( 1500 words) i need to critically evaluate the research. This evaluation should cover:1. What the aims and objective of the research are.2. What research approach and philosophy is employed. Is the approach andphilosophy appropriate to the objectives of the research and why?3. The strengths and/or weaknesses of the specific research methods used andtheir implementation in the research. You might wish to comment on, forexample, sampling issues, interview techniques, questionnaire design, etc.4. Given the above, how reliable are the results of the research likely to be, and arethe conclusions drawn from them likely to be valid?You should make reference to theory and literature on research methods to support yourclaims. These sources should be referenced using the Harvard referencing scheme****i will attached the assignment and the Sample to make assignment same the Sample*** this is the SampleINTRODUCTIONMost of the previous researches in the field of performance appraisal focus on the positive aspects of the performance appraisal process. However, certain studies suggest that employee attitudes are strongly driven by negative assessments and hence a low quality performance appraisal experience may cause an employee to react in a negative way (Brown et al. 2009). The authors have examined the role of low quality performance appraisals on three indicators of organizational efficiency ? job satisfaction, organizational commitment and intention to quit.Brown et al. determined the quality of an employee?s performance appraisal experience by combining aspects of the performance appraisal process into a measure of their total experience. Their study was based on the results of a survey of an Australian public sector organization. Based on the data from 2,336 non-managerial employees, performance appraisal experience clusters were identified and regression analysis was performed to observe the correlation between low quality performance appraisal experiences and job satisfaction, organizational commitment and intention to quit.RESEARCH PHILOSOPHYThe authors adopted a positivist philosophy wherein they observed and described the reality from an objective perspective without interfering with the phenomena being studied. As advocated by Gill and Johnson (2010), the authors used a highly structured methodology in order to facilitate replication. The emphasis was on quantifiable observations that would aid the authors in objective interpretation and statistical analysis (Saunders et al. 2009).The positivist philosophy is suitable for the selected research topic because the authors were trying to establish a relationship between different elements of the subject in a systematic manner and subsequently relate them to a set of hypotheses with a rational explanation. The established hypotheses lead to further development of existing theory; however, no new theory was established.However, an element of phenomenology could have been incorporated in the research philosophy. This would have helped the authors add a social world perception and thus add another dimension to the research findings.RESEARCH APPROACHThe authors adopted a deductive approach for their research. The authors collected quantitative data to establish their hypotheses. A sufficiently large sample size (2,336 employees) was selected to generalize the conclusions. A highly structured methodology wasPage | 1employed to test the correlation between the three dependent, four independent and twelve control variables.As suggested by Robson (2002), the authors progressed through the various stages of deductive research, i.e., a set hypotheses were deduced; a relationship between dependent, independent and control variables was established; operational hypotheses were tested using questionnaires and finally the specific outcomes of their theories were tested.The deductive approach is ideal for the research as the authors do not develop a new theory, but rather tests an unexplored area within previously developed theories.RESEARCH STRATEGYThe authors adopted survey as their research strategy. Standardized self-administered questionnaires, which would be interpreted in the same way by all respondents, were forwarded to the employees. The standardized questionnaires enable easy comparison of responses. Standardized self-administered questionnaires make sizeable samples feasible and consequently making the results statistically significant.Surveys/questionnaires are suitable for the research as it enables the collection of a large amount of data from a sizeable sample in a very economical methodology. However, random in-depth interviews would have helped the authors to explore the attitude of the employees towards performance appraisal.STRENGTHS OF THE RESEARCH METHOD1. Primary data was used for the regression analysis process. Although primary data involved considerable time and cost as compared to secondary data, they were easily outweighed by their advantages. Primary data was obtained specifically for the research and hence have high reliability and validity.2. A sizeable sample was used for the regression analysis process, i.e., the authors managed to obtain the response from 2336 after excluding managerial employees and incomplete questionnaires. A sample of this size helped the authors obtain an unambiguous view and explicit depiction of the employees? attitude towards performance appraisal among the non-managerial staff and also helped in making the results statistically significant.3. Multiple regression analysis was carried out to test the hypotheses.A hierarchical cluster analysis was initially used to establish the precise number of clusters. A non-hierarchical form of cluster analysis was subsequently used to identify the clusterPage | 2solution based on the results from the hierarchical analysis. Multiple regression was then employed to evaluate the impact of the low quality performance appraisal experience on three dependent variables ? job satisfaction, organizational commitment and intention to quit.A comprehensive list of independent and control variables were employed in the multiple regression analysis that included employees? expectations of a quality performance appraisal process, demographic characteristics and situational characteristics. The detailed regression analysis process ensured the credibility of the final outcome.WEAKNESSES OF THE RESEARCH METHOD1. The aim of the research was to identify the role of low quality performance appraisal experience on the employees. In order to get an overall outlook within the organization, the authors should have considered the responses from managers/supervisors along with the rest of the employees.Various researchers have identified the reluctance of managers/supervisors to undertake appraisal. Wanguri (1995) believes that many managers/supervisors view performance appraisal as a necessary evil in corporate life. This counterbalances the fact that manager/supervisors have greater control over their work and hence their ability to affect their performance outcomes as suggested by the authors. Thus, future researches on performance appraisal should consider the responses from managers/supervisors along with the rest of the employees.2. The study was carried out in an organization were the performance appraisal process was used to determine pay increments. Thus, the feedback from the employees was influenced to a certain extent by the fact that their yearly pay increment was dependent on their performance appraisal rating. Hence, the conclusions from the study are not applicable to organizations were the performance appraisal process is not linked to pay increments.3. The authors carried out a cross-sectional study which analyses the impact of performance appraisal at a particular time. A longitudinal study for this research topic would be time-consuming, bearing in mind that the duration of the performance evaluation cycle appraisal is one year.However, a longitudinal study would allow the authors to look at changes in the attitude and perception of employees towards performance appraisal over time. This would also help in determining whether employees dismiss a low quality performance appraisal experience as a ?one off? or whether it affects their expectations of the subsequent performance evaluation cycle.Page | 3RELIABILITY ISSUESThere are four possible threats to reliability (Saunders et al. 2009).Subject or participant bias does not pose a threat to the reliability of the research design since the authors had taken elaborate steps to ensure the anonymity of respondents to questionnaires.Observer error and observer bias do not pose a serious threat to the reliability of the research design since the authors used a structured questionnaire which minimized the possibilities of raising questions and interpreting responses in different ways.Participant error is a potential threat to the reliability of the research design. The authors have not specified the timing of their questionnaire, i.e., whether the surveys were carried out immediately after the appraisal process or not. An employee?s response to the questionnaire could vary drastically if it were conducted immediately after the year end appraisal as compared to his/her response if it were conducted during mid-year. Thus, the responses obtained by the authors may vary on another occasion.VALIDITY ISSUESThe authors intended to study the consequences of a low quality performance appraisal experience on the employees. However, if the questionnaires were carried out immediately after pay increment, the responses from employees can have a misleading effect on the finding of the study since the purpose of the study does not consider pay increments. This happens due to the fact that employee responses in the aftermath of pay increments can become deceptive based on their pay increments. Thus, the authors should have taken the ?performance appraisal ? pay increment? link into consideration when defining the purpose of the study. Hence, history is the chief threat to validity in the research (Saunders et al. 2009).Furthermore, the conclusions from the paper cannot be generalized since they are neither applicable to organizations where the performance appraisal system is not linked to pay increments nor applicable to organizations having a different approach to performance appraisal.CONCLUSIONAfter conducting a critical evaluation of the research paper, it can be concluded that the authors have provided some insights to account for the role of low quality performance appraisal on three predominant human resource management outcomes.Page | 4The authors adopted a positivist philosophy and a deductive approach for their research. Survey was adopted as their research strategy within a cross-sectional time horizon.Primary data and a sizeable sample were used for the regression analysis process. A comprehensive multiple regression analysis was carried out to test the hypotheses that ensured the credibility of the final outcome.However, the authors did not consider responses from manager/supervisors. Further studies must be undertaken to study ongoing low quality performance appraisal experience. Furthermore, the conclusions from the research paper cannot be generalized for organizations where the performance appraisal system is not linked to pay increments.REFERENCES Brown, M. Hyatt, D. and Benson, J. (2010) Consequences of the performance appraisal experience. Personnel Review. [Online] 39 (3), 375-396. Available from: Business Source Premier [8th October 2011] Cooper, D.R. and Schindler, P.S. (2006) Business Research Methods. 9th edition. New Delhi, Tata McGraw Hill Kline, T.J.B. and Sulsky, L.M. (2009) Measurement and Assessment Issues in Performance Appraisal. Canadian Psychology. [Online] 50 (3), 161-171. Available from: Academic Search Complete [7th October 2011] Kuvaas, B. (2011) The interactive role of performance appraisal reactions and regular feedback. Journal of Managerial Psychology. [Online] 26 (2), 123-137. Available from: Business Source Premier [8th October 2011] Najafi, L. Hamidi, Y. Vatankhah, S. and Purnajaf, A. (2010) Performance Appraisal and its Effects on Employees? Motivation and Job Promotion. Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences. [Online] 4 (12), 6052-6056. Available from: Academic Search Complete [7th October 2011] Nickols, F. (2007) Performance Appraisal ? Weighed and found wanting in the balance. Journal for Quality & Participation. [Online] 30 (1), 47-48. Available from: Business Source Premier [8th October 2011]Page | 5 Rasch, L. (2004) Employee performance appraisal and the 95/5 rule. Community College Journal of Research and Practice. [Online] 28 (5), 407-414. Available from: Academic Search Complete [7th October 2011] Saunders, M. Lewis, P. and Thornhill, A. (2009) Research Methods for Business Students. 5th edition. Harlow, Pearson Education Prentice Hall Schraeder, M. Becton, J.B. and Portis, R. (2007) A critical examination of performance appraisals ? An organization?s friend or foe. Journal for Quality & Participation. [Online] 30 (1), 20-25. Available from: Business Source Premier [8th October 2011]**** the is the assignment ( the artical )How store brands build retailerbrand imageFlorence KremerUniversity of Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France, andCatherine ViotUniversity of Bordeaux ? IAE, Bordeaux, FranceAbstractPurpose ? The purpose of this research is to highlight the role store brands can play in retailbranding. Does an image transfer take place between store brands and the retailer brand? To addressthis issue, the authors propose to identify and test the dimensions of image transfer from the storebrand to the retailer brand.Design/methodology/approach ? A qualitative study of 138 consumers helped to complete theattributes of store brand image and retailer brand image identified in the literature. A total of 322customers of three major French retailers responded to a questionnaire. The data collected were testedin a structural equation model.Findings ? Results indicate that store brands have a positive impact on the retailer image. The priceimage of the store brand is positively related to the retailer price image. The values that customersassociated with store brands improve the retailer brand image in terms of its values.Research limitations/implications ? Store brands are considered as a whole, without distinctionbetween product categories. The paper focuses on standard store brands only, excluding ?premium?store brands.Practical implications ? Retailers can find a rationale for investing in their store brand range inorder to differentiate themselves from their competitors. Managers should ensure that their storebrands? image is seen as congruent with their own retailer brand image. In particular, more attentionshould be paid to the values reflected by the store brands and the store brands? price image.Originality/value ? The results indicate that store brands not only benefit from the strength of theretailer brand, but they also contribute, in a reciprocal way, to the improvement of the retailer image.Keywords Store brands, Retailing, Brand image, Retail brand equity, GenericsPaper type Research paperIntroduction and purposeBoth in Europe and the USA, retailers have made large investments to launch storebrands, with the primary objective of securing significant financial benefits. Indeed,since the 1990s, store brands have been well-known for generating higher marginsthan national brands (Hoch and Banerji, 1993). They also give the retailer negotiatingleverage over the manufacturers of the national brands they compete with(Scott-Morton and Zettelmeyer, 2004) and may enhance store loyalty (Corstjens andLal, 2000; Binninger, 2008).More recently, retailers have become aware of a new advantage: beyond theirimmediate profitability, store brands could also play a role in the process of positioningthe retailer?s shop formula as a brand (Steenkamp et al., 2004; Luijten and Reijnders,2009). Also known as ?private labels? or ?own brands?, store brands are exclusive tothe retailer chain. Thus, they are associated with the retailer in a unique way,especially when they share the same brand name. Moreover, retailing at 30 per centThe current issue and full text archive of this journal is available atwww.emeraldinsight.com/0959-0552.htmIJRDM40,7528International Journal of Retail& Distribution ManagementVol. 40 No. 7, 2012pp. 528-543q Emerald Group Publishing Limited0959-0552DOI 10.1108/09590551211239846less than the leading national brands, store brands of equivalent quality shouldimprove retailer price image, by offering consumers good ?value for money?.Significantly, Carrefour, the second-largest world retailer, chose to use store brands inits first campaign on French TV in 2008 by displaying its own fishing products andbaby diapers rather than the national brands it carries. Such an advertisement isobviously product-oriented as it positions Carrefour store brands as affordable andgood-quality products. However, as the retailer and its store brands share the samebrand name, we can wonder if promoting store brands does not also aim at improvingthe retailer?s brand equity, at the chain level.This relates to retail branding, an issue that has recently garnered greater attentionfrom researchers (Burt and Sparks, 2002; Ailawadi and Keller, 2004; Kumar andSteenkamp, 2007, Burt and Davies, 2010). Retail branding conceptualization hasevolved from an initial narrow focus on products only ? namely the store brands ? to awider perspective that takes into account the store and the corporate dimensions of theretailer brand (Burt and Davies, 2010). Here we link these approaches by questioningthe relationship between the store brands? image and the retailer image (defined here atthe chain level and not at the store level). Simply, do store brands improve theperception of retailer brands?The main purpose of this research is to highlight the role that store brands play inretailer brand building and show whether a transfer of image takes place between storebrands and the retailer brand or not. We propose to address this issue with a three-foldapproach:(1) The first objective is to identify the main dimensions of store brands? image andthe retailer brand image: what are the dimensions of store brands? image andthe dimensions of the retailer?s image?(2) The second objective aims to verify if a transfer of image really does take placebetween the store brands? image and the retailer brand image. In other words,do well-evaluated store brands reinforce the retailer image? And inversely, dopoorly-evaluated store brands weaken the retailer image?(3) Finally, if it turns out that an image transfer between store brands and theretailer brand does take place, then it is necessary to investigate the way thistransfer occurs: what dimensions of store brands? image influence the retailerbrand image? This forms the third objective.The impact of store brands? image on retailer loyalty constitutes a more secondaryfocus of this research.From a theoretical standpoint, our research echoes Ailawadi and Keller?s (2004) callfor deeper insight into the relationship between retail brand equity and the productassortment. Burt and Davies (2010) remind us that prior research focused mainly onthe opposite relationship: by questioning the role the retailer ? or, more often, the store? plays in the perception of store brands (Richardson et al., 1996; Collins-Dodd andLindley, 2003; Semeijn et al., 2004; Vahie and Paswan, 2006; Ailawadi and Keller(2004)). They also underline, following Ailawadi and Keller (2004), that there is still aneed for better comprehension of the role of store brands in building retailer equity.Thus our approach is relatively new and responds to an actual concern in retailresearch.Retailer brandimage529The expected implications of this study are important: retailers have developedstore brands in almost every product category, and their economic prominence isconstantly increasing. US store brands increased their unit share and dollar share in2009 to 21.8 and 17 per cent respectively. In Europe, the unit share of average storebrands is even higher, varying between 17 per cent for Italy and over 50 per cent forSwitzerland. What return on investment can retailers expect from their store brands,from a brand-equity standpoint? Can store brands be used as a brand-equity lever toaccentuate retail differentiation, and generate more store loyalty?The theoretical background of the research, anchored in brand extension theory, ispresented first. The ?dimensions? scope of both the store brand image and the retailerbrand image is then identified, via the literature and a qualitative study, so as topropose a model that relates the dimensions of retailer brand image, as dependentvariables, to dimensions of the store brand image, as explicative variables. Testing ofthe model is followed by an analysis of results and discussion.Theoretical frameworkThe impact of retailer brand on store brandsThe role played by the store image in the evaluation of the different retailed brandswas originally explored by Jacoby and Mazursky (1984). In the retail sector, it is nowwell-established that a retailer with a favourable image improves the image of the storebrands it carries by sharing its brand name with them (Burt and Sparks, 2002). Furtherresults demonstrate that the retailer image or the store image helps fuel attitudestowards store brands (Richardson et al., 1996; Semeijn et al., 2004; Vahie and Paswan,2006). Consumers use cues such as the physical environment of the store (Richardsonet al., 1996), the composition and the display of the assortment or the level of service(Semeijn et al., 2004) to build a general belief about the retailer that, in turn, determinesthe attitude towards store brands. Previous concerns about how retailers influencedstore brands can easily be explained by the anteriority of retail brands over storebrands. When store brands were first introduced, they needed support from the retailerto be accepted by consumers as reliable products. This focus on how retailers assistedin the positioning of store brands also provides insight into cases of store brands thathave been extended into unusual product categories. As Shwu-Ing and Jui-Ho (2010)show in the Taiwanese market, store image, store loyalty and store satisfaction have apositive and direct influence on the acceptance of store brand extensions. Thesestudies, however, do not mention a potentially reciprocal effect from the store brands tothe retailer image.A reciprocal effect from store brands to the retailer brand?The impact of a branded product on store image has been investigated in previousexperimental studies: poor-image retailers may improve their image by beingassociated with a strong brand image; inversely, poor-image brands reduce a retailer?shigh quality image (Jacoby and Mazursky, 1984; Pettijohn et al., 2002). Those studies,however, focused on national brands only and not on store brands.To our knowledge, only three papers have explicitly questioned the transfer ofimage from store brands to their retailer (Dimitriadis, 1993; Collins-Dodd and Lindley,2003; Martenson, 2007). In a qualitative study, Dimitriadis (1993) underlined adiscrepancy between retailers? expectations of store brands and consumers?IJRDM40,7530perceptions of them. Whereas the retailers interviewed acknowledge that they expectstore brands to deliver a better image in terms of price and choice for their chain, therespondents only see a downward relationship from the retailer to the store brands.The inverse relationship, from the store brands back up to the retail brand, does notmake sense to consumers. In a quantitative study, Collins-Dodd and Lindley (2003)highlighted a positive relationship between consumers? perceptions of an individualstore?s own-brands and the image dimensions of the associated store. However, theregression analysis does not allow clarification of the way the relationship works.Martenson (2007) goes further by showing, in a structural equation model, that storebrands contribute positively but weakly to the building of the corporate image of theretailer. And yet, no link between the store brands and the retailer as a brand, at thechain level, is taken into account.More cues for exploring the relationship between store brands and retailer brandscan be found in the brand extension literature. Brand extension consists of using anestablished brand to penetrate a new product category (Tauber, 1981). Thus, a storebrand can be analyzed as a brand extension of the retailer brand insofar as theretailer?s brand name is explicitly mentioned on the packaging of the product it sells(Collins-Dodd and Lindley, 2003). Such a strategy is supposed to improve brand equity.More than developing a new brand, a firm chooses to extend its brand portfolio to anew product in order to benefit from the favourable image and awareness of awell-established brand (Aaker and Keller, 1990). Brand extension thus enhances thetransfer of attitude towards the new product and limits the costs associated with thecreation and the launching of a new brand (Boush et al., 1987; Keller and Aaker, 1992;McInnis and Nakamoto, 1990; Park et al., 1991). The authors define as the ?reciprocityeffect? a change that appears in the consumer?s initial attitude towards the parentbrand after such an extension (Park et al., 1993). A brand extension introduces a newset of attributes and beliefs that is perceived as either congruent or not congruent withthe brand image. So, a brand extension may either reinforce or dilute brand equity.When applied to the store brands, this theory suggests that store brands do potentiallyaffect retail brands.Model conceptionRetailer brand image and store brand imageHere, we build a model where the retail brand image depends on the image of storebrands. The retailer?s brand image is considered to be multi-dimensional, according toa literature that often mixes associations related to the store or to the corporate imageof the retailer, such as price (Birtwistle et al., 1999; Collins-Dodd and Lindley, 2003;Chowdhury et al., 1998; Martenson, 2007), quality and variety of the assortment(Birtwistle et al., 1999; Collins-Dodd and Lindley, 2003; Chowdhury et al., 1998; Guptaand Pirsh, 2008; Martenson, 2007; Mazursky and Jacoby, 1986), values, reputation,social responsibility (Birtwistle et al., 1999; Gupta and Pirsh, 2008), store atmosphere(Chowdhury et al., 1998; Martenson, 2007; Mazursky and Jacoby, 1986) and quality ofcustomer service (Birtwistle et al., 1999; Collins-Dodd and Lindley, 2003; Gupta andPirsh, 2008). Since our concern is the retailer?s brand image at the chain level ratherthan in a specific store, we completed our survey of the literature on retailer/storeimage with our own qualitative study. 138 consumers of five major French retailers(Auchan, Carrefour, E.Leclerc, Casino and Carrefour Market) were asked to give theirRetailer brandimage531opinion on the store brands, the retailer as a brand and the potential contribution ofstore brands to retailer brands. Store brands were considered as a whole. We do notinvestigate the impact of a specific store brand on a specific retailer brand but ratherhow store brands in general affect retailers? brands, irrespective of the productcategory. Moreover, we verified that the retailer?s brand image could not be confusedwith store image, as, for the same chain, respondents tended to visit different stores.Proposition of a model with transfer effectsIn our proposed conceptual model, store brand image includes three dimensions thatstem from the literature review and from our own qualitative study: price, supply andvalues. The price dimension refers to low prices, good deals and value for money. Thesupply dimension relates to the perceived quality of store brands, packaging,innovation and to the possibility of customers arbitrating between national brands andstore brands. The third and final dimension harnesses values such as proximity,affordability, convenience and sustainability. Retailer brand image presents acomparable structure (see Figure 1).Following Collins-Dodd and Lindley (2003) who transposed the literature on brandextension into the context of store brands, we hypothesized that an image transfer fromthe store brand to the retailer occurs according the three dimensions identified.The first transfer takes place between the store brand and the retailer?s image onprice. It suggests that competitive, low-priced store brands reinforce the retailer?simage of competitiveness and its ability to provide good value for money.The second transfer concerns the ?supply? dimension. Our qualitative studysuggested that a range of store brands that is attractive in both quality and variety,Figure 1.Conceptual model ofimage transfer from storebrands to retailer brandIJRDM40,7532with appealing packaging and innovative products, reinforces the perception that theretailer is providing its customers with a wide array of good products in a pleasantshopping environment.A final transfer of image takes place regarding the values dimension: the valuesconveyedby store brands may strengthen the retailer image. Indeed, many of therespondents we interviewed associate store brands with positive values that bringthem closer to consumers. We suggest here that these values could be congruent withthe retailer?s own values and help develop a retailer image associated with proximity,buying-power protection, convenience and even ethics.Our purpose is to test whether and to what extent retailer image is simultaneouslyinfluenced by store brand image in these three dimensions. H1a, H1b and H1csummarize the theoretical relationships:H1. There is a positive association between store brand and retail brand on alldimensions:H1a. price dimension;H1b. Supply dimension;H1c. Values dimension.For instance, H1a means that a good price image for the store brand improves theretailer price image. Inversely, a poor price image for store brands damages the retailerprice image.Store brands and retailer loyaltyThe ability of store brands to build retailer brand has direct relevance to loyalty, eitherwith regard to the store or to the retailer as a chain, by which we include all stores withthe same brand name. Corstjens and Lal (2000) have analytically demonstrated thatstore brands can only generate retail differentiation, store loyalty and storeprofitability if the quality of the store brand is sufficiently high. However, these majortheoretical findings have no consensual empirical validation (Ailawadi and Keller,2004). Using consumer scanner data, Sudhir and Talukdar (2004) observe that storesales decrease and ? simultaneously ? that store profitability increases when storebrands have a high level of penetration across a customer base. Ailawadi and Harlam(2004) found that heavy buyers of store brands buy less from a retailer than moderatebuyers of store brands do. These results are mixed and are also embedded in theNorth-American market, where store brands are less mature and possibly lesssophisticated than in Europe. More recently, based on Dutch household-level data,Ailawadi et al. (2008) found a positive relationship between store brand share andwallet share: higher store brand share increases wallet share and greater wallet shareincreases store brand share. Binninger (2008) also showed a positive relationshipbetween store brands? satisfaction and store loyalty, mitigated by the attitude towardsstore brands. From these results, we follow Corstjens and Lal (2000) by suggesting thatthe quality of store brands in Europe is now high enough for store brands? image tocontribute positively to retailer loyalty, at the
Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.
You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.Read more
Each paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.Read more
Thanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.Read more
Your email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.Read more
By sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.Read more