MM303, 2007-08
JULY 2008 REASSESSMENT BRIEF
Samsung Case
FINAL VERSION
Module code
MM303
Module title
STRATEGIC MARKETING
Module tutor
Mike Flynn
Tutor with responsibility for this
Assessment (First point of contact)
As above.
Assessment
Individual Case Study (Samsung) -- from the
West et al. (2006) MM303 Core text.
NOTE: This individual reassessment is in lieu of
the MM303 Group Marketing Plan assessment.
Weighting
40% of module assessment.
Size and/or time limits for assessment
1,500 – 1,800 words (excluding optional models
and diagrams.)
Deadline of submission
(Your attention is drawn to the penalties for
late submission; see UMS Handbook)
07 July 2008.
Arrangements for submission
Park Campus Assignment Room (TC109).
Your work must be submitted with:
1. Module Assignment form.
2. Diskette or CD-ROM Word file of the
assignment
NOTE: NO CD-ROM or Diskette with
submission = 0 Fail.
You are advised to keep your own copy of the
assessment.
Learning Outcomes assessed in this
assignment are:

Skills assessed in this assignment are:
Independent learning and reading; lateral
thinking.
Return of work
Available from Park Assignment Room (TC109)
after 8 September 2008.
Students with Disabilities
See the UMS Student Handbook.
Assessment Regulations
All assessments are subject to the University
Regulations for Assessment, and to the
regulations of the Undergraduate Modular
Scheme.
Understand the strategic decision making
process from a marketing perspective.
 Understand how strategic decision making
decisions impact upon other functional areas
of an organisation.
 Generate, evaluate and propose strategic
solutions.
 Synthesise various strands of subject
knowledge from other marketing subjects
You should pay particular attention to UMS
Handbook regulation 68, word limits and
University regulation 7 (University Regulations
for Assessment)
Your attention is drawn to the University
Regulations for Assessment Section 7— in
particular 7.3. If an offence has been confirmed,
the minimum penalty is 0 Fail for this assignment.
2
MM303, 2007-08
July Reassessment Assignment
Samsung Case Study
All Questions pertain to the Samsung case in the MM303 Core Text (West D., Ford
J., and Ibrahim E. (2006). Strategic Marketing. Oxford Press), pages 494-508.
A copy of the case can be found on the MM303 WebCT site
Required
Answer the following three (3) Samsung case Questions (1, 7 and 9),
which can be found on page 507 in West et. al. (2006):
1.
Using the Porter Framework (cost-differentiation-focus), describe
Samsung’s current strategic orientation. Would you say that this has
been successful? Why or why not?
7.
Using the Ansoff matrix, which strategic direction does Samsung
appear to be heading at this point? Is it working—why or why not?
9.
What specific strategic suggestions would you make to Samsung
management regarding the various components of the marketing mix
to help reach its objectives?
Write approximately 500-600 words for each question.
Note:

Answers must be supported by appropriate ‘theory’ and at least 1 business example
per question (from any market sector).

Answers must include at least two (2) academic references per question.

It is expected that your answers will incorporate relevant new data re Samsung and
its macro- and micro-environments.

Do not contact Samsung or any other companies mentioned or implied in the Case.
3
Guidelines

This is an individual academic paper

Assignment deadline is 07 July 2008.

1,500 – 1,700 words excluding optional models and diagrams.

Include a CD-ROM or Diskette. NO CD-ROM/ Diskette = 0 Fail

All references should be acknowledged, via Harvard referencing (as per ‘BM160’).

Provide two (2) copies of the bibliography.

Print in Times New Roman, Font size 12.

Double line spaced.

Include a Word Count.

Keep a duplicate for yourself.

Finally, do not loose marks by not responding accurately to this brief.
WARNING

A random sample of assignments will be put through the ‘Turnitin’ computer
programme to ascertain a ‘Similarity Index' between your work and books,
journal articles, and Websites. If an offence has been confirmed, the minimum
penalty is 0 Fail for this assignment. So, do NOT 'plagiarise in any way --and
remember to reference properly (as per xx160).
Assessment criteria
The enclosed MM303 Grading Criteria augment the Management Fields’ General Grade
Descriptors.
Markers will be looking for the following of evidence for a PASS:
The ability to:



Produce a reasoned well-written essay, which addresses the issues highlighted in
the assignment.
Demonstrate knowledge and understanding of relevant academic and applied
literature pertinent to the chosen topic.
Identify the key components of the argument.
Pieces of work that are merely descriptive will be awarded low marks.
HIGHER marks will be awarded as per the grade descriptor grid to students who:



demonstrate a comprehensive and detailed understanding of the relevant
literature and an ability to synthesise the issues raised by the question
display highly developed skills of analysis and critical evaluation
demonstrate an ability to integrate theory and practice in an innovative/original
manner
4
MM303
Strategic Marketing
SEM 2, 2006-07
JULY REASSESSMENT GRADING AND FEEDBACK SHEET
SAMSUNG CASE
Student Number: ..........................................................................................
Criterion
Weight
Answers
90%
(30% per
answer)
Fail
40-49
50-59
60-69
70+
Approach to
the task in
error. Little/ no
comprehension
demonstrated.
No analysis.
No appropriate
models.
Mainly
descriptive.
Lacks depth.
Identifies main
issues.
Not always
logical. Little
evidence of
independent
thought.
Models have
some relevance
to situation
Provides sound
evidence of
relevant theory
knowledge.
Analysis based
on evidence.
Well-developed
arguments. Good
judgement/
models based on
criteria.
As previously.
Student also
displays a high level
of understanding of
marketing theory
with a sound
analysis, judgement
and justification of
criteria. Sound use
of models.
Strong evidence of
initiative.
English at
minimum
accepted level
for business.
Essay fails to
develop an
argument
Assignment
Brief followed.
"Sparse".
References
properly cited
in text &
bibliography.
Evidence of
relevant
reading
Coherent
description of
theory. Clear
structure
generally
logical and clear
argument.
Some limited
independent
thought.
Adequate
evaluation
Models
demonstrate
some logic.
Correct English
with few
imprecise
statements.
Essay develops
an argument.
Well written with
clear, correct and
precise English.
Evidence of good
integration of
literature
Essay develops a
very good
argument.
Extensive within
the context of
time and task.
More original,
innovative
approach, command
of critical positions,
lively articulate
writing, excellent
grasp of material,
synthesis of ideas.
Writing
Style
5%
English weak
and or answer
poorly related
to the question.
Bibliography
Quality
5%
Not present, or
irrelevant or
"ghost"
bibliography.
Little or no
evidence of
reading.
(See below)
As per previous;
good, relevant
and appropriate
for the topic.
As per previous and
exceptional.
5