Digital marketing

Student Name:

Structure, Spelling and Grammar:

You should have followed the report format. There should be a clear structure to your argument i.e. each section connects with the other. Sentences should make sense and frequent spelling/grammar mistakes have been avoided by proof-reading.

The report format was followed appropriately (content calendar would have been more effective included in the body of the report). There were no spelling/grammar issues, the writing in the report was of a high quality throughout.

1. Using Social Impact Theory:

This was an opportunity to clearly demonstrate your ability to critically evaluate and apply theory to a particular context. You should also demonstrate the ability to succinctly summarise theory and also to use relevant citation to support your argument. There should be clear evidence of reading course content and in better answers this will have been supplemented by additional reading.

This section offered good insight into SIT and was particularly effective at relating it to the needs of the client. There was scope to incorporate a broader range of literature sources to further support/develop the insights offered.

2.1 Proposed Content Plan

You should have completed the content plan template. There needs to be a clear indication of the time, the source, the content, the channel and the frequency of posts.

A content calendar is included meeting the require criteria. The engagement targets could have been conveyed more clearly to the reader.

2.2 Example Post(s)

This is an opportunity to show creativity and insight. The post or posts can either be original material or a competitor post could be used to indicate the nature of the post.

Example post is described and included in the body of the report. These are clearly related to the content calendar, and effectively related to the underpinning theory.

2.3 Critical Assessment of Content Strategy

The purpose of this section is to test logical thinking and ability to conduct independent research in order to support a position. This section should contain a content strategy to achieve the SMART goals of the client. The content strategy should show clear links with Section 1 and continue to draw on course theory. The critical evaluation should give the reasons given for the strategy (with citation from the literature) and also provide some discussion of the pros and cons of the strategy.

The critical evaluation of the content strategy demonstrated some mature thinking on the topic. Appropriately, information quality theory is called upon to inform and structure the analysis offered. A balanced analysis is offered however there is scope to utilize a broader range of academic sources to fully expand and develop points made. The extent to which the campaign addresses the principles of SIT is also considered, again, scope to develop this further through demonstration of deeper engagement with relevant literature. The assessment is well-balanced.

3.1 Key Analytics:

You should have suggested social media analytics related to the SMART goals and the intended engagement outcome.

A range of analytics related to the engagement objectives are outlined, with the tools deemed most appropriate highlighted for use in this content plan. Strengths and weaknesses of these are offered to provide a balanced justification for the decisions made.

3.2 Tweaks to Content Plan

The Tweaks should be justified with reference SIT (changing source, number of immediacy) or Information Quality (change to intrinsic, contextual or representational quality) and clearly relate to the content plan.

The tweaks suggested could be further expanded. Quite limited reference to SIT is offered, and tweak outlined would require quite significant resource inputs i.e. potential not feasible.

3.3. Risks of Content Tweaks

Risks need to be identified and also the reasons for them given with reference to the practitioner/academic literature.

This section is very limited. Some risks of adjustments to the content strategy are outlined in relation to the brief goals, however, these are under-developed and not strongly supported.

4. References:

The brief states that there should be at least 10 academic references that have been used within the report using Harvard referencing accurately. All references should be present in the main text. References should give clear show evidence of your reading of both course texts and evidence of locating and reading of additional relevant research.

Referencing requirements were met.

Appendices: You have scope to use the appendices for example posts or preliminary analysis. All material in the appendices should be referred to in the main report.

Appendix was used for supplementary information, avoid including replica information that is in the body of the report – this seems to have been an oversight.

Overall a good attempt.

NB All marks are provisional until confirmed by the exam board.