| Course | MT102 Principles of Retailing |
|---|---|
| Unit | Unit 7 |
| Paper type | Channel comparison |
| Length | About 770 words, 5 pages double-spaced |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Purdue University Global |
| Program | BS in Business Administration |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for MT102 Unit 7
A Dead Heater on a January Night: A Unit 7 Channel Comparison at Glassmere Aquatics
[Student Name]
Purdue University Global
MT102: Principles of Retailing
Unit 7 Channel Comparison
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
Glassmere Aquatics, the shopper, the purchase and every observation are composite and illustrative; the sources cited are real.
The Shopper
The shopper is a hospital nurse who works three twelve-hour shifts a week and keeps a 40-gallon tank of tropical fish. She lives 22 minutes from Glassmere's Beavercreek store. On a Tuesday night in January she notices the tank has dropped to 68 degrees, and the heater's indicator light is off. Tropical fish can tolerate a cool night, but she needs a replacement before her next shift begins Thursday at 7 a.m. Time and distance matter more to her than choice.
Levy et al. (2019) note that shoppers weigh the effort of a trip against its value, and for this shopper the trip is worth it only if the heater is certain to be there. She would happily pay a few dollars more for certainty, but she cannot afford a wasted drive on her one free morning.
The Purchase
She needs a 150-watt submersible heater with an adjustable thermostat, ideally under $40.
The Online Path
Finding the product. A search for "150 watt heater" on Glassmere's site returns 11 results. Filters allow sorting by wattage, brand and price.
Weighing options. Five heaters fit her tank. Product pages show the price, a short description and reviews for national brands, but none for Glassmere's own-label heater.
Price and stock. The own-label 150-watt heater costs $32.99. The page says "In stock at Beavercreek, 4 available," with a note that store stock updates overnight.
Completing the purchase. She chooses buy online, pick up in store. The site promises pickup within two hours of opening, which is 10 a.m.
Returns. The site states a 30-day return policy for unused equipment and a one-year warranty on own-label heaters.
The In-Store Path
I followed the same purchase in the store the next morning to see what the shopper would have found.
Finding the product. Heaters sit in aisle 5 beside thermometers. No aisle sign lists heaters, but an associate pointed the way within a minute.
Weighing options. Seven heaters were on the shelf, including two models not shown online.
Price and stock. The shelf tag for the own-label heater showed $32.99, matching the site. But the shelf held only one unit, behind a peg tag for a different wattage. An associate checked the system, which still showed four, and found no others in the stockroom.
Completing the purchase. Pickup orders are filled from the shelf. A second online order placed overnight had already been assigned the same unit, so the shopper's order would have been canceled with a text at 10:40 a.m., after she had planned her morning around it.
Returns. The store's policy matched the website's.
Where the Channels Contradict Each Other
Price, assortment and returns were consistent enough. Stock was not. The website reported four heaters that did not exist, and its overnight update meant the error would persist through the morning. For a shopper with no time to spare, that one contradiction outweighs every other strength.
Gallino and Moreno (2014) studied a retailer that began showing store inventory online and found that reliable availability information moved some shoppers from online purchases to store visits. Their finding cuts both ways for Glassmere. Accurate stock information draws shoppers in; inaccurate information sends them to a competitor, since a nurse who receives a cancellation text at 10:40 a.m. will order from Amazon or drive to a pet superstore, and she may not trust the stock display again.
Verhoef et al. (2015) describe the move from multichannel retailing, where channels are run separately, to omnichannel retailing, where they are managed together around the shopper. Glassmere's channels share prices and policies but not timely inventory, so the chain sits between the two.
Recommendation
The widest gap is stock accuracy, and closing it matters more than adding features. I recommend three changes. First, update store stock on the website at least hourly for any item with fewer than five units. Second, hold a safety buffer for pickup orders: when the system shows one or two units, the site should offer delivery or another store instead of pickup. Third, when an order cannot be filled, the store should call the shopper and offer the nearest in-stock alternative, which in this case was a national-brand heater at $36.99 sitting on the same shelf.
The site and the store agreed on everything except whether the heater existed.
References
Gallino, S., & Moreno, A. (2014). Integration of online and offline channels in retail: The impact of sharing reliable inventory availability information. Management Science, 60(6), 1434-1451. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2014.1951
Levy, M., Weitz, B. A., & Grewal, D. (2019). Retailing management (10th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
Verhoef, P. C., Kannan, P. K., & Inman, J. J. (2015). From multi-channel retailing to omni-channel retailing: Introduction to the special issue on multi-channel retailing. Journal of Retailing, 91(2), 174-181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2015.02.005
Reading the MT 102 Unit 7 instructions
The seventh unit asks you to compare two of a retailer's channels, usually its website and its stores, using a single purchase. Start with the shopper, since time, distance and urgency decide channel choice more than preference does. Define the purchase, including the price range and features that matter. Then follow the purchase through each channel in the same stages and the same order, so the comparison holds: finding the product, weighing options, confirming price and stock, completing the purchase and handling a return. Most sections want the two channels set side by side on assortment, price, availability, speed and returns. Identify where the channels contradict each other and which contradiction would push your shopper to a competitor. Close with a recommendation that holds the shopper whichever channel they start in. You need not complete the purchase in either channel.
Inside the MT102 Unit 7 example
The sample describes the shopper, a nurse working twelve-hour shifts, 22 minutes from the store, who needs a 150-watt heater before Thursday morning. The online path records 11 search results, five suitable heaters, a $32.99 own-label model and a stock display showing four at the local store with an overnight update. The in-store path, followed the next morning, finds the same price and policy, two models not shown online, and only one heater on the shelf, already claimed by an overnight pickup order. Levy and coauthors explain why certainty matters more than a small price difference to this shopper. Gallino and Moreno's study of inventory information shows why accuracy can bring shoppers in or send them away, and Verhoef and colleagues place the chain between multichannel and omnichannel. Three recommendations, hourly updates, a pickup buffer and a call with an alternative, close the paper.
MT102 Unit 7 rubric: what earns full points
The rubric for this comparison rewards a well-defined shopper, parallel treatment of both channels and an analysis that finds the contradiction that matters. Following both channels through identical stages earns more than describing each channel loosely, because it lets the grader see exactly where they diverge. Evidence recorded at each stage, such as result counts, prices and stock messages, strengthens the comparison. The analysis should judge which difference matters most to this shopper rather than listing every difference equally. Recommendations that close the widest gap, and that reach the shopper whichever channel they start in, show an omnichannel understanding. Gallino and Moreno, Levy and coauthors, and Verhoef and colleagues support the analysis, and all three are listed in APA 7. Organization that mirrors the purchase stages keeps the paper easy to follow and grade.
MT102 Unit 7 help from the desk
Channel comparisons often describe the website and the store in general terms without a single purchase to anchor them. Others compare the channels on different criteria, so differences cannot be seen. A frequent gap is the shopper, who is mentioned once and then forgotten, leaving no basis for judging which contradiction matters. Some papers find that prices match and conclude the channels are consistent, missing stock or returns. Recommendations are often a wish list of features rather than a fix for the widest gap. You can be the shopper if your section allows it, which makes details easier to supply. Identical prices are worth reporting as a finding. Tell us the retailer and the purchase you have in mind, and we can map both paths stage by stage with you.
Get an MT102 Unit 7 example written to your instructions
Choose the retailer from your profile, a purchase and a shopper, then pass along the Unit 7 prompt and the rubric your section grades against. That first custom comparison is free, written to exactly those instructions, and returned within 24-48h. A shopper with a real deadline makes the friction easier to show, so include one if you can. The paper above is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Purdue University Global document.
More MT102 papers and BS in Business Administration samples
- MT102 Unit 1: Retail Formats Post
- MT102 Unit 2: Retailer Profile
- MT102 Unit 3: Store Observation Report
- MT102 Unit 4: Assortment Plan
- MT102 Unit 5: Pricing Exercise
- MT102 Unit 6: Merchandising Analysis
- MT102 Unit 8: Customer Experience Audit
- MT102 Unit 9: Seminar Reflection
- MT102 Unit 10: Retail Strategy Plan
- LI410 Unit 7: Change Leadership Analysis
MT102 Unit 7 questions, answered
Do I need to make an actual purchase for this comparison?
No. Most sections expect you to take the purchase as far as checkout in each channel without buying, recording what you saw at each stage. Some instructors accept a purchase you made recently if you describe it accurately. What matters is that the details come from a real attempt, not from assumptions about how sites and stores usually behave.
What if the prices online and in the store were identical?
Then say so and treat it as a finding. Price parity is a deliberate strategy for many retailers, and noting it lets your analysis focus on the other differences, such as availability, speed or returns. Identical prices often make the comparison sharper, because the channels then have to be separated on something other than cost.
Can the shopper in the comparison be me?
Often yes, and it can make the paper stronger, since you know your own schedule, distance and priorities exactly. Some sections prefer a described persona, so check the prompt. Either way, present the shopper as a profile with constraints rather than a first-person story, which keeps attention on the channels instead of on the narrator.
Where can I find a free MT102 Unit 7 sample paper?
This page holds a full MT102 Unit 7 channel comparison of an urgent heater purchase online and in store, with both paths, the contradiction found, recommendations, three references and margin notes.
What contradiction did the comparison find?
The website showed four heaters in stock at the local store, but the shelf held one, already assigned to another pickup order. Prices, assortment and returns matched; stock did not.