Brand Critique

Criteria

Fail (< 50)

Pass (50 – 64)

Credit (65 – 74)

Distinction (75 – 84)

High Distinction (85 – 100)

Executive Summary and Introduction of the Brand (1 mark)

No executive summary or background provided and/or background is inadequate. No secondary sources used.

Demonstrates an adequate ability to state the executive summary and provide information about the brand. Limited information presented and/or limited use of appropriate secondary sources.

Demonstrates a sound ability to state the executive summary and identify and summarise information about the brand. A range of information presented. Background is informed by appropriate secondary sources in most instances. Discussion should be more succinct.

Demonstrates clear competence to state the executive summary and identify and accurately summarize key brand information. Background is informed by a range of appropriate secondary sources. Discussion should be more succinct.

Demonstrates excellence in stating the executive summary and identifying and accurately summarising key brand information. Background is skilfully informed by a range of appropriate secondary sources. Discussion is succinct.

/ 1

Specification of Product or Brand related Attributes (1 mark)

Demonstrated little or no ability to identify the attributes of the selected brand.

No use of secondary materials.

Demonstrates an adequate ability to identify and summarise the attributes of the selected brand. Limited number of attributes identified and/or limited use of appropriate secondary sources.

Demonstrates a sound ability to identify and summarise the attributes of the selected brand. A range of attributes presented. Identification of brand attributes is informed by appropriate secondary sources in most instances.

Demonstrates clear competence in identifying and accurately summarising the attributes of the selected brand. A range of attributes presented. Identification of brand attributes is informed by a range of appropriate secondary sources.

Demonstrates excellence in identifying and accurately summarising key brand attributes. All attributes presented. Identification of attributes is skilfully informed by a range of secondary sources.

/ 1

Brand Portfolio (2 marks)

Demonstrated little or no ability to identify the selected brand’s portfolio.

No use of secondary materials.

Demonstrates an adequate ability to identify and summarise the selected brand’s portfolio. Limited aspects of the portfolio identified and/or limited use of appropriate secondary sources.

Demonstrated a sound ability to identify and summarise the selected brand’s portfolio Most aspects on the portfolio identified. Identification of the brand portfolio is informed by appropriate secondary sources in most instances.

Demonstrates clear competence in identifying and accurately summarising the selected brand’s portfolio. All brands within portfolio identified and clearly displayed. Identification of the brand portfolio is informed by a range of appropriate secondary sources.

Demonstrates excellence in identifying and accurately summarising the brand’s portfolio. All brands within portfolio identified and displayed in an aesthetically pleasing format. Identification of attributes is skilfully informed by a range of secondary sources.

/ 2

Brand Elements (2 marks)

Demonstrates little or no ability to identify the elements of the selected brand.

No use of secondary materials.

Demonstrates an adequate ability to identify the elements of the selected brand.

Limited brand elements identified and/or limited use of appropriate secondary sources.

Demonstrates a sound ability to identify and summarise the elements of the selected brand. Some brand elements not identified. Identification of brand elements is informed by appropriate secondary sources in most instances.

Demonstrates clear competence in identifying and accurately summarising the elements of the selected brand. All brands element identified. Identification of brand elements is informed by a range of appropriate secondary sources.

Demonstrates excellence in identifying and accurately summarising brand elements. All brands element identified and notes those that are not used by the brand. Identification of brand elements is skilfully informed by a range of secondary sources.

/ 2

Evaluation of Marketing Mix (2 marks)

Demonstrates little or no ability to identify and explain aspects of the selected brand’s marketing mix. Two or more marketing mix elements not discussed

No use of secondary materials

Demonstrates an adequate ability to identify and summarise the brand’s marketing mix. One marketing mix element not discussed and/or limited use of appropriate secondary sources.

Demonstrates a sound ability to identify and summarise brand’s marketing mix. All marketing mix elements discussed. Discussion of marketing mix is informed by appropriate secondary sources in most instances.

Demonstrates clear competence in identifying and accurately summarising the all aspects of the brand’s marketing mix. Identification of the brand’s marketing mix is informed by a range of appropriate secondary sources.

Demonstrates excellence in identifying and accurately summarising all aspects of the brand’s marketing mix. Identification of marketing mix is skilfully informed by a range of secondary sources.

/ 2

Evaluation of Target Market (2 marks)

Demonstrates little or no ability to identify the target market.

Demonstrates an adequate ability to identify and summarise the ‘target market. Limited knowledge dimensions identified and/or no use of appropriate secondary sources.

Demonstrates a sound ability to identify and summarise the target market. Multiple dimensions identified. In some instances, secondary sources used to inform the identification of target market.

Demonstrates clear competence in identifying and accurately summarising the target market. Aspects across all dimensions identified. In most instances, secondary sources used to inform the identification of the target market

Demonstrates excellence in identifying and accurately summarising the target market Aspects across all dimensions identified and displayed in an aesthetically pleasing format. Identification of target market is skilfully informed by a range of secondary sources

/ 2

Evaluation of Sources of Brand Equity (2 marks)

Demonstrates little or no ability to evaluate the sources of brand equity for the selected brand.

No use of secondary materials.

Demonstrates an adequate ability to evaluate the sources of brand equity for the selected brand. Some sources of brand equity not identified and/or evaluated. Limited use of secondary material to support evaluation. Discussion primarily descriptive.

Demonstrates a sound ability to evaluate the sources of brand equity for the selected brand. Most sources of brand equity identified and discussed. Multiple, relevant, scholarly secondary materials used to support evaluation. Elements of description with deeper analysis in places.

Demonstrates clear competence in evaluating the sources of brand equity for the selected brand. All sources of brand equity identified and discussed. Multiple, relevant, scholarly secondary materials used to support brand element evaluation. Deep analysis in most places.

Demonstrates excellence in evaluating the sources of brand equity for the selected brand. All sources of brand equity identified and discussed. Multiple, relevant, scholarly secondary materials used to support brand element evaluation. Deep analysis provided in all instances.

/ 2

Identification of Potential Threats to Brand Equity (2 marks)

Demonstrates little or no ability to identify potential threats to brand equity for the selected brand.

No use of secondary materials.

Demonstrates an adequate ability to identify potential threats to brand equity for the selected brand. Some potential threats to brand equity not identified and/or evaluated. Limited use of secondary material to support evaluation. Discussion primarily descriptive.

Demonstrates a sound ability to identify and evaluate potential threats to brand equity. Most potential threats to brand equity identified and discussed. Multiple, relevant, scholarly secondary materials used to support evaluation. Elements of description with deeper analysis in places.

Demonstrates clear competence in identifying and evaluating potential threats to brand equity. All potential threats identified and discussed. Multiple, relevant, scholarly secondary materials used to support brand element evaluation. Deep analysis in most places.

Demonstrates excellence in evaluating potential threats to brand equity. All sources potential threats identified and discussed. Multiple, relevant, scholarly secondary materials used to support brand element evaluation. Deep analysis provided in all instances.

/ 2

Recommendations (4 marks)

No recommendations provided and/or recommendations are not informed by analysis undertaken in the brand audit. Significant limitations apparent.

Provides a range of recommendations. Limited support from analysis undertaken in the brand audit.

Provides a range of recommendations. In most instances, recommendations are clearly supported by analysis undertaken in the brand audit.

Provides a range of appropriate recommendations that are clearly supported by analysis undertaken in the brand audit.

Provides a range of appropriate and insightful recommendations that are clearly supported by analysis undertaken in the brand audit. Recommendations are prioritised.

/ 4

Logic and Argument (1 mark)

Discussion is not logical and/or descriptive with no overall argument created. No assumptions stated and/or assumptions are not clear. Inadequate grasp and limited use of discipline terminology.

Discussion is mostly logical, but is primarily descriptive with limited overall argument. Assumptions stated, in some instances assumptions are irrelevant and/or unclear. Limited use of discipline terminology and/or minor inaccuracies.

Discussion is logical with some evidence of critical analysis evident. Assumptions are relevant and clearly stated. The extent and use of discipline terminology is adequate.

Discussion is logical. Secondary sources critically integrated to form an argument. Assumptions are relevant and clearly stated. Use of discipline terminology is extensive and largely correct.

Discussion is logical. Secondary sources are synthesised and critically integrated to form a coherent argument. Assumptions are relevant and clearly stated. Extensive use of discipline terminology is correct in all instances.

/ 1

Format and Referencing (1 mark)

No consistent style or structure. No executive summary, introduction and/or conclusion. Limited or evidence of appropriate referencing in-text and/or no reference list.

Report reflects minimal structural flaws. Information has been organised to convey meaning to the reader. Some in-text referencing errors evident (no page number/s for direct quotes or similar). A reference list provided, some references omitted. APA referencing style followed.

The report reflects consistent structure. Information is organised and sequenced to convey the intended meaning to the reader. Appropriate and consistent referencing provided with minimal errors. Both in-text referencing and reference list follow APA style.

The report is well structured.

Information is logically organised and sequenced to

convey the intended meaning

to the reader allowing ease of reading. Appropriate and consistent referencing provided with no errors (APA style).

The report is very well structured. Information is very well organised and easily accessible to the reader. Appropriate and consistent referencing provided with no errors (APA style).

/ 1