You are on page 1of 6

BM006-3-2CRI

Individual Assignment – Marking Scheme

Page 1 of 6

1. Idea Generation – 25 marks FAIL Many of the tools and techniques are not used; those tools and techniques presented in the written proposal for idea generation show very limited use evidenced by the lack of attributes and alternatives considered; no or very limited conclusion are evaluation are given for each tool and techniques used PASS Some of the tools and techniques are not used; evidence of adequate utilisation of the tools and techniques but are not presented correctly according to the required structure; CREDIT All relevant idea generation tools and techniques are used showing effective utilisation* and presented in the right structure; outcomes on the use of the idea generation tools and techniques are given showing the used attributes and generated ideas; some evaluation DISTINCTION Highly creative presentation of the tools and techniques used; highly effective utilisation of the tools and techniques evidenced by a high number of attributes and alternatives considered; detailed conclusion and evaluation given; critical evaluation the use of the each idea generation tool or technique is given 21 22 23 24 25

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

*70% or more of the page used for mind-mapping need to be filled; 70% or more of the boxes in the Lotus Blossom are used; for Concept Fan, there need to be four levels shown – problem, directions, concepts and ideas; for each picture; at least SIX (6) attributes given for Attribute Analysis and at least FIVE (5) available and potential alternatives considered under each attribute; for Force Fitting Trigger, there need to be THREE (3) pictures and for each picture, there need to be SIX (6) associated keywords given as well as arriving to an outcome of THREE (3) combinations.

Level 2

Asia Pacific University College of Technology and Innovation

response to the comments from the survey with the lecturers and students is made with effective ideas for improvement 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 *At least FOUR (4) supporting factors and FOUR (4) restricting factors are given in the Force Field Analysis with scores assigned to each of them and the total given.BM006-3-2CRI Individual Assignment – Marking Scheme Page 2 of 6 2. Level 2 Asia Pacific University College of Technology and Innovation . some recommendations are given on how to improve the product concept to achieve high market feasibility and competitive differentiation. no survey is made or information gather in the survey is limited and/or irrelevant PASS The relevant tools are used but with limited utilisation and with limited conclusion made. **Details can be written in the appendix but need to be clearly indicated in the proposal when the appendix needs to be referred to. Idea Evaluation – 25 marks FAIL Many of the tools are not used. those tools and techniques presented in the written proposal for idea generation show very limited use evidenced by lack of factors supporting and restricting the acceptability and implementation of the proposed product concept. no or very limited recommendations given on how to improve the product and/or to response to the feedback given in the interview by the lecturers and students CREDIT All relevant idea evaluation tools are used with effective utilisation* presented in the required structure. relevant recommendations are given in respond to the comments from the survey 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 DISTINCTION Each item considered in the idea evaluation is given a detailed description** to avoid ambiguity. detailed recommendations are given. interviews are made with lecturers and students to survey their responses to the proposed product concept. vagueness and overgeneralisation. at least FIVE (5) items considered for the Sticking Dots/Squares/Stars/Smileys with analysis of one or more competing alternatives. TWO (2) Force Field Analysis (FFA) diagram are drawn – one initial FFA and the other after taking into consideration of the recommendations given with the score adjusted and conclusion provided.

more detailed analysis is different but relevant variables of provided in the competitors segmentation. vague and/or over generalise. some analysis is analysis with clear citations given given to the competing alternatives. information about the target market is ambiguous. China will have different consumer behaviours as compared to people living in New Delhi. Therefore.BM006-3-2CRI Individual Assignment – Marking Scheme Page 3 of 6 3. How young is young? Students need to age range of their target market. Furthermore. Competitor Analysis and Market Identification – 20 marks FAIL Problem statement given is not ambiguous. market identified do not appear to be relevant to the product proposed or there is a serious flaw in logic in determining the receptivity of the target market to the proposed product concept. India. there is a need to specifically identify the different lifestyles these users have and find the segment relevant to the product concept. There are many cities in the world so which countries are we referring to.” The profile is not specific. very limited analysis provided in the competitor analysis evidenced by proposal having the attributes of the competing alternatives described with no conclusion of the strengths and weaknesses and what possible recommendations given to response to the advantages and disadvantages of the competing alternatives 1 2 3 4 5 PASS CREDIT Some weaknesses in the profiling Detailed characteristics are given to of the market segments and with describe the relevant market limited consideration of the segments. vague or over generalised*. on where the information is some problems in the sequencing obtained of the different section of the proposal DISTINCTION Detailed profile given on the target market(s) describing the specific characteristics of the different variables relevant to the product concepts. individuals living in Beijing. more than two competing alternatives is analysed with clear indication of their strengths and weaknesses 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 * Examples: “This new product concept is target at young people who uses mobile phone with high income and live in the cities. There may be the problem of overgeneralisation when targeting consumers who use mobile phone due to the misconceptions of thinking that all mobile phone users (even they are of the same age-group. Level 2 Asia Pacific University College of Technology and Innovation . having the same income level and/or living in the same city) are homogeneous. Even individuals living in different cities within the same country will probably have different consumer behaviour. Problem Finding. detailed information given on what occasion the proposed concept will be used. information about the acceptability of the target market towards the product concept is supported by other primary or secondary research. When do we determine whether a person earns a high income? There is a need to provide an income bracket.

Competitor Analysis and Market Identification – 10 marks FAIL No visuals of the product concept are given. given does not appear relevant to the target relevant to the target market price is indicated with market and is not competitive and is competitive specific explanation on how it is relevant to the target market and is competitive 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 3 Level 2 Asia Pacific University College of Technology and Innovation . no price is indicated PASS CREDIT DISTINCTION Some visuals of the product concept are Visuals of the product Visuals of the product given but was presented in a disorganised concept are presented and concept are presented in a manner. some description about the some detailed description is professional manner with functions and features of the product given on its functions and detailed description about concept.BM006-3-2CRI Individual Assignment – Marking Scheme Page 4 of 6 A clear market segment relevant to the product concept needs to be identified. 4. no price is indicated or price features. price given is its functions and features. limited description is provided to show the functions and features of the proposed product concept. a student who came up with shaver-mobile phone will not be relevant to the Chinese consumers as they do not have a strong physical tendency to grow facial hair but it can be highly relevant to individuals living in Middle East as the product can help avoid the need to carry two separate devices when travelling. Problem Finding. For example.

missing citations and references (citations must be accompanied with their respective references and vice versa) **To determine the originality in writing. lack of citations given and overall proposal appear to lack originality**** CREDIT Most parts of the documents are present in the document. poor use of language making the proposal highly confusing to read and understand. no or minimal grammatical and spelling errors.e. clear statement of the of the problem given DISTINCTION High overall quality of writing evidenced by good clarity in writing. etc. e. many grammatical and spelling mistakes***. some level of inconsistencies in the overall presentation of the proposal. Level 2 Asia Pacific University College of Technology and Innovation . good use of language. Overall Quality of the Proposal – 20 marks FAIL Many parts of the documents and the writing are missing*. highly consistent in the format used throughout the overall documents and clear effective writing in showing how one part of the writing connect to another+. some grammatical and spelling errors made but the written proposal can still be understood. overall proposal show coherent flow of information with clear separation of ideas using headings and subheadings.BM006-3-2CRI Individual Assignment – Marking Scheme Page 5 of 6 5.e 10) is given showing lack of research made PASS Some parts of the documents and the writing are missing. nowadays-now a days. poor use of punctuation. no captions given for photos. whether-weather. high inconsistency in format of presentation in the overall document**. they-their. and diagrams used. failure to show how certain parts of the writing connect to another.e. no indications of when to refer to appendix. overall writing appear highly fragmented and lacks coherent flow. coherent flow of information. sources of references used are of high quality as compared to the basic information available from general websites. good use of punctuation where needed. citations and references are not presented using the Harvard Reference System. affect-effect. no page number indicated.g. extensive research is made evidenced by a high number of references made in the proposal. no headings and subheadings. 10). minimum number of references (i. 10) is made. few grammatical and spelling mistakes made. proposal utilise more than the minimum required number of reference (i. pictures. less than the required number of reference (i. proposal have used references from both online and printed sources judiciously 16 17 18 19 20 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 * No executive summary and/or content page. citations and references are very important to the marker as this will enable him or her to very how much information has been take and how much original words have been used by the students *** Students need to be aware of their spelling and proof-read their work as the use of spell check of the word processing system is not entirely fool proof and may fail to detect some spelling errors.

inconsistent presentation of the citations and references + For example how the price is shown to be relevant to the target market. inconsistent use of font size and font types. how the idea evaluation relate to the different alternatives considered in the competitor analysis.BM006-3-2CRI Individual Assignment – Marking Scheme Page 6 of 6 ****Examples: High inconsistency in the use and non-use of capital letters. margin and line spacing. inconsistent indentation. how the recommendations made relate to the response given interview of the lecturers and students in regards to the product concept Level 2 Asia Pacific University College of Technology and Innovation .