Discussions

I’ve noticed that many students lose marks in marketing assignments not because their ideas are wrong, but because they confuse descriptive writing with analytical writing. So I thought I’d open a discussion on this.

Descriptive content simply explains what something is. For example, if you’re writing about Coca-Cola’s marketing strategy and you describe its target audience, pricing, and promotional channels, that’s descriptive. You’re telling the reader what the company does.

Analytical content, on the other hand, goes deeper. It answers why and how. Why is Coca-Cola targeting that specific segment? How effective is their positioning compared to competitors? What are the strengths and weaknesses of their strategy using frameworks like SWOT, STP, or Porter’s Five Forces?

In university-level marketing, lecturers expect more analysis than description. They want you to evaluate strategies, apply theory, compare alternatives, and justify your conclusions with evidence. Simply listing facts won’t earn high marks.

From my experience, the best way to improve is to:

• Link theory directly to real-world examples
• Critically evaluate outcomes
• Support arguments with academic sources
• Avoid summarising without interpretation

Many students struggle with this shift from description to critical evaluation, especially in early years. That’s where structured academic support in marketing coursework can really help — not to replace your work, but to guide you in developing stronger analytical thinking.

What strategies do you use to ensure your assignments are analytical rather than merely descriptive?