A finished MKT-660 Topic 2 market screening matrix example, scoring five markets for a cheese snack maker on import and retail-channel figures and testing whether the ranking survives new weights. Searches like "mkt 660 topic 2 assignment example", "mkt660 topic 2 sample" and "mkt-660 topic 2 example" land here.
What a finished MKT-660 Topic 2 market screening matrix looks like
A weighted matrix carries the finished example, with five markets across the top and seven criteria down the side, each score traced to a source. Import volumes for the category come from UN Comtrade, sector context from the USDA Foreign Agricultural Service's country reports, and retail structure from published channel shares, with rounded or composed figures labeled illustrative. Mexico and South Korea lead on size and growth. The Philippines scores lower on size but higher on channel fit, since sari-sari neighborhood stores sell snack formats close to the producer's existing single-serve packs. Japan ranks last on the example's competitor count, which shows the category already crowded with domestic brands. A paragraph under the matrix explains why the export manager's instinct, which favored the United Kingdom, fell to fourth once the figures were in.
How an MKT-660 Topic 2 example is structured
Rules for the screen are set down before the matrix appears. An opening section states the screening question and why it concerns the marketing program rather than the ownership or contract form of entry, which the example deliberately leaves aside. The criteria section defines seven measures, market size, growth, import share, competitor count, modern retail share, traditional store share and price level against the home market, and justifies each weight in a sentence. Sources are listed next, with the year of each figure and a note wherever data were missing and a proxy stood in. The matrix itself follows, with raw figures and scores side by side so a reader can recompute any cell. A sensitivity section reweights the criteria three ways and reports which rankings move. The last section names the two markets carried forward and the single figure most likely to overturn the choice.
An instinctive ranking set aside
The export manager's list, led by the United Kingdom, is recorded first, then held up against the published figures to see whether they support or overturn it.
Seven criteria with stated weights
Size, growth, import share, competitor count, modern and traditional retail shares and relative price level each carry a weight defended in one sentence.
Sari-sari stores and single-serve packs
Neighborhood stores in the Philippines sell small formats to daily shoppers, which matches the producer's existing pack sizes and lifts that market's channel score considerably.
Raw figures beside every score
Each cell shows the source figure next to the score it produced, so a reader can check whether a weighting or a number decided the ranking.
Three reweightings and what moved
Doubling the channel weight, halving growth and dropping price level leave Mexico first in every run, while South Korea and the Philippines trade places twice.
Where marks go in MKT-660 Topic 2
The largest deduction goes to screens that describe cultures instead of measuring markets, since trade statistics and retail channel shares for packaged food are published for every candidate here. Weights applied without a reason are the next loss, because a reader cannot tell whether the ranking reflects the markets or the writer's arithmetic. Many drafts score size and wealth heavily and never examine channel structure, which in snack foods often decides whether a pack format can be sold at all. Matrices that show only scores, with the raw figures hidden, cannot be checked. Rankings presented without a sensitivity test overstate their certainty, since a modest change in weights can reorder the middle of the list. Drifting into ownership and contract questions costs as well, because those belong to a different decision from the program this course adapts.
Get an MKT-660 Topic 2 example written to your instructions
Send the MKT-660 Topic 2 instructions and your classroom's rubric, along with the product and candidate markets your section named. A custom example is written to them, with criteria weighted and defended, every score traced to a published figure and the ranking tested under new weights, and it arrives within 24 to 48 hours. The first one is free.
MKT-660 Topic 2 questions, answered
Which data sources suit a market screen?
Sources that publish comparable figures for every candidate: UN Comtrade for trade volumes by product code, the World Bank for population and income, and government agencies such as the USDA Foreign Agricultural Service for sector reports on food markets. Commercial databases add retail detail where a library subscribes. The example cites each figure's source and year so a grader can see that nothing was estimated without saying so.
Why not rank markets by cultural fit?
Because cultural descriptions of a whole country are hard to test and rarely predict how one product will sell. National averages from frameworks such as Hofstede's describe populations, not the shoppers in a particular channel. Figures on what is already imported, who competes and where people buy are both available and closer to the decision, so the example uses them and leaves culture to the brand-meaning work of later topics.
What does a sensitivity test add to the matrix?
It shows whether the ranking depends on the markets or on the weights. If a market leads under every reasonable weighting, the choice is robust; if the top two swap when one weight changes, the decision rests on that weight and needs a better argument for it. The example runs three alternative weightings and reports which positions hold and which do not.