.
Introduction
You are asked to prepare a marketing plan including a persuasive financial assessment of your planned activities. The target audience for this plan is the Board who will give you the resources to make your plan a success. Your document therefore needs to be well-presented and deliver a concise but compelling business case. The format of the assignment is a written report.
Rationale
At the heart of what strategic marketing “does” is to plan: we plan for changes in the environment, new competitive threats, entering new markets, creating new markets, repositioning and new products and services. How much can we sell? And to whom will we sell it? What do they value about our offerings? How will price affect demand? Is the target market reachable through communications? If we spend more on communications, how much more will we sell? Who are our competitors and how will they respond to our initiatives? Should we distribute direct or via intermediaries? How much service should we offer and at what price? What is the impact of our decisions about marketing strategies on the resource base of our organisation: people, processes, technology, locations? We plan, we calculate. What is the impact of marketing’s strategic choices upon business performance and shareholder value? We prepare business cases for alternatives, scenarios, if-then analyses. Most of what we plan for never sees the light of day, the business case does not “stack up”: we cannot find a way to build it cheaply enough to sell it for a price that generates sufficient demand, we cannot find a positioning that is unique and motivating for consumers or the target market is not addressable by us. That which you see in the market is normally the result of careful planning and assessment. Key assumptions are made, and reassessed continually during the planning period, adjustments are made, the business case revisited frequently – at least, that is how it should happen. For those of you with military backgrounds, this should all be very familiar.
In creating a strategic marketing plan, we hope that you will learn experientially about how all the elements we cover in the module interact, the interdependency of segmentation, targeting, positioning and it’s relation to our offerings (price, physical goods or packaging or services, communication, distribution, people, processes, etc.) and how they all add up to a business case. We are not focusing on the minutia of creative execution of advertising, the ratio of promotion spending between TV and paid search, sales force compensation plans, etc. You will see from the overview document that we are asking you for the “high level” strategic view with just enough precision to create a high-level profit and loss (P&L) statement and discounted cash flow analysis.
Guidance
The assessment is based upon the intelligent application of marketing theory and frameworks towards the development of practical recommendations. Please read these carefully:
• Please ensure that you cover the first three quadrants of the marketing wheel as laid out in the assessment overview document: Market Sensing, Market Design and Aligning to Customers.
• Demonstrate evidence of critical thought, deeper learning and application of
marketing theory and frameworks.
- Ground the analysis in data – you must do a financial analysis of your recommendation identifying new capabilities and resources required.
- Recommendations must be realistic. You are EMBA students – employers expect realistic and achievable ideas. Assess the risks in the plan and identify how you would handle them. We want more than something such as “we will invest in our brand to make it appealing to the target group”.
- Use the marketing frameworks – correctly and with purpose. Avoid dumping every tool you know into the report and hoping something emerges from it. Tell us why you picked the tools and frameworks you did and demonstrate how they inform the recommendations. This is often the weakest element of the plans.
- Make the link or transition between analysis and recommendations compelling and obvious. Avoid leaping to recommendations. For most plans, this will involve a discussion of alternatives and reasons for your choice. Too
- ften we see plans where the up-front analysis is very detailed and professional but has absolutely no impact on what follows.
- Ensure clarity and purpose in writing. Link the thoughts into an overall story.
- Have fun with it. It is a great opportunity to experience how the marketing lens can be focused on a business and to think critically about a company’s marketing activities and strategies. On page 5, you will see how the above guidance translates into the assessment criteria for the Strategic Marketing component of the plan.
Choice of organisation
- You are free to choose whether you want to work on your own organisation1
- r a different one.
- The organisation can be from any part of the world. It can operate in a B2B, B2C or third sector setting.
- If the organisation you have chosen operates in more than one market, then please focus on one of them.
Word count
For the Strategic Marketing component of the plan, you are allowed to write a maximum of 2,500 words, while for the Accounting and Finance component of the plan you are allowed to write a maximum of 1,500 words. The marketing plan is therefore a maximum of 4,000 words.
- Areas included in the word count are as follows:
- All materials after the title page and before references and appendices (if applicable).
- All materials include: tables, charts, diagrams, illustrations, screen shots, photographs, infographics.
- Areas excluded from the word count are as follows:
- Title page, References, Appendices.
- Exceeding the maximum word count: If you exceed 2,500 words for the Strategic Marketing component you will have 10 percentage points deducted from your final mark for the Strategic Marketing component for every 1,000 words, or part of 1,000 words, in excess
- f the 2,500 word limit.
1 In case you work on your own organisation and use proprietary data or confidential information, there will be a separate restricted submission point to which only a limited number of people have access to so you can submit the plan in confidence.
Please note that writing less than the maximum word count for the Strategic Marketing component of the plan (2,500 words) does not mean that you can allocate the remaining words to the Accounting and Finance component, or vice versa.
Formatting
- Please make sure your report is professionally formatted.
- Use 12 point font size and ensure decent margins and line spacing.
- Don’t forget page numbers.
- Clearly label figures and tables numerically and with descriptive text and refer to them in the main text.
- Appendices need to be referred to in the main text in order to be taken into consideration.
- Make judicious use of tables and figures in the main text. Figures and tables should add to the report, not merely replicate what you state in the main text.
- Think about whether you need the appendices you want to include. Everything that is crucial for understanding should be in the main text. Appendices should just provide additional background information for the interested reader and should be concise.
Overview document
An overview document for the Strategic Marketing component of the individual marketing plan is provided, but please keep in mind that it is not possible to have a generic framework for assessing all opportunities across all contexts. Use the overview document as guidance, but feel free to deviate from it and amend it as necessary. It provides a starting point and ensures that you will use sufficient frameworks only.
Overall mark
Your overall mark for the Strategic Marketing and Accounting and Finance modules will be the average of the two marks you have received for the Strategic Marketing and Accounting and Finance components of the plan. The assessment criteria on the next page indicate how the Strategic Marketing component of the plan will be evaluated.
| Assessment criteria Coherent, credible plans (25%) • Plan is coherent through strong integration between the elements (opportunity, market strategy, marketing activities, financial implications). Major assumptions and risks are dearly stated, contingencies identified. • Trail of evidence leads to credible conclusions and decisions | Excellent 80-100% Mark Develops coherent, logical, relevant and innovative arguments drawing appropriate conclusions. Each stage of the plan feeds into the next. Demonstrates exceptional analysis, judgement and reflection. | Very good 70-79% Well-developed argument and justified conclusions. The analysis builds to a logical conclusion and appropriate inferences are drawn with each analysis. Evidence of independent thought and critical analysis. | Good 60-69% Develops good arguments which could have been further elaborated or clarified. The plan is not fully joined-up; bits of analysis without implications or use subsequently. Demonstrates some critical thinking but the plan can be challenged. | Satisfactory 50-59% Develops some arguments but at a superficial level. Pieces of the analysis and plan are not well connected. Assembles and links ideas but does not elaborate or fully discuss. The plan can easily be challenged. | Poor 40-49% Development of argument is weak and/or a purely descriptive account throughout. No critical evaluation of material or individual pieces of analysis. The plan is judged not to be credible at all. | Very poor 0-39% Very limited flow or coherence between the pieces of the plan. It is not evident how conclusions are generated, how the analysis informs decisions and what the financial implications of decisions are. No evaluation of material or analysis. |
| Application of marketing theory, frameworks and tools (25%) • Shows an understanding of the tools and frameworks covered in the module • Applies the tools in an appropriate manner to a specific product-market example. | Uses the ideal frameworks appropriate for the context demonstrating excellent understanding of marketing theory. Perfect application of all frameworks, no flaws. | Uses appropriate frameworks intelligently, could be challenged over choices however. Good use of marketing theory. Very good application of all frameworks, minor flaws only. | Demonstrates knowledge and understanding of the tools / frameworks. The application is largely correct however there are errors or omissions in their use. | Demonstrates limited knowledge and understanding of the tools / frameworks. There are regular and important errors and/or omissions in application. | Demonstrates inadequate knowledge and understanding of the tools / frameworks. Provides superficial application with significant errors and/or omissions. | Does not use recognisable marketing theory or frameworks from course or other credible source. Analysis is based on intuition and judgment mostly. |
| Identification and use of relevant data from appropriate sources (25%) • Identifies appropriate sources of market data for completing the various product-market analyses and applies this data effectively in the analysis and discussion. • Identifies the nature of the data and the source and evaluates the reliability of the source including any potential limitations of the data. | Extensive use of data from multiple sources throughout to support analysis. Where data cannot be obtained, educated assumptions, informed by available data, are present. Data is assessed critically and a determination of its impact on the plan discussed. | Demonstrates very good effort to collect and use appropriate data throughout. Where data cannot be obtained, this is acknowledged. The report acknowledges data limitations and their impact on the analysis. | Demonstrates a sound / basic effort to collect and use data appropriately with few errors. There is little assessment of the quality of data or attempt to “fill in blanks” with judgements based on the data available. | Demonstrates a basic effort to collect and use appropriate data. Limitations in explanation or justification. There is little assessment of data quality or basis for assumptions that need to be made where data is not available. | Limited data is used to inform the analysis — frameworks. No assessment of data quality or awareness of its potential implications upon the plan. | Demonstrates little effort to collect and use data. No discussion of data quality or its implications. |
| Quality of presentation (25%) • The plan is professionally presented. • The outcome of each analysis/frameworks generates implications that influence the subsequent document • Fluency of writing and inclusion of clear illustrations. | Exceptional structure and clarity of expression. Illustrations, figures and tables enhance the presentation and are 100% appropriate. Referencing clear, relevant and consistent. Virtually error-free. | Fluent thoughts and ideas clearly expressed. The structure is very clear and good use of visuals, tables etc. Referencing, relevant with few errors | Logical structure but not fully clear flow; can be challenging at times. Errors in tables, figures at times. Referencing, relevant but with some errors. | Language understandable, meaning apparent but not explicit, grammar and/or spelling poor. Often tables and illustrations add little or are poorly explained. Inconsistent referencing. | Very difficult to follow the structure, writing or argument. Visuals often inappropriate and fail to add anything to the report. Inconsistent, referencing with some errors. | Almost incomprehensible. No meaningful structure. Inconsistent or absent referencing. We have no idea from where the ideas or data originates — if there is any data. |
