In this assessment, you will continue to use the country and focus organisation you worked on in Asst 2. Here you will develop the next steps in their international marketing plan.
Part 1 requires you to evaluate all realistic market entry options for this organisation in your target country market (typically at least three, including your preferred option). These options should be discussed, covering advantages and disadvantages, how they might work and reasons for adopting or discarding each one, within the context of your company and the chosen market.
In Part 2, it is now necessary to identify potential market segments (target markets) in the chosen country and consider how they might be serviced by your organisation. You must show your understanding of the concepts involved and your ability to think through and express marketing strategy options. In justifying your choice for the STP strategies, you must:
? Explain the strategic approach you used to segment the market, and justify why you have selected particular target market segment(s) in the chosen market. These may be within the B2B sector, B2C or a combination.
? Identify your recommended positioning strategies for each target market.
More detail on what should be included in these sections is available in the Project Guide in Resources.
This assessment has been designed to:
? demonstrate the application of the knowledge gained in the subject to the development of strategies in an international market;
? allow you to develop your information searching and critical thinking skills; and provide you with further experience in academic writing
On successful completion of this assessment, you should:
? be able to interpret and assess the impact of marketplace variables on marketing practice in the global marketplace;
? be able to select markets and justify market entry options; and
? be able to create justifiable and effective marketing strategies.
Criterion Fail Pass Credit Distinction High Distinction
Critical analysis skills ? Student applies and integrates critical analysis when selecting and justifying marketing strategies
Value 30% No evidence of independent investigation, original questioning and analysis. No attempt to take and understand multiple perspectives Little evidence of independent investigation, original questioning and analysis. Attempts to take and understand multiple perspectives Some evidence of independent investigation, original questioning and analysis. Takes and understands multiple perspectives and through these can provide a critical discussion of the relevant issues Evidence of independent investigation, and original questioning and analysis. Independently takes and understands multiple perspectives and through these can provide an insightful critical discussion of the relevant issues. Strong evidence of independent investigation, original questioning and analysis. Independently takes and understands multiple perspectives and through these can provide an insightful and/or exhaustive critical discussion of the relevant issues
Application skills ? This criterion is about linking theory to a specific context
Value 25% There is no or limited application of theory to the context or case study The case study or context was connected briefly to theory. The case study or context was connected to theory with clear links. The case study or context was connected to theory with clear, logical and explicit connections The context is connected to theory with exceptional, logical and meaningful links.
Strategic perspectiveThis is about strategic recommendations for the company
Value 15% No recommendations are made There were some recommendations, but they are not strategic There were relevant market recommendations, partly strategic The recommendations were relevant and strategic The recommendations were highly relevant and strategic
Realism ? This is about practicality/realism in the country context
Value 10% Is not supported or linked to country context Supported by some real world information Well supported by connections to the real world context Well supported with explicit connections to the real world context Realistic and supported with explicit connections to the real world context
Communication ? This is about the presentation of the work including: Structure, Format, Grammar
Value 15% Poor grammar, spelling, punctuation, concepts were not clear, materials difficult to read ? no tables or figures, inconsistency in style and content between sections. Word count is >10% over or under limit. Some grammatical errors, sentences were clear and complete, clear structure and formatting, some diagrams, but not explained and only decorative, some inconsistencies in style and content. Adheres to word limit. Minor grammatical errors, sentences were clear and complete, structure and format were used to aid the audience including relevant graphics, style and content are mostly consistent. Adheres to word limit. Free of grammatical errors. Structure and format were clear. Sentences were well constructed. Language was concise. Excellent use of relevant graphics Clear consistency in style and content. Adheres to word limit. Free of grammatical errors. Structure and format were clear, logical and consistent. Sentences were well constructed. Exceptional use of clearly relevant graphics. Obvious consistency in style and content, with relevant links between sections. Adheres to word limit.