BMK0150 Strategic Marketing Managemnent Assignment Report Brief 25/26 Term 1
| Module Code: | BMK0150 |
| Module Title: | Strategic Marketing Management |
| Module Leader: | Professor Shona Bettany |
| Module Tutors | Dr Samrat Hazra |
| Assessment Type (Should match MSD) | Written Assignment |
| Academic Year | 25/26 |
| Term Assessment Applies to | Term 1 |
| Main or Resit | Main |
| Assessment weighting | 50% |
| Group/Individual | Individual |
| Word Count/Duration | 3000 words |
| Module Learning Outcomes | MLO2, MLO3, MLO4, MLO5 |
| Arrangements For the Return of Work and Feedback | |
| Submission Date | 12/12/2025 |
| Feedback Date | 16/01/2026 |
|
Submission Time (if applicable) If you have any technical issues submitting your work, please contact the Module Leader as soon as possible. |
3pm |
| Submission Method | Brightspace |
| Assignment Specific Resources | |
| Software | PowerPoint is available on unveirsity computers |
| Equipment | N/A |
BMK0150 Assessment Task
Based on the company your group have chosen and the initial analysis carried out, you are to write a 3,000 word report to present your strategic marketing plan.
You must provide a critical assessment of the company based on its current state and apply contemporary theories of strategic marketing to justify a set of strategies for the company's further directions
Task Specific Guidance
Structure of the report should be as follows
- Executive Summary
- Situation Analysis
A critical assessment of marketing issues facing the case company.
An analysis of the external and internal marketing environment.
- Strategy Formulation
Clear, evaluated and justified strategy
Targeting: evaluation, selection and justification of consumer and/or business segments.
- Strategy Implementation
Set of marketing tactics clearly derived from strategy and developed in accordance with segments targeted.
Demonstrate how you will implement your strategic marketing plan
- Conclusion and recommendations
Supported by your research to justify why and how your strategy will help the case company gain a competitive advantage.
WORD COUNT Reference list, appendices, table of contents are not included in the word count. Figures and tables are not included in the word count but use with care and where appropriate
Your tutor will discuss how your work will be assessed/marked and will explain how the assessment criteria apply to this piece of work. These criteria have been designed for your level of study.
Learning Outcomes
The assessment task outlined above has been designed to address specific validated learning outcomes for this module. It is useful to keep in mind that these are things you need to demonstrate in this piece of work.
On completion of this module, students will need to demonstrate:
- Develop a critical awareness of core strategic marketing theory, concepts and techniques (such as segmentation, positioning, targeting, brand management, product /service development, etc.)
- Critically apply strategic marketing theory and techniques to investigate and develop solutions to real-world marketing challenges
- Express and justify an individual perspective the application of strategic marketing management to business challenges.
- Perform self-directed tasks autonomously in tackling and solving problems at a professional or equivalent level
Please note these learning outcomes are not additional questions
PGT Marking Criteria Grid Template
|
Distinction (A): 70-100 An exceptional approach to research and enquiry that reflects outstanding knowledge of material and critical ability appropriate to postgraduate level |
||||||||||||||
|
General/Knowledge |
Presentation
|
Understanding/Skills |
Selection of cited material & Coverage |
Structure |
||||||||||
|
90-100 |
Outstanding and Insightful. Displays (for example): publishable quality; outstanding research or critical potential in the context of current problems and/or new insights; originality and independent thought; ability to make informed judgements |
Highest professional standards of presentation written in the style appropriate to the assessment brief |
Authoritative, full understanding of all the issues with originality in analysis; clear evidence of problem-solving skills |
Full range of sources used selectively and skilfully to support argument. Accurate and consistent use of the agreed referencing system |
Coherent and compelling argument well presented |
|||||||||
|
80-89 |
Striking and insightful. Displays (for example): excellent research or critical potential in the context of current problems and/or new insights; flexibility of thought; possibly of publishable quality |
Professional standards of presentation written in the style appropriate to the assessment brief |
||||||||||||
|
70-79 |
Excellent. Displays (for example): high levels of accuracy; evidence of the potential to undertake research; the ability to analyse primary sources critically in the context of current problems and/or new insights |
Very good standards of presentation written in the style appropriate to the assessment brief |
||||||||||||
|
Merit (B): 60-69 A coherent approach to research and enquiry that meets all learning outcomes and demonstrates critical evaluation appropriate to postgraduate level |
||||||||||||||
|
General/Knowledge |
Presentation |
Understanding/Skills |
Selection of cited material & Coverage |
Structure |
||||||||||
|
60-69 |
Approaching excellence in some areas with evidence of the potential to undertake research and critical analysis of current problems and/or new insights. Well-developed relevant argument and a good degree of accuracy |
Good standard of presentation; written in the style appropriate to the assessment brief with length requirement met and academic conventions followed |
Independent, critical evaluation of full range of relevant concepts and theories with some evidence of originality; evidence of problem-solving skills |
Complex work and concepts presented; key texts used effectively. Accurate and consistent use of the agreed referencing system |
Argument concise and explicit
|
|||||||||
|
Pass (C): 50-59 A coherent and logical approach to research and enquiry that meets all learning outcomes and shows understanding of the basic principles appropriate to postgraduate level |
||||||||||||||
|
General/Knowledge |
Presentation |
Understanding/Skills |
Selection of cited material & Coverage |
Structure |
||||||||||
|
50-59 |
A systematic understanding of knowledge; critical awareness of current problems and/or new insights; can evaluate critically current research and can evaluate literature and methodologies |
Length requirement met and academic conventions mostly followed. Written in the style appropriate to the assessment brief; possibly very minor errors in language which do not impede understanding |
Practical understanding of how established techniques of research and/or analysis are used to create and interpret knowledge in the discipline; some evidence of problem-solving skills |
Comprehensive understanding of techniques applicable to own research or advanced scholarship. Consistent use of the agreed referencing system which is predominately accurate
|
The argument is developed but may lack fluency
|
|||||||||
|
Referred (R): 0-49 Some knowledge of core material and critical ability appropriate to postgraduate level, though learning outcomes are not fully met |
||||||||||||||
|
General/Knowledge |
Presentation |
Understanding/Skills |
Selection & Coverage |
Structure |
||||||||||
|
35-49* |
knowledge of concepts within prescribed range but fails to adequately address the task posed by assessment |
Length requirement met and academic conventions mostly followed. The style of presentation is appropriately matched to the assessment brief. Minor errors in language which do not impede understanding |
Some insight into the problem or topic; attempt to demonstrate problem-solving skills and originality |
Limited sources. Use of the agreed referencing system contains some inconsistencies and inaccuracies |
Argument not fully developed and may lack structure and coherence |
|||||||||
|
Referred (R): 0-34 A superficial or inaccurate answer with only peripheral knowledge of core material and very little critical ability. Learning outcomes not met. Not an appropriate submission for postgraduate level. |
||||||||||||||
|
General/Knowledge |
Presentation |
Understanding/Skills |
Selection & Coverage |
Structure |
||||||||||
|
0-34 |
Knowledge of concepts falls short of prescribed range and does not address the task posed by the assessment |
Length requirements not observed, inconsistency in academic conventions and style. Minor language errors which occasionally impede understanding |
Limited or no insight into the problem or topic; no evidence of problem-solving skills or originality |
Some irrelevant and/or out of date sources. Referencing system may be systematically inaccurate or ab |
||||||||||