Marketing Across Cultures | My Assignment Tutor

Module Title:Marketing Across CulturesModule Code:7BSP1271Assignment Format & Maximum Word countIndividual Report, maximum 3,300 wordsAssignment Weighting:e.g. 100% (50hrs ? work)Coursework Submission:Time: 21:00Date: 8th Jan 2021Method: On-line via StudynetCoursework return Date returned to students:: 4 Working weeks from submissionModule leaderAdrian GoodsallFirst markerInternal ModeratorApproved ☐xDate: 13/10/20Module Board nameM&EExternal ExaminerApproved ☐Date:Module Board date Assessment CriteriaLearning Outcomes: Knowledge and Understanding tested in this assignment:1.Evaluate and apply models of environmental analysis and in particular cultural analysis 2.Evaluate and apply appropriate global marketing strategies 3.Formulate and evaluate plans for the implementation of global marketing strategies.Learning Outcomes: Skills and Attributes tested in this assignment:4 Gather, interpret and evaluate secondary global marketing data 5.Explain and critique different global marketing strategies 6.Advise on global marketing plans in terms of development implantation and control across culturesFeedback /Marking criteria for this AssignmentPerformance will be assessed using HBS Grading Criteria and Mark scheme.Guidance for improvement will be given in writing on the Assessment Feedback Form or on the StudyNet Feedback Form within 4 weeks of submission. Assignments submitted up to one week late will receive a maximum numeric grade of:Level 7 (PG) – 50Plagiarism offences will receive standard penalties. See Assessment criteria below: Penalty: Moderator: Total Mark Awarded: Detailed Brief for Individual/Group AssessmentThe title of the assignment. An analysis and evaluation of Lego’s global marketing strategy. Purpose of the assessment The aim of the assignment is to demonstrate your understanding of how a global corporation strategically manages its marketing operations across global markets and cultures. Your Specific Instructions: You are required to produce a report, which identifies and critically analyses some of the significant global strategies that Lego has adopted. You are also required to make marketing recommendations for the next 5 years, [i.e. product and market] Approach/steps to follow: You should conduct research into the history of Lego. There are many resources available on-line. Below are some links, but these are not exhaustive: Keegan and Green, Global Marketing 7th edition, on-line Case study on Lego Case 16-3 page 521 From your research, illustrate and explain through reference to academic theory, models and frame works, their global marketing strategy. A guide to the topics that you should consider are the unit topics that are covered by this module. You should consider, as a minimum, their market and product development, market entry approach and the marketing mix selection. 80% of the report. You must follow a report structure, but include academic references. Below is a list of heading topics that you could consider: Introduction to the business Company capability and product/service portfolio Market/Environment opportunities and characteristics Marketing Strategies and Tactics Market selection – Key market[s] and target customers Mode of market Entry Marketing Mix Lastly, you should make justified recommendations for the next 5 years. 20% of the report. Reference list (at least 15 references, with at least 10 academic [journal articles and books], please separate academic from secondary) Give full details, following CASE Harvard Referencing guidelines. Appendices must be linked to the body of the work – do not include if not referred to. It is essential that: You show ability to describe and apply theoretical concepts and then use examples as illustrations. You do not make unsubstantiated assertions, references must back up your in-text statements You use Harvard Referencing throughout this report, linking theory to this practical business example. You do NOT engage in primary research for this task. Tips: Show awareness of other aspects of marketing to convince the marker that you understand the subject. Read and use a range of recent academic resources, e.g books, journals, websites for Mintel reports, Keynote, etc Do NOT use Wikipedia/ website references alone Paraphrasing others’ views and citing/referencing the relevant source, is generally better than using direct quotes Check grammar, use UK spelling and try to use PEEEL to structure your main paragraphs. Refer to CASE Evidence of independent thought and original applications may improve your mark Use Arial Font size 12, double spacing between paragraphs. WE use plagiarism software so do not copy and past from websites. You are advised to run your work through Turnitin before submission.Submission Instructions You should follow a report structure using headings and sub-headings. Include an appendix if necessary, but these MUST be referred to in the report, and the references; these will not be included in the word count. You must reference any sources of information used. All references stated at the end MUST be used in the report.Cover sheet to include: Module title; Code; Report Title; No Name as it must be submitted anonymously, your SRN [student member Number], Word Count. Please use a font size 12 throughout the work. Word count – max 3,300 words.You must submit a copy anonymously on StudyNet on the due date. The file name should follow the following structure: SRN Number.docx  [Example     704885.docx]Student Support and Guidance For further help, contact your module leader in their drop-in hours or by email. Use the Grading Criteria and Mark Scheme to help improve your work. Go to CASE workshops, use the CASE website and drop-in hours Academic English for Business [AEB] support will be made available, specific details will published by the AEB Tutor. Make full use of Library search to identify relevant academic material and the ‘Subject Toolkit for Business’ which contains links to other Information Databases and the Information Management contact details. ( Some tutors allow students to test their work using Turnitin. Guidance on submission to Turnitin via StudyNet can be found by using the following link.$FILE/TURNITIN+FOR+STUDENTS+2016+USER+GUIDE.pdf PG Grading Criteria for HBS Individual Report Module Code: 7Bsp1271 Lecturer: Adrian Goodsall Student ID number: REPORTPresentation & structureIntellectual Curiosity (Quality of academic sources) Use & presentation of Harvard ReferencingContent/ Terms/ Findings/ Definitions/ CalculationsBusiness Application & Integration of Data/LiteratureDiscussion /Analysis /Critical evaluation &/or ReflectionTask detailsFollows report structure & keeps to word limit of 2200 max. As advised. – An outline marketing plan Contents, Logic, Appendices, Grammar, Spelling, Professional presentation. Your expression will have an impact upon your critical evaluation [see last column] 10Follows Harvard style for in-text citation & Reference List Use a range of sources and a minimum of 10 academic sources. Separate Academic from Secondary. In-text correctly referenced at end. 10Content included – As specified in the assignment brief. Relevant research evident. Answers the question set. Evidence of research. 20Integration & application of information such as theory models and frameworks from coursework guidance and module content. Lectures and seminars 30Line of argument, development of discussion evidence of critical thinking demonstrated through discussion of the finding against theory, and the theories and frameworks themselves. Instructional verbs to suit the task & level Logical convincing and evidenced argument. 30Marks90 – 100OutstandingOutstanding presentation & report structure, with numbered paragraphs, list of contents/figures &appendices. Articulate & fluent academic writing style with ideas cross referenced. No grammatical / spelling errors.Outstanding selection of quality sources, well beyond core & recommended resources. Outstanding standard of Harvard referencing within text & consistent use of Harvard referencing system. Accuracy of in-text references & full details shown in Reference list.Outstanding exploration of topic showing excellent knowledge & understanding through thorough & appropriate research. Impressive choice and range of appropriate content.Outstanding business insight & application. Outstanding integration of literature/data into work. Very impressive breadth and depth.Outstanding level of discussion/analysis/ critical evaluation &/or reflection. Highly developed/ focused work, with thorough consideration of all possibilities and aspects of the topic.80 – 89ExcellentExcellent presentation & report structure, with numbered paragraphs, list of contents/figures, appendices & cross referencing. Articulate & fluent academic writing style. Only minor errors.Excellent selection of quality sources. Evidence of independent searching beyond core & recommended resources. Excellent standard of Harvard referencing within text & consistent use of Harvard referencing system. Accuracy of in-text references & full details shown in Reference list.Excellent level of knowledge & understanding demonstrated. Evidence of appropriate reading. Covers all relevant points & issues.Excellent business insight & application. Excellent integration of literature/data into work. Impressive breadth and depth.Excellent level of discussion/analysis/ critical evaluation &/or reflection. Clearly developed points all of which are relevant to the topic70 – 79Very GoodVery good presentation & report structure, paragraphing, use of numbering, list of contents/figures, appendices & cross referencing. Fluent academic writing style. Very few grammatical errors & spelling mistakes.Very good selection of mostly quality sources beyond the recommended resources. Few irrelevant/poor quality sources used. Very good standard of Harvard referencing within text & consistent use of Harvard referencing system. Accuracy of in-text references & full details shown in Reference list.Very good level of knowledge & understanding demonstrated. Covers most relevant points & issues. Few errors / omissions in content/calculations.Very good business insight & application. Very good integration of literature/data into work. Very good use of literature/data with breadth and depth.Very good level of discussion/analysis/ critical evaluation &/or reflection. A few less relevant ideas/points or would benefit from further development &/or evaluation/comparison.60 – 69GoodGood clear presentation & report structure, use of numbering & appendices. Writing is mainly good with some flow and spelling &/ or grammatical errors seldom impede understanding.Good selection of quality sources but some irrelevant/poor quality sources used beyond the recommended reading. Good standard of Harvard referencing within text & consistent use of Harvard referencing system. Accuracy of in-text references & full details shown in Reference list.Good grasp of the topic & some of its implications presented. Good knowledge & understanding is demonstrated. Minor errors / omissions in content/ calculations.Good business insight & application. Good integration of literature/data into work. Good use of literature/data with adequate breadth and depth.Good level of discussion/analysis/ critical evaluation &/or reflection but more ideas/points could be addressed or developed further.50 – 59Clear PassSatisfactory basic report structure. Not always written clearly & has grammatical & / or spelling errors which impede understanding.See CASE with feedbackSatisfactory: Some quality sources used. Research did not go beyond the recommended sources. Satisfactory referencing within text & consistent use of Harvard referencing system.See CASE/ Information Managers (LRC) with feedbackSatisfactory content / level of knowledge of the topic. Addresses most of the task. Some errors / omissions in content/ calculations. May benefit from further research.Satisfactory business insight & application. Limited integration with literature/ data. Use of literature/data but limited in breadth or depth.Satisfactory: basic evidence of discussion/analysis/ critical evaluation &/or reflection but some points irrelevant or superficially made so need further development. See CASE with feedback40 – 49Marginal FailWeak report format. Limited or poor structure. Muddled work with many spelling & / or grammatical errors.Must see CASE with feedbackWeak: Limited evidence of appropriate research. Some use made of recommended reading, but the majority of sources are irrelevant/of poor quality. Weakuse of Harvard referencing system with errors & inconsistently applied. Must see CASE/ Information Managers (LRC) with feedbackWeak: limited content / knowledge/ calculations. Limited or muddled understanding of the topic/question. Does not meet all the learning outcomes.Weak: unsatisfactory evidence of business application & insight Work needs to show better links between practical application and theory.Weak: limited evidence of discussion/analysis/ critical evaluation &/or reflection. More development & comment needed. May need to do more than describe. Must see CASE with feedback20 – 39Clear FailInadequate report format and poor paragraphing / signposting. Inappropriate writing style Poorly written &/or poor spelling & grammar. Must see CASE with feedbackInadequate: Little evidence of appropriate research. Few quality sources used from recommended reading. Inadequate use of Harvard referencing with many errors &/or inconsistencies.Must see CASE/ Information Managers (LRC) with feedbackInadequate: Lacking in relevant content/ knowledge/calculations. Content irrelevant / inaccurate. Does not meet all the learning outcomes.Inadequate: Lacks evidence of business application & insight. Some literature missing or irrelevant to topic.Inadequate: Lacking / inadequate level of discussion/ analysis/critical evaluation & /or reflection. Descriptive.Must see CASE with feedback0 – 19Little or Nothing of meritNothing of merit: Poorly written work, lacking structure, paragraphing / signposting. Many inaccuracies in spelling & grammar. Must see CASE with feedbackNothing of merit: No evidence of research. No use made of recommended reading. Sources are irrelevant & of poor quality. No or little attempt to use the recommended Harvard referencing system. Must see CASE/ Information Managers (LRC) with feedbackNothing of merit: Unsatisfactory level of knowledge demonstrated. Content used irrelevant / not appropriate/ to the topic. Does not meet the learning outcomes.Nothing of merit: No evidence of appropriate business application & insight.Nothing of merit: Unsatisfactory level of discussion/analysis/critical evaluation &/or reflectionMust see CASE with feedbackKEY ACTIONS To achieve a higher grade, next time you need to…(Where to go?) Who can help?)1.2.3.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *