Assessment Brief (Student)
Module: MKT 306
Academic Year: 2021 / 22
Module Leader: Benjamin Spence


Assessment Method: 3000-word report (100% of marks)

Assignment Submission: Students are required to submit their coursework through
Turn-It-In. Only assessments submitted through Turn-It-In will be marked

Submission Date: By 23:59 on Monday 16th May 2022


Module Learning Outcomes:

K1 Explain the nature of marketing strategy and its significance for the organisation.
K2 Assess the drivers and factors affecting the choice of marketing strategies.
K3 Evaluate appropriate models and techniques that aid the strategic marketing
process.
K4 Analyse contemporary marketing issues and problems in a strategic context.

S1 Research skills.
S2 Interpretation of advanced information and marketing data handling skills.
S3 Assessing communications skills to develop effective relationship marketing.


MKT 306



Assignment Brief:

Your task is to identify an organisation (producer and/or brand owner), that is involved
in the marketing of games consoles and prepare an individual report of 3,000 words
(please see appendix 1 for further details) addressing the following issues.
The task is divided into two parts (Part 1 & Part 2) and candidates are expected to
address both.
Part 1
Using appropriate sources undertake a marketing audit of your chosen brand, this
should contain the following:
➢ An evaluation of the chosen brand’s current performance, this should include the
use of relevant market performance data to underpin your evaluation, for
example market growth, sales trends, profitability, etc.
➢ A critical evaluation of the brand’s customers and identification of the key drivers
in aligning the brand to preferences of this target group(s).
➢ An identification of the brand’s key competitors and exploration of how they gain
competitive advantage.
[Weighting - 60%]
Part 2
Based on your analysis of the brand in Part 1 you must select one of the brand’s products
and undertake a detailed evaluation of marketing practice - using a 4P Framework.
This should include discussion on:
➢ Product or Service
➢ Pricing approach
➢ Promotion techniques
➢ Location & Physical environment (Place)
You should also look to indicate key marketing mix recommendations to move the
business forward.
[Weighting - 40%]


MKT 306



You must:
➢ Undertake suitable secondary research into the sector and market using
appropriate secondary sources (non-academic).
➢ Apply appropriate theory and models to examine the organisation and their
marketplace using suitable academic articles and texts.
➢ Submit as a formal business report using appropriate headings.
➢ Further details will be provided in class and on Canvas Assessment section.
Assignment Structure:
This is an individual assignment as a single report in two parts. Candidates are
encouraged to be creative with their analysis and recommendations by using theories
covered in the lectures and workshops.
The below is a suggested structure that candidates may wish to follow for this
report:
Part 1
➢ Title page
➢ Table of contents
➢ Introduction
➢ Evaluation of current marketing strategy/performance (inc PESTLE)
➢ Analysis of customers and segments
➢ Analysis of the organisations competitors and competitive advantage (USP)

Part 2
➢ Marketing strategy analysis:
• Product rationale and explanation
• Pricing strategies employed
• Promotional campaigns used
• Distribution strategies undertaken
➢ Identification of appropriate marketing strategies to your chosen product / brand
➢ Conclusion
➢ Reference list


MKT 306



Appendix 1 - Word count requirement and word limit penalties


If the word limit is exceeded, the following penalties apply:










➢ The word count does not include words in tables, title page, references or
appendices.

➢ Students must indicate word count in submitted work - this word count should
appear on your title page.

➢ The word count for this assignment is 3,000 with a leniency of 10% (+/-) i.e.
a maximum word count of 3,300 and a minimum of 2,700 (it is strongly advised
you do not use this lower threshold).


Exceeds word limit by up to 10% No Penalty - tolerance band

Exceeds word limit by 10.1-20% 5 percentage points deduction
Exceeds word limit by 20.1-30% 10 percentage points deduction
Exceeds word limit by 30.1-40% 15 percentage points
Exceeds word limit by 40.1-50% 20 percentage points deduction
Exceeds word limit by more than 50% Mark of zero


MKT 306




Generic Assessment Criteria – Undergraduate Bachelor’s degree - Categories
Grade Relevance Knowledge Analysis Argument and Structure Critical Evaluation Presentation Reference to Literature
P
a
s
s

86 –
100%
The work examined is exemplary and provides clear evidence of a complete grasp of the knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to the Level of the
qualification. There is also unequivocal evidence showing that all the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that Level are fully satisfied. At this level it is
expected that the work will be exemplary in all the categories cited above. It will demonstrate a particularly compelling evaluation, originality, and elegance of argument,
interpretation or discourse.
76-85% The work examined is excellent and demonstrates comprehensive knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to the Level of the qualification. There is also
excellent evidence showing that all the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that level are fully satisfied. At this level it is expected that the work will be
excellent in the majority of the categories cited above or by demonstrating particularly compelling evaluation and elegance of argument, interpretation or discourse and
there may be some evidence of originality

70 –
75%
The work examined is of a high standard and there is evidence of comprehensive knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to the Level of the qualification.
There is also clearly articulated evidence demonstrating that all the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that level are satisfied. At this level it is
expected that the standard of the work will be high in the majority of the categories cited above or by demonstrating particularly compelling evaluation and elegance of
argument, interpretation or discourse.

60 –
69%
Directly relevant to
the requirements
of the assessment
A substantial
knowledge of
relevant material,
showing a clear
grasp of themes,
questions and
issues therein
Good analysis,
clear and orderly
Generally coherent and
logically structured, using
an appropriate mode of
argument and/or
theoretical mode(s)
May contain some
distinctive or
independent thinking;
may begin to
formulate an
independent position
in relation to theory
and/or practice.
Well written, with
standard spelling
and grammar, in a
readable style with
acceptable format
Critical appraisal of up-to-
date and/or appropriate
literature. Recognition of
different perspectives.
Very good use of source
material. Uses a range of
sources

50 –
59%
Some attempt to
address the
requirements of
the assessment:
may drift away
from this in less
focused passages
Adequate
knowledge of a fair
range of relevant
material, with
intermittent
evidence of an
appreciation of its
significance
Some analytical
treatment, but
may be prone to
description, or to
narrative, which
lacks clear
analytical
purpose
Some attempt to construct
a coherent argument, but
may suffer loss of focus
and consistency, with
issues at stake stated only
vaguely, or theoretical
mode(s) couched in
simplistic terms
Sound work which
expresses a coherent
position only in broad
terms and in uncritical
conformity to one or
more standard views
of the topic
Competently
written, with only
minor lapses from
standard grammar,
with acceptable
format
Uses a variety of literature
which includes some
recent texts and/or
appropriate literature,
though not necessarily
including a substantive
amount beyond library
texts. Competent use of
source material.
40 –
49%
Some correlation
with the
requirements of
the assessment
but there are
instances of
irrelevance
Basic
understanding of
the subject but
addressing a
limited range of
material
Largely
descriptive or
narrative, with
little evidence of
analysis
A basic argument is
evident, but mainly
supported by assertion
and there may be a lack
of clarity and coherence
Some evidence of a
view starting to be
formed but mainly
derivative.
A simple basic style
but with significant
deficiencies in
expression or
format that may
pose obstacles for
the reader
Some up-to-date and/or
appropriate literature
used. Goes beyond the
material tutor has
provided. Limited use of
sources to support a point.


MKT 306



F
a
il
35 –
39%
Relevance to the
requirements of
the assessment
may be very
intermittent, and
may be reduced to
its vaguest and
least challenging
terms
A limited
understanding of a
narrow range of
material
Heavy
dependence on
description,
and/or on
paraphrase, is
common
Little evidence of coherent
argument: lacks
development and may be
repetitive or thin
Almost wholly
derivative: the writer’s
contribution rarely
goes beyond
simplifying
paraphrase
Numerous
deficiencies in
expression and
presentation; the
writer may achieve
clarity (if at all) only
by using a
simplistic or
repetitious style
Barely adequate use of
literature. Over reliance
on material provided by
the tutor.
The evidence provided shows that the majority of the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that Level are satisfied – for compensation consideration.
30 –
34%

The work examined provides insufficient evidence of the knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to the Level of the qualification. The evidence provided shows
that some of the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that Level are satisfied. The work will be weak in some of the indicators.
15-29% The work examined is unacceptable and provides little evidence of the knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to the Level of the qualification. The evidence
shows that few of the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that Level are satisfied. The work will be weak in several of the indicators.
0-14% The work examined is unacceptable and provides almost no evidence of the knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to the Level of the qualification. The
evidence fails to show that any of the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that Level are satisfied. The work will be weak in the majority or all of the
indicators.