University of Economics, Prague
Faculty of Business Administration
Bachelor´s Thesis Evaluation by the Opponent
Title of the Bachelor´s Thesis:
Author of the Bachelor´s Thesis:
Goals of the Bachelor´s Thesis:
Criteria (each max 10 points) Points awarded
1. The goals of the thesis are evident and accomplished 4
2. Demands on the acquisition of additional knowledge or skills 8
3. Adequacy and the way of the methods used 7
4. Depth and relevance of the analysis in relation to goals 7
5. Making use of literature/other resources, citing 8
6. The thesis is a well-organised logical whole 9
7. Linguistic and terminological level 9
8. Formal layout and requirements, extent 7
9. Originality, i.e. it is produced by the student 9
10. Practical/theoretical relevance/applicability 7
Total score in points (max 100) 75
Final grading very good (2)
Overall evaluation (cca 150 words):
The name of the supervisor:
The employer of the supervisor:
18 May 2021
Signature of the supervisor
Strategic Analysis of Mattoni 1873 on the Czech Market
Valeriia Malakhovskaia
Ing. Ladislv Tyll, MBA., Ph.D.
KSG FPH VŠE
The author presents her bachelor thesis which meets the expected standards. From the work it is evident, that the author puts her efforts into secondary data research as most of the analyses are well backed by sound data which are often well sourced. On the other hand, I missed more qualitative research done and more primary research. The value of the work could be simply much higher if surveys or observations would be conducted. I also missed bit more elaboration on distribution situation, e. g. how well the company is doing compared to their competitors in terms of availability of products, most important distributors etc.
There are some more issues to be mentioned:
1)The author totally missed the introduction chapter where she would clearly pronounce the goal of the thesis. Luckily from the content and the work title it is evident what it will be about. The final conclusions are missing as well.
2) I did not get the point why are customers identified as key players if the author says „customers have low power“. I am not challenging the classification as I do agree with that. But the further provided justification does not make that much sense to me.
3)With company like Mattoni, which is exploiting natural resources, i. e. public goods I bet there are also other stakeholders involved.
4)The issue matrix is rather general with less insights. Mattoni as well as other FMCG companies are struggling heavily with retailers when managing their expectations and requests.
5)From the formal perspective, there are many tables and charts where I missed units or axes description.
6) Unlike Stakeholder´s analysis in case of 5 Forces the author focuses mostly on end consumers, which is not correct. The author should have evaluated retailers instead.
7)In case of competitive benchmarking the author did a good job in terms of financials and description of other elements of the business. However, it would be nice to have a comprehensive table, where those benchmarked factors would be displayed so it is evident from the first glance, how the company is doing from different perspectives.
During the defence I would like to hear bit more insights from the market. What about the number of restaurants in specific district which offer Mattoni compared to other producers? Or any other interesting information gathered by conducting primary research.
