Assessment item 2Corporate objectives and approaches to marketingValue: 15%Due date: 18-Mar-2018Return date: 11-Apr-2018Length: 600 wordsSubmission method optionsAlternative submission methodTaskThis assessment is designed to engage you in the subject and to begin to develop an understanding of central issues in marketing. It will also be the start of the discussion and comparison with your peers on topics of the marketing concept and market management, and starts the process of the marketing audit.In 3 sections of 200 words each (or less), incorporating the theoretical concepts into your discussion from the first two chapters of the text, and with the use of secondary research, discuss the following concepts and apply to your selected organisation:Identify the concept of corporate objectives and evaluate an organisation with information available in the public domain.Discuss marketing orientation concepts (i.e. the marketing concept, the selling concept or production concept). Explain with examples which concept your organisation follows.What is your organisation’s core marketing strategy? Discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the current marketing strategy and explain how this strategy will help your organisation reach its corporate objectives.More information on how to complete this assessment will be provided on Interact 2RationaleThis assessment assesses the following learning outcomes:be able to assess and explain the nature of marketing and marketing management in contemporary organisations;be able to find relevant and important information about organisations, their industries and marketplaces from secondary sources;Marking criteriaCriterion :The various skills to be assessed Fail (0 – 49%) Pass (50 – 64%) Credit (65-74%) Distinction (75 – 84%) High Distinction (85+)Communication SkillsThis is about the presentation of the work including: Structure, Format, Grammar, including imagesValue 15%Grade range 0-2.5Poor grammar, spelling, punctuation, concepts were not clear, no paragraphs or formatting- no images, tables or illustrationsMarks 0 – 1Some grammatical errors, sentences were clear and complete clear structure and formatting using headings, and sub headings, some illustrations and diagrams, but not explained and only decorativeMarks 1.3 – 1.6Minor grammatical errors, sentences were clear and complete, structure and format were used to aid the reader including diagrams, tables and images, that were relevant to argument, but were still not fully explained or describedMarks 1.7 – 1.8Free of grammatical errorsStructure and format were clear Sentences were well constructed. Language was concise. Excellent use of diagrams, images and tables that were both visually appealing as well as clearly relevant and explainedMarks 1.9 – 2.1Free of grammatical errorsStructure and format were clear, logical and consistent. Sentences were well constructed. Exceptional use of diagrams, images and tables, clearly relevant, explained and insightful links madeMarks 2.2 – 2.5Theoretical analysis skillsThis criterion is about defining, describing and evaluating the concepts that were found when researching the topicValue 30%Grade range 0-4.5Concepts were not defined, described or evaluated, mainly listed without explanationMarks 0 – 2.2Concepts were defined, there was an attempt to provide descriptions with examples to explain, limited analysisMarks 2.3 – 2.9Clear and relevant definitions and descriptions with examples, some attempt to develop analysis by comparing and contrasting of conceptsMarks 3 – 3.3Clear definitions, descriptions with examples and analysis of concepts with comparison, with clear evaluations and conclusionsMarks 3.4 – 3.8Clear definitions, descriptions with examples and analysis of concepts with highly insightful and perceptive comparisons, evaluations and conclusionsMarks 3.9 – 4.5Application skillsThis criterion is about linking theory to a specific context, explaining how it relates to a product/company and making recommendationsValue 40%Grade range 0-2There was no or limited application to the case study, no examples provided no recommendationsMarks 0 – 2.9Case study was described and identified. The context was connected briefly to theory, but the discussion was not well supported by argumentsMarks 3 – 3.8Case study was described and identified. The context was connected to theory with clear links. There were relevant market discussionsMarks 3.9 – 4.4Case study described and identified and insightful evaluations were made. The context was connected to theory with clear, creative and logical links. There were relevant, well supported market discussions with explicit connections to theoretical argumentsMarks 4.5 – 5Case study described and identified and insightful evaluations were made. The context was connected to theory with exceptional, logical and imaginative links. The market discussions were highly relevant , realistic and supported with explicit connections to theoretical argumentsMark 5.1 – 6Referencing SkillsThis criterion was about the application of APA 6th referencingValue 15%Grade range 0-2There was limited or no attempt at in text or end of text referencingMarks 0 – 0.9There was an attempt to apply referencing, but style and application were inconsistent and some points remain unreferencedMarks 1 – 1.2Referencing applied. However style/application was inconsistent with some errors in text/reference listMark 1.3 – 1.4Both the in text and end reference list were consistent in terms of style and application of APA6.Marks 1.5 – 1.6Both the in text and end reference list were consistent in terms of style and application of APA6. Referencing apparent in all places where expected.Marks 1.7 – 2No marks awarded but a maximum of 5 marks each may be deducted for errors in the following:Word count (+/- 10%)Turnitin text match (max 20%)RequirementsAssignments must be submitted through Turnitin. Details can be found on Interact 2. Text match should not be more than 20%It is recommended that your name, student ID and page number be included in the header or footer of every page of the assignment. Referencing should use APA 6th edition – see CSU library for tutorials and guide.
Assignment status: Already Solved By Our Experts
(USA, AUS, UK & CA PhD. Writers)