TASK ONE
Using a UK electric car market as the scope for your study, critically analyse how the concept of:
a. Perception of risk
b. The elaboration likelihood model are used in the formulation of marketing communication strategies
The purpose of this task is to test your understanding of two important concepts that enable marketing communication managers to understand their audiences. This understanding enables them to produce winning marketing communication strategies and programmes.
Perception of risk
Elaboration likelihood model
For each theory/model you are expected to do the following (treat each section as ESSENTIAL):
Define the model and explain it, assuming you are teaching it to someone who has never heard of it.
Draw a model or diagram that provides a visual representation of the theory.
Now pick up the context of the question – the electric car market. Do a brief research to help you understand the dynamics of the market. If you find any supporting evidence for the behaviour of the market you should present it in the form of charts, graphs and tables.
You should assume that you are performing the role of a decision maker such as a marketing communications manager. Suggest how your understanding of the context and the theory with influence your communication strategies: ATL, BTL, TTL, selection of communication tools (Advertising, Sales Promotion, Direct marketing, Personal selling, PR, digital marketing communications etc), branding dynamics, message creation, media selection, scheduling or control.
A critical analysis is not just a description.
It involves assessing the usefulness of the model. Which aspects of the model are useful and which are not useful for the scenario or industry context? Why? The extent to which the model can be applied to the management of marketing communications.
Also discuss the extent to which each model addresses the particular characteristics or needs of your target audience or of the industry.
Justify your approaches.
TASK 2
Compare and contrast the branding strategies from a marketing communications standpoint of two competing high street clothing retailers in the UK. Your comparative analysis should be based on at least ONE brand equity model.
Brand equity models to use: – Aaker
Comparison should be structured to cover each layer of the model, drawing out the differences of approach used by the two competitors.
You are required to use one of the brand equity models as the basis for a comparative analysis of two competing high street clothing retailers. This implies that the two companies operate in the same industry, perhaps, but not necessarily using the same business model (style or format of retailing).
Brand equity models to use:
Aaker
A suggested approach is given below (treat each section as essential:
Select the model (one is enough) you prefer to use as the basis for the comparison. Read around the model and learn it until you are completely comfortable with it.
Now return to the report. Define and explain the model as though you were teaching it to someone who has never heard of it. This must include a drawing or picture of the model embedded in the report, not in the appendix.
Now you can use a number of approaches for the comparative analysis. Note: this not merely a description of how each company applies the model but write this part of the report in such a way as clearly brings out the differences between the way each clothing retailer has approached its brand building. You may use a table if it works for you. Be careful with a table that it does not tempt you to write a shallow or simplistic answer that lacks depth.
Consider each component of the selected brand equity model. Now compare how each retailer uses marketing communications in particular to achieve a number of objectives such as creating awareness, increasing market share (remember relationship between SOV and SOM) and creating a particular positioning in the marketplace.
Finally comment on the level of success each retailer has managed to achieve with their particular brand equity strategies. You may present evidence of success such as sales or market share record over a number of years.
