MARK5814 T2-2024 Assessment Information
21 May 2024
5. Individual Assignment – Digital Marketing Evaluation Report (30%)
Due date: 16:00, Thursday, 8 August 2024.
Word limit: Maximum 2,500 words (All included except UNSW assignment cover sheet,
references, and appendices). Submission: To TurnitinTM via Moodle.
Task:
This report is designed to help you reflect on your own experiences as a consumer being targeted by a specific brand through its digital marketing activities. The brand can be any brand with which you have had multiple engagement, purchasing, or consumption experiences. For example, it could be a fashion brand, an online marketplace, an online game, a food delivery service, or an online streaming service. Ideally, you should select a brand where some forms of digital engagement exist. By recording and analyzing your own experiences, particularly in reference to the theories of digital marketing, you should begin to evaluate the effectiveness of certain digital marketing efforts.
For this assignment, you are required to discuss your experiences with the digital marketing activities of your chosen brand. The digital marketing activities may include, for example, social media marketing, mobile app marketing, content marketing, email and SMS marketing, referral marketing, and/or display advertising, aimed at increasing your engagement with the brand. Critically discuss and analyse the activities based on the digital marketing theories and concepts studied in MARK5814 and support with good secondary data.
Format and instruction:
Please include: The School of Marketing Assignment Cover Sheet as the first page
Executive summary:
You should only briefly summarise the digital marketing activities experienced, digital marketing theories discussed, and key recommendation(s) proposed. This should be no more than half a page. Have a separate page for the executive summary.
1. Description of the digital marketing activities experienced.
Describe your chosen brand (focus on only one brand, the brand can be any firm or organisation) and its business model. Describe in detail what specific digital marketing activities the brand has done to engage you. Document each digital marketing activity experienced and what value you received from each activity (e.g., quality value, economic value, social value, emotional value). Discuss at least two digital marketing activities. You are also required to give an overall engagement rating and whether you would recommend this brand to a close friend or family member (all using 5-point scales).
This section should be no more than 800 words.
2. Analyse and evaluate the digital marketing activities experienced.
Analyse and evaluate the digital marketing activities using relevant digital marketing theories (concepts, frameworks and/or models) and support this with good secondary data.
In addition to the MARK5814 text, you should at least read and refer to two recent academic journal articles (published after 2016, excluding 2016) that are related to the digital marketing theories you are going to apply to analyse your experience and form. your recommendation(s) and implementation.
This section should be no more than 800 words.
3. Recommendation(s) and implementation
Based on the analysis, make a recommendation for improvement - or if your evaluation was a very positive one, then indicate what lessons could be passed on to other brands. By applying digital marketing theories, you should briefly make a recommendation on how the brand may improve their digital marketing activities. However, do not recommend theory or ideas in this section. Practical and specific recommendation(s) are required. Recommendation(s) should
be evaluated in terms of its advantages and disadvantages (strong and weak points) and you need to justify your recommendation(s). No more than two recommendations should be made. Use valid supporting evidence to argue why such recommendations are practical and useful.
In this section you should specifically explain how you would implement the recommended solutions. What should be done, by whom, when, in what sequence, what it will cost (rough estimates) and other such issues.
Remember, if a recommended solution cannot be realistically implemented, then it is not a solution at all.
This section should be no more than 800 words.
4. Reference list
5. Appendix (if applicable)
• You are free to include an appendix; however, no mark is allocated to the information contained in the appendix.
Additional format requirements:
• Font: Headings - Font size: 14; main text - Font size: 12. Times New Roman is preferable.
• Margin: 2.5 cm.
• Space: Double-spaced throughout the paper, except the Executive Summary.
• Presentation style. for Executive Summary: Font size: 12, 1.5 spaced, no more than half a page.
• This course uses in-text referencing, for more information also see UNSW Business School Harvard Referencing Guide available on the Moodle course website.
You must reference all non-original work, e.g., if you take an idea from an academic journal article, book, magazine, or website, you must reference it. Do not reference lecture notes/PowerPoint, you must go to the original source, i.e., book, article, magazine, website.
Marking rubric:
CRITERIA
|
FAIL
|
PASS
|
CREDIT
|
DISTINCTION
|
HIGH
DISTINCTION
|
Level of summary, research,
referencing,
presentation style. and formatting
(30%)
|
Poorly research. No appropriate
referencing.
Inconsistent
presentation
styles through all parts.
|
Research
adequate.
Correct
referencing. Some
inconsistent
presentation
styles through all parts.
|
Research good.
Correct
referencing. Consistent
presentation
styles through all parts.
|
Researched very well (multiple
good sources).
Correct
referencing. Consistent
presentation
styles through all parts.
|
Research excellent.
Correct
referencing.
Consistent
presentation styles through all parts.
Appropriate use of tables and diagrams.
|
Coherent,
professional and logically
structured analysis and
recommendations (50%)
|
No clear logic or
flow to the
report. No
application of course concepts or models in
problem
identification, analysis and/or solution
identification.
|
Some structure
for the report,
though relatively poor integration between report
parts. Little
support among report parts.
Some
application of course concepts or models in
problem
identification, analysis and/or solution
identification.
|
Good logical
structure flow
for the report
and from one
report part to
another. Some
support among
report parts.
Good application of course
concepts or
models in
problem
identification,
analysis and/or solution
identification.
|
Well-structured report, reflecting high level of
integration
among different report parts.
Good support
among report
parts. Very good application of
course concepts or models in
problem
identification, analysis and/or solution
identification.
|
Well-
structured, synthesised into a rich report.
Excellent logical
structured
analysis and
flow from one report part to another.
Excellent
support among report parts.
Excellent
application of course
concepts or
models in
problem
identification,
analysis and/or solution
identification.
|
Clear, concise,
insightful writing (20%)
|
Poor level of
reflected
understanding. Inaccurate
expression
making meaning unclear.
|
Basic effort in reflecting
understanding. Inaccurate
expression
making meaning sometimes
unclear.
|
Some insightful reflection.
Expression generally accurate.
|
Insightful reflection. Consistent expression
making meaning concise and
clear.
|
Exceptionally insightful
(reflected
understanding). Fluent
expression
making it very easy to read
and
comprehend.
|