Assessment 3: Critical Evaluation of a Marketing Campaign
Overview:
Task: This assignment requires students to submit a critical evaluation of the marketing communications plan. Due: Week 12, 11pm Friday 8 NovemberType: Individual Weight: 40%
This assignment requires students to analyse a marketing communication campaign. This is a written assignment only. There is no oral presentation.
Objective:
This assessment task addresses these subject learning objectives.
critically analyse and evaluate managerial decisions with respect to a marketing communications campaign
review principles, concepts, and tools that aid marketing professionals in planning a marketing communications campaign.
recommend marketing communication activities in a comprehensive and integrated manner.
Task :
Critique the elements of the marketing communications plan generated from your group assignment
elements: communications objectives; creative strategies; tactics used; target customer; category positioning (mental partitioning)
considerations: look at positioning (market needs) and customer persona(s); discuss both positive and negative aspects
Provide a conclusion and recommendation
write a paragraph stating overall how successful you think the campaign is in reaching the objectives you can infer they want to achieve
discuss at least one change (specifically to the material you chose for this assignment) that you think would make the campaign more successful (even if you think it is already successful)
explain why you would make this change.
Potential structure:
Page 1: name of the brand/product.
Page 2: provide a brief description of the Campaign.
Page 3: start critique, suggested parts:
Category Positioning and ‘Involvement by Motivation’ Grid
Target Customers
Marketing Communications Strategy and Objectives
Creative Strategy and Tactics
Integration of media channels and suitability to audience and objectives.
Conclusion with a recommendation
References: APA 7th
Appendices: should not contain any content expected in the main body of the report and should only be included if deemed necessary.
Length: Maximum limit of 1,000 words, excluding references and appendices (if any).
Format: Assignments should:
be in Word document format only, A4-sized
normal margins
have 1.5 spacing
12-point font
Other requirements
Marks will be deducted for late submission of the assignment.
You are not permitted to use Generative AI in the completion of this assignment.
Keep the documentation you collect whilst completing this assignment, such as search history, draft documents, detailed notes, etc. (these should be kept for 4 months after submission). This documentation may assist in your group assignment.
You may be required to complete a viva regarding your assignment.
If there are any unforeseen changes to the information presented here, they will be announced on Canvas. It is your responsibility to note any changes.
Marcoms Rubric
Marcoms Rubric
Criteria
Ratings
Pts
Conviction
Quality of the argument: strong, sensible, deep, focused, conclusive.
50 to >42.5 Pts
High distinction
The critical evaluation offers very high-level relevant insights. The discussion is of a very high standard and offers considered ideas with an applicable and very strong rationale provided
42.5 to >37.5 Pts
Distinction
The critical evaluation offers very high-level relevant insights. The discussion is of a very high standard and offers considered ideas with an applicable and strong rationale provided.
37.5 to >32.5 Pts
Credit
The critical evaluation offers a relatively high level of relevant insights. The discussion is of a high standard and offers considered ideas with some rationale provided.
32.5 to >25.0 Pts
Pass
The critical evaluation offers relevant insights. The discussion is of an acceptable standard and offers some considered ideas with some rationale to support them
25 to >0 Pts
Fail
The analysis offers poor or no relevant insights. The discussion is of an inadequate standard and offers few or no ideas
50 pts
Completeness
How well the topic/issue is covered; both positive and negative aspects are covered; supported by reliable sources/material.
40 to >34.0 Pts
High distinction
The evaluation was comprehensive and fully complete or goes beyond what was required. Demonstrated very considered thought and understanding.
34 to >30.0 Pts
Distinction
The evaluation was fully complete. Demonstrated considered thought and understanding.
30 to >26.0 Pts
Credit
The evaluation was mostly complete. Demonstrated some considered thought and understanding.
26 to >13.0 Pts
Pass
The evaluation was general, or not fully complete. Demonstrated only the absolute bare minimum thought and understanding.
13 to >0 Pts
Fail
The evaluation was overly general or mostly incomplete. Demonstrated little to no thought and understanding.
40 pts
Presentation
How well the paper is presented; written-expression; proper referencing
10 to >8.5 Pts
High distinction
Work is very clear and logical. It looks professional, with no spelling or grammatical errors. It has excellent structure, cohesion and flow. All references are appropriately provided.
8.5 to >7.5 Pts
Distinction
Work is clear and logical. It looks professional, with no spelling or grammatical errors. It has very good structure, cohesion and flow. All references are appropriately provided.
7.5 to >6.5 Pts
Credit
Work is generally clear and logical. It looks professional, with no more than three spelling or grammatical errors. It has good structure, cohesion and flow. All references are appropriately provided.
6.5 to >5.0 Pts
Pass
Work is adequately clear and logical. It looks professional overall, with less than seven spelling or grammatical errors. It has adequate structure, cohesion and flow. References are appropriately provided.
5 to >0 Pts
Fail
Work is inadequately clear and logical. It may not look professional overall, with more than seven spelling or grammatical errors. It has inadequate structure, cohesion and flow. Referencing does not meet requirements.
10 pts
Total points: 100
