Faculty of Business Environment and Society

Module No: 304MKT MODULE TITLE: Contemporary Marketing Issues 2018-19

Coursework Number or Title: CW - Individual report (FT and PT)

Word Length (as per MID): 2500 words - a penalty of 10% of the mark is applied if the word
limit is exceeded more than 10% or is below the limit by more than 10%

Submission: 21 May 2019 - 23:55 – Online; PSB Academy access@Moodle

Contributes 50% to total module mark

You must select one of the following questions

1- Based on your academic research, critically evaluate the contribution of marketing to

the performance of organisations and innovations. Furthermore, select three
organisations that demonstrate good or bad examples in applying contribution of
marketing and show how theories can be applied these organisations.

2- Based on your academic research, critically evaluate the concept of managing brand
equity and how it should be applied to enhance shareholder and customer value.
Furthermore, select three organisations that demonstrate good and/or bad examples of
managing brands, and show how theories can be applied to these organisations.

Academic databases: Business Source Complete, Sage. Emerald and Science Direct

Practitioners’ databases: Marketing Week, Brand republic, TED, Economist, Bloomberg

BusinessWeek and Financial Times

CW Steps:
1. Decide on the topic of your CW (Contribution of Marketing or Managing Brand
Equity)
2. Read and review the relevant theories
3. Decide which theories you want to apply and why
4. Select three organisations based on examples/case studies/reports from the
practitioners’ databases
5. Apply your selected theories to these companies and show how they are doing/not
doing what the theories, you have reviewed, suggested
6. Provide recommendations based on theory to enhance their business
7. If in doubt, please email Justin Kung: justin.kung@associate.psb.edu.sg

Learning Outcomes Assessed:

1. Undertake a critical analysis of current marketing issues
2. Synthesise emerging issues and concepts from a range of academic journals, and
relevant texts.

Content of the report:

• Executive summary: less than one A4 page
• Table of contents
• Introduction
• Main body
• Conclusion
• Recommendation
• References

1
Report format
• Times New Roman, Arial or Calibri size 12 points
• 1.5 line spacing
• Include page numbers

Marking Scheme:
• Structure 10%: Content is organised and appropriate; coherent; flow of information,
arguments, and concepts
• Knowledge and Understanding 30%: Identifies, explains, draws on appropriate
theories, models, literature to demonstrate depth and breadth of reading to address
the question
• Application 30% Application of theory or practical examples given appropriate to
context
• Analysis and Recommendations 20%: Evaluation and critical analysis of the topic,
synthesis of ideas/concepts, appropriate conclusions, justified recommendations
• Presentation 10%: Spelling, punctuation, grammar, layout, accurate CU Harvard
Referencing style, writing style academic/professional

Submission information: Online

Date and time: 21 May 2019 - 23:55 – Online; PSB Academy access@Moodle

This assignment must be submitted online

Please note:
1. Please note that work submitted late (where an extension/deferral has not been granted)
will automatically attract a result of 0%. This will count as a failed attempt, and may result
in you failing the module overall. You may be eligible to resit the failed assessment(s),
subject to the University’s regulations on reassessment. The maximum module mark that
can be awarded for resit work is 40%.

2. Extensions will be in accordance with University and Faculty policy.

Any penalties for not complying with word limits will be in accordance with University and
Faculty policy.

Return of Marked Work

Marked work will be returned. You can expect to have marked work returned to you by 2
teaching weeks after the submission date.

PLAGIARISM WARNING! – Assignments should not be copied in part or in whole from any
other source, except for any mark-up quotations, that clearly distinguish what has been
quoted from your own work. All references used must be given, and the specific page number
used should also be given for any direct quotations, which should be in inverted commas.
Students found copying from the internet or other sources will get zero marks and may be
excluded from the university.

Assessment Criteria
Mark Band Descriptor
80% and above An outstanding piece of work with little scope for improvement.
70-79% An excellent piece of work that covers all of the required elements;
well-written and presented.
60-69% A good piece of work that covers all of the required elements; well
written and presented with only minor errors.
50-59% Work covers most of the required elements, with frequent errors,
and lapses in clear presentation of the report.
40-49% A poor piece of work that may not cover all of the required
elements. Poorly written and presented.
39% and below Assignment has failed to reach the min requirements for
Undergraduate level work.

2
ASSESSMENT CRITERIA:
70% and above:
• Near complete conceptual knowledge and understanding of appropriate
theoretical frameworks and relevant literature
• Clear demonstration of high degree of understanding and application of theoretical
concepts to the given business scenario
• Highly developed abilities to analyse, synthesise and apply knowledge and concepts to
the case.
• Highly developed critical and evaluative abilities
• Clear demonstration of significant business progress
• Excellent standards in presentation including meeting all of the format and assessment
requirements
• Demonstration of an overall standard of knowledge, understanding, application, analysis,
and presentation appropriate for UG level

60-69%:
• Sound conceptual knowledge and understanding of appropriate theoretical frameworks
and relevant literature
• Demonstration of sound understanding and application of theoretical concepts to the
given business scenario
• Well developed abilities to analyse, synthesise and apply knowledge and concepts to the
case.
• Well developed critical and evaluative abilities
• Sound demonstration of good business progress
• High standards in presentation including meeting all of the format and assessment
requirements
• Demonstration of an overall standard of knowledge, understanding, application, analysis,
and presentation appropriate for UG level

50-59%
• Satisfactory levels of conceptual knowledge and understanding of appropriate theoretical
frameworks and relevant literature
• Demonstration of average understanding and application of theoretical concepts to the
given business scenario
• Satisfactorily developed abilities to analyse, synthesise and apply knowledge and
concepts to the case.
• Satisfactorily developed critical and evaluative abilities
• Satisfactory demonstration of good business progress
• Acceptable standards in presentation including meeting all of the format and assessment
requirements
• Demonstration of an overall standard of knowledge, understanding, application, analysis,

3
 and presentation appropriate for UG level

40-49%
• Significant weaknesses in levels of conceptual knowledge and understanding of
appropriate theoretical frameworks and relevant literature
• Minimal understanding and application of theoretical concepts to the given business
scenario
• Minimal abilities to analyse, synthesise and apply knowledge and concepts to the case.
• Extremely weak or little critical and evaluative abilities
• Poor levels of business progress
• Flawed presentation of format and assessment requirements
• Overall standards of knowledge, application, and presentation inappropriate for UG level

35-39%
• Very poor levels of theoretical and conceptual understanding and knowledge
• Very poor levels of business application
• Very little or no analysis or evaluation abilities
• Very little or no business progress achieved
• Presentation standards very poor and unacceptable for UG levels

0-34%
• Extremely poor effort in demonstrating any kind of theoretical understanding or practical
application
• Little or no analysis or evaluation and no evidence of any business progress
• Extremely poor presentation standards

4
Feedback Sheet

Module: 304MKT Contemporary Marketing Issues

CW title: CW - Individual report

Assessment Criteria (tick as Poor Satisfactory Good Very Excellent

Good
appropriate)
Structure 10%
Content is organised and appropriate;
coherent; flow of information, arguments,
and conceptsand Understanding 30%
Knowledge
Identifies, explains, draws on appropriate
theories, models, literature to demonstrate
depth and breadth of reading to address
the question

Application 20%
Application of theory or practical examples
given appropriate to context
Analysis and Recommendations 30%
Evaluation and critical analysis of the topic,
synthesis of ideas/concepts, appropriate
conclusions, justified recommendations

Presentation 10%:
Spelling, punctuation, grammar, layout,
accurate CU Harvard Referencing style,
writing style academic/professional

Feedback grading:
<40 Poor; 40-49 Satisfactory; 50-59 Good; 60-69 Very Good; 70+ Excellent