You are required to write an individual report on related brand and communications concepts for a new brand, based around an advertisement film which you will produce and submit

Criteria

Excellent 70+ (A)

Good 60-60% (B)

Solid 50-59% (C)

Needs further improvement 40-49% (D)

Very poor below 40% (F)

Clear, robust and critical use of appropriate academic literature

There was consistent evidence of the report making use of appropriate academic sources when a point was being made, but it was also clear that reading, consideration, and creative thinking had been done at every stage. This was often backed up by multiple sources and was also well mixed with alternative sources of relevant information related to the destination from things such as industry reports.

Whilst there was some good application of academic sources in places, the report was lacking some depth and criticality in its use of academic sources in places.

This report would have benefitted from using more sources in general. Both more academic literature and a wider range of industry sources. The result of this was that in places statements and points being made were not always clearly supported and therefore undermined the report's validity.

In places the use of literature was appropriate but there were often large areas of text that showed no evidence of any engagement with source material and that led to a lack of clarity and criticality in the way the discussion was developed.

The use of literature was inappropriate. Where there should have been consistent reference to scholarly sources, there was reference to alternative sources. Further, it was not clear how insight into the destination was gathered.

Use of references

The use and presentation of references throughout was exceptional, of the standard one would expect from published academic work.

The references used were of good quality and a wide range. There were some errors in the citation style and/or the presentation of the list of references.

Although this was generally done well, there were consistent errors made in citation style and there were further inconsistencies in the way the list of references was presented.

The citation of sources and the presentation of the list of references were highly inconsistent and regularly contained errors. This is below the standard expected at this level.

The accuracy and consistency of the citation style and the contents of the list of references were of a poor level and this detracted from the overall appearance and clarity of the report.

Presentation

The level of care, detail, creativity and clarity that is achieved by this report is noteworthy, but that high standard of presentation also served to amplify the quality of the report's contents.

The presentation of the report is logical, clear and has clearly been given appropriate time and attention.

The report was generally structured and presented appropriately, although more time could have been spent to ensure that the presentation of the report served to best communicate its contents and help the reader navigate.

The standard of the presentation of the report let it down in places, i.e. it actually detracted from the clarity of what the report was saying. More time could have been spent ensuring that the report's structure and presentation served to enhance communication rather than diminish it.

The standard of presentation of this report was far below the standards expected at this level. Some elements required in the report were either not present or were so unclearly presented that the reader had to work hard to discern the structure. This needed considerable more attention in the preparation of the report.

Academic writing style

High quality scholarly work, executed with expert critical balance.

There was a tendency to be labour certain points in places, thus a point may start to lose critical balance, or some areas of the report displaced other areas because they were not concise enough.

The style was overall appropriate, but it strayed into being journalistic or lacking critical balance and as a result lost its academic tone. This can lead to a lack of validity coming across in the report's content.

The prevailing tone and style of the report was not scholarly or academic and predominantly relied on rhetoric and opinion rather than evidence and process.

The prevailing tone and style of the report was not scholarly or academic and predominantly relied on rhetoric and opinion rather than evidence and process.

The Brand

The background on brand (e.g., the brand name, marketing research) was highly detailed, very well supported with high quality sources.

The background on brand was detailed and showed that some industry data had been consulted to inform this section.

The presentation of the brand was not as dense in information and detail as would have been expected.

Some brand information was provided but it was often not clear what the sources of the information were and there were some assumptions made about details of the background of the brand.

The information discussed was disparate and it was not clear what exactly the brand was.

Brand characteristics & positioning

There was comprehensive detail offered on the brand characteristics and positioning and related concepts.

Although the brand characteristics and positioning and related concepts are described, the discussions remained slightly too surface level to merit higher marks.

This section would have benefitted from more clarity in the explanation of how it was determined what the characteristics and positioning were.

It was very unclear what the brand characteristics & positioning were and how these had been established through the analysis carried out for the presentation.

What was presented was overly general and did not demonstrate an attempt to describe brand characteristics & positioning.

Brand Symbolism

There was comprehensive detail offered on the brand symbolism, brand image, brand logo and related concepts.

Although the brand symbolism, brand image, brand logo and related concepts are described, the discussions remained slightly too surface level to merit higher marks.

This section would have benefitted from more clarity in the explanation of how it was determined what the brand symbolism, brand image, brand logo and related concepts were.

It was very unclear what the brand the brand symbolism, brand image, brand logo and related concepts were and how these had been established through the analysis carried out for the presentation.

What was presented was overly general and did not demonstrate an attempt to describe the brand symbolism, brand image, brand logo and related concepts.

IMC

There was comprehensive detail offered on IMC and related concepts.

Although IMC and related concepts are described, the discussions remained slightly too surface level to merit higher marks.

This section would have benefitted from more clarity in the explanation of how it was determined what the IMC and related concepts were.

It was very unclear what the IMC was and how these had been established through the analysis carried out for the presentation.

What was presented was overly general and did not demonstrate an attempt to describe IMC.

Marketing communications strategy

There was comprehensive detail offered on IMC strategy and related concepts.

Although IMC strategy and related concepts were described, the discussions remained slightly too surface level to merit higher marks.

This section would have benefitted from more clarity in the explanation of how it was determined what the IMC strategy and related concepts were.

It was very unclear what the IMC strategy was and how these had been established through the analysis carried out for the presentation.

What was presented was overly general and did not demonstrate an attempt to describe IMC strategy.

Use of current communications and/or branding framework(s) e.g., digital communication etc

There was comprehensive detail offered on use of current and contemporary IMC frameworks.

Although use of current and contemporary IMC frameworks was described, the discussions remained slightly too surface level to merit higher marks.

This section would have benefitted from more clarity in the explanation of how it was determined what the use of current and contemporary IMC frameworks was.

It was very unclear what the use of current and contemporary IMC frameworks was and how these had been established through the analysis carried out for the presentation.

What was presented was overly general and did not demonstrate an attempt to describe use of current and contemporary IMC frameworks.

Use of appropriate IMC campaigns

There was a strong and clear link between the selected IMC campaigns and the brand.

Although use of IMC campaigns was described, the link between the selected IMC campaigns and the brand remained slightly too surface level to merit higher marks.

It would have benefitted from more clarity in the link between the selected IMC campaigns and the brand.

It was very unclear the link between the selected IMC campaigns and the brand.

There was not any link between the selected IMC campaigns and the brand.