- Case StudyHelp.com
- Sample Questions
MBA Marketing Strategy Final Assignment Questions and Answers offer important guidelines that scholars can follow to perfect their marketing Strategy. Get Help with Strategy Marketing Assignment Online with complete Case study writing – Get expert Help with Strategic Management Assignment with 100% plagiarism free Solution with in timeline.
[Final Assessment 8.1] Marketing Strategy
Journal articles
In order to demonstrate evidence of wider reading you are required to use at least 20 academic peer-reviewed articles, these are in addition to the readings that you have been given throughout the module.
Journals that you may want to look at include:
- Journal of Marketing Management
- European Journal of Marketing
- Marketing Research
- Psychology and Marketing
- Journal of Marketing
- Journal of International Marketing
- Journal of Services Marketing
- Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice
- Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science
- Service Marketing Quarterly
- Journal of Consumer Research
- The International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research
- Advances in Consumer Research
- Journal of Consumer Marketing
UNIT EIGHT
Rubric
MBA 10 Marketing Strategy
MBA 10 Marketing Strategy | ||
Criteria | Ratings | Pts |
This criterion is linked to a learning outcome Where is your chosen company in their marketplace? Issues to consider – are they in a blue or red ocean? Does the Big Middle apply? What is their brand strategy? What is their retail strategy? 70+ – Clear and complete knowledge of what the assignment involves. Complete and thorough analysis of your company’s strategy. 60+ – Provides a reasonable quality of accurate information regarding your company’s strategy. 50+ – Provides limited quality of information with some accuracy regarding your company’s strategy. FAIL – Very inaccurate assessment of your company’s marketing strategy. |
20.0 pts | |
This criterion is linked to a learning outcome How does your chosen company co-create the in-store experience? 70+ – Complete and thorough discussion of co-creation. 60+ – Provides a reasonable quality of accurate information regarding co-creation. 50+ – Provides limited quality of information with some accuracy regarding co-creation. FAIL – Very inaccurate discussion of co-creation. |
20.0 pts | |
This criterion is linked to a learning outcome Consider and evaluates the ethical issues associated with your company. 70+ – Complete and thorough discussion/ explanation of your company’s marketing ethics. 60+ – Provides a reasonable quality of accurate discussion/ explanation of your company’s marketing ethics. 50+ – Provides limited quality of information with some accurate discussion/ explanation of your company’s marketing ethics. FAIL – Very inaccurate discussion/ explanation of your company’s marketing ethics. |
20.0 pts | |
This criterion is linked to a learning outcome Make 4 evidence based recommendations as to how your chosen company may improve their marketing strategy. 70+ – Complete and thorough recommendations. Effectively supported by academic evidence. 60+ – Provides a reasonable quality of recommendations. Mostly supported by academic evidence. 50+ – Provides limited recommendations. Little supporting by academic evidence. FAIL – Very inaccurate recommendations. No supporting academic evidence. |
20.0 pts | |
This criterion is linked to a learning outcome Understanding and using academic literature is a key part of the assessment. At least 20 academic peer-reviewed journal articles should be used throughout the assessment. 70+ – References are complete and of an academic standard, accurate and effectively presented, many references. 60+ – References are complete and effectively presented and are mostly of an academic standard. 50+ – References are complete but non- standardized and poorly presented; some references are not of an academic standard. FAIL – Inadequate number of references; references are not of an academic standard. |
20.0 pts | |
This criterion is linked to a learning outcome Use of arguments 70+ – Questions are exhaustively answered by a sustained, coherent, convincing, very well-organised and fully supported arguments. 60+ – The question is answered by a clear, coherent and confident argument that is supported by an intelligent selection and skillful use of relevant evidence. 50+ – The question is answered by an argument that is sufficiently logical and adequately supported by relevant evidence. FAIL – Incomplete, unintelligible, irrelevant or unfinished answer. |
0.0 pts | |
This criterion is linked to a learning outcome Quality of analysis 70+ – An excellent standard of analysis that is authoritative, coherent, logical, well reasoned, persuasive, insightful, sophisticated and original. 60+ – A good standard of analysis that is systematic, appropriate, perceptive, thoughtful; and shows some originality; 50+ – A competent standard of analysis that is fairly well-organised and relevant, has some logical structure and is supported by the evidence of one or more carefully described examples. FAIL – Inadequate standard of analysis that is simply not merely entirely descriptive but which also contains serious inaccuracies and inconsistencies. |
0.0 pts | |
This criterion is linked to a learning outcome What to improve on for next time Individual feedback. |
0.0 pts | |
Total points: 100.0 |
Reference ID: #getanswers19120005