This MT102 Unit 4 assortment plan, shown complete, rebuilds one category's breadth and depth for a single retailer, adding and cutting items against shelf space and a named shopper. Searches like "mt 102 unit 4 assignment example", "mt102 unit 4 sample" and "mt102 unit 4 example" land here.
What a finished MT102 Unit 4 assortment plan looks like
The plan reads as a set of decisions with a table at its center. A short opening names the category, packaged coffee at a mid-sized grocer in this example, and the linear feet of shelf it currently occupies. The current assortment is summarized next: roughly how many items, split across ground, whole bean and single-serve pods, and across national brand, private label and a small premium tier. Then the changes. Two regional roasters come in because the target shopper buys whole bean and currently leaves to find it. Four pod flavors drop because they duplicate each other and move slowly. Private label gains a medium roast to complete a good-better-best ladder. Each change is defended in a sentence or two, and the table shows the before and after side by side.
How a MT102 Unit 4 example is structured
Many sections supply a template or a list of required elements, and the example keeps to a sequence a category manager would recognize. The category and its space constraint open the paper. The current assortment follows, described by breadth, meaning the number of distinct subcategories, and depth, meaning the versions offered within each. The target shopper is restated in two sentences drawn from the earlier profile, because every addition must serve that person. Additions come next, each with the gap it fills. Deletions follow, each with its reason: low velocity, duplication, or a better substitute already on the shelf. A table shows the revised assortment. A closing paragraph addresses risk, naming the buyers who might be lost when an item disappears and how the retailer could soften the loss, perhaps by keeping it online.
The shelf and its limit
Category named, linear feet stated, and the physical constraint made explicit, since assortment is a space problem before it is a question of preference.
Breadth and depth, as found
Subcategories counted and the depth of each described, with brand tiers noted so a reader sees where the current mix runs thin and where it is crowded.
What comes in
Additions tied to a gap: a subcategory the shopper wants and currently buys somewhere else, or a missing rung in a good-better-best brand ladder.
What comes out
Deletions defended by velocity, duplication or substitutability, never by taste, with the item that catches each displaced buyer named beside it.
Before and after, in one table
The revised assortment laid against the current one, so the net change in item count and in shelf use is visible at a glance.
Where marks go in MT102 Unit 4
The most expensive gap in a fourth-unit plan is the one-way assortment, where items are added and nothing is removed, as though the shelf could stretch. Rubrics read that as ignoring the central constraint. Next is an addition with no shopper attached: a trendy product brought in because it sells somewhere, with no evidence this retailer's buyer wants it. Deletions justified by the author's taste lose points against deletions justified by movement or duplication. Breadth and depth are frequently confused, and a paper using them interchangeably signals the vocabulary never landed. A missing table costs presentation marks in sections that ask for one. Finally, a plan that ignores private label misses one of the main levers a retailer holds over margin, and instructors in this course tend to notice the omission.
Get a MT102 Unit 4 example written to your instructions
Pick the category, or ask for one to be chosen from the retailer in your profile, and forward the Unit 4 prompt with its rubric. A custom example plan follows those instructions and arrives inside 24-48h. The first costs nothing, and the table is laid out the way your section expects.
MT102 Unit 4 questions, answered
Do I need actual sales data to justify deletions?
Retailers rarely publish item-level sales, and instructors know it. Evidence can come from what you observe: facings compared, items marked down or gathering dust, gaps that never get restocked, flavors that duplicate each other. Name the proxy you are using and why it suggests slow movement. A plan that states its evidence honestly scores better than one inventing precise velocity figures.
How many items should the plan add or drop?
Enough to show a real trade-off, which usually means a handful of each rather than a single swap or a total rebuild. The count matters less than whether the net change fits the shelf you described. If your prompt specifies a number, follow it; otherwise, let the space constraint set the scale and say so in the paper.
Can the plan cover an online assortment instead?
An online shelf has no physical limit, which removes the tension this unit is built around, so most sections expect a store category. If your retailer sells mainly online, the constraint can shift to inventory investment or warehouse capacity, but name that substitute constraint clearly and hold every addition and every deletion to it throughout the plan.