IB846B
Page 1 of 3


Global Branding
Term Three 2021/22
WARWICK BUSINESS SCHOOL



60% Individual Assignment

2500 words:
This is a strict limit not a guideline: any piece submitted with more words than the limit
will result in the excess not being marked

Drawing on the concepts and tools covered in the module, conduct an audit of a global brand
of your choice and make recommendations on how to further build its brand equity. Your
assignment should be in report format. Please note that you may not use a brand that has
been covered by the group assignments.

Your brand audit should evaluate the following:
• Brand strategy
• Brand marketing programmes
• Brand performance

Your recommendations may relate to any or all of the above. Further guidance on the marking
criteria is given in the appendix.




SUBMISSION DEADLINE: 20:00 (UK time) Wednesday 15th June 2022


Word Count Policy and Formatting (found in your Masters Student Handbook Section 6.2c)

Guidelines for Online Submission (found in your Masters Student Handbook Section 6.2e)


The submission deadline is precise and uploading of the document must be completed before 20.00 (UK time)
on the submission date. Any document submitted even seconds later than 20.00 precisely will be penalised for
late submission in line with WBS policy. Please consult your student handbook on my.wbs for more detailed
information.

The online assignment submission system will only accept documents in portable documents format (PDF)
files. Please note that we will not accept PDF files of scanned documents. You should create your assignment
in your chosen package (for example, Word), then convert it straight to PDF before uploading. Please place
your student ID number, NOT YOUR NAME, on the front of your submission as all submissions are marked
anonymously.

All the scripts should also have the following paragraph included on the front page:
IB846B
Page 2 of 3




PLEASE ENSURE YOU KEEP A SECURITY COPY OF YOUR ASSESSMENT
Your Academic Writing and Avoiding Plagiarism Module on my.wbs has lots of useful information on
structuring assignments, academic style and demonstrating critical engagement.

Please ensure that any work submitted by you for assessment has been correctly referenced as WBS expects
all students to demonstrate the highest standards of academic integrity at all times and treats all cases of poor
academic practice and suspected plagiarism very seriously. You can find information on these matters on
my.wbs, in your student handbook and on the University's library web pages here.

The University's Regulation 11 clarifies that '…'cheating' means an attempt to benefit oneself or another by
deceit or fraud. This includes reproducing one's own work…' It is important to note that it is not permissible to
re-use work which has already been submitted by you for credit either at WBS or at another institution (unless
you have been explicitly told that you can do so). This is considered self-plagiarism and could result in
significant mark reductions.

Upon submission of assignments, students will be asked to agree to one of the following declarations:

Individual work submissions:


By agreeing to these declarations (when the message pops up on submission) you are acknowledging that you
have understood the rules about plagiarism and self-plagiarism and have taken all possible steps to ensure
that your work complies with the requirements of WBS and the University.

You should only indicate your agreement with the relevant statement, once you have satisfied yourself that
you have fully understood its implications. If you are in any doubt, you must consult with the Module
Organiser or Named Internal Examiner of the relevant module, because, once you have indicated your
agreement, it will not be possible to later claim that you were unaware of these requirements in the event
that your work is subsequently found to be problematic in respect to suspected plagiarism or self-
plagiarism.

IB846B
Page 3 of 3


Appendix: Marking criteria:

Marks will be awarded as follows:

The brand audit (75%)
Comprehensiveness of the audit: How fully does the report cover the different elements of the brand’s
strategy, marketing programmes and performance?
Evidence of research into the brand: How strong is the evidence presented to support the evaluation of the
brand?
Application of relevant theory: How well is the evaluation supported by concepts and tools covered in the
module?
Justification of conclusions: How strongly are the conclusions on the brand supported by evidence and
argument?
Clarity of conclusions: How clear are the conclusions about the strengths and weaknesses of the brand?


Recommendations (15%)
Comprehensiveness of the recommendations: How fully do the recommendations mitigate weaknesses and
leverage strengths identified in the evaluation?
Justification: How strongly are recommendations supported by the preceding evaluation?


Academic writing (10%)

Writing style: How well-written is the report in terms of vocabulary, grammar and tone?
Structure: Are the different elements of the report presented in a logical and coherent order?
Referencing: Are contributing sources cited and referenced?