1 MAIN ASSIGNMENT AS1 BIRMINGHAM CITY BUSINESS SCHOOL UNDERGRADUATE DEGREES COURSEWORK FRONT SHEET MODULE TITLE: Managing the Brand MODULE CODE: MKT5007 LECTURER: Lee Kern Tzen (Kern) ISSUE DATE: 10th April 2017 HAND IN: 5th May 2017 Learning outcomes and assessment criteria specific to this assignment: 1. Be able to analyse the various parameters of brand management, brand equity and identity. 2. Be able to make and justify proposals for the development of a brand with the aim of creating and sustaining long term brand equity. A minimum grade of 40% average combined grade for assessment tasks one and two is needed in order to pass the module. Under the University Assessment Regulations (SUAR5) students have two opportunities to be assessed and to pass this module. If a student has not achieved a pass in this module after the resit, no further opportunities are available and the student will be withdrawn from the course. 2 Group Presentation Guidelines: You are required to select an organisation from within the clothing, footwear and accessories industry that is currently present in the UK market, and complete the following assessments or a Multinational Corporation (MNC) subject to approval. You MUST choose a company with an established brand portfolio in order to be able to undertake analysis and make recommendations in sufficient depth. You are NOT ALLOWED to select NIKE as your chosen brand. Each group MUST obtain approval from the Module Leader BEFORE starting work on a brand. Working in groups of 4 to 5 members, you are required to prepare for a group presentation which will take place in week 5. The presentation will specifically address the topics listed below. Please note that the group presentation component is designed to assess module learning outcomes 1 and 2. Group Presentation (50% of module assessment) Based on your chosen clothing, footwear and accessories company your group presentation should address the following topics. The given time frame for this assessment is 20 minutes per group including Questioning time at the end of the presentation. 1. Using appropriate theories, analyse and present an overview of your chosen company’s existing brand portfolio. In doing so, justify the company’s market segmentation strategy and the opportunities that led to the introduction of individual brand lines or brand extensions. [Weighting 20%] 2. Analyse brand equity of your chosen brand (or one of its strongest brands) using the CBBE model. Identify TWO of the POD’s and POP’s for the chosen brand and compare these to an immediate rival. In doing so, you will need to consider the main brand elements and any secondary associations that have contributed to the brand’s equity. [Weighting 40%] 3. As a newly appointed branding team, you have been asked to enhance your company’s product portfolio by successfully introducing a new brand line. Using secondary market research data and branding theories, discuss your plan for launching and establishing your new brand line. You must present a REALISTIC plan demonstrating how your new brand line will contribute towards the company’s overall sustainability and brand equity propositions. [Weighting 30%] The final 10% of the grade will depend on the Presentation Criteria (listed on page 4). 3 Please Note: 1. Group size is limited to a minimum of 4 to a maximum of 5 members only. Groups that have more than 5 members or less than 4 will be significantly penalised when submitting assessments unless they have had written prior approval from their tutor. 2. Please note that although each group will initially be awarded a group grade, a peer assessment of each group member by yourselves could result in the redistribution of marks due to unequal contribution. This redistribution of marks will be based on peer assessment sheets (see pages 5 and 6) that each individual member of the group will need to complete and submit online. 3. Your analysis and recommendations MUST be supported by relevant branding theories. Any subjective view without proper theoretical foundation may not be enough to achieve the learning outcomes of this module. 4. You are NOT ALLOWED to select NIKE as your chosen brand. Each group MUST obtain approval from the Module Leader BEFORE starting work on a brand. 5. A presentation timetable will be made available a few days before the presentations. EACH group member MUST present. If a group member is absent, that member will receive a mark of ZERO and will be required to re-sit the assessment. 6. Each group member must ensure that they arrive for the presentation 15 minutes before their allotted time. If the presentation starts late because you or a group member are late, group marks will be deducted by 10% of the final grade, so a mark of 60 would become a 54, etc. 7. You must reference all sources in your presentation using the Harvard referencing style with sources listed alphabetically. You are asked only to list sources that you have actually cited in your presentation. 8. A copy of your PowerPoint presentation must be submitted by Monday 3thrd October 2016 at 2359 hours via 2nd Floor Wilkie Edge Campus Assignment Dropbox located beside Materials Distribution Centre. 4 Assessment Criteria 0 – 39% Fail 40 – 49% Third 50 – 59% 2:2 60 – 69% 2:1 70 – 79% First 80 – 100% First Task 1 (20%) Insufficient use of concepts from the module to support any ideas that are presented. Weak attempt at analysing the brand portfolio and segmentation strategy. Limited use of concepts from the module to support any ideas that are presented. Basic attempt at analysing the brand portfolio and segmentation strategy. Satisfactory use of concepts from the module to support any ideas that are presented. Fair attempt at analysing the brand portfolio and related segmentation strategy. Good use of concepts from the module to support any ideas that are presented. Good attempt at analysing the brand portfolio and how the segmentation strategy led to new brand lines and extensions. Very good use of concepts from the module to support any ideas that are presented. Very good attempt at analysing the brand portfolio and how the segmentation strategy led to new brand lines and extensions. Excellent use of concepts from the module to support any ideas that are presented. Excellent attempt at analysing the brand portfolio and how the segmentation strategy led to new brand lines and extensions. Task 2 (40%) Insufficient use of concepts from the module to support any ideas that are presented. Weak attempt at analysing the various parameters of brand management, brand equity and identity. Limited use of concepts from the module to support any ideas that are presented. Basic attempt at analysing the various parameters of brand management, brand equity and identity. Satisfactory use of concepts from the module to support any ideas that are presented. Fair attempt at analysing the various parameters of brand management, brand equity and identity. Good use of concepts from the module to support any ideas that are presented. Good attempt at analysing the various parameters of brand management, brand equity and identity. Very good use of concepts from the module to support any ideas that are presented. Very good attempt at analysing the various parameters of brand management, brand equity and identity. Excellent use of concepts from the module to support any ideas that are presented. Excellent attempt at analysing the various parameters of brand management, brand equity and identity. Task 3 (30%) Ideas not clear or not based on findings. Insufficient discussion on how the long term brand equity will be attained. Unrealistic plan and little or weak justification. Ideas are basic and may not be based on findings. Limited or weak discussion on how the long term brand equity will be attained. Some attempt at coming up with a plan. May not be detailed and/or realistic enough. Satisfactory discussion about ideas. Reasonable or limited discussion on how the long term brand equity will be attained. Reasonable level of detail. Some elements of the plan may not be realistic. Good discussion about ideas. Good discussion on how the long term brand equity will be attained. Good level of detail and realistic plan based on findings. Very good discussion about ideas. Very good discussion on how the long term brand equity will be attained. Very good level of detail and a good realistic plan clearly based on findings. Excellent discussion about ideas. Excellent discussion on how the long term brand equity will be attained. Excellent level of detail and realism in plan very clearly based on findings. Presentation criteria (10%) An incoherent and disjointed presentation with little or no evidence of research. Presentation is significantly Presentation not always clear or logical. Some evidence of research. More or less right length but some material not Reasonable level of structure and clarity in presentation. Satisfactory level of research undertaken. More or less the Generally clearly structured and logical presentation. Most points illustrated with evidence. Timing is well Lively, logical and coherent presentation. Very good evidence of research and evaluation. Perfectly timed Presentation has a clear agenda and is extremely well structured and clearly logical. Excellent evidence 5 under or over time and members unable to answer the most basic questions properly. Ineffective teamwork. Likely to be missing records of peer assessment and team logs. covered. Struggled to or were unable to answer several questions. Some level of teamwork evident. Evidence of disparity of contribution among team members. right length of time. Most questions answered to some extent although not all answers may be appropriate. Cooperative teamwork evident. Reasonable evidence of contributions and peer assessment. organised, more or less to time. Most questions answered well. Good cohesive & cooperative teamwork evident. Good evidence of contributions and peer assessment. presentation. Very good response to all questions. Very good management of teamwork. Very good evidence of contributions and peer assessment. of research and evaluation. Perfectly timed and well organised. Clear knowledgeable answers that dealt with all of the examiner’s issues. Impressive management of teamwork. Excellent evidence of contributions and peer assessment. 6 Mark Adjustments Please note that assessing tutor(s) can change group and individual marks according to their academic judgement, at their discretion, in line with published marking schemes and in accordance with academic moderation processes and have the final say in all marks for all work. Group Size Tutors can change group members according to individual and group performance. Group size is limited to a minimum of 4 to a maximum of 5 members only. Groups that have more than 5 members or less than 4 will be significantly penalised when submitting assessments unless they have had written prior approval from their tutor. Peer Assessment This assessment is subject to a PEER Assessment (details included below). Peer assessment of individual contribution can result in the assignment of different grades to different group members subject to assessing tutor moderation. The following evaluation of your group members is a tool to determine those who have been active and cooperative members as well as to identify those who did not participate. Be consistent when evaluating each group member’s performance by using the guidelines below. REMEMBER you are evaluating the contribution of the group member to the group tasks. For each member of your group, INCLUDING YOURSELF, evaluate each group member using the scale and sheet provided below. PLEASE NOTE THAT IT IS ESSENTIAL NOT TO SHARE YOUR RATINGS WITH OTHER GROUP MEMBERS. Submit the completed consolidated ratings form via 2nd Floor Wilkie Edge Campus Assignment Dropbox located beside Materials Distribution Centre. By rating members of your group differently to other group members, you will redistribute the total marks achievable between group members. For example: GROUP A achieves an examiner mark of 60% in their group report. GROUP A has five members, so the total maximum marks achievable by the group is 300 (5 times 60). Different ratings between GROUP A members will redistribute the 300 marks as appropriate, resulting in some members receiving less than 60 and some members receiving more than 60. But the total marks when all members marks are added together will always be equal to 300. 7 PEER ASSESSMENT SHEET MKT5007 Please enter your Group Letter (A, B, etc.), your name and student ID in the table below. Group Letter: Your Name: Your Student ID: When grading the group element of the assignment, a group grade will be assigned to each member. This peer assessment sheet has been designed to give every group member the opportunity to evaluate their own work and that of their group members. The ratings provided on the sheet will be used to determine a weighting factor that will be applied to the group grade and marks for individual members will then be adjusted based on the weighting factor. Once you have rated each member using the rating scale provided, including yourself in the first row of the table below, please consolidate your ratings on the table below and submit this page via 2nd Floor Wilkie Edge Campus Assignment Dropbox located beside Materials Distribution Centre by 3rd October 2016. If none of the group members submits this sheet, all members will get the same overall grade. However, if you do not submit this sheet but some or all of your group members do, marks for all group members will be adjusted according to the ratings provided by your group members. GROUP MEMBERS LAST NAME FIRST NAME RATING 1 2 3 4 5 Assign an overall rating using the scale below for each member of your group, including yourself. RATING WORDS - Graded from 'Excellent' (the best) to 'No show' (the worst) Rating word Rating Description Excellent Consistently carried more than his/her fair share of the workload Very good Consistently did what he/she was supposed to do, very well prepared and cooperative Satisfactory Usually did what he/she was supposed to do, acceptably prepared and cooperative Ordinary Often did what he/she was supposed to do, minimally prepared and cooperative Marginal * Sometimes failed to show up or complete assigned work, minimally prepared Deficient Often failed to show up or complete assigned work, rarely prepared Unsatisfactory Consistently failed to show up or complete assigned work, rarely prepared Superficial Practically no participation No show No participation at all *Note - A rating of 'Marginal’ or above is equivalent to a pass mark or more.