MKT 2292 IMC II Winter 2017 Professor Noni Stukel and Erin Sparks Algonquin College MKT 2292 IMC…
MKT 2292 IMC II Winter 2017
Professor Noni Stukel and Erin Sparks Algonquin College
MKT 2292
IMC Business to Business Case
CASE: “B2B Co-Marketing Partnership”
VALUE: 15%
DUE DATE: Week 7 Beginning of class.
OBJECTIVE: To provide students with the opportunity to individually apply
Business- to- Business Integrated Marketing
Communications strategies learned in the class to a real
industry situation.
OUTCOMES: a) Develop problem solving and strategic decision-making
skills by analyzing business- to- business marketing
situations in a structured format.
b) Improve understanding of various components of
marketing communications management and how they are
integrated in an industry environment.
REQUIREMENTS:
1) You will complete this assignment within your client team.
All policies and procedures outlined in your Team Contract
(MKT 2261) are applicable to this assignment. All team
members must sign the Team Contract.
2) Within the Team Contract, you must complete “Team
Meeting Information” to include a specific meeting time and
location for MKT2292. A soft –copy must be uploaded into
your Group File Exchange under Group Pages in
Blackboard.
3) Maximum length is 15 double – spaced pages (not
including appendices). Any additional pages will not be
graded.
.
4) All course hand-in guidelines must be followed. Reference
School of Business Procedures document & Business
Marketing Program Standards document.
MKT 2292 IMC II Winter 2017
Professor Noni Stukel and Erin Sparks Algonquin College
CASE OVERVIEW:
Your industry client is interested in supplementing their Marketing Plan project with an in depth
analysis of Business to Business marketing opportunities in the region. Co-marketing
strategies are experiencing considerable growth in recent years as organizations leverage the
benefits of: optimizing resources, building brand equity, improving image, broadening
consumer appeal, and expanding expertise.
In addition to the growth of co-marketing many companies are recognizing the importance of
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) in building their brand. The majority of consumers
expect companies’ business practices to benefit society.
According to a recent study by Havas World Wide (Havas WorldWide, 2015)
The survey found 73% of consumers believe companies have a responsibility to do more
than just generate a profit; 75% believe companies have an ethical obligation to operate
in a way that doesn’t harm the environment; and 53% avoid buying from companies that
have a negative social or environmental impact.
Among Canadians, 72% want companies to fight injustice, 80% want companies to
improve the communities in which they operate; 77% want companies to be transparent;
and 84% want companies to improve the lives of its employees.
The Director of Marketing for your client has hired you as independent marketing
consultants. You have been asked to:
1. Conduct market segmentation for their company in order to identify the business
industry segments (targets) which offer the most potential for partnership
opportunities to improve their CSR. The recommended strategic alliance should be
based on your in-depth situational analysis from MKT 2261 and clearly leverage your
clients strengths and opportunities while mitigating their weaknesses and threats. The
director has asked that you conduct sufficient research to factually support your
recommendations.
2. Recommend specific Integrated Marketing Communications objectives, strategies
& tactics to reach the chosen business target and establish the CSR partnership.
Source:
Havas WorldWide. (2015). Project Superbrand: 10 Truths Reshaping the Corporate World.
MKT 2292 IMC II Winter 2017
Professor Noni Stukel and Erin Sparks Algonquin College
ASSIGNMENT NOTES:
1) Business Industry target markets must be analyzed using B2B Segmentation
criteria (Nesting). Please reference week 4 PowerPoint lecture notes.
2) Case Consultations will be held in class week 4. Attendance is mandatory and a
component of each student’s class participation grade.
3) Peer Evaluations will be incorporated in the final individual grades. All team
members must submit a peer evaluation by midnight on the case due date, failure
to do so will result in 5% individual grade reductions. Peer evaluations must be
posted in the individual journal on blackboard (located in Student Tools).
4) Sources of information must be properly referenced in APA format, including
additional appendices on industry data, market trends etc. are expected.
5) A detailed marking guide is provided on the following page.
6) With the final deliverable, teams should be sure that all of their related Team Meeting
Logs (template is posted on Blackboard) have been successfully posted in their team’s
specific Group Page under group journal. These are due at midnight the day the
B2B Case is due. Failure to submit will result in an automatic 5% off of all team
members grade.
Please read points 1 and 2 of the Case Overview very carefully and confirm that
your final case submission accomplishes what you have been hired to achieve.
MKT 2292 B2B Case
Professor Noni Stukel and Erin Sparks Algonquin College
Component
Mark
Marking Criteria
REQUIRED ELEMENTS
Guide: present; not present; partial
Comments
1. Executive
Summary
/10
8-10 excellent
7- 7.9 superior
6 – 6.9 satisfactory
5-5.9 minimal
0-4.9 unsatisfactory
– key factors from the situation analysis (MKT
2261)
– the core problem
– the chosen alternative and its rationale for
selection
– the benefits to the organization resulting from the
decision
– description of the IMC Plan implementation
4. Core Problem
/5
4 -5 excellent
3.5 – 3.9 superior
3 – 3.4 satisfactory
2.5 – 2.9 minimal
0- 2.4 unsatisfactory
– one, concise, specific statement
– rationale
5. Alternatives
/20
16-20 excellent
14- 15.9 superior
12 – 13.9 satisfactory
10-11.9 minimal
0-9.9 unsatisfactory
– Identify and describe 3 business alternatives
that are viable to solving core problem
– Each of the 3 business alternatives must be fully
segmented utilizing all B2B segmentation criteria
(*required appendix)
– positioning statements are included for all 3 B2B
target markets
6. Evaluative
Criteria
/10
8-10 excellent
7- 7.9 superior
6 – 6.9 satisfactory
5-5.9 minimal
0-4.9 unsatisfactory
– tables and/or tools used
– criteria identified
– criteria must be weighted and rationale
provided
– criteria need to be prioritized according to the
Situation Analysis
– financials examined as required
7. Analysis of
Alternatives
/10
8-10 excellent
7- 7.9 superior
6 – 6.9 satisfactory
5-5.9 minimal
0-4.9 unsatisfactory
– each alternative is measured against the
evaluative criteria
– identify advantages and disadvantages of
your chosen alternative
8. Decision and
Justification
/10
8-10 excellent
7- 7.9 superior
6 – 6.9 satisfactory
5-5.9 minimal
0-4.9 unsatisfactory
– selected alternative provides the most viable
solution to the problem
– alternative selected is justified
– clear demonstration of how the decision best
meets the criteria
– disadvantages of the selected alternative are
managed or mitigated
– financial analysis is considered
MKT 2292 B2B Case
Professor Noni Stukel and Erin Sparks Algonquin College
Component
Mark
Marking Criteria
REQUIRED ELEMENTS
Guide: present; not present; partial
Comments
9. IMC Plan
Implementation
/25
22- 25 excellent
19- 21.9 superior
15- 18.9 satisfactory
12.5-14.9 minimal
0- 12.5 unsatisfactory
– State marketing communication Objective(s)
include rationale.
– Identify which IMC elements will be used to
reach the chosen business target and establish
the CSR partnership. Provide detailed rationale
for your decisions.
– Develop a creative plan that clearly states
“what” is your key message and “how” are you
going to communicate it.
(objectives, strategies, USP, positioning)
– Create a detailed implementation schedule for
all IMC elements chosen in calendar format
– Provide schedule timing rationale
– Creative Execution Samples required for each
IMC element (*required appendix)
***decision was fully implemented from a B2B target
market perspective
10. Bibliography
/5
4 -5 excellent
3.5 – 3.9 superior
3 – 3.4 satisfactory
2.5 – 2.9 minimal
0- 2.4 unsatisfactory
– reference all work of other individuals including
course notes, textbooks,
– journals, periodicals,
– websites and all other sources
11. Format and
Structure
/5
4 -5 excellent
3.5 – 3.9 superior
3 – 3.4 satisfactory
2.5 – 2.9 minimal
0- 2.4 unsatisfactory
– overall organization and appearance
– title page and table of contents
– clarity of expression
– free of spelling and grammatical error
– appendices including graphics, charts,
diagrams, statements, etc
– complies with Departmental Policies
***APA format required
