High Distinction
Overall visual appeal of
10% There are many errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation. The slides were difficult to read and too much information had been copied onto them.
No visual appeal. There are many errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation. Too much information was contained on many slides.
Minimal effort made to make slides appealing or too much going on. There are some errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation. Too much information on two or more slides.
Good visual appeal. There are no errors
grammar and punctuation. Information is clear and concise on each slide. Very good visual appeal and engaging. There are no errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation. Information is clear and concise on each slide. Outstanding in visual appeal and very engaging.
Provide background information of the chosen
company and product/service.
10% The introduction did not meet the minimum standard. Inadequate information. Lack of
identification of specific product/service. Meets minimum standard. Basic background information provided. Moves beyond minimum standard. Shows evidence of research. Exceeds minimum standard. Information well synthesised and evidence of research. Far exceeds minimum standard. Background information of the
demonstrates ability to research and synthesize information into clear and concise information
Demonstrated understanding of the relevant concepts of segmentation and targeting.
Demonstrated the analysis that has been substantiated
Limited understanding and analysis of target market. Analysis includes limited substantiation. Some understanding and analysis of target market. Concepts are a bit patchy. Not all segmentation variables have been used. Some efforts of supporting the argument have been shown. Some research evident. A good understanding and analysis of the target market. Concepts have been clearly outlined. All variables have been used. Targeting options have been analysed. Targeting strategy has been outlined clearly. Effort to substantiate the A highly developed understanding and analysis of target market analysis is evident. Relevant concepts have been outlined clearly. All variables have been used. Targeting options have been outlined. Targeting strategy has been A sophisticated understanding and target market analysis. Relevant concepts have been outlined clearly. All variables have been used effectively. All variables show one intact target market. Targeting options have been outlined.
20% analysis has been demonstrated. Substantial research evident. outlined clearly.
Argument substantiated. A high level of research evident Targeting strategy has been outlined clearly. Argument substantiated. All analyses are linked one to another. A comprehensive research effort evident.
Demonstrated the analysis of positioning strategy and positioning statement.
20% Limited understanding of positioning. Positioning statement is unclear. Relevant concepts have been outlined. Concepts may be a bit patchy. Positioning statement contains the key elements. Some research evident to support argument. A good understanding of the relevant concepts. Positioning statement has been outlined. Substantial research evident. A highly developed understanding of positioning concept. Positioning statement has been outlined. Link to target market and need analysis
demonstrated. A high level of research evident. Sophisticated understanding of positioning concept. A positioning map created to help substantiated the argument. Positioning statement has been outlined comprehensively. Link to target market and need analysis demonstrated. Highly developed analysis of positioning analysis based on comprehensive research.
Marketing mix variables
Demonstrated the analysis and application of the marketing mix variables: core marketing mix variables and Limited understanding and analysis of the marketing mix variables. Not all variables have been analyzed. Analyses are patchy.
Little research evident. Some understanding and analysis of the marketing mix variables. Relevant concepts have been outlined. Minor concept inaccuracy may happen. All marketing mix variables have been outlined. Some analyses may be patchy.
Some research evident. A good understanding and analysis of marketing mix variables. Concepts have been outlined accurately. All marketing mix variables have been outlined. Substantial research demonstrated A highly developed understanding and analysis of the marketing mix variables. Concepts have been outlined accurately. All marketing mix variables have been outlined. A sophisticated understanding and analysis of the marketing mix variables. Concepts have been outlined accurately. All marketing mix variables have been outlined.
extended marketing mix variables.
20% to support argument. Demonstrated the effort to show all marketing mix variables are integrated. Argument substantiated. A high level of research evident. Demonstrated the effort to show all marketing mix variables are integrated.
Demonstrated the effort to show all marketing mix variables are linked to the positioning strategy. Argument substantiated.
Demonstrated the ability to outline a conclusion.
10% Conclusion not outlined.
If it is outlined, conclusion does not reflect the analyses at all. Conclusion has reflected the analyses. However, some key elements may be missing. Conclusion has reflected the analyses. Only minor elements missing. Conclusion has reflected the analyses. All key findings have been included in conclusion. Conclusion has reflected the analyses. All key findings have been included in conclusion. It shows one intact strategy.
Difficult to understand for audience, no logical/clear structure, poor flow of ideas, argument lacks supporting evidence.
No effort is made to keep audience engaged, audience cannot follow the line of reasoning.
Information, arguments and evidence are presented in a way that is not always clear and logical.
Attempts are made to keep the audience engaged, but not always successful. Line of reasoning is often difficult to follow.
Information, arguments and evidence are well presented, mostly clear flow of ideas and arguments.
The audience is mostly engaged, line of reasoning is easy to follow.
Information, arguments and evidence are very well presented, the presentation is logical, clear and well supported by evidence.
Engages the audience, demonstrates cultural sensitivity.
Expertly presented; the presentation is logical, persuasive, and well supported by evidence, demonstrating a clear flow of ideas and arguments.
Engages and sustains audience’s interest in the topic, demonstrates
Little use of presentation aids, or the presentation aids and material used are irrelevant.
Presentation aids are used more for effect than relevance.
Effective use of presentation aids.
Carefully and well prepared presentations aids are used. high levels of cultural sensitivity
Effective use of diverse presentation aids, including graphics and multi-media.
Part B: Peer Review Marking Guide –
Your instructor will use the guide below to assess your group review of another group’s presentation
(Advanced) High Distinction
Did the groups comments reflect their own understanding of the relevant marketing concepts
Often confuses assertion of personal opinion with marketing concepts from research/course materials.
Incorrect or missing marketing concepts were not identified (or
Made no recommendations or suggested changes are very general, lacks detail, does not answer the problem.
Often confuses assertion of personal opinion with marketing concepts from research/course materials.
Recommended improvements and
provides alternative solutions but lack detailed explanation and justification.
Supports personal opinion and information substantiated by marketing concepts from the research/course materials.
Demonstrates a capacity to explain and apply relevant concepts.
Identify logical flaws.
Recommended changes answers the problems and provides alternative solutions and detailed explanation and justification. Some explanations are not convincing.
Discriminates between personal opinion and information substantiated by robust evidence from the research/course materials and extended reading.
Well demonstrated capacity to explain and apply relevant concepts. Analysis and evaluation reflect growing judgement, intellectual independence, rigor and adaptability.
answers the problems and provides alternative solutions and detailed explanation and justification.
Explanations are convincing. Main problems were prioritised.
Systematically and critically discriminates between assertion of personal opinion and information substantiated by robust evidence from the research/course materials and extended reading.
Information is taken from sources with a high level of interpretation/evaluation to develop a comprehensive critical analysis or synthesis.
Exhibits intellectual independence, rigor, good judgement and adaptability.
Excellent explanation and justifications of the recommended changes. Main problems were categorised and prioritised. Alternative solutions were evaluated.