MKTG 30673 – IMPROVING THE CUSTOMER EXPERIENCE

INDIVIDUAL ASSIGNMENT BRIEF 2021/22

Section 1 – Problem identification (no more than 700 words)

• Select an organisation of your choice (no approval needed)
• Identify a service failure related problemlinked to customer experience in your chosen organisation(provide evidence)

Guidance for Section 1– Introduce the current status of the customer experience of the selected company. You must identify a challenge the company is currently facing, a problem that customers complain about, or the disadvantages of the current customer experience system in place. Remember your analysis will only be based on secondary sources, including publicity on the firm, social media posts, public comments on brand communities etc. Be clear about what the problem/challenge is. You are required to provide evidence while presenting the problem. In other words, provide citationwherever necessary using Harvard Referencing Style. This section is relatively short [700 words]. So, your analysis must be clear and concise.

Section 2 – Application of ICE theories to practice (no more than 2300 words)

• Provide a critical discussion using ICE theories/models to the problem identified in section 1
• Use ICE theories/models and wider evidence to analyse their effectiveness in addressing the problem identified in section 1

Guidance for Section 2 – Provide a critical review of the literature on improving the customer experience within your chosen organisation. To do this, you will need to draw on relevant concepts, theories, and models identified throughout the module and examples of best practices used within the industry. Remember you are expected to be critical in reviewing relevant concepts and theories. This means that you need to examine the relevant literature, compare and contrast the various contributions, identify similarities and differences within these contributions, and develop your argument so that you can show how to solve the problem identified in section 1. This is an opportunity for you to demonstrate what lessons can be drawn from the academic literature and present them in the context of your report.

Section 3 – Recommendation (no more than 1000 words)

• Based on the discussion presented in section 2, recommend an appropriate and justified solution to the problem identified in section 1
• Provide a service blueprint that should highlight the proposed solutionto the problem identified in section 1
• An implementation/control plan is NOTrequired

Guidance for Section 3 –Based on your analysis in section 2, recommend a solution to improve the customer experiencewithin your chosen organisation. Justify your choice with reference to relevant theory. You need to ensure that your recommendation followsfrom your analysis in section 2 (e.g. it addresses the weaknesses identified in your analysis and the theoretical foundation that emerged from the reviewed literature).Your proposed solution should be highlighted and presented in a service blueprint. An implementation and control plan for the proposed solution is NOT required.

REFERENCING

• Use one version of Harvard referencing style. There are a number of versions available. You are required to use one version consistently.
• Refer to the NTU Harvard referencing style guide (recommended version) https://now.ntu.ac.uk/d2l/lor/viewer/view.d2l?ou=6605&loIdentId=25435

FURTHER INSTRUCTIONS

• This report is based on a review of relevant literature and available secondary data
• Direct and personal contact with your chosen organisation is strictly forbidden
• Submit a report with a maximum of 4000-word. This will represent 100% of the module grade
• Please note that the 4000-word count for this report is the absolute maximum. There is no safety margin of +10%. So, you need to ensure that your report contains only the most important pieces of information. This is very much an exercise in developing your ability to focus on the key issues and communicate opinions clearly and succinctly. These are valuable business skills.
• Please ensure you use the coursework cover sheet. You can find the template for the cover sheet in the NOW learning room under the assessment section.
• The title page and reference list are not included in the word count
• Table of contents,executive summary, introduction, conclusion and appendices are not required
• You must write in the third person; this is an academic report, not a reflective piece
• Submit your work via NOW by 11 pm Tuesday the 17^th of May 2022

MODULE LEARNING OUTCOMES BEING ASSESSED

This activity is designed to test the following learning outcomes:-

Knowledge and understanding

After studying this module, you should be able to:

1. Critically evaluate the nature and relevance of, and relationships between, service, quality and value as these pertain to the service and customer experience.
2. Critically evaluate the roles of employees, customers, the inanimate environment and technology in the context of customer experience and organisational performance.
3. Assess key practices pertinent to the effective delivery of services on customer experience in direct, indirect, remote and social contexts.
4. Appraise both social and organisational factors pertinent to international service networks.

Skills, qualities and attributes

After studying this module, you should be able to:

• Write in a convincing manner, employing an appropriate academic style and conventions.
• Evaluate, select and utilise sources of evidence effectively.
• Demonstrate critical awareness of competing theories and paradigms in the context of service delivery/the service experience.
• Apply pertinent knowledge and understanding to problem resolution in contemporary service networks.

ASSESSMENT CRITERIA

Grade Assessment Criteria	Fail	Marginal Fail	Third	Lower Second	Upper Second	First	Exceptional first
Theories and Concepts(25%) Identification and understanding of relevant models and theories /evidence of reading/ / use of literature	No significant evidence of awareness of relevant models and theories. Very little evidence of reading around the subject. Little or no evidence of engagement with relevant literature	Very limited evidence of independent reading and/or inappropriate sources used and/or engagement with the literature very superficial. Shows limited awareness and/or discussion of models and theories. Relevance of theory is not properly explained	Shows a barely sufficient awareness and understanding of the major models and theories. Limited evidence of independent reading. The demonstration of their relevance in particular contexts is barely sufficient.Literature is presented in a descriptive way	Evidence of independent reading from a wide range of appropriate sources. Shows good awareness and understanding of a broad range of models and theories. Clear, accurate, systematic application of material. Shows developing ability to appraise material critically	Evidence of broad and/or in-depth independent reading from appropriate sources. Shows very good awareness and understanding of models and theories. The rationale for the choice of sources is clear. Clear, accurate, systematic application of material, with consistent, thorough critical appraisal	Shows excellent awareness and understanding of a substantial range of models and theories, offering an excellent demonstration of their relevance in a wide variety of contexts. An excellent range of reading is evident. Choice of sources clearly enhances the fulfilment of the assignment objectives. Clear, accurate, systematic application of material with consistent, very rigorous critical appraisal	Demonstrates excellent broad and/or in-depth independent reading from appropriate sources. Shows exceptional awareness and understanding of an outstanding range of models and theories with an exceptionally clear demonstration of their relevance in a wide variety of contexts. Choice of sources clearly enhances the fulfilment of the assignment objectives. Clear, accurate, systematic application of material with exceptional critical appraisal
Content and range of knowledge displayed (25%)Critical analysis of business situation using relevant models and theories	Little or no relevant knowledge included. No significant evidence of   analysis of business situation using relevant models and theories	Some relevant and/or required knowledge missing or confused and/or significant misuse of terminology. Demonstrates limited knowledge of business situation using a few models and theories, but analysis is incomplete and/or uncritical	Evidence of essential knowledge of topic and use of appropriate terminology. Demonstrates some analysis of the business situation using the major models and theories but the analysis is mostly general, descriptive, and barely sufficient	Demonstrates a sound factual and/or conceptual knowledge base and uses appropriate terminology. Demonstrates good analysis of the business situation using a range of models and theories. Analysis shows critical insight and is complete in most major aspects	Demonstrates a detailed, systematic, theoretically informed knowledge base. Demonstrates very good analysis of the business situation using a broad range of models and theories. Analysis shows evidence of very good critical insight in all major aspects	Demonstrates a detailed, systematic and in-depth knowledge base. Demonstrates excellent analysis of the business situation using a very broad range of models and theories. Analysis shows outstanding critical insight in all aspects and raises a number of interesting questions	Demonstrates an exceptional knowledge base with the capacity to integrate theoretical and substantive knowledge. Demonstrates exceptional analysis of the business situation using an outstanding range of models and theories. Analysis shows exceptional critical insight in all aspects.The response is precise and comprehensive –and raises new and unforeseen issues
Critical reasoning planning and synthesis (40%) Development of a sound and convincing argument. Clear recommendations based on a critical analysis of the business context and possible alternative strategies	No evidence of critical thought. Planning recommendations are very limited, poorly expressed and are not based on a critical analysis of the business context and possible alternative strategies. Lack of ability to apply theory to practice. Lack of ability to synthesise plans that are theoretically underpinned.	Critical thought and/or analysis are very limited and/or incoherent. Some planning recommendations are presented but lack clarity and are only loosely based on a critical analysis of the business context and possible alternative strategies. Insufficient ability to apply theory to practice. Insufficient ability to synthesise plans that are theoretically underpinned.	Demonstrates limited critical insight. Recognises alternative positions. Some planning recommendations are presented based on some analysis of the business context and possible alternative strategies, although these are barely sufficient. Barely sufficient ability to apply theory to practice. Barely sufficient ability to synthesise plans that are theoretically underpinned.	Demonstrates conventional critical insight and ability to contrast alternative positions. Evidence of a reasonable argument. A good range of recommendations are drawn and broadly based on a critical analysis of the business context and possible alternative strategies. Good ability to apply theory to practice. Good ability to synthesise plans that are theoretically underpinned.	Well developed, theoretically and/or conceptually informed critical thinking is consistently integrated into the work. Arguments demonstrate the ability to apply theories and/or concepts. A very broad range of planning recommendations, some demonstrating original insights and firmly based on a full critical analysis of the business context and possible alternative strategies.Very good ability to apply theory to practice. Very good ability to synthesise plans that are theoretically underpinned.	Excellent critical thinking demonstrated. Arguments are clear, coherent, tenable, organised, expressed with conviction and demonstrate some originality. Excellent evidence of a convincing argument. An excellent range of planning recommendations, some demonstrating clearly original insights and firmly based on a full critical analysis of the business context and possible alternative strategies. Excellent at applying theory to practice. Excellent at synthesising plans that are theoretically underpinned.	Exceptional critical thinking demonstrated. Exceptional application of theory. Arguments are clear, coherent, tenable, organised, expressed with conviction and demonstrate exceptional levels of originality. Exceptional evidence of a convincing argument. An outstanding range of planning recommendations, demonstrating clearly original insights and firmly based on a full critical analysis of the business context and strategic alternatives. Arguments are both academically rigorous and conceptually novel. Exceptional application of theory to practice. Exceptional ability to synthesise plans that are theoretically underpinned.
Overall presentation (10%) Presentation, clarity of expression, including punctuation, grammar and spelling, structure, reading and referencing (range / breadth and accuracy)	Very poor presentation, grammar and spelling. Illogical structure. Very few or no references. Meaning unclear. Poor spelling, grammar and punctuation.	Poorly presented. Frequent examples of poor grammar and spelling. Structure at times unclear. Little evidence of reading around the subject, some basic references but significant inaccuracies. Meaning often unclear and/or frequent errors in grammar and/or spelling.	Barely sufficient presentation. Generally understandable, but language contains errors which detract from the argument. Mainly logical structure. References are generally accurate but some errors	Good standard of presentation. Meaning clear, but language not always fluent. Grammar and/or spelling contain errors. Clear and logical structure. References are accurate with a few minor errors	Very good presentation and writing style appropriate to the assignment. Grammar and spelling mainly accurate. Very clear and logical structure. References are generally accurate	Excellent presentation. Excellent writing control, appropriate to assignment, which shows professional use of English. Grammar and spelling accurate. Extremely clear and logical structure and references are fully accurate	Exceptional presentation. Writing is exemplary in all respects and the document could be shared with a professional audience. Structure is a model of clarity and logic. This goes well beyond the expected level and references are fully accurate