Professional Diploma in Marketing Project Management in Marketing Senior Examiner Assessment Report March 2013 The Chartered Institute of Marketing 2013
Contents This report contains the following information: Section Page Background to the assessment 3 Comments on how the marking scheme was applied Concept, Application and Evaluation Syllabus coverage Use of command words and the extent to which answers reflected what was required The relative weighting of each part of a task and an indication of what aspects of the task required most care and attention What differentiated the A, B, C, or D grades. 4 Analysis of the assessment Statistics General comments Strengths and good practice by task (including examples of best practice) Weaknesses and common mistakes by task Recommendations for improved candidate performance Possible alternative approaches 8 Feedback on the academic quality of the cohort and the quality of the teaching, as judged by the results 11 Commentary as to whether recommendations made in previous years have been properly followed up 12 Recommendations for improving performance in future assessments (for tutors and candidates) 12 Clarification about any syllabus or assessment changes 13 Possible future assessment themes 13 Page 2
Senior Examiner Assessment Review Report UNIT NAME: AWARD NAME: Project Management in Marketing Professional Diploma in Marketing DATE: March 2013 Background to the assessment: This was the eighth set of assessment briefs for this unit of the Professional Diploma and the first set under the new four task format. Two options, with accompanying assignment tasks and assessment criteria including supplementary guidance notes were published, so that candidates can choose a broad context and scenario that is most applicable to their chosen organisation. For the March 2013 session, the options covered the following themes: Option One Social Media Marketing This option was designed to allow candidates to develop a project around a specific business problem within the broad context of social media marketing practices. Option Two International Marketing This option was designed to allow candidates to develop a project around a specific business problem within the broad context of international marketing practices. The common assessment criteria dictated that candidates needed to identify the information needs, requirements and sources relative to the business problem in terms of the context of the brief. Then, to collect and present all relevant data that will form the foundation of the business case, summarise the key issues relative to an identified explicit or underlying business problem and identify any current information gaps. The next task needed to cover the presentation of a business case for a marketing project that will solve the underlying business problem (in terms of the context of the brief), which critically analysed the findings from Task One, identified the associated organisational risks in context, assessed all resource capacity, capability and necessity relative to the proposed project. In addition, candidates need to justify via a robust cost benefit analysis and demonstrate how the proposals will support and enhance current marketing operations. Task Three was concerned exclusively with risk and candidates were expected to propose a risk control or risk mitigation programme (depending upon which option was chosen), for the identified organisational risks highlighted in the business case. Additionally, assess the potential impact of these risks and the organisational implications if the risks are not treated and present the benefits of introducing a culture of risk management to the organisation. Finally, a complete marketing project plan was required to effectively implement the proposals which required specific development around utilising a range of tools and techniques for project planning, scheduling, resourcing and control, recommended and justified project methodology, defined and itemised work breakdown, timelines, deliverables and milestones, quantified resource budgets and assessment of the main evaluation techniques for determining success or failure of the specific project in context. Page 3
Comments on how the marking scheme was applied: Concept, Application and Evaluation Syllabus coverage Use of command words and the extent to which answers reflected what was required The relative weighting of each part of a task and an indication of what aspects of the task required most care and attention What differentiated the A, B, C, or D grades. Concept, Application and Evaluation The magic formula has been developed by CIM to facilitate a standardised approach to teaching and marking assessments. It comprises four elements: Concept covers the knowledge of marketing terms, ideas, theories, notions and principles Application covers marketing knowledge, models and frameworks as applied to different scenarios and business settings. This requires making and demonstrating associations between concepts according to set criteria and within a given context Evaluation is the assessment of a course of action against a standard or set of objectives or projections. It requires justifying actions, reviewing whether the course of action taken was appropriate and assessing whether resources have been used effectively Presentation covers format, presentation, evidence of wider reading and Harvard referencing The relative weightings of these elements are used to inform different grades within a level and differentiate between levels. The assessment briefs for this unit are written with these weightings in mind. Overall the breakdown of the marking scheme was as follows: Concept 30% Application 30% Evaluation 30% Format and Presentation 10%. In addition, specific mark schemes are also published for each of the assessment criteria to set out the total number of marks available for particular tasks. These schemes are published to aid structure and format, highlight indicative weighting and word count, whilst identifying minimum requirements from an assessment perspective. A holistic approach to the marking of each submission adds additional balance to the final assessment. To maximise marks and achieve higher grades candidates are advised to understand the principles of the magic formula and recognise the equal balance of the four elements. This means that candidates must ensure that their answers reflect the right balance to match the requirements of the task. From an assessment and marking perspective, this approach was applied rigorously across both options in this diet. Syllabus Coverage The syllabus weighting for this unit is as follows: Page 4
- Using information for developing business cases: 15% - Building a case for marketing projects: 20% - Assessing managing and mitigating risk: 25% - Project management for analysis, planning, implementation and control: 40%. All of the above sections of the syllabus featured within the assessment criteria across both assignment briefs. This will continue to be 100% mapped with the difference being that of the elements assessed under each section. The indicative weight and level of importance of the elements will vary for each assessment and this will be reflected in the maximum amount of marks available for any given area of the syllabus. Command Words One of the major areas that candidates must consider when tackling the assignment is the use of command words, this gives an indication of what is required and the level of difficulty associated with each task. Correct interpretation of the command words used throughout the assignment brief and within the assessment criteria is therefore very important. For example in the briefs for this session, candidates were expected to: Identify Present Critically analyse Critically assess Demonstrate Determine Evaluate Recommend Review Justify Outline Propose Quantify Summarise Develop Establish, recognise and indicate specific elements and aspects required. Clear, specific, coherent and synthesised commentary and illustration of fact, analysis and evaluation. An appraisal based on careful analytical evaluation. Examine closely, examine in parts, and show how the parts contribute to the whole. Decide the value of, judge, measure the importance of. Provide evidence of. Make firm decisions about. Appraise worth/effectiveness/impact in terms of validity and implication. Propose a course of action that is recommended as advisable supported with justified reasons. Examine and assess a subject critically. Show to be reasonable or provide adequate evidence/argument for. Give main features of. Put forward a point of view, idea, argument, suggestion for consideration or action. To formally present by itemised enumeration and characterisation. Give a concise account of the key points, omit details and examples. Expand and elaborate under any given theme within any chosen context and exercise. Therefore, in the context of both assignment briefs, candidates were expected to: - Identify information requirements and sources in the first instance with further identification of information gaps in the second instance. Identification of associated risk in context was also required under Task Two Page 5
- Summarise the specific key issues related to the specific business problem in context Critically analyse their findings, thereby appraising the evidence and evaluating the implications for the organisation. Diagrams and appropriate models should have been included to illustrate the analysis and support the points made Recommend or propose how the organisation should solve an explicit or underlying business problem. The recommendations should be supported with justified rationale and evaluation Critically assess the organisations resource capability and capacity required to realise the recommendations as opposed to available resources Develop, i.e. outline all stages of the marketing project plan informed by the justified recommendations previously stated and expand around the specific elements required under the assessment criteria Quantify via distinct itemisation all required resource budgets Assessment criteria weighting and mark allocation The nature of the tasks reflects the weighting across the syllabus sections. The allocation of marks is aligned to the breadth and depth of the assessment criteria. It is therefore important that the format and structure of the assignment submission should be directed by the relative weight and mark allocation indicated. Consequently, critical analysis of findings should be sharp, succinct and to the point. Where key issues are requested, these should be highlighted and presented. Such summary pieces should therefore not extend to more than 10% of the overall assignment or no more than 600 words. Furthermore, this analysis should be directly related to the candidates findings from their undertakings in Task One and not be presented as independent material that was not investigated in the first instance, or worse still, has no relevance to the context of the brief. Where it is fairly obvious that a depth and breadth is required around issues such as project planning, justifying business cases and risk, then the appropriate time, effort, research and construction should be apportioned accordingly. These core issues individually or together, could potentially represent between 22% to 60% of the overall marks available for any given assignment brief. Grade Differentiation The grade descriptors indicate what is expected from candidates within the different grade boundaries. In addition, the specific mark schemes indicate the minimum requirements under each assessment criteria. Generally, these can be summarised as follows: A grade: - All of the elements under each assessment criteria are comprehensively presented - Thorough understanding of relevant syllabus areas - Considerable evidence of wider reading from a range of sources - Consistently relies upon and refers to situational specific audit and other appended material - Thorough appreciation and understanding of key issues Page 6
- All aspects of the submission relate entirely to the assignment brief - All aspects of the submission are detailed, complete, applied and evaluated - All aspects of the submission adhere fully to the command prompts within the assessment criteria - Consistent and appropriate use of underlying concept and theory - Professionally researched, structured and presented throughout. B grade: - All of the elements under each assessment criteria are competently presented - Good understanding of relevant syllabus areas - Some evidence of wider reading from a number of sources - Relies upon and refers to audit and appended material - Sound appreciation and understanding of key issues - Most aspects of the submission relate to the assignment brief - Most aspects of the submission contain good detail, application and evaluation - Most aspects of the submission adhere to the command prompts within the assessment criteria - Appropriate use of underlying concept and theory - Well researched, structured and presented throughout. C grade: - Most of the elements under each assessment criteria are adequately presented - Reasonable understanding of relevant syllabus areas - Some but more limited evidence of wider reading - Some reliance and reference to audit and appended material - Reasonable appreciation and understanding of key issues - Aspects of the submission have a tendency to be overly generic and formulaic - Aspects of the submission contain reasonable detail, application and evaluation - Aspects of the submission adhere to the command prompts within the assessment criteria - Reasonable use of underlying concept and theory - Reasonably researched, structured and presented. D grade: - Some elements under the assessment criteria are not fully presented - Limited/lacks understanding of relevant syllabus areas - Little/no evidence of wider reading - Little/no reliance or reference to audit or appended material - Limited/lacks appreciation or understanding of key issues - Aspects of the submission are irrelevant, inaccurate or inconsistent - Aspects of the submission contain little/no detail, application or evaluation - Aspects of the submission ignore command prompts within the assessment criteria - Limited/no reference to theory and/or incorrect application - Report lacks structure and focus, is under researched and poorly presented. One significant point to raise is that a number of candidates fail to refer to core project management texts and even the official CIM course book continues to be ignored. A range of additional reading is highly beneficial and allows a greater appreciation of the published brief, providing the foundations for a sound construction of the report for submission. However, it must be stated that over reliance on web based resources and references is unlikely to improve the candidate s work. Those candidates who endeavoured to refer to a range of texts tended to achieve a pass grade. Page 7
In summary: The grade descriptors and specific mark schemes are indicative of grade differentiators and minimum requirements under assessment criteria. They are by no means definitive and will evolve with the qualification and within this unit. However, these documents are selfcontained and defined benchmarks of what is expected and their content should be studied and absorbed by tutors and candidates alike. Analysis of the assessment Statistics: The overall pass rate for the March 2013 assignment was 70%. The grade profile was as follows: General comments: Option One Social Media Marketing This was the slightly more popular option among candidates. Those candidates that concentrated their submission around the core elements of the brief were in the main, able to achieve pass grades. Candidates generally demonstrated a very good appreciation and understanding of the core underlying principles and were able to attempt application in context. In these situations generally, research, structure and presentation were very sound and aligned with a Level 6 qualification. Where candidates were not successful, the opposite of the above was apparent. Core social media marketing approaches and issues were neither identified nor discussed and limited application was evident. Page 8
Option Two International Marketing This was a slightly less popular option and candidates achieved pass grades by concentrating the submission around the core elements of the brief. Successful candidates demonstrated a strong understanding of the assignment and an appreciation of what was required. When the project was planned and justified in context, the submissions were of a reasonably good standard. The opposite of the above would apply to unsuccessful candidates. Business cases were weak with shallow or superficial justification and cost benefit analyses were insubstantial. Strengths and good practices by task (including examples of best practice): Sharp and succinct critical analysis of findings fully based on preparatory work and supporting appended material Findings were critically analysed as opposed to listed and described. Using traditional, adapted or original models and illustrations to support the context Recommendations for in context were proposed and justified Resourcing capability and capacity was assessed relative to existing availability Outline project plans were full and concentrated expansion under the required assessment criteria Sources of risk were analysed in terms of organisational impact Format and presentation was categorised by an ease of flow and navigation Business cases were drawn from Task One and appended material and justified via the same approach. Robust cost benefit analyses were undertaken and presented. The project was further justified in terms of how it would fit with marketing operations Risk control and mitigation programmes were recommended and fully aligned with project implementation Effective project evaluation methods were critically assessed. Weaknesses and common mistakes by task: Findings bore no relation to the preparatory work or appended material Submissions were text heavy, with no diagrammatic or illustrative punctuation Only one element of a particular aspect within the assessment criteria was covered, when in fact several needed to be examined Assessments were not critical Recommendations were not justified Resource capacity and capability was not assessed Outline project plans were incomplete, did not cover all stages and were not aligned with proposals Relevant sources of risk were not identified and no organisational impacts were offered Format and presentation was fragmented with no references or evidence of additional reading Business cases were not qualified or quantified Cost benefit analyses were shallow and superficial Risk control and mitigation programmes were generic and formulaic Evaluation techniques were not critically assessed Format and presentation was fragmented with no references or evidence of additional reading. Page 9
General Strengths and good practice: Format and structure to include clear identification of the option chosen, highlighted word counts, title page, contents page, executive summary and Harvard references Covering all aspects of assessment criteria and paying particular attention to the fact that these more than likely will be multi-faceted Aligning depth and breadth of assessment criteria with indicative weighting and mark allocation Demonstrating appreciation and understanding of underlying concept and theory Information collected and any supporting appended material concentrates solely on context Reliance on and reference to material introduced in Task One Synthesis and cohesion throughout Evidence of equilibrium between concept, application and evaluation. Common mistakes: Over reliance on generic models and formulaic solutions Core content not relating to information collected or appended material Inclusion of irrelevant or inaccurate material Unqualified and unquantified cost benefits analysis Non critical analysis Lack of recommendation and justification Incomplete submissions in relation to aspects of the assessment criteria with dual or multiple facets Presenting marketing plans or marketing communications plans in place of outline project plans Underlying concepts of risk and control not appreciated Non alignment of indicative weighting and mark allocation with word count Lack of format or structure, synthesis and cohesion. Recommendations for improved candidate performance: Information/Data collection and manipulation is specific and concentrated, ignoring irrelevant material Subject matter within assignment briefs is fully appreciated and understood Analysis and assessment must be critical and not descriptive Project plans must be detailed from initiation through to evaluation and must outline all stages Recommendations must be justified Diagrammatic illustration should be included were possible All aspects of all elements under assessment must be covered Business cases must be robust and justified Cost benefit analysis should be qualified and quantified Plans and programmes must be consistent and relevant All elements of the submission should be framed in context Underlying concepts and theories need to be used in support Presentation must be professional and fluent with synthesis and cohesion All reading and sources must be referenced Concept, application and evaluation must be relevant and obvious throughout. Page 10
Possible alternative approaches to addressing tasks: Reference to academic and trade journals to identify case study benchmarks and best practice could give a fuller understanding of the issues and aid the construction of a viable report. At the very least, the official course textbook should be referenced and, ideally, other project management texts consulted. Full engagement with examples of professional documents and reports that critically analyse findings, make recommendations, critically assess resources, rigorously examine risk and evaluate control mechanisms will further cement understanding in practice. Examples of business cases and actual cost benefit analyses should be studied and project management case studies and reports read and absorbed. This exposure to concept in practice will be invaluable. Candidates and tutors could also create a reading/reference bank that evolves throughout the programme. This then becomes a shared resource of relevant literature in terms of syllabus content, assignment brief and submission. Project proposals addressing all tasks and associated assessment criteria should be drawn up with cut of times and dates for completion to be agreed between candidate and lead tutor. Feedback on the academic quality of the cohort and the quality of the teaching, as judged by the results: The academic quality of this cohort was of a very good standard. Underlying concepts, principles, and theories were appreciated and understood by the majority of candidates. The interpretation of the briefs was predominantly correct and the professionalism and referencing showed significant improvement from previous diets. The breadth of knowledge across the syllabus was also very good. However, the ability to evaluate and apply in context continues to give some cause for concern. What was gratifying was the extent to which a sound appreciation of the area related to risk was evidenced. Candidates were able to demonstrate an awareness of areas relating to the identification, impact, mitigation and control of risk. The candidates work suggested that most had received guided tuition and support with their submissions. However, several submissions would have benefited from additional feedback to improve their understanding of the context and enhance their research, structure, content and presentation. The use and adaptation of formulaic assignment report templates was in evidence in just a few cases. Formulaic assignments have similar structure and content and use is made of the same reference material. It is clear to the examiners that some candidates have been instructed to follow a common format and have often been provided with a template to work from. Formulaic answers do not represent collusion because candidates have used their own words to answer the tasks, but they do suggest too many similarities to be a coincidence. A lack of creativity and originality in approach can hamstring the candidate and therefore individual and independent work should be advised and encouraged at all times. Page 11
Commentary as to whether recommendations made in previous years have been properly followed up: Where candidates and tutors refer to published assessment reports, there is a strong positive correlation with the attainment of pass grades. Furthermore, the addition of specific webinars for candidates and tutors in terms of delivery and learning and also tackling actual assignment briefs has enhanced the global understanding of professional assessment at this level. It is no coincidence that Accredited Study Centres, tutors and candidates who fully engage with these additional resources tend to over perform against the UK and International pass rate statistics. Unfortunately, it is still apparent that there are a number of candidates and tutors not making any such reference. Recommendations for improving performance in future assessments (for tutors and candidates): The assignment briefs are complete documents containing all of the necessary information, guidance and indicative assessment scoring and grading mechanisms. They are the best practical guidance available, in conjunction with the syllabus, supports the candidate in the construction of the assignment submission and the tutor in the delivery of all relevant knowledge. These documents should be thoroughly read, scrutinised, and absorbed. The assignment brief should be deconstructed analytically. This means a systematic deconstruction of the brief should be taken from a word by word perspective. No stone should be left unturned in the pursuit of understanding exactly what candidates are being tasked with. This paint by numbers approach will significantly enhance the learning experience and will positively correlate with assessment success. One of the key approaches in avoiding common pitfalls and errors is the management of the assignment in context. The brief dictates exactly what the context should be. Candidates should drill down into the subject matter under investigation only. When the problems and issues are concerned with social media marketing, then only areas and aspects pertaining to, or impacting upon those fundamental areas should be examined. When the problems and issues are concerned with international marketing, then only areas and aspects pertaining to those operations should be examined. It is imperative, that tutors and candidates can interpret what is required from the outset. If material or scenarios under investigation are not related to the context of the brief, these must be ignored and discarded, leaving only those issues and elements that are relevant in the final report. If the concept of data collection and manipulation is not fully appreciated and understood, success in this unit will become increasingly difficult. It will be necessary for candidates, after having fully deconstructed the brief as advised previously, to reconstruct it into a proposal. Such a proposal will demonstrate the core understanding of the brief in question. It will also identify the core elements and hence the actual questions the report must tackle and answer. An outline assignment completion plan containing key objectives, outcomes and dates should be included as a minimum. Such proposals can then be submitted early in the programme to the unit lead tutor for feedback and sign off. It would also be extremely beneficial for candidates to identify direct reporting support from their employer, particularly in terms of access to all the relevant data required around the chosen option. Page 12
With this in place, all aspects of the assessment criteria will become grounded and clear. There will be no room for ambiguity or digression. The ability to get to the essence of the issue under assessment will be clear. The result will then be a management report that fully tackles and answers all aspects under assessment. Furthermore, there should be no doubt as to the treatment of the command words within all elements of the task. Clarification about any syllabus or assessment changes: Future assignment briefs will continue to align assessment weighting to mirror the four elements of the syllabus in terms of data collection and interpretation, building and presenting business cases, risk and project management per se. In addition, it will be a requirement to append assignment proposals and completion plans signed off by unit lead tutors. No major changes have been made to the PMiM syllabus as a result of the most recent review. The emphasis has been on ensuring the content continues to represent professional practice in the operational management of proposing and implementing marketing projects, while at the same time introducing updates to include areas related to contemporary digital marketing tools and technologies. Opportunity was also taken to refine areas of the syllabus which, under review, no longer aligned with the overarching and indicative learning outcomes. Possible future assessment themes: Future themes will be drawn from the fundamental principles and practices of marketing management across all units of the Professional Diploma in Marketing. Contemporary issues in marketing management will also continue to be at the fore for assessment and the dynamic around digital marketing will continue to feature. Page 13