代做07 37285 Services and Retail Marketing代做留学生SQL语言

Programme Title

MSc Marketing Suite

Module Title

Services and Retail Marketing

Module Code

O7 37285

Assignment Titles

Individual Assignment: Services and Retail Marketing Strategy

Level

MSc

Weighting

70%

Hand Out Date

08/07/2024

Due Date & Time

08/08/2024

12pm

Feedback Post Date

06/09/2024

Assignment Format

Report

Assignment Length

3,000 words max

Submission Format

Online

Individual

Section

Qualitative Comments

Select ONE service provider or retailer of your choice. Using your service provider or retailer evaluate their strategy. Your service provider or retailer may be either online, in-store or both. The following areas must be discussed:

A) Audit your retailer or service provider’s strategy. You should identify what are the key strategies that have made your retailer or service provider successful. You should identify the following:

- What is the MAIN strategy that has led to their success?

- What are the additional THREE strategies that support the main strategy?

You must explain your choice with theoretical evidence. As this is an audit you should ensure that you use some of the core models as presented in the module and map your company to these models. This means that you should include diagrams or tables that you have amended to include your company’s strategy.

Areas that you may want to consider are (you are not limited to these areas – please look at the module content as a whole) (1200 words):

- Product range

- Brand strategy

- Innovations

- Use of technologies

- Customer experience

- Place design and location

- Customer service

- Online strategy

- CSR

80+ This report shows originality of insight when analysing the service provider’s or retailer’s strategy and excellent intellectual engagement is offered. Highly relevant arguments are presented regarding the service provider’s or retailer’s strategy

70+ Shows a sound understanding, offering a consistent and mature analytical insight into the service provider’s or retailer’s strategy. Incisive and persuasive with strong evidence for the conclusions drawn; highly relevant arguments made regarding the service provider’s or retailer’s strategy

60+ Some analysis and insight demonstrated into the service provider’s or retailer’s strategy. Some understanding of the service provider’s or retailer’s strategy demonstrated

50+ Shows a competent if dependent or incomplete understanding of the service provider’s or retailer’s strategy. Limited analysis offered. A general outline of an appropriate argument is presented; basic relevant material is offered regarding the service provider’s or retailer’s strategy

40+ Shows some limited understanding and some elements of an appropriate argument regarding the service provider’s or retailer’s strategy. No evidence of analysis.

Less than 30 Shows little understanding of the service provider’s or retailer’s strategy. Ill- considered or poorly constructed arguments regarding the service provider’s or retailer’s strategy are presented

b) Make 2 evidence-based recommendations as to how your service provider or retailer can improve their strategy to enhance their offering. In this section we encourage you to be creative and thoughtful (but always underpinned with theory) about how your service provider or retailer may develop. Areas that you may want to consider are - you are not limited to these areas – please look at the module content as a whole (1200 words):

- Sustainable place and product design

- Relationships with suppliers

- Sourcing of products

- CSR

- New consumer needs

- New products

- Phygitalisation

- The use of AI

- The use of data

- The use of robotics

80+ Recommendations are exceptionally detailed. All recommendations are thoroughly argued and supported by relevant academic evidence. All arguments go beyond received wisdom. All recommendations are highly relevant to the retailer and are highly congruent. Both recommendations are offered.

70+ Complete and thorough recommendations that incisive and persuasive and are very congruent to the retailer provider and their current strategy. All recommendations are effectively supported by relevant academic evidence. Both recommendations are offered.

60+ The recommendations are of a reasonable quality of and are mostly congruent with the retailer’s strategy. The recommendations are mostly supported by relevant academic evidence. Both recommendations are offered.

50+ Limited recommendations are offered that have some congruence with the retailer’s strategy. The recommendations lack considered supporting academic evidence.

40+ Limited and inaccurate recommendations that offer little congruence with the retailer’s strategy. Very little use of supporting academic evidence. Or not all 2 recommendations are offered.

Less than 30 Very inaccurate recommendations that are not congruent with the retailer’s strategy.  No supporting academic evidence. 2 recommendations are not offered.

The report should contain substantial evidence of wider academic reading. A minimum of 10 peer reviewed academic journal articles should be used.

80+ References are complete, accurate and effectively presented to support the arguments made; appropriate number of citations to the word count. The assignment identifies new information from sources which are consistently appropriate, are used to develop sound arguments and go beyond the module reading list. The assignment makes extensive use of new information in order to support the arguments and recommendations made. The assignment shows an excellent grasp of the meaning and significance of new information and such new information supports the arguments and recommendations made accurately. The use of sources is succinct, innovative and creative. References are all of an academic standard

70+ References are complete and of an academic standard, accurate and effectively presented, appropriate number of citations to the word count. The assignment identifies new information from sources which are consistently appropriate and are used to develop sound arguments and mostly goes beyond the module reading list. The assignment makes effective use of some new information in order to support the arguments and recommendations made. The assignment shows a very good grasp of the meaning and significance of new information and such new information mostly supports the arguments and recommendations made accurately. The use of sources is mostly succinct. References are all of an academic standard

60+ References are complete and effectively presented and are mostly of an academic standard. The assignment identifies some new information from sources which are generally appropriate and there is evidence of some reading beyond the module reading list. The assignment makes use of some new information in order to support the arguments and recommendations made. The assignment shows a good grasp of the meaning and significance of new information. Where used, such new information mostly supports the arguments and recommendations made accurately. References are all of an academic standard

50+ References are complete but non- standardised and poorly presented; some references are not of an academic standard. The assignment identifies very little new information from sources. Little evidence of reading wider reading beyond the module reading list. The assignment makes little use of new information in order to support the arguments and recommendations made

40+ Few references; few references are of an academic standard. No evidence of wider reading beyond the module reading list. No use of new information from sources. No use of new information in order to support the arguments and recommendations made.

Less than 30 Inadequate number of references; references are not of an academic standard. No use of new information to support the arguments and recommendations made.

Use of arguments:

80+ Convincing, fluent and going beyond received wisdom, highly relevant arguments regarding the service provider’s or retailer’s strategy and the ethical and social responsibility strategy of your service provider or retailer; detailed arguments are made for the two recommendations

70+ Incisive and persuasive with strong evidence for the conclusions drawn; highly relevant arguments made

60+ Argues in an assured way with some clear development and some understanding of the service provider’s or retailer’s strategy and the ethical and social responsibility strategy of your service provider or retailer; good arguments are made for the two recommendations; relevant material covered

50+ Presents the general outline of an appropriate argument; basic relevant material covered regarding the retailer

40+ Presents some elements of an appropriate argument; questionable relevance of material

Less than 40 Ill- considered or poorly constructed arguments regarding the service provider’s or retailer’s strategy and the ethical and social responsibility strategy of your service provider or retailer; irrelevant material

Quality of Analysis:

80+ This report shows originality of insight when analysing the service provider’s or retailer’s strategy and the ethical and social responsibility strategy of your service provider or retailer and excellent intellectual engagement; excellent analysis of both recommendations

70+ Shows a sound understanding, offering a consistent and mature insight into the service provider’s or retailer’s strategy and the ethical and social responsibility strategy of your service provider or retailer and thoughtful consideration of both recommendations

60+ Shows a clear understanding of retail theory and its significance; insight demonstrated into the service provider’s or retailer’s strategy and the ethical and social responsibility strategy of your service provider or retailer; good analysis of both recommendations

50+ Shows a competent if dependent or incomplete understanding of the service provider’s or retailer’s strategy and the ethical and social responsibility strategy of your service provider or retailer; some analysis of both recommendations

40+ Shows some limited understanding of the service provider’s or retailer’s strategy and the ethical and social responsibility strategy of your service provider or retailer; limited analysis of both recommendations

Less than 40 - Shows little understanding of the service provider’s or retailer’s strategy and the ethical and social responsibility strategy of your service provider or retailer; inappropriate analysis of both recommendations

The main 3 strengths of this assignment are:

What to improve on for next time: