•   Services Marketing 3041185-3004 01.08.2021-26.12.2021  5 credits  (LIPATMODsemFinancialServices, ...) +-
    Competence objectives of study unit
    Marketing a service can at times be more challenging than marketing a product. You are not selling something that is tangible; you are selling the invisible which cannot be touched or seen or tasted. Services can be tricky to market and sell, and therefore we need to have a different marketing approach for them than for products. More and more companies nowadays operate in service business, even those which we traditionally have known as industrial companies.
    After completing this course you will
    - recognise the basic characteristics and trends of services marketing.
    - be able to take customer experience into account as one extremely important element, as it has an impact on the perceived value of the service.
    - know the key models, for example gap analysis for evaluating service quality
    - be able to develop services using the principles and tools of service design
    Content of study unit
    Contents

    - the differentiating characteristics of service in comparison to physical products

    - marketing thinking behind a successful services marketing

    - creation and development of service and service offering

    - critical elements when marketing service; service quality, service culture, customer experience, etc.
    Teacher(s) in charge

    Anne Leinovaara-Matomäki

    Learning material

    Informed at the platform.

    Learning methods

    Innovation pedagogy, PBL.

    Objects, timing and methods of assessment

    Only those tasks that are returned on time, before the final deadline, are evaluated and can be accepted ! Late returns are not qualified. Please note that Urkund- Plagiarism detection can be used, so use citations and references correctly (according to any standard you wish e.g. Harward, TUAS etc.)
    Scale : 0- 5
    • Fail (0)
    There are clear mistakes in the returned tasks, or something is missing (e.g. video-presentation, peer comments etc.) or the tasks returned are very limited. Or the deadlines are neglected.
    • Satisfactory (1-2)
    All the task are returned on time and they reach satisfactory level, but they are limited / narrow and lacking deep analysis. Or the references are very limited. Self- and peer evaluation (if asked) limited.
    • Good (3-4)
    All the tasks are analytical, and well done. They represent high quality in terms of references, length, deep analysis. And in comparison to other group members there are clear bonus aspects (wider theories, more theories or tools used or so...). Also presentations are high quality. And the peer comments are constructive and analytical. There are lots of good references used and theories and tools relevant to the subject are shown in the assignments. Self- and peer evaluation (if asked) analytical.
    • Excellent (5)
    All the tasks are excellent. And results are even higher than in the grade 3-4. Presentations extremely high quality as well as constructive peer comments.Theories, tools and references are widely used. Self- and peer evaluation analytical, reflective, vide and constructive.

    Teaching language

    English

    Timing

    01.08.2021 - 26.12.2021

    Enrollment date range

    02.07.2021 - 30.09.2021

    Group(s)
    • LIPATMODsemFinancialServices
    • PMYYNS19LIPATfinanssi
    Seats

    5 - 40

    Responsible unit

    Engineering and Business

    Teachers and responsibilities

    Lecturer: Anne Leinovaara-Matomäki

    Additional information

    -

    Degree Programme(s)

    Degree Programme in International Business (not translated)

    Campus

    Kupittaa Campus

    RDI share

    2 credits

    Share of online studies

    5 credits

    Assessment scale

    H-5

    Alternative methods of attainment for implementation

    No optional version.

    Exam dates and retake possibilities

    No exam, course is done through learning assignments.

    Pedagogic approaches

    Innovation pedagogy.

    Student's schedule and workload

    5 ects, detailed guidelines at the database. 135 hours of student work.
    Divided into the individual study, reading and reflection,
    + team discussions and sharing.
    Online, videos, reading materials and slides.

    Content scheduling

    According to separate timetable (on-line). Autumn course.

    Assessment criteria
    Failed (0)

    Only those tasks that are returned on time, before the final deadline, are evaluated and can be accepted ! Late returns are not qualified. Please note that Urkund- Plagiarism detection can be used, so use citations and references correctly (according to any standard you wish e.g. Harvard, TUAS etc.). The reference books must be used when doing the assignments!
    Scale : 0- 5
    • Fail (0)
    There are clear mistakes in the returned tasks, or something is missing (e.g. video-presentation, using references, peer comments etc.) or the tasks returned are very limited. Or the deadlines are neglected.

    Assessment criteria – satisfactory (1-2)

    Only those tasks that are returned on time, before the final deadline, are evaluated and can be accepted ! Late returns are not qualified. Please note that Urkund- Plagiarism detection can be used, so use citations and references correctly (according to any standard you wish e.g. Harvard, TUAS etc.)
    Scale : 0- 5
    • Satisfactory (1-2)
    All the task are returned on time and they reach satisfactory level, but they are limited / narrow and lacking deep analysis. Or the references are very limited.

    Assessment criteria – good (3-4)

    Only those tasks that are returned on time, before the final deadline, are evaluated and can be accepted ! Late returns are not qualified. Please note that Urkund- Plagiarism detection can be used, so use citations and references correctly (according to any standard you wish e.g. Harvard, TUAS etc.)
    Scale : 0- 5
    • Good (3-4)
    All the tasks are analytical, and well done. They represent high quality in terms of references, length, deep analysis. And in comparison to other group members there are clear bonus aspects (wider theories, more theories or tools used or so...). Also presentations are high quality. And the self and peer comments are constructive and analytical.

    Assessment criteria – excellent (5)

    Only those tasks that are returned on time, before the final deadline, are evaluated and can be accepted ! Late returns are not qualified. Please note that Urkund- Plagiarism detection can be used, so use citations and references correctly (according to any standard you wish e.g. Harvard, TUAS etc.)
    Scale : 0- 5
    • Excellent (5)
    All the tasks are excellent. And results are even higher than in the grade 3-4. Presentations extremely high quality as well as constructive peer comments and self-evaluation.Theories, tools and references are widely used.