Comparison of Online Retailers' Website: Next versus Marks & Spencer - Term Paper Example

Internet Marketing Next and Marks & Spencer are departmental store brands that operate mainly in the UK but are recognized for their distinct products and services throughout the world. They provide consumers with apparel for kids, women and men as well as items such as electronics, gifts items and the like. All of these products are not only available in the outlets but are also accessible to consumers through the online presence of the two stores. This paper will present an elaboration of the websites of the two departmental stores. The elaboration shall highlight the manner in which each brand chooses to reinforce its image across consumers. In order to do so effectively, the paper will consider the details of the usability of each of the two websites in comparison alongside an elaboration of the functionality in contrast to the complexity of the websites. The discussion will also cover other attributes of the website such as download limits, access restrictions, communication means supported and promotional strategies incorporated. The paper will bring the comparative discussion to a concluding note by highlighting the strategies of feedback that each of the two websites has adopted in order to acquire feedback from consumers. Brand Image The fundamental strategy adopted by each of the two brands in an attempt to develop their brand image was observed to be based on the direct communicating of product information to the website viewer. The information was presented in a highly segregated manner in order to ensure that the consumer was able to find the required and desired information with ease and without complexity. The product segregations were presented on the home pages of both the websites and there was an uncanny similarity between the two websites in this regard. Both the websites chose to classify their products in a manner that addressed basic product classification as well as seasonal products. Once the user had selected a distinct product category, he/she was taken to another page where the product type was divided into further product categories. Both the websites gave the online shopper the ability to maintain a record of the products selected to purchase as they went along browsing the websites. An internet search of opinions on the Marks and Spencer website revealed that Marks and Spencer has almost always been observed to be implementing changes in its website (Zaidi 2009). The search showed that Marks & Spencer performs continuous evaluations of consumer opinions regarding its website and frequently changes the appearance and updates it. Moreover, it was observed that Next chose to maintain a dark theme throughout the website which was found to be in sharp contrast to the Marks & Spencer website in which the colours used were much more bright and somewhat cheery (Wise 2007). By doing so, Next was apparently trying to attract consumers who wanted a more sombre and serious experience in procuring products online while Marks & Spencer tried to get hold of consumers who wished to indulge in a more colourful and light experience (Aykin 2007). Ease of Use Both the websites were presented in a manner such that the user was provided with a continuous stream of pictures and videos if the user chose to view them. A majority of the products had modelling videos of the products available for purchase. This factor was one that served to place a significant degree of reliance on the nature of the consumers’ connection to the internet. However, none of the two websites placed any restrictions on consumers for downloading off their websites. A rather clear distinction that was observed between the two websites was that the two websites appeared to have very different positions on enhanced promotional capabilities. The Marks & Spencer website allowed users to share any product that they viewed on the website with their friends through external means such as facebook, twitter, MySpace, Digg and the like. It can therefore be surmised that Marks & Spencer had chosen to establish an adaptability of its website with these external social networking websites in order to encourage the promotion and the spreading of the word-of-mouth of its products. Next, in sharp contrast provided no such facility on its website. The websites supported actions such as menu opening through the hovering of the mouse over a tab and inviting viewers to hover the mouse of product displays to acquire a close look at the product. In this regard, every single product on both the websites was carefully and thoroughly described and also included a representation of the options available to the consumer for the product in question. With regard to the consideration of the manner in which both the retailers chose to promote their products through multiple channels, it was evident that both of them had attempted to provide the website viewers with an experience that was meant to rival that which the consumers got when browsing through the products at the actual store. Promotion The promotion of the products in the case of Marks & Spencer was one that was observed to be in action by providing consumers with a thorough understanding of the products in question. The consumer had the facility to observe a majority of the products on models and share the information regarding the products with friends accessible through some of the most prominent internet based information sharing portals. In contrast to the approach adopted by Marks & Spencer to promote its products, Next adopted a strategy that was significantly broad in comparison and somewhat vague in its scope. The Next website offered browsers nothing more than a link at the bottom of each page that allowed users to recommend to a friend, the product in question (Next 2009). The link led to a page on the Next website where the consumer could enter the email address of the friend and invite him/her to download the entire directory of Next products. This aspect of Next was one that served to set eliminate the otherwise overwhelming similarity that both the websites incorporated. Marks & Spencer allowed users to share a product with users regardless of the social website that the friend was based on (M&S 2009). On the other hand, Next required that the friend be sent an invitation, inviting the friend to develop an account on the Next website and make a purchase. As a motivation, Next promised to give the recommender free credits if the recommended friend developed an account on the Next website and made a purchase amounting to a certain magnitude. This approach by Next was one that was rather odd since it treated the consumer as a sales agent being given commission in the event that the agent was successful in making a sale. We can observe in this case that Marks & Spencer was relying on a form of promotion that was based on a philosophy that relied on the associations of a website viewer to promote the products on the websites. Marks & Spencer therefore served as a reason for users to communicate and socialize with peers. On the other hand, Next chose to provide its consumers with a rather different incentive when compared with the incentive of socialization that Marks & Spencer provided consumers with. The motivation provided by Next was far more monetary than the one provided by Marks & Spencer. Feedback The area of feedback was the one perspective in which none of the two websites gave users an extended capability. There was no option available on either one of the websites that was designated to allow users to communicate with the retailers running the websites. While both the websites allowed users to make use of a Contact Us link that was available on almost every page, there was no specific channel through which the user could expect to provide feedback. One appreciable attribute of the Marks & Spencer website that was observed was that the consumer had the luxury of writing reviews of products. Each product had a review tab to it and the website was invited to actually invite users to be the first to write a review on a product in cases where none had been written to date. In contrast, Next showed no channels or attributes designed to let consumers express opinions and expressions on products (Next 2009). Conclusion If anything, the research performed on the two websites in the course of the writing of this paper made it more than evident that the both the brands are extremely vast in their product range. Both the websites were designed to serve the same purpose that one would expect to acquire from a stroll through the actual stores. The products were categorized into the same categories and the extended options available were ones that one would expect to acquire from a customer service expert present in the actual outlet. Moreover, certain options available on the websites superseded the facilities that a consumer could expect to benefit from in a trip to the actual store. In a broad perspective, it was evident that the two websites were engaged in aggressive competition since both appeared to be almost equivalent in terms of the features and options they provided website browsers with. On the other hand, a more thorough delving made it apparent that there were indeed numerous differences between the two. Nonetheless the central aim of both the websites remained the convincing of the consumer to make a purchase. As a concluding note, this paper recommends that the websites under discussion need to broaden their scope of consumers and need to take advantage of the larger mass market. By adopting constricting and limiting approaches, the websites will fail to identify with consumers of all segments of society. The websites should not be developed so that they adhere to a specific tone but should be generalized so that consumers can feel comfortable with them and the adaptability of the websites increases. While it was more than evident that both the internet-retailers recognize the competition that they pose as for each other, it would be pointless to lose consumers on grounds of excessive segregation directed towards the incorrect bearing. List of References Aykin, N. (2007) Usability and Internationalization: Global and local user interfaces. London: Springer M&S. (2009) Your M&S [online] available at [accessed 16 December 2009] Next. (2009) Next [online] available at [accessed 16 December 2009] Next. (2009) Recommend a Friend [online] available at [accessed 16 December 2009] Wise, C. D. (2007) Foundations of Microsoft Expression Web: The Basics and Beyond. London: Apress Zaidi, A. (2009) Q&A: Sienne Veit on Marks & Spencer's social media strategy [online] available at [accessed 16 December 2009] Read More