Návrh rozvoje marketingu vybrané společnosti

Loading...
Thumbnail Image

Date

Authors

Ďurina, Richard

Mark

F

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Publisher

Vysoké učení technické v Brně. Fakulta podnikatelská

ORCID

Abstract

Tato bakalářská práce se zaměřuje na identifikaci strategií pro zvýšení počtu samoplátců ve srovnání s pojištěnými klienty v Moderných Kúpeľoch Turčianske Teplice. Cílem výzkumu je analyzovat současnou strukturu klientely, porozumět její motivaci a navrhnout účinné marketingové a servisní inovace s cílem přilákat více samoplátců. Teoretická část popisuje základy lázeňského turismu, segmentaci zákazníků a spotřebitelské chování. Analytická část je založena na analýze interních dat, zákaznických průzkumech a srovnání s konkurencí. Závěrečná část předkládá konkrétní doporučení přizpůsobená potřebám lázní, včetně diverzifikace produktů, cílených propagačních aktivit a zlepšení zákaznické zkušenosti. Výsledky zdůrazňují význam personalizovaných služeb a nabídky s přidanou hodnotou pro zvýšení podílu samoplátců.
This bachelor thesis focuses on identifying strategies to increase the number of self-paying clients in comparison to insured clients in the modern spa of Turčianske Teplice. The aim of the research is to analyze the current structure of clients, understand their motivations, and suggest effective marketing and service innovations to attract more self-payers. The theoretical part outlines the fundamentals of spa tourism, customer segmentation, and consumer behavior. The analytical part is based on internal data analysis, customer surveys, and competitive benchmarking. The final section proposes specific recommendations tailored to the needs of the spa, including product diversification, targeted promotional activities, and improvements in customer experience. The results highlight the importance of personalized services and value-added offers in increasing the share of self-paying clients.

Description

Citation

ĎURINA, R. Návrh rozvoje marketingu vybrané společnosti [online]. Brno: Vysoké učení technické v Brně. Fakulta podnikatelská. 2025.

Document type

Document version

Date of access to the full text

Language of document

en

Study field

bez specializace

Comittee

Ing. František Milichovský, Ph.D., MBA, DiS. (člen) doc. Ing. Robert Zich, Ph.D. (předseda) doc. Ing. Pavla Marciánová, Ph.D. (místopředseda) Ing. David Havíř, Ph.D. (člen) Ing. Kateřina Petrová, Ph.D. (člen)

Date of acceptance

2025-09-04

Defence

In his presentation, the student informed the committee about the objectives, solutions and results he reached in his thesis. The committee then read the opinions and evaluation of the thesis supervisor and the opponent. The thesis supervisor graded the thesis with a grade of "E" and the thesis reviewer graded the thesis with a grade of "D". The student did not answer the questions from the supervisor's evaluation properly, the questions from the opponent's evaluation were answered partially. Questions from the committee members: 1. doc. Zich: What is the source of the pictures and outputs in the proposal part? - not answered (see the comment below) 2. doc. Zich: How did you measure brand awareness in your thesis? - not answered 3. Ing. Petrová: Why didn't you work with the sources mentioned in the assignment? - not answered 4. Ing. Petrová: If you were the CEO of the company. What would be the estimated price of the 4P improvements? - partly answered 5. Ing. Milichovský: Why there are no references for the analytical part? - not answered On the basis of the voting 3:2 (3 for F, 2 for E) the committee decided the student did not defend the thesis. Justification: On the basis of the presentation and the answers to the questions raised in the discussion, the committee found that the deficiencies in the thesis defense were serious and decided that the student did not defend the thesis. During the defense, the student failed to demonstrate the transparency of the data used in the analytical and design parts of the thesis. When asked by the committee about the use of AI, the student replied that he had used AI, but did not mark these outputs as sources and citations. The committee further states that these mistakes were pointed out to the student in the supervisor's assessment.

Result of defence

práce nebyla úspěšně obhájena

DOI

Collections

Endorsement

Review

Supplemented By

Referenced By

Citace PRO