Combo Offer Get 10% OFF + 5% Signup Bonus ! Limited Time, Hurry ! CLAIM OFFER

BUS020X610H Branding Assignment Help

14-08-2022 06:29:18 By Admin

Assessment Brief

Academic year and term:

2022 – Semester One

Module title:

Branding

Module code:

BUS020X610H

Module Convener:

Ian Rogers (QA) [email protected]

 

Learning outcomes assessed within this piece of work as agreed at the programme level meeting

Knowledge:

You will be able to develop an in-depth knowledge of branding as part of marketing management, and its relationship to the wider organisational objectives including corporate social responsibility.

Intellectual/transferrable:

You will be able to assess the success or otherwise of a brand, identifying problems, offering suggested improvements by utilising a wide range of sources of information to apply appropriate techniques and, demonstrate criticality (independent thinking) in the evaluation and synthesis of information relating to branding. You will be able to present the findings of your analysis in a professional business report.

Type of assessment:

Formative assessment:

Individual report (maximum 500 words)

Summative assessment:

Business report of a self-selected brand (3000 words)

Assessment deadlines :

 Formative TBC

 Summative 7TH SEPTEMBER BEFORE 2 PM

 

Instructions for assessment

  1. Formative assessment

The formative assessment for this module takes the form of an individual report. You will be asked to conduct an analysis of the evolution of the positioning of a brand. This can be a UK brand or from any other country. Who is the target market of the brand? Who is the key competition? What are the points of parity and the points of difference of the brand against key competition? How have these elements changed over time? You will need to include your analysis in a report of maximum 500 words and submit it by Week 7 via Moodle.

The formative assessment represents a unique opportunity to test your understanding of, and ability to correctly and creatively apply, concepts that are part of your summative assessment (e.g., brand positioning).

 Get Best Quality Essay writing Service in UK !!

 

  1. Summative assessment

The summative assessment for this module consists in an individual business report on a self-selected brand. You will need to identify a brand that is currently having some image issues (i.e., not clear what it stands for, or perceived as old-fashioned and out-of-date), analyse its current positioning, develop a new positioning and managerial recommendations to bring this new positioning to life.

Note that you can select any type of brand. It can be a consumer goods brand (e.g., Bird’s Eye), a retailer brand (e.g., WHSmith), a consumer electronics or technology brand (e.g., Apple), a luxury brand (e.g., D&G), a fashion brand (e.g., Abercrombie & Fitch), a corporate brand (e.g., Unilever), or a celebrity brand (e.g., Britney Spears), to give some examples.

The word limit for this assessment is 3,000 words including tables and figures but excluding references.

Your report should include the following sections:

  1. An introduction which explains the reasons behind the choice of your brand. Why did you select this brand? What are the image issues this brand is currently going through? The choice of your brand should be supported by some type of evidence such as facts from the news or data from industry reports. (About 500 words)
  2. An analysis of the current positioning of the brand. Who is the target market? Who is the key competition? What are the points of parity (POPs) and the points of difference (PODs) of the brand against key competition? (About 1000 words)
  3. Development of a new brand positioning. How should the current brand positioning be different? What elements of the current positioning should be maintained, if any? What elements should be changed? (About 1000 words)
  4. Development of managerial recommendations about how to bring the new brand positioning to life. For instance, what communication leverages should be used to implement the new brand positioning with the target market? How should these leverages be integrated one another? Although you do not have a budget, you must be realistic and develop feasible managerial recommendations. This means, for example, that if you choose a small, local brand, you cannot include TV advertising in your recommendations. (About 500 words)
  5. A bibliography which includes all the references that you used to carry out your brand analysis. (Not included in the word count)

Resit assignment details

Resit submission date: TBC and as shown on Moodle

 

For students who are offered a resit you are required to improve and resubmit your original work as well as adding a further reflective commentary discussing what you have learned from the process.

You must resubmit your work using the specific resit Turnitin link on Moodle.

You should:

  1. Review your previously submitted work and read carefully the feedback given by the marker.
  2. Use this feedback to help you revisit and rewrite your work, improving it in the areas identified as weak in the original marking process
  3. Include with your resubmission an additional reflective piece (up to 500 words) on what you understand was weak, how you set about addressing this and what you have learned from this that may help you with further assignments. You should address the following specifically:
  4. i) Identify tutor feedback points on your original work and identify where/how the resit work has changed (give page number) in response to feedback
  5. ii) Identify the lessons you have learnt from doing the resit

iii) Reflect on how your feedback and this process will help you improve future assignments. Looking for commercial cookery assignments !!

How will we support you with your assessment?

  • Assessment briefing Week 1 (lecture).
  • Dedicated seminar session on your formative assessment in Week 6.
  • In Week 8, feedback session on your formative assessment and tutorial session to support the development of your summative assessment.
  • Tutorial session to support the completion of your summative assessment in Week 11.
  • FAQs will be posted on the module’s Moodle site.

How will your work be assessed?

Your work will be assessed by a subject expert who will use the marking grid provided in this assessment brief.  When you access your marked work it is important that you reflect on the feedback so that you can use it to improve future assignments.

Referencing

You MUST use the Harvard System.  The Harvard system is very easy to use once you become familiar with it.

Assignment submissions

The Business School requires a digital version of all assignment submissions.  These must be submitted via Turnitin on the module’s Moodle site.  They must be submitted as a Word file (not as a pdf) and must not include scanned in text or text boxes.  They must be submitted by 2pm on the given date.  For further general details on coursework preparation refer to the online information via StudentZone http://studentzone.roehampton.ac.uk/howtostudy/index.html

Mitigating circumstances/what to do if you cannot submit a piece of work or attend your presentation

The University Mitigating Circumstances Policy can be found on the University website - Mitigating  Circumstances Policy.

Marking and feedback process

Between you handing in your work and then receiving your feedback and marks within 20 days, there are a number of quality assurance processes that we go through to ensure that students receive marks which reflects their work. A brief summary is provided below.

  • Step One – The module and marking team meet to agree standards, expectations and how feedback will be provided.
  • Step Two – A subject expert will mark your work using the criteria provided in the assessment brief.
  • Step Three – A moderation meeting takes place where all members of the teaching and marking team will review the marking of others to confirm whether they agree with the mark and feedback.
  • Step Four – Work at Levels 5 and 6 then goes to an external examiner who will review a sample of work to confirm that the marking between different staff is consistent and fair.
  • Step Five – Your mark and feedback is processed by the Office and made available to you.

 

 

Outstanding

100

Excellent (80-89)

85

Very Good (70-79)

75

Good

(60-69)

65

Satisfactory (50-59)

55

Adequate (40-49)

45

Marginal Fail (30-39)

35

Fail

(20-29)

25

Not done

0

Introduction (15%)

·   Identification of a brand which is currently having image issues.

·   Explanation of reasons behind the choice of brand.

·  Use of data or other type of evidence to support the choice of brand.

Outstanding and flawless.

The brand with image issues is presented in a strong and effective manner. Comprehensive, well-argued and in-depth explanations are provided to support the choice of brand. Excellent quality data or other types of evidence from authoritative sources is used to illustrate the image issues faced by the brand.

The brand with image issues is presented clearly. Very good and thorough explanations are provided to motivate the choice of brand. Data or other types of evidence used to support the choice of brand are comprehensive and are taken from authoritative and reliable sources.

 

Good effort to introduce the brand with image issues. Good explanation is provided to motivate the choice of brand. Data or other types of evidence used to support the choice of brand are relevant and appropriate, and they are taken from good quality sources.

 

The brand with image issues is presented in a satisfactory manner. Some of the reasons provided to explain the choice of brand are convincing and well-argued. Some of the data or other types of evidence used to support the choice of brand is relevant and appropriate, and come from good quality sources.

The brand with image issues is correctly identified. Explanation of reasons behind the choice of brand lacks depth and/or precision. Not all data or other types of evidence used to support this choice are relevant or appropriate, and come from good quality sources.

The brand with image issues is partially correctly identified. Incomplete or inconsistent explanation is provided to motivate the choice of brand. Data or other types of evidence used to support this choice are irrelevant or inappropriate, and come from low quality sources.

The brand with image issues is not correctly identified. Insufficient explanation is provided. No data or other types of evidence is used to support the choice of brand.

Missing. Wholly incorrect or not attempted.

Analysis of current brand positioning

(30%)

·   Identification of target market.

·   Identification of key competition.

·   Identification of points of parity (POPs) and points of difference (PODs).

 

Outstanding and flawless.

The analysis of current brand positioning is very well-articulated, comprehensive and insightful. The analysis shows a critical and deep understanding of the concepts of target market, key competition, POPs and PODs, which are applied in a critical and accurate manner.

The analysis of current brand positioning is comprehensive and accurate. The concepts of target market, key competition, POPs and PODs are very well applied to the brand selected in the assignment. The analysis shows a very good understanding of the theory.

The analysis of current brand positioning is quite comprehensive and accurate.

The concepts of target market, key competition, POPs and PODs are applied well to the brand selected in the assignment. The analysis shows a good understanding of the theory.

A satisfactory analysis of the current brand positioning is provided. Concepts of target market, key competition, POPs and PODs are covered. Some of these concepts are covered in detail, some others in a more superficial manner. The analysis reveals some depth of understanding of the theory.

A basic analysis of the current brand positioning is provided. Concepts of target market, key competition, POPs and PODs are covered, but are treated in a superficial way. The analysis reveals an understanding of the main concepts of the theory.

The analysis of current brand positioning is weak and limited. The analysis reveals a partial understanding of the concepts of target market, key competition, POPs and PODs, brand which are not always correctly applied to the brand selected in the assignment.

 

 

The analysis of current brand positioning is very weak and limited. The analysis reveals a lack of understanding of the concepts of target market, key competition, POPs and PODs which are not correctly applied to the brand selected in the assignment.

Missing. Wholly incorrect or not attempted.

Development of new brand positioning

(25%)

·   Explanation of how new brand positioning differs from current brand positioning. 

·   Explanation of link between old and new brand positioning.

·  Application of concepts to develop the new positioning (e.g., points of parity or difference).

Outstanding and flawless.

Development of an excellent and creative new brand positioning. Exhaustive explanation of how the new and old positioning differs from each other. Exceptionally clear and meaningful link between the old and new brand positioning is provided. Critical, accurate and comprehensive application of theoretical concepts to the new brand positioning.

The newly developed brand positioning is very good and presents some exceptional elements. Very good explanation of how the new and old positioning differs from each other. Clear and meaningful link between the old and new brand positioning is provided.

Theoretical concepts are applied in relation to the new brand positioning in an accurate and comprehensive manner.

The newly developed brand positioning is generally good. Good explanation of how the new and old positioning differs from each other. Quite clear and meaningful link between the old and new brand positioning is provided. Theoretical concepts are applied in relation to the new brand positioning in a quite accurate and comprehensive manner.

The development of the new brand positioning is satisfactory. Quite good explanation of how the new and old positioning differs from each other. The link between the old and new brand positioning is provided but is superficial in some points. Theoretical concepts are correctly applied to develop the new brand positioning, but lacks of details and accuracy in some parts. 

Reasonable attempt to develop a new brand positioning. The difference and link between old and new brand positioning are explained in a basic manner. Theoretical concepts (e.g., points of parity or difference) are applied to develop the new brand positioning in an adequate manner.

 

The new brand positioning is developed in a weak and limited manner. Partial explanation about how the new and old brand positioning differs from each other as well as how they are linked. Theoretical concepts (e.g., points of parity or difference) are partially applied to develop the new brand positioning.

 

The new brand positioning is developed in a very weak and limited manner. No explanation about how the new and old brand positioning differs from each other is provided. No application of theoretical concepts (e.g., points of parity or difference) to develop the new brand positioning.

 

Missing. Wholly incorrect or not attempted.

Development of managerial recommendations

(20%)

·   Identification of marketing communication leverages.

·   Explanation of how different communication leverages are integrated one another.

·  Explanation of how different communication leverages help implement the new brand positioning.

·  Feasibility of recommendations.

 

Outstanding and flawless.

Development of exceptional recommendations. Marketing communication leverages are presented in an extremely clear and effective manner. Excellent connection between recommendations and the new brand positioning. Recommendation are realistic and based on contemporary and professional sources.

Very good recommendations are developed. Marketing leverages are presented in a clear and effective manner. Very good connection between recommendations and the new brand positioning. Recommendation are realistic and based on very good sources. 

Good recommendations are developed. Marketing leverages are presented in a quite clear and effective manner. Good connection between recommendations and the new brand positioning. Recommendations are generally realistic and based on some good sources. 

Satisfactory recommendations are developed. Marketing leverages are clearly identified but lack of detail. Quite good connection between recommendations and the new brand positioning. Recommendations are quite realistic and based on few quite good sources.  

Recommendation are developed in a basic manner. Marketing communication leverages that are identified lack clarity and detail. A partial connection between recommendations and the newly developed brand positioning is provided. Recommendations are not always realistic.

 

Recommendations are developed in a weak and limited manner. Marketing communication leverages are partially identified. A partial connection between recommendations and the newly developed brand positioning is provided. Recommendations are not always realistic.

Recommendations are developed in a very weak and limited manner. Marketing communication leverages are not correctly identified. No connection between recommendations and the newly developed brand positioning is provided. Recommendations are not at all realistic. 

Missing. Wholly incorrect or not attempted.

Quality of presentation

(10%)

·   Writing style.

·   Spelling and grammar.

·  Use of Harvard referencing system.

Outstanding and flawless.

The presentation of the assignment is excellent. Exemplar academic style is adopted. No spelling or grammatical mistakes are present. Harvard referencing system is correctly implemented throughout the assignment.  

The assignment is very well presented. Appropriate and consistent academic writing style is used. There are hardly any spelling or grammatical mistakes. Harvard referencing system is generally implemented throughout the assignment.

The assignment is well presented. Mostly appropriate and consistent academic writing style is used. A few spelling or grammatical mistakes are present in the assignment. Most of the work conforms to Harvard format, but there are a few references or citations that are not consistent with Harvard notation. 

The presentation of the assignment is satisfactory. Usually appropriate and consistent academic writing style is used. Some spelling or grammatical mistakes are present. Harvard referencing system is usually implemented correctly, but some errors in referencing are present.

The presentation of the assignment is adequate. Reasonable attempt to write in an appropriate and consistent academic style. Spelling and grammar mistakes are present in the assignment. Reasonable attempt to correctly implement the Harvard referencing system, although several mistakes are present.

The quality of presentation of the assignment is largely insufficient. The writing style is largely not consistent with academic conventions. Several spelling and grammar mistakes are present throughout the assignment. Referencing is poor and does not conform to Harvard standards.

The quality of presentation of the assignment is insufficient. The assignment requires substantial proof-reading to become a reasonable piece of work. Referencing is sparse or non-existent.

Missing. Wholly incorrect or not attempted.