One of four executions fails at the freezer door, and the MT359 Unit 4 message strategy analysis explains why through the Rossiter-Percy split between brand recognition and brand recall. Searches like "mt 359 unit 4 assignment example", "mt359 unit 4 sample" and "mt359 unit 4 example" land here.
What a finished MT359 Unit 4 message strategy analysis looks like
Around five pages with one comparison table. Two or three sentences describe each execution. The connected TV spot, Crooked Edge, opens on a pincher's thumbs sealing dough, holds on the uneven seam, and ends on the red bag in a freezer case. The radio read gives an 81-year-old pincher's voice explaining why no two edges match. The poster sets a close-up of that edge beside the pack, headline No Two Alike. The cling repeats the photo on the freezer door itself. A second poster version, written late by the sales team, reads More Pierogi Per Bag. All five are scored in the table for the proposition carried, the grid cell, whether the package appears as shoppers see it, and drift from the brief.
How a MT359 Unit 4 example is structured
The brief's proposition and proof are quoted at the top, so each later verdict has a fixed reference. The FCB grid comes first and briefly: frozen pierogi sit in the low-involvement, feeling quadrant, where buyers try, react and only then form a view, so the ads need to be liked more than argued. The Rossiter-Percy grid does the heavier work because it splits brand awareness into two kinds. A product picked from a freezer door needs recognition, the pack known on sight, not recall from memory, and that test sorts the executions sharply. Connected TV, the poster and the cling all show the red bag; the radio cannot, however warm the voice. The late poster is judged separately, as drift, since quantity is a second proposition. Recommendations close the paper, cutting radio weight and withdrawing the late poster.
The quadrant pierogi fall into
On the FCB grid, a [$6.49] bag of comfort food is low involvement and driven by feeling. The analysis argues that this makes likability and repetition matter more than a list of reasons, which suits the thumbs and the seam.
Recognition, not recall
Rossiter and Percy separate brands chosen from memory from brands chosen on sight. Pierogi are chosen on sight at the freezer door, so the analysis requires every execution to show the red bag as it looks in the case.
A warm voice with no package
The radio read carries the proposition well and scores highest for emotional authenticity. It still fails recognition, since a listener never sees the bag, and the paper proposes cutting radio weight or adding a spoken line about the red bag.
More pierogi per bag
Written late by the sales team, the second poster swaps the edge for a quantity claim. The analysis judges it a second proposition, one that invites comparison with the leader on the leader's terms, and asks that it be withdrawn.
Five executions, four columns
Proposition carried, grid cell, package shown, drift. Laid out this way, the comparison shows at a glance that the cling does the most with the least, and that the radio and the late poster fail for different reasons.
Where marks go in MT359 Unit 4
What earns the most in MT359 message analysis is a model applied execution by execution, with a sentence of reasoning for each placement, rather than a model defined in the introduction and then forgotten. Papers that describe executions in enough detail to picture, and that quote the brief before judging, give the grader something checkable. Credit also comes from spotting drift honestly: an analysis declaring every piece on strategy tends to read as uncritical. The medium matters too, and papers asking radio to do visual work, or ignoring whether the package appears, lose ground on shelf-bought products. Any recommendation should follow from the findings, so cutting weight or rewriting a line needs a stated reason. Grids placed without justification, or two models that contradict each other with no comment, draw deductions from most instructors.
Get a MT359 Unit 4 example written to your instructions
Got executions to judge, or only a brief they should follow? Either can start the Unit 4 sample. With the prompt and rubric, name the model your course relies on, whether FCB, Rossiter-Percy or another. A free first custom analysis arrives within 24-48h, each execution placed with a reason and tested for drift.
MT359 Unit 4 questions, answered
What is the difference between the FCB grid and the Rossiter-Percy grid?
The FCB grid, from Richard Vaughn at Foote, Cone and Belding, sorts products by involvement and by thinking versus feeling. Rossiter and Percy keep involvement but split motives into informational and transformational, and add a separate choice between brand recognition and brand recall. Many papers use FCB for the broad placement and Rossiter-Percy for specific execution tactics.
Do I need to create the executions myself?
It depends on the prompt. Some sections supply real advertisements to analyze, others ask for proposed executions described in words, and a few want rough layouts. Where you propose them, describe each in enough concrete detail to be pictured, because the analysis can only be judged against something concrete. Label proposed work as proposed, not as a campaign that ran.
How should the paper handle an execution that drifts from the brief?
Name the drift, say which second proposition it introduces, and recommend a fix: rewrite it, withdraw it or reassign it to a different job. An honest drift finding usually earns more than claiming every piece fits. If the drifting piece came from someone with authority, such as a sales team, the paper can still judge it on strategy rather than on who wrote it.