MT494 Unit 5 Segmentation and Targeting Brief Example

Weights Before Scores: An MT494 Unit 5 Segmentation and Targeting Brief Choosing Mid-Sized Employers for Sandberg Lanes

[Student Name]

Purdue University Global

MT494: Bachelor's Capstone in Marketing

Unit 5 Segmentation and Targeting Brief

[Instructor Name]

[Date]

Sandberg Lanes, its segments and the scores are composite, built from the composite survey and situation analysis of earlier units; the sources cited are real.

Criteria and Weights

The weights were fixed before any segment was scored, so that the matrix could not be tuned to a favorite answer. Weekday fit, meaning how much of the segment's business would fall on Monday to Thursday afternoons, carries 30 percent, because the plan exists to fill those hours and a segment that books only Saturdays solves nothing. Likely spend per lane hour carries 25 percent, since the plan must earn back its budget. Ease of reaching the person who decides carries 20 percent, because the business has no sales staff and needs buyers it can find cheaply. Segment size within the trade area carries 15 percent and the strength of competition for that segment 10 percent. Ratings run from a low of one to a high of five, and every score cites evidence from Units 3 or 4.

The Matrix

1. Mid-sized employers: fit 5, spend 4, reach 4, size 4, competition 3; weighted score 4.2.

2. Retiree daytime bowlers: fit 4, spend 2, reach 3, size 2, competition 3; weighted score 2.9.

3. Birthday parties: fit 1, spend 4, reach 3, size 5, competition 1; weighted score 2.75.

4. Youth sports teams: fit 2, spend 2, reach 4, size 3, competition 3; weighted score 2.65.

5. Existing leagues: fit 1, spend 2, reach 5, size 1, competition 5; weighted score 2.45.

6. College students: fit 1, spend 1, reach 3, size 3, competition 2; weighted score 1.8.

Why Employers Win

Employers score highest on the most heavily weighted criterion. In the Unit 4 survey, 58 percent of planners preferred a weekday afternoon, so most of their bookings would fall exactly where the lanes are empty. Their spend is solid: groups of around 22 guests at about $30 a head, with food included, earn more per lane hour than any other weekday group. They can be reached through the chamber of commerce, a purchased list of office managers and search ads on team-outing terms. Size scores a four because the trade area holds roughly 790 employer outings a year across all venues. Competition scores only a three, because Ridgeline Social sells actively to the same buyers, but neither it nor the escape-room bar serves large weekday groups at a moderate price.

A large segment that books only on weekends is a weak target for a weekday problem.

Why Birthdays Score Low Here

Birthday parties are Sandberg's largest group business and score a five on size. Yet almost all of them happen on Saturday and Sunday afternoons, so they earn a one on weekday fit, and two rival family centers compete hard for them. The weighting turns a big segment into a weak target for this particular problem. That is not a judgment about birthdays in general; they remain important to the business, but marketing money spent on them would not fill a Tuesday.

The Chosen Segment

The target is employers in Rock Island and Scott counties with roughly 20 to 249 staff that already take their people out together once a year or more. Within each, two people matter. Webster and Wind (1972) described organizational buying as shared among roles, and the survey found that 71 percent of planners needed someone else's approval. The person doing the legwork, most often whoever runs the front office or handles staff events, wants a date that works, one price, one invoice and an event where nobody sits out. The approver, usually a department head, needs a per-head figure that will pass a budget review and an afternoon the staff will not resent. The positioning in Unit 6 will need to speak to both, and the promotion in later units will need a message for each.

Demographics alone would not describe this segment well. Two employers of the same size can differ completely in whether they hold outings, so the brief defines the segment by behavior, the habit of holding group events, and by the buying roles inside it. Wedel and Kamakura (2000) separate general bases for segmenting, such as company size, from bases tied to the purchase itself, such as how often a buyer uses the category, and the second kind fits this decision better.

A Queue for the Other Five

Deferred segments are treated as a queue, not as rejections, and each has a condition that would move it forward. Retiree daytime bowlers come first. They fit weekday hours well but spend little per hour, so the plan will revisit them in its second year as a daytime league if employer events reach their twelve-month target and lanes remain open on Monday and Wednesday mornings. Youth sports teams come second, worth testing as end-of-season parties on weekday evenings if the coordinator has time. Existing leagues stay with the current owners' program, since they already bowl at the center and need retention rather than marketing. Birthday parties are served by the business's existing weekend effort. College students come last, because their free time falls in evenings that are already busy.

Kotler and Keller (2016) argue that a firm should choose segments it can serve better than rivals and reach economically. The matrix shows Sandberg can do both with mid-sized employers, and the queue shows what comes next if that first choice succeeds.

References

Kotler, P., & Keller, K. L. (2016). Marketing management (15th ed.). Pearson.

Webster, F. E., Jr., & Wind, Y. (1972). A general model for understanding organizational buying behavior. Journal of Marketing, 36(2), 12-19. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224297203600204

Wedel, M., & Kamakura, W. A. (2000). Market segmentation: Conceptual and methodological foundations (2nd ed.). Kluwer Academic.