Brand Case Memo
Assuming you are a brand consultant, write a memo to the CEO of H&M based on this case. In your memo:
a) provide one learning you gained from reading the case and
b) recommend one alternative solution/approach based on your learning
Course code and name: MKTG1080 Applied Brand Management
Assessment Task 3: Weekly Case Report
Weighting: 50%
Assignment due date: 18 October 2024, Friday by 11.59 PM. (Melbourne Time) Word Count: 3000 words Assessment Declaration:
I declare that in submitting all work for this assessment I have read, understood, and agree to the content and expectations of the Assessment declaration Links to an external site..
Learning Objectives Assessed:
This assignment assesses Learning Objectives 2, 5. Linked CLOs: 2, 5
Details: Purpose
The purpose of this task is to help you reflect on your learnings from each weekly assigned case study or reading and see how you can apply your learning to making concrete recommendations for a/the relevant brand. This will help you simulate the role of a brand manager in the workplace.
The Task
Each week, from Weeks 2-11, you will be assigned a case study and a brand (see the tutorial page each week on Canvas).
You must assume the position of a brand manager addressing your memo to the CEO of the assigned brand. For each week, your task is to write a 300-word response noting a) one key learning from the case study and b) one alternative recommendation that the assigned brand can adopt based on your learning from the case.
Your learning and recommendation for each week must be different from any that are stated in the case
Details of each case study and case questions are provided under the Lecture Module for the relevant week on Canvas where you will also find the relevant case reading. Submission Details
This is an individual assignment
You are encouraged to write down your case responses for each week of up to 300 words
The final report of 3000 words (+10% excess word count applies) is due at the end of Week 12, 18 October2024 (Friday), by 11.59 PM. (Melbourne Time) The final report must be submitted as one file via Canvas in an MS Word format
The report should be typed, using a serif font of at least 11 pt (e.g., Times New Roman/ Garamond)
This case report will account for 50% of your marks.
Ensure that your assignment includes a reference list using Harvard referencingLinks to an external site. and that all sources are appropriately cited (the reference list is not included in the count)
Penalties for Late Submission : All assignments will be marked as if submitted on time. Late submissions of assignments without special consideration or extension will be automatically penalised at a rate of 10% of the total marks available per day (or part of a day) late. Assignments will not be accepted if more than five days late, unless special consideration or an extension of time has been approved.
Marking Criteria
Memos will be assessed based on the insightfulness of the key learnings, and the relevance and soundness of the recommendations provided.
Below are some guidelines on things you should (not) do to improve your memo marks.
DON’T’s
Don’t use obvious learnings discussed in class as your learning
Don’t summarise case as a learning
Don’t discuss unrelated points
Don’t copy and paste recommendations from the case as your recommendations. Just because it worked for the brand in the case doesn’t mean it will work with your brand.
DO’s
Justify your learnings and recommendations
Provide concrete recommendations with actionable plans (tactics); better to have one detailed recommendation than many cursory recommendations.
Always link your recommendation(s) to your learning; it is a requirement of the case question
When coming up with learnings and recommendations, always think, why is this useful?
Use branding concepts and learnings from the lectures to frame your case learnings and recommendations
As much as possible, write clearly, succinctly, answer the question directly and separate answers for the learnings (a) from the recommendation (b)
Remember you are the brand consultant, think like one
Rubric
Brand Memo
Brand Memo
CriteriaRatingsPts
This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeLearningThe learning is insightful (intuitive or counterintuitive) and is not just a copy and paste or summary of the case.
The learning uses branding concepts and theories from the lecture to draw out insights from different parts of the case
The learning is well explained and justified with evidence from the case
40 to >31.99 PtsHD
Excellent : The learning is exceptionally insightful, offering both intuitive and counterintuitive perspectives that go beyond mere summary or repetition of the case. It demonstrates a deep understanding of branding concepts and theories from the lecture, effectively drawing out insights from various parts of the case. The learning is well-explained and justified with strong evidence from the case, showing clear connections between theoretical concepts and practical applications. The reflection is thorough, compelling, and demonstrates high-level critical thinking.
31.99 to >27.99 PtsDI
Very Good : The learning is insightful and provides a strong analysis that moves beyond simple summary. It effectively applies branding concepts and theories from the lecture to extract meaningful insights from different parts of the case. The learning is well-explained and supported with relevant evidence from the case. The reflection is clear, logical, and demonstrates a good level of critical thinking, with minor areas that could be further developed.
27.99 to >23.99 PtsCR
Good : The learning is adequate, offering some insights that go beyond mere summary, but may lean more towards expected conclusions. It applies branding concepts and theories from the lecture to derive insights from the case, though the application may be basic or somewhat limited. The learning is explained and supported with some evidence from the case, but the connections between theory and practice may not be fully developed. The reflection shows a satisfactory level of understanding and critical thinking.
23.99 to >19.99 PtsPA
Fair : The learning provides limited insights, often summarising the case rather than offering deeper analysis. It shows some application of branding concepts and theories from the lecture, but the insights drawn may be superficial or not well-explained. The learning lacks sufficient evidence from the case to justify the insights. The reflection demonstrates a basic understanding but falls short in critical thinking and depth of analysis.
19.99 to >0 PtsNN
Below Expectation : The learning is minimal or largely a summary of the case, lacking any significant insights. It shows little to no application of branding concepts and theories from the lecture. The learning is poorly explained and lacks evidence from the case to support any insights. The reflection fails to demonstrate a meaningful understanding of the material or critical thinking, providing little value beyond basic case details.
40 pts
This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeRecommendationThe recommended solution/approach is relevant, practical and actionable, detailed, and creative.
The recommended solution/approach is different from what is provided in the case
The recommended solution/approach is linked to your learning from the case
The recommended solution/approach applies branding concepts and learnings from the lectures.
60 to >47.99 PtsHD
Excellent : The recommended solution/approach is highly relevant, practical, and actionable, offering detailed and creative ideas that significantly differ from those provided in the case. It is closely linked to the learning derived from the case and effectively applies branding concepts and theories from the lectures. The recommendation is well-justified, demonstrating clear, logical connections between the case insights and the proposed solution, showcasing a high level of originality and critical thinking.
47.99 to >41.99 PtsDI
Very good : The recommended solution/approach is relevant, practical, and actionable, providing detailed and creative ideas that differ from those in the case. It is linked to the learning from the case and applies branding concepts and theories from the lectures effectively. The recommendation is well-explained showing logical connections between the case insights and the proposed solution, indicating a satisfactory level of originality and critical thinking.
41.99 to >35.99 PtsCR
Good : The recommended solution/approach is relevant and practical, offering actionable ideas that may be somewhat detailed and creative. It differs from the solutions provided in the case and is linked to the learning from the case. The recommendation applies branding concepts and theories from the lectures, though the application may be basic or limited. The explanation is adequate but may lack depth or thoroughness, reflecting some level of originality and critical thinking.
35.99 to >29.99 PtsPA
Fair : The recommended solution/approach is somewhat relevant and practical but may lack actionable details or creativity. It may only slightly differ from the solutions in the case and show weak links to the learning from the case. The application of branding concepts and theories from the lectures is minimal or superficial. The recommendation lacks thorough explanation, demonstrating limited originality and critical thinking.
29.99 to >0 PtsNN
Below Expectation : The recommended solution/approach is irrelevant or impractical, offering little to no actionable or creative ideas. It does not differ significantly from the solutions provided in the case and shows poor or no connection to the learning from the case. The application of branding concepts and theories from the lectures is absent or incorrect. The recommendation lacks explanation failing to demonstrate originality or critical thinking.
60 pts
Total points: 100