1MANG1015 -
ASSESSMENT
BRIEF
Photo by Tiago Alexandre Lopes on Unsplash
MANG1015 Introduction to Marketing Individual Report
Submission Deadline by 4pm on Thursday 12th January 2023.
The Scenario
You have just been appointed as a Marketing Assistant to a company of your choice (A copy of the
role can be found in appendix 1). The Marketing Manager has asked you to prepare a briefing
deck entitled “The Jewel in the Crown; Insights and Challenges” for an upcoming board level and
stakeholder briefing in Spring 2023.
By its very nature, this is not a presentation that will paint a gloomy picture of current performance
or circumstance. This is a deck that will demonstrate not only understanding but will solidify the
audiences confidence in the marketing manager. Yes there are always challenges but equally chal-
lenges can be overcome.
Selecting an organisation
You may select an organisation from any of the following sectors excluding organisations covered
in the module schedule (e.g Week 4: BBC iPlayer, Now TV, Disney+, Amazon Prime, Netflix, & Ap-
pleTV. Week6: Camden Town Brewery Week 9: Elon Musk / Twitter). The organisation should be
based in the UK and should be publicly accessible, e.g. the marker will need to be able to fact check
your submission if necessary. Data should come from the public domain or available re-
sources through the University Library. Primary data collection is prohibited for this
assessment.
• Banking
• Charity
• Education
• Entertainment (inc. Music, Film, Games, TV)
• Government
• Hospitality
• Insurance
• Journalism
• Manufacturing
• Publishing
• Retail
• Software
• Sport
• Technology
• Tourism
It is accepted that many organisations have multiple brands and can operate in numerous sectors.
In cases such as these, you should choose only one business unit for the assessment. E.g Amazon
2
sell products on a website and also deliver Amazon Web Services (AWS), Alexa, Prime etc. You
should focus one part of the business such as Alexa.
The Briefing Deck
The Briefing Deck has 2 components.
• A Presentation Deck
• Evidential Notes
Presentation Deck
The powerpoint or keynote deck suitable for a 10 minute presentation will be used by the market-
ing manager when he presents at the podium. They are presenting to an audience of approximately
200 people in a theatre setting. In addition to the slides visible to the audience, the notes section
should be used to highlight key points and areas of the narrative that can be emphasised appropri-
ate to each slide.
Evidence Notes
The Evidence Notes should provide the detail for the marketing manager to justify the approach
and points taken. This is an ‘overlay’ to accompany the Presentation Deck that details the rationale,
evidence, sources used by you and your own reflection that underpins the opinions given in the
other decks. This is an internal document of no more than 5 pages for the marketing manager
and is not designed for wider circulation outside the organisation.
Assessment Submission Format
The Presentation Deck and Evidential Notes should be submitted in PDF format as a single docue-
ment. The original files used to create them (e.g .MS Powerpoint or Apple Keynote, MS Word or
Apple Pages etc) need to be retained and be available for inspection at the request of the marker.
Assessment Marking Criteria
Please refer to the Grade Descriptor of further detail.
The Presentation Deck (40%)
The presentation deck is focused on visually supporting the speaker. The marker will be looking at
the approach taken to visual storytelling balanced with key information presentation and speaker
notes. This part of the assessment is focused primarily on Learning Outcomes A1, A2 , B1 & C2.
Consider the manner in which you are presenting (C2) your chosen business unit / organisation
and its position within the business environment (A1). Those insights should flow into the chal-
lenges that can be overcome (A2 & B1) .
3
The Evidence Deck (60%)
The evidence deck focuses on your ability to evaluate and apply marketing principles (B2), sum-
marising concepts (C1) and to communicate those accordingly (C2). This element forms the
foundation and justification of your approach and therefore carries a greater number of marks.
In all cases it is important that you use Harvard referencing (including imagery) to acknowledge
all your sources.
4
MANG1015: Grade Descriptor
Percentage 0 - 24 25 – 39 40 – 49 50 – 59 60 – 69 70 - 79 80 - 100
Degree Class Fail Third class Class 2.2 Class 2.1 First Class First class
The Presentation Deck (40%)
Addresses task Misunderstands the
task.
Limited understand-
ing of the task.
Poor understanding
of the task.
Reasonable under-
standing of the task.
Good understanding
of the task.
Very good under-
standing of the task.
Excellent understand-
ing of the task.

Shows knowledge
and understanding
of theory and con-
cepts.
No/inadequate evid-
ence of knowledge
and understanding of
theory and concepts.
Limited and patchy
evidence of know-
ledge and under-
standing of theory
and concepts.
Some evidence of
superficial critical
knowledge and un-
derstanding of theory
and concepts.
Level of critical know-
ledge and under-
standing of theory
and concepts is sound
but lacks depth.
Good level of critical
knowledge and un-
derstanding evident
of theory and con-
cepts.
Critical knowledge
and understanding of
theory and concepts
is applied in a com-
prehensive and con-
cise manner.
Critical knowledge
and understanding of
theory and concepts
is applied in a highly
comprehensive and
concise manner.

Shows independ-
ent thinking.
No/inadequate evid-
ence.
Limited evidence. Poor evidence. Reasonable inde-
pendent ideas evid-
ent.
Good independent
thinking is evident
Evidence of very good
Independent thinking
and original views.
Excellent innovative/
original ideas presen-
ted.

Well-structured No/inadequate struc-
ture.
Limited structure. Poor structure Adequate structure Good structure Very good structure Excellent structure
with exceptionally
clear introduction
and conclusions.

Correct and fluent
English language.
Very poor and often/
mostly inarticulate.
Mostly incompre-
hensible.
Significant deficien-
cies in expression.
Inconsistent and
limited use of lan-
guage.
Adequately expressed
but some inconsist-
encies apparent. Ba-
sic use of language.
Appropriately ex-
pressed. Reasonable
use of language.
Well expressed. Clear
and appropriate use
of language.
Very well expressed.
Confident and very
good use of language.
Exceptionally com-
petent and fluent use
of expression. Con-
fident and excellent
use of language.

5
Percentage 0 - 24 25 – 39 40 – 49 50 – 59 60 – 69 70 - 79 80 - 100
Degree Class Fail Compensatable
Fail*
Third class Class 2.2 Class 2.1 First Class First class
The Evidence Notes (60%)
Addresses task Misunderstands the
task.
Limited understand-
ing of the task.
Poor understanding of
the task.
Reasonable under-
standing of the task.
Good understanding
of the task.
Very good under-
standing of the task.
Excellent understand-
ing of the task.
No/inappropriate
evidence of reading.
Little or no ability to
use information ef-
fectively. No/inad-
equate focus and dir-
ection.
Limited evidence of
reading. Patchy evid-
ence of appropriate
use of information.
Limited focus and
direction throughout.
Some evidence of
reading the literature.
Information applied
with some consist-
ency. Inconsistent
focus and direction
throughout.
Appropriate use of
literature. Reasonable
use of information but
not always relevant to
the task. Mostly con-
sistent focus and dir-
ection throughout.
Evidence of extensive
reading. Good use of
information, relating
it clearly to the con-
text of the task. Clear
focus and direction
throughout.
Evidence of compre-
hensive reading. Very
good use of informa-
tion, relating it very
clearly to the context
of the task. Very clear
focus and direction
throughout.
Evidence of very
comprehensive read-
ing. Outstanding abil-
ity in the use of in-
formation to support
points. Exceptionally
clear focus and direc-
tion throughout.
Shows knowledge
and understanding
of theory and con-
cepts.
No/inadequate evid-
ence of knowledge
and understanding of
theory and concepts.
Limited and patchy
evidence of know-
ledge and understand-
ing of theory and con-
cepts. Limited discus-
sion.
Some evidence of
superficial critical
knowledge and under-
standing of theory and
concepts. Basic dis-
cussion.
Level of critical know-
ledge and under-
standing of theory
and concepts is sound
but lacks depth. Reas-
onable discussion.
Good level of critical
knowledge and un-
derstanding evident
of theory and con-
cepts. Clear discus-
sion.
Critical knowledge
and understanding of
theory and concepts
is applied in a com-
prehensive and con-
cise manner. Very
clear discussion.
Critical knowledge
and understanding of
theory and concepts
is applied in a highly
comprehensive and
concise manner. Ex-
ceptionally clear dis-
cussion.
Shows independent
thinking.
No/inadequate evid-
ence.
Limited evidence. Poor evidence. Reasonable inde-
pendent ideas evid-
ent.
Good independent
thinking is evident
Evidence of very good
Independent thinking
and original views.
Excellent innovative/
original ideas presen-
ted.
Clearly presented,
rigorously argued
and focussed ana-
lysis.
No analysis, no central
argument evident.
Mostly descriptive,
with minimal analysis.
Limited coherent
argument.
Basic and sometimes
irrelevant analysis
evident. Argument is
basic and poorly con-
structed.
Analysis is reasonable
with some reliance on
description. Some
confusion evident but
most argument is
appropriate.
Clear and effective
analysis. Argument
has structure and is
legitimate. Well-struc-
tured argument that
provides very good
clarity.
Comprehensive and
precise analysis.
Excellent analysis,
precise and concise.
Exceptionally well-
structured argument
that provides excel-
lent clarity.
6
Supports argu-
ments with clear
and effective ex-
amples/ evidence.
No/inadequate ex-
amples/evidence.
Limited examples/
evidence.
Poor evidence and/or
basic examples.
Reasonable relevant
examples/evidence.
Good relevant ex-
amples are evident
and clearly articu-
lated. Good evidence
to support argu-
ments.
Very good relevant
examples are evident,
very clearly articu-
lated. Very good evid-
ence to support ar-
guments.
Excellent relevant
examples are evident,
exceptionally clearly
articulated and evid-
enced to the task.
Excellent evidence to
support arguments.
Scope of relevant
literature including
reference list in the
Harvard style.
No/inadequate evid-
ence of reading of the
core text or beyond.
Limited or no evid-
ence of reading of the
core text or beyond.
Evidence of some use
of literature but with
numerous omissions.
Appropriate coverage
of relevant literature
but with omissions.
Good coverage of
relevant literature.
Comprehensive cov-
erage of relevant liter-
ature.
Excellent coverage of
relevant literature.
Well-structured No/inadequate struc-
ture.
Limited structure. Poor structure Adequate structure Good structure Very good structure Excellent structure
with exceptionally
clear introduction and
conclusions.
Ability to reflect on
the task.
No/inadequate reflec-
tion.
Limited reflection. Basic reflection. Reasonable reflection. Good reflection. Very good reflection. Excellent reflection
Correct and fluent
English language.
Very poor and often/
mostly inarticulate.
Mostly incomprehens-
ible.
Significant deficien-
cies in expression.
Inconsistent and lim-
ited use of language.
Adequately expressed
but some inconsisten-
cies apparent. Basic
use of language.
Appropriately ex-
pressed. Reasonable
use of language.
Well expressed. Clear
and appropriate use
of language.
Very well expressed.
Confident and very
good use of language.
Exceptionally com-
petent and fluent use
of expression. Confid-
ent and excellent use
of language.