| Course | MKT 440 Fundamentals of Digital Marketing (MKT/440) |
|---|---|
| Week | 2 |
| Paper type | Digital marketing tools comparison |
| Length | about 1,112 words, 4 double-spaced pages plus title page and references |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | University of Phoenix |
| Program | BS in Business |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for MKT 440 Week 2
Paid Search, Map Listings, Email or Retargeting: Weighing Digital Marketing Tools for an Omaha Heating and Cooling Contractor
[Student Name]
University of Phoenix
MKT/440: Fundamentals of Digital Marketing
Week 2 Assignment
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
Kessler Comfort Systems and all details are composites written for a model paper.
In Week 1, Kessler Comfort Systems, a composite Omaha heating, cooling and plumbing contractor, learned that its customers now find service providers through search rather than the printed phone book. The company still spends about $38,000 a year on its directory ad and about $6,000 on online ads bought one at a time by an office manager who has no time to review results. Owner Ruth Kessler has agreed to shift most of the directory money to digital tools next year, but she wants to know which tools fit a company whose customers are homeowners within 25 miles of Omaha. This paper defines six digital marketing tools, compares them against four criteria and recommends an order for Kessler to adopt them.
Criteria for the Comparison
Four criteria guide the comparison. The first is cost per useful lead, meaning a call or form from a homeowner in the service area who needs work Kessler performs. The second is control, or how much the company decides what people see. The third is speed, the time between starting a tool and receiving calls. The fourth is measurability, how clearly each lead can be traced back to the tool that produced it.
Tool 1: The Website and Search Engine Optimization
The website is the one digital asset Kessler fully owns. Search engine optimization is the work of making the site easy for search engines to read and rank, through clear pages for each service, fast loading on phones, local information and links from other sites. Its strengths are control and low ongoing cost, since unpaid clicks cost nothing. Its weaknesses are slow results, often several months, and rankings that depend on decisions made by search companies. Kessler's current site loads slowly on phones and has a single page for all services, so it ranks poorly.
Tool 2: Paid Search Advertising
Paid search places ads above search results for chosen queries, and the advertiser pays when someone clicks. Edelman et al. (2007) explained that these placements are sold through auctions in which advertisers bid on keywords, so the price of a click rises with competition. Paid search is fast and can be targeted to specific neighborhoods and hours. Its weakness is that it stops the moment spending stops.
A field experiment at eBay by Blake et al. (2015) added a caution. When the company turned off ads on searches for its own brand name, nearly all of the traffic arrived anyway through the unpaid results, and returns from other paid search were concentrated among infrequent customers. For Kessler, the lesson is to avoid paying for searches on its own name and to spend on the people who do not yet know it. In practice, that means focusing on urgent queries, such as no heat or water heater leaking.
Tool 3: The Local Map Listing
Search engines show a map with three or so local businesses for service queries. The listing is free, includes hours, photos, the phone number and reviews, and often receives more calls than the website. Its strengths are zero cost and strong visibility for local searches. Its weakness is limited control, since the platform decides what to show and anyone can suggest edits. Kessler's listing has an outdated phone number and only four photos.
Tool 4: Online Reviews
Reviews are not a tool Kessler controls, but responding to them is. Chevalier and Mayzlin (2006) compared book sales on two large retail sites and found that an improvement in a book's reviews on one site raised its relative sales there, and that one-star reviews carried more weight than five-star reviews. For a contractor, a few complaints about missed appointments can outweigh dozens of satisfied customers. The strength is credibility; the weakness is that a company can only influence reviews through service quality and honest requests.
Tool 5: Email to Past Customers
Kessler has about 9,000 past customers with email addresses in its service records. Email is cheap, fully controlled and easy to measure, and it suits reminders for seasonal tune-ups and filter changes. Its weakness is that it reaches only people who already know the company, so it builds repeat business rather than new customers. Sahni et al. (2018) found in field experiments that putting a person's own name in the subject of a promotional email lifted both opens and inquiries, a sign that small personal touches matter more than elaborate design.
Tool 6: Display Retargeting
Retargeting shows ads to people who visited a company's site as they browse other sites. Lambrecht and Tucker (2013) studied a travel company and found that ads showing the exact product a person viewed were generally less effective than generic brand ads, except when the person had narrowed their search and was close to buying. For Kessler, retargeting might remind a homeowner who priced a new furnace, but it would do little for emergency repairs, which are decided within an hour.
Comparison Table
The table scores each tool from 1, low, to 5, high, on Kessler's criteria.
Website and SEO: cost per lead 5, control 5, speed 2, measurability 4
Paid search, urgent terms only: cost per lead 3, control 4, speed 5, measurability 5
Local map listing: cost per lead 5, control 2, speed 4, measurability 3
Review responses: cost per lead 5, control 2, speed 3, measurability 2
Email to past customers: cost per lead 5, control 5, speed 4, measurability 5
Display retargeting: cost per lead 2, control 4, speed 4, measurability 3
Recommendation
Kessler should adopt the tools in three steps. First, in the first two months, correct and complete the map listing, assign the office manager to answer every review within two days and start seasonal emails to past customers. These cost little and work quickly. Second, rebuild the website with a page for each service and neighborhood, which will take several months to show results. Third, fund paid search for urgent repair terms during heating and cooling seasons, excluding the company's own name, and judge it by cost per booked job. Retargeting should wait until the new website is live and Kessler sells enough replacement systems to justify it.
Conclusion
No single digital tool suits every purpose. For a local contractor whose customers search in moments of need, the free map listing, an owned website, honest review responses and email to past customers offer the best value, while paid search fills gaps during busy seasons. Research on paid search and retargeting shows that measured results are often smaller than platforms suggest, which is why Kessler should trace every lead to its source before spending more.
References
Blake, T., Nosko, C., & Tadelis, S. (2015). Consumer heterogeneity and paid search effectiveness: A large-scale field experiment. Econometrica, 83(1), 155-174. https://doi.org/10.3982/ECTA12423
Chevalier, J. A., & Mayzlin, D. (2006). The effect of word of mouth on sales: Online book reviews. Journal of Marketing Research, 43(3), 345-354. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.43.3.345
Edelman, B., Ostrovsky, M., & Schwarz, M. (2007). Internet advertising and the generalized second-price auction: Selling billions of dollars worth of keywords. American Economic Review, 97(1), 242-259. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.97.1.242
Lambrecht, A., & Tucker, C. (2013). When does retargeting work? Information specificity in online advertising. Journal of Marketing Research, 50(5), 561-576. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmr.11.0503
Sahni, N. S., Wheeler, S. C., & Chintagunta, P. (2018). Personalization in email marketing: The role of noninformative advertising content. Marketing Science, 37(2), 236-258. https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.2017.1066
What the MKT 440 Week 2 instructions ask
Week 2 of MKT 440 typically asks students to compare digital marketing tools and explain where each works best. A common version lists channels such as websites, search engine optimization, pay-per-click advertising, social media, email, display ads, mobile and affiliate programs, and asks for the strengths and weaknesses of several of them, often in a table followed by a short paper. Many prompts ask for a recommendation for a specific organization. Define each tool briefly, judge it against clear criteria such as cost, reach, targeting, control and measurement, and support claims with research rather than marketing copy from platforms. A recommendation should rank the tools for the chosen company and explain why the lower-ranked ones wait.
How this MKT 440 Week 2 example is built
Kessler, the composite contractor, spends about $38,000 a year on a shrinking phone book ad and $6,000 on scattered online ads that nobody reviews. The paper first sets four criteria: cost per useful lead, the company's control over the message, how fast a tool produces calls and how well results can be traced. It then assesses six tools one at a time. Field experiments supply the cautions: a large test of paid search found that brand-name ads mostly bought clicks that would have arrived anyway, a retargeting study found generic reminders often beat specific ones, and review research shows how a rating moves sales. A comparison table summarizes the scores, and the closing section ranks the map listing, the website and review responses first, with paid search limited to emergency repair queries.
MKT 440 Week 2 grading rubric: where the points go
Graders of this comparison want evidence that the student understands how each tool works and where it falls short. The higher bands usually require accurate definitions, a consistent set of criteria applied to every tool and weaknesses that are specific rather than generic. Papers that cite research on how well tools actually perform, such as field experiments, stand out over papers that repeat platform promises. Applying the comparison to one organization is the second major area: the recommendation should follow from the scores and fit the company's customers and budget. A table that summarizes the analysis, clear headings, APA citations and a short conclusion complete a strong submission, and readable writing makes the comparison easy to check.
MKT 440 Week 2 help: mistakes to avoid
Students often list every channel they can name and give each two sentences, which leaves no room for real comparison. Choose five or six tools and judge them on the same criteria. Another common issue is one-sided praise; every tool has limits, such as paid search costs rising with competition or social reach falling without paid promotion. Some papers recommend everything at once, which no small budget can support, so rank the tools and explain the order. Avoid presenting a platform's own statistics as neutral evidence. When you build a comparison table, make sure the text discusses it rather than repeating it. Finally, connect each tool to the buyer: a homeowner with no heat at midnight behaves differently from one planning a new system next spring.
Related MKT 440 sample papers
Other MKT 440 week samples
- MKT 440 Week 1: The Internet and Digital Marketing
- MKT 440 Week 3: Digital Marketing Terms and Metrics
- MKT 440 Week 4: Ethics in Digital Marketing
- MKT 440 Week 5: Digital Media in a Marketing Plan
More BS in Business sample papers
- MKT 431 Week 2: Evaluating Growth Opportunities
- MKT 435 Week 2: Perception and Motivation
- MKT 438 Week 2: Media Relations and Publicity Tools
- MKT 443 Week 2: Social Media and Customer Loyalty
MKT 440 Week 2 questions, answered
What does MKT 440 Week 2 usually cover?
It usually covers the main digital marketing tools, such as websites, search engine optimization, paid search, social media, email and display advertising, and asks students to compare their strengths and weaknesses.
Where can I find a free MKT 440 Week 2 sample paper?
The full Week 2 comparison of six digital tools for a composite Omaha heating and plumbing contractor, including its scoring table, is published above in APA form.
What is the difference between SEO and paid search?
Search engine optimization improves a site's position in the unpaid results over time, while paid search buys ad placements above or beside results, usually charged for each click.
What are the weaknesses of paid search advertising?
Costs rise when many competitors bid on the same terms, traffic stops when spending stops, and some clicks come from people who would have found the business anyway.
Should I include a table in the MKT 440 Week 2 assignment?
A table is a clear way to compare tools on the same criteria, but the paper should still explain the scores in sentences and connect them to a recommendation.
Write yours, or have the desk draft it
This paper is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official University of Phoenix document. Read it for the moves, then write your own to the instructions in your classroom. If you want one built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.
Request this one custom, free · All MKT 440 week samples · All courses