To: Angie Zhou (Author)
From: Amy McCoan (Peer Reviewer)
Date: April 2, 2023
Subject: Peer Review of Formal Report Draft: Feasibility Analysis of Installing a Mirror Inside Each Change Room in Aritzia.
Thank you for submitting the Formal Report Draft Feasibility Analysis of Installing a Mirror Inside Each Change Room in Aritzia for assignment 3.2. Please see the document below for feedback and recommendations.
Initial Impressions:
The formal proposal draft is well laid out, including a title page, table of contents, and appropriate body. The topic, the need for installing individual mirrors in Aritzia change rooms, is relevant, and the data collected appropriately supported the report’s recommendations. Reordering some of the headings and subheadings will improve logical flow. Writing to emphasize what Aritzia will gain from pursuing the outlined recommended actions rather than why customers suffer will result in maintaining a you-attitude writing style.
Content
The data results of the survey respondents are intriguing and provide excellent insight that supported the recommendations. A few revisions will strengthen the persuasiveness of the report.
- Adding the benefits of installing individual mirrors to the change rooms could be an informative lead to the rest of the report and less of an abrupt end to the Background
- In the Statement of Problem section, the focus is on the problem rather than the solution. Rewriting this paragraph with what Aritzia has to profit, instead of customer pain points, will be more convincing. For example: rewriting “Overall, the current Aritzia change room design may discourage customers from trying on clothes and ultimately decrease customer satisfaction”, try “To increase sales, decrease returns and increase customer satisfaction, Aritzia should equip each change room with a mirror”. Clearly stating the problem is salient however, emphasizing the advantages is equally paramount. Aritzia prides itself on customized customer service therefore, tying in how a mirror could positively impact the business by using positive language (increase, positively, satisfied, encourage) rather than negation (increased returns, less efficient, discourage) will drive the point of what Aritzia will benefit from installing mirrors.
- Attaching pictures to the section Cost and Places to Purchase Mirror will help provide a constructive visual for the audience to consider the proposal.
- Adding Erika Patterson as a secondary audience as this is also an ENGL assignment.
- Including areas of inquiry as bullet points (eg: the survey questions asked of Aritzia customers and the investigation done into secondary sources) in The Scope of Inquiry will expressively let the intended audience know what to expect regarding the data collected.
The report investigates installing mirrors inside individual change rooms at Aritzia, analyzes the impact on the business, and recommends a workable and affordable solution. There are no technical terms in the report that need defining.
Organization
The organization is clear and somewhat logically presented. The draft is correctly paginated. The title page is presented corrected as is the table of contents.
Increasing the report content clarity could be achieved with the following revisions:
- Rewriting the running head to something more indicative of what is covered in the report.
- Re-naming “areas of focus and objective” under Survey Results to “Methodology” to increase clarity.
- Adding where and how surveys were distributed, and how many survey respondents answered will increase transparency.
- Removing “current” from the report will decrease redundancy. The report is dated, and the survey is assumed to be current.
- Changing the subtitle “Current Aritzia customers’ preferences and perspectives” to e.g. Aritzia Customers Survey Results illustrates this section’s intent clearly.
- Moving the Proposed Solution paragraph to the B. Recommendation section would increase logical flow.
- Moving section Summary and overall interpretation of results, to replace C. Proposed Solution would help tie in all the results to support the recommendations.
- Analyzing the secondary and primary data together and adding citations to The summary and overall interpretation of results will provide a more robust evaluation.
- Eliminating The paragraph under Conclusion by only summarizing the body of the report instead, would remind the audience of what the report has covered thus far.
- Adding succinct instructions in bullet points to Recommendations will give the intended audience clear guidance for what action to take next.
The report is written in clear small chunks making readability enjoyable. The points are connected and will follow more logically with the revisions above. There are no gaps in information – the report is concise.
Style
The tone is objective throughout the body, however, changes to subjective in the data interpretation section. There was a noticeable absence of supporting citations which could strengthen the persuasiveness of the report.
The following revision will aid in eliminating a biased intonation.
- Most figures summarize the pie charts well however, the summaries report that the results are supported by responses from the “overall opinions” question. Combining the answers to the survey responses (e.g. “…current change room design at Aritzia “could be better with mirrors” as it would be “more convenient,” “more spacious,” and “a more comfortable experience””) comes across as creating a bias/subjective tone. Separating the results from the survey question “Overall opinions about the current change room design at Aritzia” from the pie chart and presenting the responses in another section will increase objectivity.
Design
Graphics are consistent and well-designed. Correcting the titles of the pie charts by adding capitalization, as in the Technical Communication section Charts 12.5.1, will provide the proper layout. As previously mentioned, adding graphics of the proposed mirrors will provide a more full-bodied data section. The report is visually appealing. The spacing, font size, and layout are correct and easy to read.
Grammars and Typos:
There are a few grammatical errors and typos throughout the report. Running the report through a grammar-checking program will eliminate them efficiently.
Concluding Comments:
This proposal draft was an enjoyable and engaging report to read. Please see the following revisions to strengthen and clarify the proposal.
- Adding the benefits of installing individual change room mirrors to the change rooms in the Background section could be a good lead into the report.
- Revising the Statement of Problem section into a more you-attitude paragraph using the suggestions above to increase persuasiveness.
- Adding graphics of the researched mirrors to the Cost and Places to Purchase Mirror section to help illustrate a practical visual for considering the proposal.
- Adding Erika Patterson as a secondary audience for the ENGL assignment component.
- Including areas of inquiry as bullet points (e.g. the survey questions asked of Aritzia customers, and the investigation done in secondary sources) in The Scope of Inquiry will let the intended audience know precisely what to expect regarding the data collected.
- Adding where and how surveys were distributed, and how many survey respondents answered will increase transparency.
- Removing “current” from the report will decrease redundancy. The report is dated, and the survey is assumed to be current.
- Analyzing the secondary and primary data together and adding citations to The summary and overall interpretation of results will provide a more robust evaluation.
- Eliminating the paragraph under Conclusion by instead summarizing the body of the report, would remind the audience of what it has covered thus far.
- Adding succinct points in the Recommendations section will give the intended audience clear guidance for what action to take next.
- Separating the results to the survey question “Overall opinions about the current change room design at Aritzia,” from the pie chart summaries then presenting the responses in another section to increase the objective tone.
- Correcting the titles of the pie charts by adding capitalization for proper formatting.
Headers and Subheaders
- Re-naming “areas of focus and objective” under Survey Results to “Methodology” to increase clarity.
- Changing the subtitle “Current Aritzia customers’ preferences and perspectives” to eg: Aritzia Customers Survey Results illustrates the section’s intent in more clarity.
- Moving the Proposed Solution paragraph to the B. Recommendation section will increase logical flow.
- Moving section Summary and overall interpretation of results, to replace C. Proposed Solution would help tie in all the results to support the recommendations.
Please feel free to reach out with any questions. It has been a pleasure reviewing this work. Great job!
Link to Angie Zhou Formal Report Draft
Leave a Reply