Posudky závěrečné kvalifikační práce

The intention of benchmarking, with the aim of looking for best practices in the behaviour of selected companies on the US market, can be evaluated very positively. However, the actual elaboration of the thesis as a whole has a below-average level, fulfilling only the minimum requirements for a master's thesis. The problem is the general concept of the research and analytical part, insufficient use of recommended sources, general and incomplete concept of the design part. The minimal research and analysis of the customers' perspective is striking. There are also considerable reserves in the implementation of benchmarking. Questions What would the evaluation of positioning look like using the approach you have in the theoretical part? How would it be appropriate to complement customer research and analysis? Which parts would be appropriate to complete the brand development framework with? What are the five priorities of brand development and what are the specific steps of implementation? How could brand performance be evaluated if changes are adopted?

Dílčí hodnocení
Kritérium	Známka	Slovní hodnocení
Splnění stanovených cílů	E	The objectives are defined in a standard way in the structure of the main objective and partial objectives for the theoretical, analytical and design part. The author modifies some of the formulations compared to the assignment, but the logic of the focus remains the same. The topic addresses the situation of a real company. The objectives are sufficiently fulfilled with regard to the general concept.
Zvolený postup řešení, adekvátnost použitých metod	E	The author has chosen standard approaches to the solution. The definition of the methodological framework is at an average level. For example, it cannot be stated that the method is "research" because it is not clear what form it chooses, or that the method is "difference analysis".Some of the theoretical frameworks used as a basis rely on inappropriate sources (online stats and popular articles) and some recommended sources, on the other hand, are not used sufficiently (Keller and Floor). Overall, the author relies on a broadly standard approach in terms of branding. Other parts of the theory are rather general. The theoretical definition of the "brand development framework" itself is only basic in terms of the problem addressed and does not cover all necessary areas.
Schopnost interpretovat dosažené výsledky a vyvozovat z nich závěry	E	The analytical part is descriptive and does not properly use the different branding tools and approaches. It is, for example, a descriptive style in defining identity with minimal emphasis on specific evaluation. Another example is the descriptive approach to positioning evaluation, which does not reflect the theoretical background, the section labeled target segment analysis is again only a basic description, the USP definition is not based on any specific evaluation, etc. The generality is also reflected in the overall assessment of the brand status. It can be said that it is primarily based on vaguely supported statements by the author or a company representative. The section on the evaluation of the brand from the customer's point of view is completely missing. The choice of the US market to find a suitable benchmark for the brand is in a good sense original and creative. However, the author failed to clearly define the relevant external factors having a direct impact on the brand. For example, the SLEPT analysis is often just a statement that a given factor is important and has an impact, while lacking specific information (e.g. economic factors). Similarly, the brand evaluation of the selected companies is again rather descriptive. These are long passages of text in which it is very difficult to identify specific conclusions. From this point of view, it is more or less just data that needs to be further analyzed and evaluated. The benchmarking in chapter 2.3 is more of a mere overview of selected factors The segment comparison is another weakness, especially in view of the lack of analysis of the customer segment of the brand in focus.The outputs and the framework for recommendations stick to the general concept. Chapter 2.4 summary of analytical part does not make as much contribution as it could. There is no clear summary of key internal and external factors - see sub-objective of the assignment.
Praktická využitelnost výsledků	E	The proposals put up are also very general. The brand development framework is incomplete - for example, there are no sections defining the vision and objectives of the brand. Recommendations such as "Prostěvize must monitor economic trends such as interest rates and housing market fluctuations." can in no way be considered a specific proposal. It lacks any specification of what the trends are, how they should be monitored, how to react to them, etc.There are also general recommendations on digital tools and trends, whether social media or more advanced digital tools. Recommendations on implementation, such as steps or timelines, are not sufficiently supported. The final evaluation does not take into account specific impacts and implementation assumptions - see the terms of reference and objectives of the assignment.
Uspořádání práce, formální náležitosti, použitá terminologie a odborná jazyková úroveň	B	The formal structure meets the requirements. The unnecessary introductory paragraphs of chapters constantly repeating the content and focus of individual parts can be criticized.
Práce s informačními zdroji, včetně citací	D	The author in the theoretical often works with not entirely appropriate sources - e.g. Forbes, and the recommended sources are not sufficiently used. The sources of customer information are then quite minimal. There are reserves in the citations - for example, reference to the outputs of the own bachelor thesis.

Posudek oponenta

Chlebovský, Vít

The main objective of the thesis is to define the framework of strategic brand development of the selected organization. The goal is achieved with some remarks below. The analytical part is based on actual brand analysis, comparison of the general business environment in CZ and USA (target market), and benchmark with selected U.S. competitors. The structure of the analysis makes sense. On the other hand, all the analyses are very general and descriptive. There are no clearly formulated outcomes in the form of identified opportunities and threads out of the external environment and strengths and weaknesses out of internal factors. It would help to summarize the analysis in some tables. There is a table summary of the benchmark, but again the formulations are very general and descriptive. The proposals are in the form of general guidelines of the recommendations for brand development. Again just descriptive. Despite the remarks I recommend the thesis for the defense.

Posudky

Posudek vedoucího

Zich, Robert

Posudek oponenta

Chlebovský, Vít

Otázky