Assignment Marking Criteria and Feedback Strengths of this assignment and how it might be improved: Your introduction is not terribly relevant. You would do better to keep it simple and signpost the reader. Your analysis begins with a generic description of the problems associated with intangibility. Remember that this assignment is about the application of theory rather than description. The remainder of your analysis highlights some of the issues in the case study. However, there is no application of theory. You could have used any one of a number of frameworks to frame your analysis and give it greater depth: Servuction model, Flower of Service, Gaps model, etc. Furthermore, I would like to see you explain the reasons for these problems. In this case study, the lack of service culture is a significant issue. With regard to recommendations, it would again be better if you approach the task in a more systematic way rather than making random suggestions with no indication as to which problems these activities will resolve. For example, are testimonials a priority? Given that the service being offered is poor, there may not be many customers with anything positive to say. Wouldn’t it be better to fix underlying issues first? You recommend personal selling and communications but there is a lack of detail and no explanation as to what problems these activities would address. You recommend that the company needs to act on the feedback it receives (page 6), but you do not say how. Similarly, recommendations like personalised service might be relevant but you do not say what this means in practice. Overall, there is a lack of application of theory to this response. You need to look back over the lecture slides and use appropriate models to frame your analysis and recommendations. While what you write is sound, it does not directly address the case study. There is insufficient detail. Very limited reference list (because of the lack of theory in the response). Remember that references should be in alphabetical order. assessment brief Module Title: Marketing Services Submission Deadline: Tuesday 12th July 2019 Assessment Component Coursework (RESIT) Assessment Weighting: 50 per cent of total module mark Marking and feedback deadline (20 working days) 13th August 2019 Assessment Instructions This is an individual case-based assignment that requires you to answer a question in relation to the case study below: ‘Best Car Hire’. Question: Using services marketing theory, analyse and explain Best’s loss of customersand recommendhow it might improve the customer experience. (100 marks) General Guidance · The coursework requires you to select and apply theories, frameworks, and concepts from the first six study units of the module. · It is your decision as to what theories/frameworks/concepts to use to inform your answer. There is no recommended minimum or maximum number, but generally, quality of application is more important than the quantity.

1. Assignment Marking Criteria and Feedback
Strengths of this assignment and how it might be improved:
Your introduction is not terribly relevant. You would do better
to keep it simple and signpost the reader.
Your analysis begins with a generic description of the problems
associated with intangibility. Remember that this assignment is
about the application of theory rather than description. The
remainder of your analysis highlights some of the issues in the
case study. However, there is no application of theory. You
could have used any one of a number of frameworks to frame
your analysis and give it greater depth: Servuction model,
Flower of Service, Gaps model, etc. Furthermore, I would like
to see you explain the reasons for these problems. In this case
study, the lack of service culture is a significant issue.
With regard to recommendations, it would again be better if you
approach the task in a more systematic way rather than making
random suggestions with no indication as to which problems
these activities will resolve. For example, are testimonials a
priority? Given that the service being offered is poor, there may
not be many customers with anything positive to say. Wouldn’t
it be better to fix underlying issues first? You recommend
personal selling and communications but there is a lack of detail
and no explanation as to what problems these activities would
address. You recommend that the company needs to act on the
feedback it receives (page 6), but you do not say how.
Similarly, recommendations like personalised service might be
relevant but you do not say what this means in practice.
Overall, there is a lack of application of theory to this response.
You need to look back over the lecture slides and use
appropriate models to frame your analysis and
recommendations. While what you write is sound, it does not
directly address the case study. There is insufficient detail.

2. Very limited reference list (because of the lack of theory in the
response). Remember that references should be in alphabetical
order.
assessment brief
Module Title:
Marketing Services
Submission Deadline:
Tuesday 12th July 2019
Assessment Component
Coursework (RESIT)
Assessment Weighting:
50 per cent of total module mark
Marking and feedback deadline (20 working days)
13th August 2019
Assessment Instructions
This is an individual case-based assignment that requires you to
answer a question in relation to the case study below: ‘Best Car
Hire’.
Question: Using services marketing theory, analyse and explain
Best’s loss of customersand recommendhow it might improve
the customer experience. (100 marks)
General Guidance
· The coursework requires you to select and apply theories,
frameworks, and concepts from the first six study units of the
module.
· It is your decision as to what theories/frameworks/concepts to
use to inform your answer. There is no recommended minimum
or maximum number, but generally, quality of application is
more important than the quantity of frameworks applied.

3. · Remember that the requirement is to apply rather than
describe theory.
· You may use subheadings in your answer, but avoid excessive
use of bullet points.
· Do not reiterate passages from the case study. Obviously, you
will need to refer to the case, but do this as succinctly as you
can.
· Evidence of relevant reading beyond the lecture slides, with
appropriate application of this reading, will be rewarded.
Besides textbooks, you may want to explore relevant articles
from Journal of Services Marketing,Journal of Service
Research, or Service Industries Journal. Other journals will
haverelevant articles, but, as implied by their titles, these three
focus on services.
· Include a title page, contents, and references. There is no need
for an abstract or executive summary. Please number your
pages.
Marking Criteria
Please see the grid below:
Criteria
Grading
Analysis (35%)
Recommendations (35%)
Structure (20%)
Literacy, presentation, referencing (10%)
80-100 PASS
Exceptional
Insightful analysis with originality of thought. Identifies
underlying issue(s). Excellent application of theory.

4. Demonstrates excellent integration of relevant literature from
outside the module reading list.
Highly appropriate, with originality of thought. Consistent with
issues raised in the analysis. Exceptional clarity and detail.
Supported wherever possible by theory / literature.
Exceptional organization and flow of material with excellent
connections between ideas. Introduction is specific and
signposts. Conclusion synthesises and may highlight
implications of recommendations.
Exceptional standard of literacy and presentation. Near faultless
referencing.
70-79 PASS
Excellent
Insightful analysis. Identifies underlying issue(s). Excellent
application of theory. Demonstrates excellent integration of
relevant literature from outside the module reading list.
Excellent and appropriate, with some originality of thought.
Consistent with issues raised in the analysis. Excellent clarity
and detail. Supported wherever possible by theory / literature.
Excellent organization and flow of material. Ideas are well
connected. Introduction is specific and signposts. Conclusion
synthesises and may highlight implications of recommendations.
Excellent standard of literacy and presentation. Referencing is
excellent but there may be one or two slips.
60-69 PASS
Very good / good
Good analysis. Identifies underlying issue(s) though may not
discuss in depth. Good application of theory. Demonstrates
good integration of relevant literature, with some from outside
the module reading list.
Good and generally appropriate. Largely consistent with issues
raised in the analysis. Good clarity and detail. Some
recommendations supported by theory / literature.
Good organization and flow of material with ideas that are
mostly well connected. Introduction is largely contextualised
and signposts. Conclusion provides a good summary.

5. Good standard of literacy and presentation. Just a few errors.
Referencing is good, though there may be a few errors or
omissions.
50-59 PASS
Competent
Competent analysis. May miss underlying issue(s). Reasonable
application of theory though not always systematic or accurate.
Evidence of reading beyond the lecture slides.
Competent and generally appropriate. There may be
inconsistencies with issues raised in the analysis. Some
recommendations lack clarity and detail. Limited theoretical
support.
Competent organization of material but flow may not always be
logical. Ideas not always connected. Introduction is general
with limited signposting. Conclusion provides an incomplete
summary.
Competent standard of literacy and presentation. Referencing is
competent but there may be several errors or omissions.
40-49 PASS
Adequate
Adequate analysis. Misses underlying issue(s). Adequate
application of theory but not systematic and with evidence of a
lack of understanding in places. No evidence of reading beyond
lecture slides.
Adequate though not all appropriate. A lack of consistency with
the analysis. A substantial lack of clarity and detail. Limited or
no theoretical support.
Some attempt to structure the report but not always effective.
Ideas often unconnected. Introduction is superficial with
limited/no signposting. Conclusion is weak or absent.
Adequate literacy and presentation but with several areas of
weakness. Many instances of incorrect or missing references.
35-39 FAIL
Inadequate
Superficial analysis. Misses underlying issue(s). Limited and
unsystematic application of theory, demonstrating a lack of

6. understanding. No evidence of reading beyond the lecture
slides.
Inadequate and with limited appropriateness. A lack of
consistency with the analysis. A substantial lack of clarity and
detail. No theoretical support.
Vague structure with little or no logic to the flow of material.
Ideas unconnected. Introduction and conclusion are superficial
or absent.
Inadequate literacy and presentation, with substantial areas of
weakness. Many instances of incorrect or missing references.
Significantly under or over word count.
0-34 FAIL
Poor
Poor analysis. Misses underlying issue(s). Very limited and
unsystematic application of theory, demonstrating a lack of
understanding. No evidence of reading beyond the lecture
slides.
Very few, and largely inappropriate, recommendations. A lack
of consistency with the analysis. A substantial lack of clarity
and no detail. No theoretical support.
Very disorganized with no logic to the flow of material. Poor
connections between ideas. Introduction and conclusion are
superficial or absent.
Poor literacy and presentation. Many instances of incorrect or
missing references. Significantly under or over word count.
Formative feedback and Support
Formative feedback
Formative feedback provides opportunities to reflect on your
ongoing work and preparation for your assignment. Time will be
set aside in every lecture prior to the submission date for you to
ask questions and receive feedback about the assignment. If you
prefer not to ask your question aloud in the lecture, you can
email it in advance to the module leader. Weekly tutorial tasks
are designed to give you the opportunity to apply theory that
you may choose to use in your coursework, thus giving you the

7. opportunity to receive formative feedback in class. In addition,
a ‘frequently asked questions’ document will be made available
on Blackboard and updated regularly.
Formatting
Please use the following file format: Microsoft Word file with a
.doc or .docx file extension. We cannot ensure that other
formats are compatible with markers’ software.
All work should be word processed in 12-point font Times New
Roman or Arial and single spaced. Please number your pages.
The first page of your coursework must include:
· Your student number
· The module name and number
· Your word count
Word Limit
The maximum word limit for this coursework is 2,500.
· This word count includes everything in the main body of the
text (including headings, tables, citations, quotes, lists, etc.).
· References, title page, contents page, and appendices are NOT
included in the word count.
· There is no direct penalty for exceeding the word count, but
the marker WILL stop reading once the maximum word limit
has been reached and nothing further will be taken into account
in the allocation of marks.
Referencing:
Please adhere to the principles of good academic practice and
ensure you reference all sources used when developing your
assessment, using the HARVARD system. Failure to properly
reference your work to original source material can be grounds
for the assessment offence of plagiarism and may result in
failure of the assessment or have more serious implications.

8. Instructions for submission
You must submit your assignment before the stated deadline by
electronic submission through Blackboard. Notification that the
electronic submission portal is open for your assignment is
displayed (usually two weeks before the submission date) in the
Coursework tab in myUWE, the Coursework tab in Blackboard
and via an announcement in the Blackboard course.
Please allow sufficient time to upload your assignment, noting
that the system becomes busier and slower as the deadline
approaches. Only your final upload will be counted. Ensure all
your information is submitted at one attempt to avoid
‘overwriting’ your intended submission. Always check and
retain your receipts.
Late submission in the 24 hours following the deadline will be
accepted but the assignment mark will be capped at 40%.
Submissions after 24 hours will not be accepted.
Submissions of coursework by any other method (including a
paper copy, on disk or by email) are NOT permissible for this
module unless specifically agreed in advance of the submission
date.
· You have proof read you work thoroughly to ensure your work
is presented appropriately
· You have addressed all the required elements of the
assessment
· You have referenced in accordance with the guidance provided
· You have addressed each of the marking criterion
· The submission is in the correct format
Final feedback and marks release
Students will normally receive marks and feedback on their

9. submission within 20 working days of the submission deadline
(not including any public holidays or university closure days).
Any delay in returning students’ work will be communicated by
the module leader via Blackboard. Feedback on this module is
not limited to the written comments you will receive on
individual written assessment submissions.
Feedback and marks for this module will be available by 13th
August 2019.
For further guidance on feedback, please refer to the module
handbook.
Best Car Hire: Service with a smile
Best Car Hire is a car rental firm operating in the UK. Although
the firm was successful in its early years, revenue has recently
declined. Given the increasingly competitive environment in
which it operates — new and aggressive car rental firms, as
well as substitute products such as car sharing and peer-to-peer
car lending — the firm decided to explore the reasons for the
drop in sales revenue.
In the first instance, the company conducted a large-scale
survey. The results of the survey suggested that customers were
dissatisfied with Best and considered the quality of service to
be low. The firm’s management could not understand why,
because they were convinced they offered a wider range of cars
(including electric cars) and competitive prices. They decided

10. that the answer was to run a marketing communications
campaign to remind customers that Best would not be beaten on
price and that it offered ‘service with a smile’ (its advertising
tagline). Yet 12 months later, the problem persisted – sales
revenue continued to fall.
In an effort to ‘dig deeper’, the firm decided to conduct
interviews with 50 of their customers who had not hired a car
for some time. The interviews were unstructured and the
principal question was “how do you find the experience of
hiring from us?” Below are the words of one respondent whose
experience was typical.
I realize that you offer the most competitive prices on the
marketplace and that you supply cars that generally get me to
my destination. However, my most recent experience of hiring
from you has left me thinking I will go elsewhere next time.
Your website was very slow so I decided to call to make a
booking. I was ‘on hold’ for several minutes before a service
representative answered my call. I am a regular customer and
yet I had to go through the process of providing all my personal
details.
When I asked to hire a small car from your Bristol office, I was
told that you only had mid- or large-sized cars available for the
dates I requested. I have always been able to hire a small car
from you, even at a few hours’ notice, so I was surprised you
could not accommodate my needs. When I queried this, the
representative put me on hold for what seemed like five
minutes, only to tell me that he did after all have a small car he
could give me. When I asked him the make of car, he was
unable to provide me with the information. When I said I
wanted to collect the car from your Bristol office but return it to
your Edinburgh office, I was told there would be an extra
charge. Is this a new charge? Furthermore, I was also told your
Bristol office closes at 18.00. This is problematic for me given
that I finish work at 17.30.
When I arrived the next day to collect the car, and after queuing
for some time to speak to the only representative in the office, I

11. was informed that you no longer had a small car available. I was
told it is standard practice to overbook but, because there had
been no ‘no-shows’, I would have to hire a mid-sized car at an
extra cost of £15 per day. Given that the time was 17.55 and
there was insufficient time to explore alternatives, I reluctantly
agreed. When it came to quoting for the car hire, your
representative was unable to tell me whether it was cheaper to
hire the car on a daily basis or for the weekend. I then spent
several minutes repeating all the personal information I had
given to the representative on the telephone. I found this
annoying. I was handed several pages of terms and conditions to
sign, without being given time to read them (in any case, it
would have taken me at least five minutes to read them).
The car itself seemed fine until, that is, it broke down on the
motorway. I appreciate this can happen and, to be fair, it was
the first time one of your cars had broken down on me.
However, I could not find any information about who to call in
the event of a breakdown. I rang the Bristol office but it was
closed. An automated message gave an out-of-hours number
which I rang, but no one answered. Using my mobile phone, I
managed to find the number for your London office and rang
them. They were rather surprised that no one in Bristol had
spoken to me about what to do in the event of a breakdown.
Having checked my location, I was told that one of the
breakdown services would be with me within 45 minutes. I do
not remember the representative apologising to me for the
inconvenience I was experiencing.
I waited two hours. When they (a transit van with no
identification) finally arrived, I was told the car could not be
repaired at the roadside and that I would have to wait another
hour for a tow truck to take me to my destination in London. I
finally arrived in London at about midnight. I spent a long time
on the phone the next morning trying to organise a replacement
car for the remainder of the hire period. Neither your Bristol,
London, nor Edinburgh office wanted to take responsibility. I
was passed from one to the other. Eventually, I managed to

12. secure a replacement car and complete my journey.
When the charge for the car hire appeared on my credit card, I
was very surprised and angry to see that the cost was £70 more
than expected, even after allowing for the hire of a mid-, rather
than small-sized, car. I called your Bristol office for an
explanation but was told to contact your central administration
team. Despite several calls, and even after lodging a complaint
about the whole disastrous rental episode, I have still not
received an explanation for the extra charge, nor an apology.
I have been a customer of yours for several years but I do not
feel this is reflected in the way I am treated.
N.B. Best Car Hire is a fictitious company.
1