MKTG7512 2022 S2 CASE REPORT (individual) Weighting: 40%
Student Name: ID:
Criteria

7 (High Distinction)
85-100%
6 (Distinction)
75-84.9%
5 (Credit)
65-74.9%
4 (Pass)
50-64.9%
<=3 (Fail)
0-49.5%
SATISFACTORY UNSATISFACTORY

Background

(10 points)
• Information in the background
section is very clear and follows a
very logical structure.
• Excellent introduction of the
company and its background, the
products and the focal product, and
motivation or reasons behind the
choice of the firm/brand/product.
• Information in the background
section is clear, follows a logical
structure, and somehow generates
interest from the readers. Both
academic and non-academic
information is used appropriately to
describe the scope, nature, current
situation, and potentially relevant
theoretical underpinnings of the
phenomenon.
• Information in the background
section is somewhat clear and
somehow follows a reasonable
structure that helps readers navigate
the contents. Both academic and
non-academic information are used,
although some are used
inappropriately, that provide
sufficient coverage of the
phenomenon.

• Information in the background
section follows an acceptable
structure, although readers may
struggle to understand the flow of
the statements. Some references are
used, although some are irrelevant
or used inappropriately. Overall,
the background section provides
satisfactory coverage of the
phenomenon.
• Information in the background
section is not organized
appropriately. Readers are
constantly baffled when reading
through the paragraphs. Very few
references are used and fail to
provide an acceptable coverage of
the phenomenon; some important
elements are missing.
Competitive position
(Situational analysis)

(16 points)
• Excellent analysis of the focal
product (or product line)’s
competitive situation.
• Demonstrates a highly developed
ability to identify key issues and
synthesize your ideas with those of
researched sources to strengthen
your argument.
• Very good analysis of the focal
product (or product line)’s
competitive situation.
• Demonstrates a well-developed
ability to identify key issues and
synthesize your ideas with those of
researched sources to strengthen
your argument.
• Good analysis of the focal product
(or product line)’s competitive
situation; more explanations are
needed for some items listed for
some of the SWOT components.
• Demonstrates a developed ability to
identify key issues and synthesize
your ideas with those of researched
sources to strengthen your
argument.
• Satisfactory analysis of the focal
product (or product line)’s
competitive situation; more
explanations are needed for some
items listed for some of the SWOT
components.
• Demonstrates a developing ability
to identify key issues and
synthesize your ideas with those of
researched sources to strengthen
your argument.
• Unsatisfactory analysis of the focal
product (or product line)’s
competitive situation; substantially
more explanations are needed for
some items listed for some of the
SWOT components.
• Demonstrates little to no ability to
identify key issues and to
synthesize your ideas with those of
researched sources.
Industry
competitiveness

(16 points)
• Excellent identification and
explanation for each force, with
overall competitiveness assessed
for each force as well as for the
whole industry.
• Demonstrates a highly developed
ability to identify key issues and
synthesize your ideas with those of
researched sources to strengthen
your argument.
• Very good identification and
explanation for each force, with
overall competitiveness assessed
for each force as well as for the
whole industry.
• Demonstrates a well-developed
ability to synthesize your ideas with
those of researched sources to
strengthen your argument.
• Good identification and explanation
for each force, with overall
competitiveness assessed for each
force as well as for the whole
industry.
• Demonstrates a developed ability to
synthesize your ideas with those of
researched sources to strengthen
your argument.
• Satisfactory identification and
explanation for each force, but
lacks an overall competitiveness
assessment for some forces or for
the whole industry.
• Demonstrates a developing ability
to identify key issues and
synthesize your ideas with those of
researched sources to strengthen
your argument.
• Unsatisfactory identification and
explanation for each force; lacks an
overall competitiveness assessment
for individual forces and overall
industry competition.
• Demonstrates little to no ability to
identify key issues and to
synthesize your ideas with those of
researched sources.
Segmentation

(16 points)
• Excellent identification of the
consumer characteristics, with their
relevance and importance very well
and clearly explained or justified.
• Excellent judgment of each
segment’s market attractiveness
based on the size and growth rate of
the market.
• Demonstrates a highly developed
ability to synthesize your ideas with
those of researched sources to
strengthen your argument.
• Very good identification of the
consumer characteristics, with their
relevance and importance well
explained or justified.
• Very good judgment of each
segment’s market attractiveness
based on the size and growth rate of
the market.
• Demonstrates a highly developed
ability to synthesize your ideas with
those of researched sources to
strengthen your argument.
• Good identification of the
consumer characteristics, with their
relevance and importance
satisfactorily explained or justified.
• Good judgment of each segment’s
market attractiveness based on the
size and growth rate of the market.
• Demonstrates a developed ability to
synthesize your ideas with those of
researched sources to strengthen
your argument.
• Satisfactory identification of the
consumer characteristics, with
some but inadequate explanation of
their relevance and importance.
• Satisfactory judgment of each
segment’s market attractiveness
based on the size and growth rate of
the market.
• Demonstrates a developing ability
to synthesize your ideas with those
of researched sources to strengthen
your argument.
• Unsatisfactory identification of the
consumer characteristics, with little
to no explanation of their relevance
and importance.
• Poor judgment of each segment’s
market attractiveness.
• Demonstrates little to no ability to
synthesize your ideas with those of
researched sources.
Perceptual map

(16 points)
• Excellent identification of product
attributes, with their relevance and
importance well and clearly
justified about selected consumer
characteristics.
• Excellent judgment and thorough
explanation of the position of the
focal and competing products on the
perceptual map.
• Demonstrates a highly developed
ability to synthesize your ideas with
those of researched sources to
strengthen your argument.
• Very good identification of product
attributes, with their relevance and
importance well justified about
selected consumer characteristics.
• Very good judgment and careful
explanation of the position of the
focal and competing products on the
perceptual map.
• Demonstrates a well-developed
ability to synthesize your ideas with
those of researched sources to
strengthen your argument.
• Good identification of product
attributes and their relevance and
importance are satisfactorily
justified about selected consumer
characteristics.
• Good judgment and explanation of
the position of the focal and
competing products on the
perceptual map.
• Demonstrates a developed ability to
synthesize your ideas with those of
researched sources to strengthen
your argument.
• Satisfactory identification of
product attributes, with some but
inadequate attempts to justify their
relevance and importance
concerning selected consumer
characteristics.
• Satisfactory judgment and
explanation of the position of the
focal and competing products on the
perceptual map.
• Demonstrates a developing ability
to synthesize your ideas with those
of researched sources to strengthen
your argument.
• Unsatisfactory identification of
product attributes, with no attempts
to justify their relevance and
importance concerning selected
consumer characteristics.
• Little or no explanation of the
position of the focal and competing
products on the perceptual map.
• Demonstrates little to no ability to
synthesize your ideas with those of
researched sources to strengthen
your argument.
Targeting and
positioning

(16 points)
• Excellent re-positioning of the
current product or introduction of a
new product, with potential
consequences thoroughly examined,
rationales very well justified and
clearly linked to a target market.
• Creative and original design of
product slogan.
• Excellent managerial contribution
to the firm/brand.
• Very good re-positioning the
current product or introducing a
new product, with potential
consequences carefully examined,
rationales well justified and linked
to a target market.
• Creative design of product slogan.
• Very good managerial contribution
to the firm/brand.
• Very good re-positioning the
current product or introducing a
new product, with potential
consequences examined, rationales
justified, and linked to a target
market.
• Good design of product slogan.
• Good managerial contribution to the
firm/brand.
• Satisfactory re-positioning the
current product or introducing a
new product, but lacks examination
of potential consequences or
sufficient justification of rationale;
somehow reasonably linked to a
target market.
• Satisfactory design of product
slogan.
• Some managerial contribution to
the firm/brand.
• Unsatisfactory re-positioning the
current product or introducing a
new product, with no examination
of potential consequences or
rationale justification; not linked to
a target market.
• Poor or no product slogan design.
• Little to no managerial contribution
to the firm/brand.
Professionalism
(presentation &
structure)

(10 points)
• Communication is very clear.
• No issues with coherence,
consistency, and/or flow.
• No referencing spelling and/or
grammatical issues.
• The report always adheres to the
formatting requirements.
• The report is within the 18-page
limit.
• Communication is clear.
• Few issues with coherence,
consistency, and/or flow.
• Few referencing, spelling, and/or
grammatical issues.
• The report adheres to the formatting
requirements.
• The report is within the 18- page
limit.
• Communication is mostly clear.
• Some issues with coherence,
consistency, and/or flow.
• Some referencing, spelling, and/or
grammatical issues.
• The report mostly adheres to the
formatting requirements.
• The report is within the 18-page
limit.
• Communication is sometimes
unclear.
• Issues with coherence, consistency,
and/or flow.
• Many referencing, spelling, and/or
grammatical issues.
• The report sometimes adheres to the
formatting requirements.
• The report is within the 18- page
limit.
• Communication is unclear.
• Many issues with coherence,
consistency, and/or flow.
• Many referencing, spelling, and/or
grammatical issues.
• The report does not adhere to the
formatting requirements.
• The report is over the 18-page
maximum.

Overall mark: _______
Marker: ___________

Comments: