Level: Diploma In Professional Marketing. Module: Strategic Marketing. Please refer to the July 2016 assessment

Transcription

1 Module report Level: Diploma In Professional Marketing Module: Strategic Marketing Please refer to the July 2016 assessment Overarching performance and key points: Organisational summaries were generally well produced using clear headings and populated with appropriate supporting data. Weaker candidates chose not to use headings or structure their summary. Most Candidates produced a good marketing plan using a suitable framework. Responses were generally well analysed using a variety of audit tools, with good application to the task in hand. Higher scoring candidates related responses specifically to the issue of marketing assets rather than generic responses. Candidates did not always develop clear conclusions, following the audit stage, and higher scoring candidates used a wider range of tools and frameworks, such as TOWS, to draw out options and strategic choices. Similarly, stronger responses were those that critiqued objectives and justified strategic decisions. Weaker candidates produced a superficial audit and evaluation of strategic decisions recommended. In general, written responses were clearly presented and consistent with the theme of the strategic plans and showed good linkages. Weaker responses lacked depth and content, with generic responses lacking basic critical evaluation and justification. In Task 2 (b) (i), when asked about strategy, many answers were tactical. For example, discussing the marketing mix or the BCG or simply saying Digital Marketing. Candidates should have referred to appropriate strategies, such as Ansoff, Blue Ocean, etc. Task 2 (c) (ii), was often missed out or had a short answer; it appears that many candidates were not prepared for, or did not understand, the theory on QMS. Some answers to this task were vague and discussed some management and measurement tools, but did not mention Kaizen TQM, Six Sigma or any other QMS. Practical issues, such as time management issues in Task 2, lack of clarity of language or not answering the brief (both Task 1 and Task 2) were shown by only a small number of candidates. Pre-dominant issues were weak answers to the financial tasks; lack of TQM theoretical knowledge and plans that did not link audits to the theme well enough. It is vital that candidates know the entire syllabus.

2 Given the clear guidelines for the marketing plan there should have been no reason for candidates not to achieve good marks for Task 1. The stronger candidates took advantage of these guidelines and scored good marks in this task. There were some disappointing plans due to a lack of insights and detail and/or lack of integration across the plan. There remains a lack of understanding of basic concepts, which represent a key part of the syllabus. The exam paper presented some difficulties for candidates: a lack of understanding of concepts a lack of understanding of the principles of critical evaluation and impact analysis; aspects requiring more focus some tasks not answered. Good results were achieved by candidates who understood concepts and were able to apply them in the context of the organisation and the tasks. Task Task 1 Strengths Use of recognised marketing plan framework. Generally good content, solid analysis with appropriate justification. Good justified conclusion following SWOT/TOWS. Use of wide range of audit tools and strategic frameworks. Higher scoring candidates related responses specifically to the issue of marketing assets rather than generic responses. Most submissions were well presented with a professional tone and format with clear, comprehensive coverage of the required headings introducing the organisation. An immediate focus on assets and USP s using VRIN as a means of analysis, going beyond simple ranking, ie providing some justification. Identification of competitive advantages resulting from assets. A conclusion with good critical analysis of position of the company with some focus on assets, USP s and competitive advantages. A hierarchy of objectives presented from mission, vision, corporate and marketing objectives through to those proposed for the plan. Strategies presented from Ansoff and/or Porters generic strategies with justification through a valid application of SAF. STP included with a specific focus on the segments associated with the plan.

3 Comprehensive tactics with 7P s applied together with an implementation plan incorporating a budget. Valid and justified CSF s presented with a comprehensive set of measures, perhaps using/applying the balanced scorecard. Task 2 Clearly presented responses with consistency of content and good links to strategic plan with justified conclusions arising from, and referenced to, the audit. Focus throughout on theme of marketing assets. Good understanding of competitive advantage. Good analysis and understanding of macro environment. Good recommendations for strategic options and justification. An analysis of competitive advantages in the industry market with examples of competitive approaches. Taking as a basis the company assets, an examination as to how they are exploited for a number of macro environment changes. Valid strategic options presented linked to those included in the marketing plan with good explanations, perhaps critical evaluation together with justification for their inclusion. A recommendation made as to the appropriate strategy with justification and reference to calculated financial benefits. Valid critical success factors presented with clear justification as to their importance in supporting objectives. Continuous improvements as a concept explained and justified as a necessity, together with an explanation of the part played by quality management systems in their implementation. Format Work was presented fairly professionally in Task 1. In Task 2 candidates could use more headings, subheadings and clearly paragraphs to improve. Using rulers and pencils when drawing tables and charts would make the answers much clearer, neater and better prepared/professional. Task Weaknesses Recommendations Task 1 More evaluation, more analysis of the situation and the potential impact on the business within the audit required. Candidates need to use only models and frameworks that are relevant to the scenario. Candidates need to be more critical, evaluative and analytical in their approach.

4 There is little justification of recommendations and these are not always in context. Some Accredited Study Centres clearly issued a template for candidates to follow, which meant that some tables were not required/appropriate or applied in context to the scenario. Generic responses, basic strategic evaluation, no critique of mission, values, objectives. Lack of depth in presenting assets, USP s and competitive advantages with a lack of justification, ie merely listings. A TOWS or SWOT with a lack of detail. Rather than the required focus on assets, etc, a general audit (perhaps three pages in total) incorporating PESTEL, Porters 5 Forces, value chain, etc. Some lack of understanding of the purpose of objectives, eg a plan proposed with only 2019 objectives; no short/medium term objectives included. Objectives not SMART and bearing little relationship to corporate objectives. Little/no justification of marketing objectives in relation to corporate objectives. For strategic options a lack of application of frameworks together with a lack of understanding of STP. Strategic options presented, which in reality were tactics. At times a very poor understanding of the strategy concept. Candidate should include more clearly justified recommendations. There should be a clear flow between each element within the audit and plan. Keep everything within the Audit and Plan in context to the given scenario. Do not just use bullet points. Consider using a ranking/scoring system to help explain the urgency/importance of points made. Relate to marketing assets, wider use of analytical frameworks, greater critical evaluation. Tutors should, through their own analysis of requirements, explain clearly the emphasis of the plan. Tutors should take responsibility for ensuring candidates have a knowledge and understanding of essential marketing concepts as defined in the module syllabus. Exercises should be undertaken illustrating the application of concepts and frameworks.

5 Lack of detail in tactics with little/no integration overall and linkage to strategy recommendations. Tutor support and review/feedback should be provided to candidates during the production of their marketing plans. A lack of understanding of CSF s and their importance. A presentation of requirements for completion of the plan schedule rather than true CSF s required to meet objectives. A focus on metrics/kpis rather than measurement tools and measures. Task 2 There were instances across Accredited Study Centres of identical and superficial marketing plan structures, generally with a poor level of detail. Generic responses. Basic strategic evaluation/lack of justification. Limited examples of financial measures. No reference to quality management theories. Lack of justification to points made and recommendations. Little use of examples and referencing/wider reading. Some candidates wrote in bullet points. Some mismanaged their time. Not answering the task set. Did not understand all of the theory. An unjustified analysis of the organisation s competitive advantages rather than those in the market. Tutors should avoid providing candidates with prescriptive marketing plan structures and content. Relate to marketing assets. Greater critical evaluation and justification. Greater understanding of theories behind continuous improvement. Do practice papers. Use the plan and audit to help build discussion and help justify. More depth and detail within the plan will help with this. Ensure all of syllabus is clearly understood. Essential that the capability of candidates should be assessed before being accepted on this level of qualification.

6 A description of macro environment changes with/without impact, together with little/no reference to asset exploitation. Invalid strategic options presented which were in essence tactical initiatives. An incorrect understanding that the frameworks of Ansoff and Porters generic strategies were themselves strategies. A selection of an invalid strategy, lack of justification for the selection and no reference to financial measures. Ensure candidates understand the meaning of action words such as: critical evaluation assess (impact) discuss, etc. Tutors are responsible for course coverage of basic concepts and principles of marketing. Practical exercises in concept/theory application should be incorporated in studies/teaching. Mock papers should be sat. A lack of understanding of critical success factors. A lack of understanding of quality management systems. General issues SWOTs lacking depth with no conclusion and often used instead of TOWS. Lacking analysis in the audit. Basic strategic evaluation. Minimal link to plan in written responses. Lack of depth regarding STP. Generic plans. Lacking justification in the plan. Recommendations Consider TOWS. An audit is to analyse, assess and evaluate. Always consider impact of the point being made in the context to the given scenario on other chosen business, customer, industry or wider stakeholder community. Greater use of alternative analytical frameworks. Link answers to the plan. Tutors to place greater emphasis on critical evaluation. Tutors to advise greater application to task. Do not just make a point but explain why this is being made. Underpin discussion with real life examples or academic theory.

7 Lack of understanding of theory. Inability to understand and apply action words, eg analyse, assess, justify, discuss, etc. Lack of understanding and inability to apply basic marketing concepts. Tutors to ensure all elements of syllabus is taught, candidates to revise ALL elements. Tutors to encourage candidates to look into action words. Tutors to question candidate understanding. Training could be provided by established tutors for modules.