You are required to critically examine the marketing strategy of a commercial organisation of your choosing.

You are required to critically examine the marketing strategy of a commercial organisation of your choosing. The purpose of the assignment is to look at marketing strategy from a strategic perspective and to examine in depth one aspect of the organisations marketing strategy. You should focus on only 1 of the following strategies:

1. STP (Segmentation, Targeting and Positioning)
2. Branding Strategy
3. Relationship Marketing Strategy
4. Market Penetration Strategy
5. Market Extension Strategy
6. New Product Development Strategy

Extra Guidance:

 

Your discussion should include:

• Marketing objectives related to the chosen strategy. This should be placed before the main discussion on Strategy.

 

• The relationship between the firms’ competitive advantage and the chosen strategy. You will need to clearly identify what you consider to be the organisations competitive advantage(s).

 

• Application of relevant models and theories to support your discussion. You are advised to include key academics in the relevant fields.

 

• Clear conclusions with justified recommendations for improvements (from a critical perspective)

You can choose any commercial organisation. It is recommended to choose a medium to large size firm, where secondary information is readily available.

There are a large number of case studies on organisations such as Apple, Burberry, Starbucks etc, and some will be used in the seminars. If you choose a firm that we study in Seminar, the quality & originality of your analysis needs to be much more advanced and not merely a repeat of the seminar.

You are required to be analytical and critical and not merely descriptive. So ‘critically examine’ is a key term.

Use a proper report format, so a title and contents page should be included, with section headings and page numbers. There should be an introduction, main body and conclusion.

The assignment should be in a report format and 1,500 words in length (MAX). You should not exceed this amount.

Details of how marks will be awarded are in the tables below:

The word count excludes the title page, table of contents, list of references and appendix. You do NOT need an executive summary.

PLEASE UPLOAD THIS DOCUMENT WITH YOUR ASSIGNMENT IN A WORD FORMAT.

This will be returned to you with your marks and assignment feedback.

Feedback and the assignment mark will be given within 3 weeks of the submission date,  via Surreylearn.

1. Presentation and Style (10 marks)

	Mark range	MARK
The work is well structured and has a logical and well ordered flow between issues. Language used is sophisticated and articulate. Referencing is consistent and uses the Harvard method. Originality of thought is demonstrated	8-10
There is a clear underlying structure to the work which makes it easy to read and understand. Referencing is consistent. Some original ideas	6-7
The work is acceptably presented and has a clear structure. The arguments are clearly expressed although the language and terminology used lacks sophistication. Referencing is consistent. Lacking originality of ideas	5
The work lacks a central narrative which links the issues discussed together in a coherent way. Referencing is haphazard.	4
The work has no real structure and is more a collection of loosely related issues than anything. Referencing is haphazard and weak. There are errors of spelling, grammar and punctuation.	0-3

 

1. Use of Appropriate Models and Concepts (25 marks)

	Mark range	MARK
A clear and sensible choice of models and concepts has been made with which to carry out analysis. The models are used well and develop clear and robust analysis which shows an excellent understanding of the model and how it can be applied. There is a clear link between objectives and strategy.	18-25
A good choice of models and concepts is made and these models and concepts are used appropriately and correctly. There is some link between the objectives and strategy.	15-17
Models chosen are appropriate to the example under discussion but the analysis derived from them could be further enhanced. The use of models has a limited impact on the analysis. A limited link between objectives and strategy.	12-14
The use of models is haphazard and there is no clear rationale for why they have been chosen. The models deliver limited analysis and offer few if any insights into the example under discussion. Poor or little mention of objectives and poor relation to strategy.	10-11
Limited or no use of models is demonstrated. Information about the company and its environment is simply described and there is nothing to guide or focus the analysis. Objectives are not mentioned with no link to strategy.	0-9

1. Evidence of Research and Understanding about the Organisation  (25 marks)

	Mark range	MARK
The assignment uses a variety of sources, all of them reliable, to provide an excellent level of detail. A systematic approach is taken to the gathering of evidence and information about the company. Discussions and recommendations are supported by robust evidence throughout.  Excellent understanding about the organisation is shown.	18-25
A good selection of sources are used to provide information about the company  and these are used to reach sound conclusions. A good understanding about the organisation is shown. Clear, well explained and justified recommendations are given.	15-17
Different sources may be used to gather information but there is no real attempt made to distinguish between the quality of information presented. The use of information is unstructured and haphazard and provides a limited base for conclusions and discussion. Some understanding of the organisation shown. Recommendations, but lacking evidence and justification	12-14
Whilst there is some information provided about the company, it will tend to be anecdotal and lacking in robustness. There is no real evidence of a systematic approach to gathering information. Conclusions reached do not reflect the quality of evidence provided. Limited understanding of the organisation shown.	10-11
The assignment is too reliant on just one or two sources of information about the company and no attempt is made to examine the reliability and quality of those sources. Material presented is accepted uncritically and without question.	0-9

1. Discussion and Analysis (25 marks)

	Mark range	MARK
The assignment has a clear focus on the question posed and answers it using sophisticated analysis and discussion. There is a clear structure and line of argument throughout the assignment.  There is a clear critical discussion throughout. Originality of thought and creativity is demonstrated. Excellent integration of competitive advantage with strategy. Recommendations are clear, sensible, and well justified.	18-25
The assignment contains some good discussion and analysis.  Most of the assignment questions have been addressed well. The discussion overall is good and there is a good line of argument. Clear, justified recommendations are made Good integration of competitive advantage with strategy.	15-17
The assignment attempts to answer some of the questions posed in a satisfactory manner. There is a blend of analysis and description but the assignment overall leans towards the descriptive rather than the analytical. Models may be used but there is no real attention paid to how theory can develop analysis and insights. Some attempt to examine competitive advantage with strategy. Some attempt to make recommendations for improvement.	12-14
The assignment lacks a clear structure which focuses on the question posed and is mainly descriptive with no real analytical content. The assignment focuses on what has happened and makes no real attempt to use theory, models or evidence to explain why it may have happened and the implications of such things. The work is mainly descriptive. Poor or no mention of competitive strategy. Unjustified superficial recommendations, that lack links to analysis	10-11
The assignment is little more than a collection of loosely related points about a company and the environment in which it operates. There is no integration between theory, models and evidence at all. No mention of competitive advantage or recommendations.	0-9

1. Conclusions (15 marks)

 

Conclusions reached are robust, clear and an accurate reflection of the preceding sections of the report. Conclusions draw together the different strands of theory and practice developed in the assignment. The conclusions show a high level of understanding of marketing strategy.	10-15
Conclusions are a good reflection of the assignment overall and round things off in a clear and competent manner. An understanding of marketing strategy is demonstrated but differentiating between important and less important issues needed development.	8-9
Reflections are a reasonable reflection of the work in the main body of the assignment. No real distinction is shown between important and less important issues but there is an adequate understanding of marketing strategy demonstrated.	6-7
Conclusions do little more than restate what was in the main body of the assignment and so lack impact. No distinction is made between important and less important issues and limited understanding of the subject matter is demonstrated.	4-5
Conclusions are weak, underdeveloped and have no real relationship with the work which preceded them. Conclusions do not suggest an understanding of either the theory or practice of marketing strategy.	0-3