Help with Case

Final Case

OVERVIEW

This is the final assignment of BUSMGT Strategic branding. The purpose is to integrate the learnings from the course by asking you to perform ‘casing,’ that is the process of making a case, with the concepts from the course. The assignment has the following objectives.

1. Students demonstrate proficiency and mastery of the course’s subject knowledge. This objective means that students should know what the concepts mean and how they work.

2. Student show their competence in applying the course’s concepts in practice meaningfully. This objective means that students should know when, how, and in which context the concepts could work, justifying choices based on the context.

3. Students reflect critically upon their learning by building compelling arguments (positions instead of opinions) about why their proposed solutions work. In other words, students demonstrate a rationale or justification about the logic supporting their strategy and implementation.

The case has a difficulty equivalent to the final test. It is expected that students demonstrate both subject knowledge and critical reflexivity by writing a case-based essay with the following instructions.

DETAILED INSTRUCTIONS

Please, choose one of the following products/services to (1) analyze the category (2) develop a branding strategy, (3) and propose a creative, advertising implementation. This exercise is like the groupwork assignment for this class, except that in this case you must do it individually, and the delivery is in the form of an essay.

Please, choose one of the following product/service categories:

· Luxury fashion brand (apparel) entering the East Asian Market (China, Japan, Korea).

· Almond-based milk entering New Zealand.

· A digital marketing agency in Auckland.

· Chocolate milkshake in a can

· A Fish and Chips eatery

Please, divide the essay in the following three parts

Part 1. Perform an analysis of the product category, identifying the main competitors, and charting their branding strategies. The objective of this section is to identify the competitive environment, including the existing competitive advantages, and their branding strategies. Use the concepts from class to discuss the competitors’ brand strategies Overall, the purpose is to contextualize a gap and define an opportunity for a new brand entry.

Part 2. Pretend that you oversee a new brand entry - propose its brand strategy. The brand strategy must respond to the competitive environment that you identified in Part 1. Reflect upon the concepts from class and use them to justify your strategy. Write a position arguing why the strategy that you propose is likely to succeed in the current competitive environment.

Part 3. Propose the creative advertising implementation of the strategy. Identify a consumer insight, define the ‘big idea’, and explain how you are going to operationalize it (bring the idea to life). Explain what makes your idea ‘creative.’ You can rely on the structure of the Effie cases from the Team-Based Learning sessions: define a market challenge, identify a consumer insight, propose the big idea, and sketch its implementation.   

 

STRUCTURE

The structure of this paper is essential. Please follow the following guidelines.

· Title page. Please write in the first page your name, course code, student number.

· Part 1 – analysis of the product category (20% of the marks) must have minimum 500 words and maximum 700 words.

· Part 2 – branding strategy (50% of the marks) must have minimum of 1,000 words and a maximum of 1,200 words.

· Part 3 – creative implementation (30% of the marks) must have minimum 500 words and maximum 700 words.

· Appendix. If you choose to do so, you can use an appendix to identify your references, diagrams, or tables. You do not need to bring any extra academic research (you can, but it is not required). Only bring academic references that are directly relevant to your argument. References must be used to identify when someone else is doing the talking (for instance, when you present the market overview)

 

GENERAL GUIDELINES

 

· Write using Times New Roman (pt. 12), Single space, and normal margins (1’).

· The word count is a minimum of 2,000 words (about four pages), and at maximum is 2,600 words (about five pages).

· All arguments are expected to be your original work, positions, and arguments.

· The word-count includes only your essay and titles. Diagrams, references, and addendums are allowed but they do not count toward the word limit.

· You may consult any materials (books, academic articles, news, your notes, online articles), but please do not discuss your specific answers with classmates - it is easy to find out if two essays are too similar.

· If you use pre-existing work, please reference it thoroughly, for example, references are required if you use direct quotes, industry reports, or specific theories.

· Points will be deducted if your word counts exceed the limit by more than 10%, or if it is below (10%) of the minimum.

· We retain the right to ask any student to explain their essay verbally if we suspect any form of plagiarism. In this case, you can ask a support person to accompany you to this mini review. If you cannot explain the logic of your essay independently, the mark will be zero for this assignment.

· You do not need to contact anyone at any company. Please use existing information from news, industry reports, your own experience, financial reports, corporate websites, social media, etc.

· I am looking for your professional expert voice. Write as a branding expert.

· Please, use paragraphs to organize the structure of the essay. Write using running text, not just bullets, so that you can develop a full argument. Consider using full paragraphs to organize your arguments. One paragraph means one idea.

· The objective is to develop your point of view from an opinion into an argument. The difference between an opinion and a position is that the later answer to the question: How do you know? What evidence do you have?

· If you use figures, tables, or other data, please reference them in text, but leave the figures in the annex.

· Use the correct referencing style (APA 6) for marketing theories or supporting materials.

· Remember to keep the argument within the marketing field.

· Keep the text lean. Read and edit your final paper to remove all the unnecessary bits, polish it, and streamline the argument.

· Please, do not copy things from the internet. Make it your own position by being creative, strategic, and thoughtful.

 

Top of Form

Bottom of Form

Rubric

Brand Strategy Report

Brand Strategy Report
Criteria	Ratings	Pts
This criterion is linked to a learning outcome General descriptor	5 Pts Level 4 Excellent understanding and application of key marketing concepts and/or models 4 Pts Level 3 Good understanding and application of key marketing concepts and/or models 3 Pts Level 2 Some understanding and application of appropriate marketing concepts and/or models 0 Pts Level 1 No or very little understanding and application of appropriate marketing concepts and/or models	5 pts
This criterion is linked to a learning outcome Overall	5 Pts Level 4 The document provides an excellent overview of the report by providing the key take-outs from each section and therefore can be read as a standalone document 4 Pts Level 3 The document provides a good overview of the report though it may be generic in places. 3 Pts Level 2 The documeny is adequate but may be quite generic and descriptive (e.g. tells the reader what the report does rather than providing a complete snapshot of the report) and/or more like an introduction than a summary 0 Pts Level 1 The document is inadequate (e.g. missing or very short or does not accurately reflect the report)	5 pts
This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeSituation analysis	5 Pts Level 4 Situation analysis is relevant and well justified, with a good level of relevant research. Aspects of the brand audit report have been selected and crafted in an appropriate way to fit with the brand strategy suggested. New research has been conducted where required. 4 Pts Level 3 Situation analysis is mostly relevant and mostly well justified, with adequate relevant research. The original brand audit report has been adequately crafted to fit with the brand strategy suggested. Some new research has been conducted where required. 3 Pts Level 2 Situation analysis is somewhat relevant but somewhat speculative, with very little relevant research conducted. Original brand audit report work has been minimally crafted to fit with the brand strategy suggested. May be very little new research conducted where required. 0 Pts Level 1 Situation analysis is mostly irrelevant and entirely speculative, with no relevant research. May just be cut and pasted from the brand audit but with very little thought about how the original work fits with the brand strategy suggested. No new research conducted.	5 pts
This criterion is linked to a learning outcome Branding strategy	5 Pts Level 4 A single, clear branding strategy is provided which makes sense given the key findings of the situation analysis. Excellent rationale provided. 4 Pts Level 3 A single, clear branding strategy is provided which mostly makes sense given the key findings of the situation analysis. Good rationale provided. 3 Pts Level 2 The branding strategy is not clearly one option but a brand strategy is at least suggested and may be tangentially relevant to the key findings from the situation analysis. Poor rationale provided. 0 Pts Level 1 Branding strategy not clearly identified. No or inadequate rational provided.	5 pts
This criterion is linked to a learning outcome Branding strategy implementation (how is the branding strategy suggested in the previous section going to be manifest)	5 Pts Level 4 This part of the report is a good length, has an excellent level of detail, is well supported by secondary research and is entirely logical given the findings of the front part of the report and the chosen brand strategy. Excellent mix of research provided to support ideas. 4 Pts Level 3 This part of the report is adequate in terms of length and level of detail though more research would have provided an even more sophisticated level of detail. The tactics suggested are mostly logical given the findings of the front part of the report and chosen brand strategy. Some good research provided though may be slightly unbalanced (either too practical or too academic). 3 Pts Level 2 This part of the report may be short and/or speculative in places and/or lacking logical connection to the front part of the report and chosen brand strategy. Poor research provided to support ideas. 0 Pts Level 1 This part of the report may be very short and/or very speculative and/or not at all logical. No research provided to support ideas.	5 pts
This criterion is linked to a learning outcome Recommendations	5 Pts Level 4 Final recommendations are excellent, with just the right level of detail and insight, and they are completely logical 4 Pts Level 3 Final recommendations are good and provide a good level of detail and insight; they seem to mostly logically emerge from the rest of the document 3 Pts Level 2 Final recommendations are adequate though there may be too few, and/or they may not all logically emerge from the rest of the document and may be very generic and speculative. 0 Pts Level 1 Final recommendation are either missing or inadequate. What is suggested does not logically emerge from the rest of the document.	5 pts
This criterion is linked to a learning outcome Professionalism	5 Pts Level 4 Readability is excellent; the report is professional and engaging; tone is entirely appropriate; referencing excellent with no formatting issues. 4 Pts Level 3 Readability is mostly good; the report is presented in a professional manner; tone is mostly suitable; referencing good with only minor formatting issues. 3 Pts Level 2 Some issues with readability; an attempt has been made to present the report in a professional manner; tone may be variable; referencing adequate and mostly accurate. 0 Pts Level 1 Readability is poor; the report is not presented in a professional manner; tone may not be suitable; inadequate and/or inaccurate referencing.	5 pts
Total points: 35