KOUTNÝ, A. Podnikatelský plán pro podnik poskytující vzdělávání [online]. Brno: Vysoké učení technické v Brně. Fakulta podnikatelská. 2025.
The work is at a good level, the author, although with reservations, has demonstrated the ability to apply theoretical approaches to practice.
| Kritérium | Známka | Body | Slovní hodnocení |
|---|---|---|---|
| Splnění stanovených cílů | C | The objectives of the thesis are clear to the reader only from the assignment. The aim of the thesis has been fulfilled with reservations, which I state in my review. | |
| Zvolený postup řešení, adekvátnost použitých metod | C | The chosen methods are adequate, but I have reservations about the quality of their processing. It is evident from the text that the work deserved more time for completion. | |
| Schopnost interpretovat dosažené výsledky a vyvozovat z nich závěry | C | The background of the research is described very vaguely.There is no sample or information about how the data was collected, cleaned, classified. The author uses only descriptive statistics.The results obtained through the analysis are rather superficial, the author has not fully exploited the potential of the data obtained. | |
| Praktická využitelnost výsledků | C | The proposed recommendations are usable in practice, but their feasibility in the given circumstances is questionable. | |
| Uspořádání práce, formální náležitosti, použitá terminologie a odborná jazyková úroveň | C | The structure of the work lacks logic in places and the text is chaotic in some passages. | |
| Práce s informačními zdroji, včetně citací | B |
The author prepared a thesis with a problematic reflection of the objective. The thesis assignment states a different goal than the one subsequently stated in the thesis itself (p. 11). The semantic content of both formulations is consistent with each other. Considering the various propositions of the thesis and the resulting evaluation, it can be concluded that the thesis has achieved the stated main objective. The basic structure of the thesis complies with the chosen topic. From the format perspective, there are many errors. The structure of the thesis is divided into 11 main chapters instead of 3 (Theoretical part, Analytical part, Proposals) and of course with Introduction and Conclusion chapters. The thesis then contains format errors in the form of typos or unnecessary omissions. There is a duplication of the paragraphs in chapter 3.2.1 Macroenvironment because there are Political and legal factors and Legal factors. In the SWOT analysis (chapter 9) there are several items in threats and opportunities. Some of them have bad formulations (they are specified as solutions of the company, neither threats nor opportunities as a result of the general environment), or have no clear description (e.g. O - Opportunity to build local partnerships; T - Possible diversion of attention from the core business mission by the key team). In Chapter 11, which includes proposals, there are only statements instead of explanations. From a quotation perspective, I also found many errors. The author used the quotation "Koráb, 2007", but the correct book was written by three authors - Koráb, Peterka, and Režňáková. In the introduction to the analytical part and chapters 4.1 and 4.2 is no quotation. From the overall point of view, the thesis reaches a standard qualitative level.
| Kritérium | Známka | Body | Slovní hodnocení |
|---|---|---|---|
| Splnění stanovených cílů | D | ||
| Zvolený postup řešení, adekvátnost použitých metod | B | ||
| Schopnost interpretovat dosažené výsledky a vyvozovat z nich závěry | C | ||
| Praktická využitelnost výsledků | C | ||
| Struktura práce, použitá terminologie a odborná jazyková úroveň | C | ||
| Práce s informačními zdroji | C |
eVSKP id 168338