IB Business Management SL Extended Essay Example

A clear, relevant title establishes the investigation’s business focus immediately. This helps the reader anticipate that the report is about KFC’s marketing performance, not just general brand history, which supports focus from the outset.

What evidence shows that digital marketing, rather than post-pandemic recovery, menu changes, or franchise expansion, is driving those sales? A stronger introduction would preview how the report will separate these influences instead of assuming the relationship.

The methodology is identified, but the student does not explain how sources were selected, judged, or compared. To strengthen the method, the student should specify criteria for choosing reports, articles, and platform data, and show how they were triangulated to answer the causal sales question.

This plan is too broad for the research question because it promises a survey of many marketing tools rather than a tightly focused test of digital marketing’s contribution to sales. The student should narrow the investigation around a smaller set of digital channels and their measurable link to sales outcomes.

This list of specific digital channels is helpful because it shows the student understands the breadth of KFC’s online strategy. Naming concrete methods gives the investigation a clearer operational focus and makes later analysis easier to follow.

This is strong business understanding, but it sits too far from the research question unless the student shows how these factors affected KFC’s sales after 2020. The method would be stronger if it connected market adaptation to a specific digital campaign or sales change.

This claim is asserted without evidence or comparison. The student should either cite a source that compares profitability or revise the wording to a more cautious claim, because profitability and global engagement need measured support to be convincing.

This is a strong application of market knowledge because it links product innovation to a specific customer segment and consumer trend. That kind of targeted explanation helps show why a product decision could support broader business performance.

This sentence overstates causation. The student should avoid presenting brand-value trends as direct proof of sales growth unless the essay can connect them with sales data or campaign evidence; otherwise, the claim should be framed as a plausible contribution rather than a demonstrated effect.

The brand-value figure is not used cautiously enough: brand value is not the same as sales, so it cannot by itself prove digital marketing increased revenue. The student should distinguish between brand equity and sales performance, then explain what the figure can and cannot demonstrate.

The explanation of SEO is oversimplified and too absolute. The student should clarify that search ranking improves visibility, not guarantee superiority over competitors, and should support any claim about customer conversion with data or a source.

This is one of the most relevant pieces of evidence in the essay, but it needs tighter linkage to the argument. The student should explain whether the 70% digital-sales increase is U.S.-specific and how far it can be used to infer the global impact claimed in the research question.

The student uses the financial table well here by identifying a clear trend and placing it in context. This is a useful starting point for analysis because it moves beyond description and begins to relate business conditions to performance changes.

The comparison is not supported analytically. The student should show how profitability, ease, or engagement was measured, or compare channels using evidence such as cost, reach, conversion, or sales data rather than making a general claim.

The student identifies a trend, but the analysis stops at description. To deepen this, the student should ask what caused the trend, whether it aligns with sales changes, and whether other factors such as product launches or market recovery could explain the same movement.

How can the student demonstrate that social media caused the sales increase rather than simply coinciding with it? A stronger argument would test alternative explanations and show why the digital channels were the most plausible driver.

These impressive figures are not analysed in relation to the research question. The student should explain whether they come from digital demand, franchise expansion, or menu scale, because raw business statistics do not by themselves show the effect of digital marketing.

This statistic is introduced but not interpreted analytically. The student should explain what a high keyword volume and difficulty mean for KFC’s search visibility, and then connect that interpretation to the sales question.

This is descriptive rather than analytical. The student should explain why AMP-style emails are likely to convert better than standard emails, ideally using engagement or conversion evidence, so the paragraph moves from feature listing to evaluation.

This is a stronger analytical point because it links content style to a marketing effect, namely word-of-mouth and reach. The student is beginning to explain not just what KFC posts, but why that content may matter for sales and brand visibility.

The discussion of video marketing is still largely promotional. The student should evaluate whether these campaigns measurably increased engagement, traffic, or sales, and should distinguish between attention-grabbing creativity and actual business impact.

This is a useful business point, but it weakens the argument if it is treated as evidence for digital-marketing impact. The student should separate franchise expansion from digital marketing effects and explain how each may have contributed differently to sales growth.

This is a balanced evaluative move because it avoids claiming that every sales increase was dramatic or solely driven by digital marketing. Recognising limits in the data is a good habit for writing a more credible business analysis.

The conclusion is cautious, but it still bundles many claims together without weighing them against other explanations. The student should evaluate which digital tools appear strongest, which evidence is weakest, and how non-digital factors limit the certainty of the claim.

The report has a clear overall structure, and the table of contents signals an organised progression from introduction to conclusion. This makes the investigation easier to navigate and supports a coherent line of argument.

Including a labelled SWOT table helps break up the report and gives the reader a visual summary of key strategic points. Used well, this kind of structure can make evaluation more accessible and easier to compare with the written discussion.

The table is useful, but the report should make the reader work less to interpret it. The student should add a short sentence explaining what the key pattern is before or after the table, and ensure any interpretation names exactly which figures matter most.

The conclusion is clear, but it does not fully synthesise the evidence into a concise final judgement on the research question. The student should restate the extent more directly and briefly weigh the strongest supporting and limiting evidence in the final lines.