EGEL Plus Mercadotecnia common mistakes
EGEL Plus Mercadotecnia · Understand the traps and how to avoid them.
In strategic-planning scenarios, the candidate reproduces a SWOT/TOWS matrix and then recommends 'leveraging opportunities' without selecting among growth, defensive, or diversification options or tying the choice to the stated objective.
Exam items usually supply a situation and ask for the most appropriate strategy. Candidates default to describing the analytical tool because it is memorable and feels safe, and they do not practise the final decision step under time pressure.
What to do instead
After each analysis, force a one-sentence strategic implication and select one option using explicit criteria: fit with mission and objectives, resource feasibility, and likely competitive response. Practise stems ending in '¿Cuál estrategia...?' and write the decision rule before reading the answer options.
Writes objectives as activities ('realizar una campaña de redes sociales') or omits a time frame and metric, and treats mission and vision as interchangeable in case questions.
Course material presents these concepts together, and under time pressure candidates recall the label but not the function. Activity verbs such as 'realizar' feel concrete and are easy to defend in a written answer.
What to do instead
Use a checklist for every objective: outcome verb, metric, baseline, target, deadline, and responsible area. For mission versus vision, apply the test: mission = current purpose and scope; vision = future desired state. Rewrite three sample objectives with the checklist until each passes.
Selects exploratory, descriptive, or causal design by matching the data-collection technique named in the options (for example, survey = descriptive) rather than by the decision problem and the current state of knowledge.
The design labels are taught alongside methods, so surface cues overshadow the underlying question. Candidates see 'encuesta' and stop analysing whether the problem is ambiguous, descriptive, or cause-effect.
What to do instead
Before looking at options, classify the decision problem: ambiguous or new = exploratory; measure prevalence or segment profiles = descriptive; test cause-effect = causal. Eliminate any option whose design contradicts the classification, even if its method sounds familiar.
Interprets a Likert-scale average as an interval measure, or treats a statistically significant correlation as proof that one variable causes another, and recommends action from a small difference with no effect size.
Statistical output often appears with p-values and means, and candidates conflate significance with practical importance. Measurement-level rules are learned early and then forgotten when a ready-made average is displayed.
What to do instead
For each result, write three labels: measurement level, significance, and practical effect. Use medians or frequencies for ordinal items and reserve means for interval scales. Reject causal language unless the design is experimental or longitudinal, and compare the effect size with the decision threshold.
Builds a segment solely from age, gender, and income and then treats it as actionable, without checking size, accessibility, stability, or behavioural differences.
Demographics are easy to recall and appear in almost every case. Candidates confuse a descriptive profile with a viable segment and skip the criteria that make segmentation useful for marketing decisions.
What to do instead
Apply a five-criterion screen: measurable, substantial, accessible, differentiable, and actionable. Add at least one behavioural or psychographic variable. Write a profile that includes needs, purchase occasions, and likely response to the offer; discard any segment that fails a criterion.
In consumer-behaviour scenarios, labels a purchase as need recognition when the case describes information search or post-purchase dissonance, and mixes needs with wants and demand.
The stages of the decision process and the need/want/demand distinctions are learned as lists. Candidates match keywords superficially instead of locating the consumer's position in the process and checking purchasing power.
What to do instead
Annotate each case with the consumer's current stage and the evidence for it: comparing alternatives = evaluation; regret or reassurance seeking = dissonance. For need/want/demand, require willingness and purchasing power before calling something demand. Classify ten short scenarios and justify each stage in one line.
Sets price by adding a standard margin to cost and ignores perceived value, elasticity, and competitor response; also uses penetration and skimming as synonyms in recommendation questions.
Cost-plus is the easiest formula to compute, and price terminology is often memorized without the conditions under which each strategy works. Candidates then produce an arithmetic answer to a strategic pricing question.
What to do instead
For every pricing question, state the pricing objective (volume, profit, or image), the demand elasticity assumption, and the likely competitor reaction. Match skimming to early adopters and low price sensitivity; match penetration to scale and high elasticity. Compute break-even and compare it with the value-based ceiling.
Confuses channel levels (zero-, one-, two-level), push versus pull, and intensive/selective/exclusive coverage when choosing a distribution strategy for a scenario.
The terms are paired in textbook tables, so candidates count intermediaries incorrectly or focus on the product's prestige rather than buying behaviour and coverage objectives.
What to do instead
Draw the channel from producer to consumer and count intermediary levels explicitly. Match coverage to purchase frequency and service needs: convenience goods = intensive; shopping goods = selective; specialty goods = exclusive. State whether promotion targets the intermediary (push) or the end user (pull).
Mixes up sales quota, sales potential, sales forecast, and territory workload; calculates territory size from total market size without adjusting for call frequency, selling time, and account profitability.
These terms sit in the same planning chapter, and formula questions reward quick arithmetic over definitions. Candidates substitute total market size for workload because it is the most visible number in the stem.
What to do instead
Write one-line definitions and units for each term: quota = target assigned; potential = capacity; forecast = expected sales. For territory sizing, use workload = accounts × call frequency × call duration, then divide available selling time. Check whether the question asks to allocate effort or to set a target.
In digital-marketing cases, judges campaign success by impressions, reach, likes, or CTR alone, and attributes all conversions to the last click without considering assisted conversions or a baseline.
Platform dashboards foreground easy-to-see engagement metrics. Candidates equate activity with outcomes and ignore funnel stage, attribution model, and comparison period.
What to do instead
Map each metric to a funnel stage and to a business outcome such as CPL, CAC, ROAS, or retention. Ask which attribution model the data supports and compare results with a control or pre-period. Reject recommendations that optimize a vanity metric without a link to revenue or margin.