Marketing homework help
Assignment description: This assignment requires students to present a comprehensive marketing plan for a hospitality business, assembled from 8 smaller assignments developed throughout the course. The deliverable is in powerpoint associated with a 15 – 20 minutes in-class presentation demonstrating application of the following 8 core marketing concepts: Environmental Analysis, Market Segmentation, Internal Analysis and Objectives, Competitive Positioning, Marketing Strategies (4Ps), Promotional Mix, Value Proposition and Communications Strategy, and Budget/ROI. This assignment is the signature assessment for the Hospitality Management Program Learning Outcome PLO-4: Marketing: Students will be able to apply marketing and sales principles, tools and techniques to solve hospitality business problems. The PLO is assessed again at the end of the program (Senior Integrative Project or Capstone).
Assignment outcomes:
- Appropriately applies marketing theories and concepts to a specific hospitality or tourism enterprise.
- Uses strategic marketing planning terms, concepts and methods.
- Demonstrates analytical and research skills.
- Uses data logically to justify marketing-related judgments.
- Expresses ideas in writing for a business document, citing sources appropriately.
- Presents findings compellingly and with poise, supported by creative, engaging visuals.
| Category | Outcome Description | Exemplary | Competent | Developing | Beginning | Unacceptable |
| Assignment -Specific | ||||||
| Applies Theories and Concepts
(40 points)
|
Environmental Analysis (5) | Identifies all relevant outside forces (2.5) | Identifies many relevant outside forces (2) | Identifies some relevant outside forces (1.75) | Identifies few relevant outside forces (1.5) | Identified no relevant outside forces ( 0) |
| Explains all their implications (2.5) | Explains most of their implications (2) | explains a few of their implications (1.75) | Poor explanation of implications (1.5) | Doesn’t explain implications (0) | ||
| Market Segmentation (5) | Identifies 3+ relevant target segments (2.5) | Identifies 3 target segments but one lacks relevance (2) | Identifies < 3 relevant target segments or more than one lacks relevance (1.75) | Identifies only 1 target segment or all lack relevance (1.5) | Identified no relevant target segments ( 0) | |
| Profiles thoroughly detail demo, psycho and behavioral characteristics (2.5) | Profiles detail most demo, psycho and behavioral characteristics (2) | Profiles lack details in one category of characteristics (1.75) | Profiles lack details in two or more categories (1.5) | Doesn’t provide profiles (0) | ||
| Internal Analysis and Objectives (5) | SWOT lists > 4 items per category and differentiates internal and external factors (2.5) | SWOT lists 4 items per category and differentiates internal and external factors (2) | SWOT lists < 4 items per category or confuses internal and external factors (1.75) | SWOT is missing categories (1.5) | SWOT is missing ( 0) | |
| Objectives are SMART (1) | Objectives are mostly SMART (.75) | Objectives are missing some SMART elements (.75) | Objectives are missing most SMART elements (.5) | All SMART elements are missing (0) | ||
| Objectives relate to external and internal analysis (1.5) | Objectives mostly relate to internal and external analysis (1.25) | Objectives loosely relate to internal and external analysis (1) | Objectives don’t follow from external or internal analysis (1) | Objectives are missing or unconnected to external or internal analysis (0) | ||
| Competitive Positioning (5) | Correctly analyzes direct and indirect competition (3) | Analyzes most of the direct and indirect competition (2.25) | Analyzes some competitors but confuses direct and indirect (2) | Competitive analysis is incomplete (1.75) | No competitors identified or there is no analysis provided (0) | |
| Competitive advantage is well articulated (2)
|
competitive advantage is adequately (1.75)
|
competitive advantage is poorly identified (1.5)
|
Competitive advantage is lacking (1.25)
|
No competitive advantage is provided (0) | ||
| Marketing Strategies (4Ps) (5) | Recommends >3 Product, Price or Place strategies (2.5) | Recommends 3 Product, Price or Place Strategies (2) | Recommends at least 2 Product, Price or Place Strategies (1.75) | Recommends <2 Product, Price or Place Strategies (1.5) | No Product, Price or Place Strategies (0) | |
| Strategies strongly support marketing objectives (2.5) | Strategies mostly support marketing objectives (2) | One or more strategies fail to support marketing objectives (1.75) | Strategies fail to support marketing objectives (1.5) | Makes no connection to marketing objectives (0) | ||
| Promotional Mix (5) | Chooses >3 appropriate promotional media per target market (3) | Chooses 3 appropriate promotional media per target market (2.5) | Chooses 2 promotional media per target market or some of the media are inappropriate (2.25) | Chooses <2 Promotional media per target and most are inappropriate (2) | No promotional media are selected for some targets (0) | |
| Timing and frequency are exemplary (2) | Timing and frequency are good (1.5) | Timing or frequency are inadequate (1.25) | Missing either timing or frequency (1) | Timing and Frequency are missing (0) | ||
| Value Proposition and Communication Strategy (5) | Value proposition expresses compelling emotional benefits and supporting facts (2.5) | Value proposition expresses adequate emotional benefits and supporting facts (2) | Value proposition expresses few emotional benefits or confuses with some supporting facts (1.75) | Value Proposition does not express emotional benefits and confuses with supporting facts (1.5) | No value proposition provided (0) | |
| Messages are highly motivating for target markets and objectives. (2.5) | Messages are somewhat motivating for target markets and objectives. (2) | messages are a mix of motivating and un-motivating for target markets and objectives. (1.75) | Messages are not motivating for target markets and objectives. (1.5) | No or incomplete messages provided (0) | ||
| Budgeting and ROI (5) | Budget is complete and realistic (2.5) | Budget is realistic but has small gaps (2) | Budget is realistic but has significant gaps (1.75) | Budget is sketchy or unrealistic (1.5) | No budget provided (0) | |
| Correctly calculates ROI with full explanation (2.5) | Correctly calculates ROI with some explanation (2) | Correctly calculates ROI with no explanation (1.75) | ROI is incorrect and explanation is missing (1.5) | No ROI provided (0) | ||
| General Requirements | ||||||
| Critical thinking (15 points) | Relevance | Only uses data that is correct and appropriate to the problem (5) | Most of the data is correct and appropriate to the problem (4) | Only some data is correct or appropriate to the problem. (3.5) | Data is completely lacking or incorrect (3) | No relevant data (0) |
| Analysis | Interprets data correctly with full understanding of implications. (5) | Interprets data mostly correctly with good understanding of implications.(4) | Misinterprets some data or shows limited understanding of implications. (3.5) | Relies on limited information or misinterprets it. Doesn’t recognize implications. (3) | No analysis provided (0) | |
| Logic | Conclusions follow logically from information provided. (5) | Conclusions mostly follow logically from information provided (4). | There is some disconnection between conclusions and information provided. (3.5) | Conclusions do not follow logically from information provided. (3) | No conclusions provided (0) | |
| Research
(15 Points) |
Scope | Research is comprehensive (5) | Research is extensive but incomplete (4) | Research is adequate but incomplete (3.5) | Research is insufficient and incomplete (3) | No research provided (0) |
| Credibility | Cites credible sources from (5) | Cites mostly credible sources (4) | Cites some credible and some questionable sources (3.5) | Cites slanted or questionable sources (3) | Does not cite sources (0) | |
| References | Includes many matching in-text citations and references (3) | Includes some in-text citations and references or some don’t match (2.5) | Includes a few in-text citations and references; many don’t match (2.25) | In-text citations or references are missing or don’t match at all (2) | No in-text citations or references (0) | |
| All references and in-text citations are properly formatted in APA (2) | Most references and in-text citations are properly formatted in APA (1.5) | Some references and in-text citations are properly formatted in APA (1.25) | References and in-text citations are not properly formatted in APA (1) | No references (0) | ||
| Written Communication (20 points) | Mechanics | Writing is clear and concise (5) | Writing is mostly clear and concise (4) | Writing is unclear and difficult to follow (3.5) | Writing is very hard to understand and follow (3) | Writing does not meet college level expectations (0) |
| Vocabulary | Incorporates terminology correctly (5) | Incorporates some terminology, mostly correctly (4) | Rarely incorporates terminology or occasionally misuses it. (3.5) | Fails to use or misuses terminology (3) | No terminology used (0) | |
| Organization | Ideas are organized (5) | Ideas are mostly organized (4) | Ideas are somewhat disorganized (3.5) | Ideas are very disorganized (3) | Ideas are impossible to follow (0) | |
| Grammar and Typos | Grammar and spelling is correct throughout (5) | Grammar and spelling is mostly correct(4) | There are numerous errors in grammar and spelling. (3.5) | Riddled with grammatical errors/typos (3) | Excessive number of grammatical errors/typos (0) | |
| Oral Communication (5 points) | Content | Presentation is compelling and generates audience enthusiasm (2) | Presentation is interesting and holds audience’s attention (1.5) | Parts of presentation are interesting for the audience (1.4) | Presentation is uninteresting and loses audience (1.25) | Presentation is incomplete or garbled (0) |
| Delivery | Presenter shows confidence and poise. (2) | Presenter shows some confidence and poise (1.5) | Presenter’s confidence and poise fluctuates (1.4) | Presenter is lacking confidence and poise (1.25) | Presenter is unable or unwilling (0) | |
| Visuals | Visuals are creative and engaging (1) | Visuals are somewhat creative and engaging (.75) | Visuals lack creativity but cover the material adequately (.7) | Visuals are unappealing and difficult to follow (.5) | No visuals provided (0) | |
| Timeliness (5 points) | Timeliness | Submitted on time (5) | < one day late (4) | 2 days late (3.5) | 3 – 5 days late (3) | >5 days late (0) |
| 90 – 100 points | 80 – 89 points | 70- 79 points | 60 – 69 points | 0 – 59 points | ||
Talk to us support@bestqualitywriters.com