Sei sulla pagina 1di 23

GROUP 6 Case Study On BRAND EQUITY

S. No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Name Govinda Kumar Ruchika Wardhan Satya Prakash Shalini Shilpa Gupta Sushant Saurav Utkarsh Anand Roll Number 50012 60032 60033 60035 60036 60042 60043

Qs1.What statistical analysis is suitable to measure Brand equity with the collected data? Why?

. Brand equity is identified as the value added to a brand due to its name. High Brand equity helps companies maintain their competitive advantage.

Brand equity is a difficult concept to measure due to its intangible and complex nature. Ariel research tried to quantify brand equity, that is turn an intangible concept to tangible measurement. It created a multidimensional measure with five main dimensions: Familiarity, popularity, relevancy, loyalty & uniqueness. They used binary variables (0,1) for analysing the data. They collected 125000 records and split the responses into high (1) & low.(0) On a scale of 1 to 10, 1-7 was given low (0) and 8,9,10 was given high.(1)

From our group analysis mode has been used for statistical analysis. For example,if we consider a particular age group(i.e.20 to 25years) we would see how many times 0 or 1 is coming. The highest frequency shows the consumers being more loyal to a particular brand.

group(i.e.20 to 25years) we would see how many times 0 or 1 is coming. The highest frequency shows the consumers being more loyal to a particular brand.

Question 2 . Compare loyality ,relevance,familiarity,uniqueness and popularity for its brands using the appropriate statistical analysis. Ans

We have calculated total number of rating of familiarity, uniqueness, relevence, loyality and popularity o f each have compared the all brand on the basis of familiarity,uniqueness,relevence,loyality and popu Comparing of Brands 263 264 Closer to Closer to Closer to Closer to 0 1 0 1 128 173 196 196 155 155 108 85 87 128 127 195 197 190 117 164 95 92 101 171

Brands Ratings Questions Famil Uniqu Relev Loyal Popul

265 Closer to Closer to 0 1 164 200 212 215 174 152 114 103 101 139

266 Closer to 0 47 131 162 142 30

Assumption : we have consider responses 1-7 is "Closer to 0" and 810 is "Closer to 1" Findings Most familiar brand is 266 Most unique brand is 265 and least unique brand is 264 Most relevent brand is 265 and least relevent brand is 263 Most loyal brand is 265 and least loyal brand is 263 Most popular brand is 266

Supporting data for Comparision

Brands and their number of ratings closer to 0 and 1 on the basis of familliarity,uniqueness,relevence,loyality and popullarity Brands Rating 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Total Famil 15 15 13 12 34 24 15 52 21 82 283 Uniqu 16 14 19 18 51 26 29 44 29 35 281 Relev 29 17 21 13 51 32 33 33 16 36 281

263

128

173

196

155

108

85

Brands

264

Rating 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Total

Famil 16 11 12 10 32 15 31 47 41 76 291

127

164

Uniqu 17 16 22 23 48 34 35 44 24 27 290

195

95

Relev 36 18 19 20 41 32 31 34 24 34 289

197

92

Brands

265

Rating 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Famil 50 22 13 11 26 18 24 36 37 79 316

164

152

Uniqu 40 20 14 14 55 33 24 53 25 36 314

200

114

Relev 53 23 12 26 40 31 27 42 24 37 315

212

103

Brands

266

Rating 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Famil 3 4 2 1 10 10 17 43 67 150 307

47

260

Uniqu 10 11 7 10 40 19 34 61 37 79 308

131

177

Relev 18 15 18 19 36 23 33 54 45 47 308

162

146

Brands

267

Rating 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Famil 41 13 12 15 24 25 26 44 31 71 302

156

146

Uniqu 35 17 12 15 45 22 34 44 30 47 301

180

121

Relev 43 23 12 17 45 26 23 38 23 51 301

189

112

arity for its brands using the

ce, loyality and popularity o f each brand . After that we eness,relevence,loyality and popularity

266 Closer to 1 260 177 146 166 277

267 Closer to Closer to 0 1 156 180 189 205 149 146 121 112 97 152

Loyal 25 25 11 18 59 27 31 33 16 38 283

196

87

Popul 9 13 11 18 42 26 36 38 39 51 283

155

128

Loyal 47 21 20 13 34 23 32 49 18 34 291

190

101

Popul 13 3 5 11 30 16 39 50 43 78 288

117

171

Loyal 63 29 12 19 43 24 25 41 20 40 316

215

101

Popul 38 13 16 14 38 29 26 56 32 51 313

174

139

Loyal 21 11 16 14 40 15 25 70 35 61 308

142

166

Popul 4 1 1 0 6 9 9 39 59 179 307

30

277

Loyal 58 24 12 13 46 26 26 35 22 40 302

205

97

Popul 31 6 8 13 28 23 40 57 30 65 301

149

152

Q 3). Analyze a Fast Food Brand to determine relationship between Loyality and Respondats profile (eg. Age , Region , Income ).

Count of loyalbin Brand 263

LOYALITY vs AGE for BRAND 263 Column Labels


LOW HIGH 20 1 21 1 1 22 1 23 5 24 3 25 2 2

16

1. For Brand 263 , Number of LOW is more than Number of High. It signifies, More samples are not loyal to the brand.

14 12 10 8 6

2. For Brand 263 ,from the age group 31 to 40 , Number of LOW is significantly more than Number of High. It signifies, More samples are not loyal to the brand esp in this age zone.

4 2 0

LOYALITY vs REGION for BRAND 263 Count of loyalbin Row Labels BRAND 263 BRAND 263 BRAND 263 Column Labels Maritiimes 21 16 5

TOTAL LOW HIGH

Quebec 66 46 20

Ontario 102 89 13

West 94 45 49

Grand Total 283 196 87

120 100 80 60 40 20 0 Maritiimes Quebec Ontario West 16 5 20 13 46 45 49 89

0 Maritiimes Quebec TOTAL LOW Ontario HIGH West

LOYALITY vs INCOME for BRAND 263 Count of loyalbin Row Labels BRAND 263 BRAND 263 BRAND 263 Column Labels <30 k 30 - 49.9 K 50-74.9 K 47 52 57 23 18 25 70 70 82
57 52 47 40 40 30 20 10 0 <30 k 30 - 49.9 K LOW 50-74.9 K HIGH 75 k+ 23 18 25

LOW HIGH

75 k+ 40 21 61

60 50

21

26 4 3

27 3 4

28 4

29 4 3

30 4 3

31 5

32 16 4

33 8 3

34 9 2

16 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 LOW 1 11 1 5 3 22 4 3 3 4 4 4 3 4 5 3 4 3 8 9 7 6 4 2 2 22 4 9 7 5 4 2

1.In WEST region , more people are loyal to the Brand 263 . As it shown by the number of samples for HIGH is more than Number of Samples for LOW

1.In ONTARIO region , There is a wide gap between the loyal and not loyal samples for BRAND 263. as the Number for LOW loyality exceeds .

1.For all income range, there is uniformity , as LOW loyality is more than the HIGH Loyality samples.

2. In the middle income Range, From 30 to 49.9 K and 50 to 74.9 K , the Gap between Loyal and NOT LOYAL is large , showing affinity of other brands.

35 7 2

36 2 2

37 6 4

38 9 4

39 5 4

40 7 2

41 3 2

42 7 2

43 3 2

7 5 5 3 1 44 45 2 3 2

8 5 2 3 2 2

3 1

3 3 1 54

33

1 48

22

33 3

3 1 60

22

2 2

41 LOW

42

43 HIGH

46

47

49

50

51

52

53

55

56

57

58

59

61

62

63

44 7 1

45 5 3

46 5 2

47 3 2

48 7 1

49 8 2

50 3 2

51 5 2

52 4 3

1 64

63

53 1 3

54 3 1

55 3 3

56 2 2

57 3 3

58 3

59 2

60 3 1

61 2 2

62 3 2

63 2 1

64

(blank) 4 1

Grand Total 196 87

Q4.Ariel created binary variables for familiarity ,uniqueness,relevance,loyality and popu splitting responses into high and low.why would they would choose to do(or not do other words ,what information is gained and what information is lost?

Ans: ariel research created binary variables by splitting responses into high and lo have considered various factors while calculating brand equity .if they would have chos numbers(like 1 to 7) or (8,9,10),then it was even more difficult to analyze the data.In fact consisits of 125000 records.By creating binary variables ,they became somewhat comfo analyzing data.
LOST INFORMATION

now by creating binary variables for responses, exact information for a brand got lost.if measuring a data on a scale of 1 to 7(i.e.for low) there can be a huge difference between but in this data sheet they are clubbed into same category as low. Now this creates con while analyzing data.1 and 7 can be extreme values but they have been grouped into one

elevance,loyality and popularity by ould choose to do(or not do)this?In hat information is lost?

ponses into high and low.They y .if they would have chosen exact to analyze the data.In fact the data became somewhat comfortable in

ation for a brand got lost.if we are a huge difference between 1 and 7 s low. Now this creates confusion ave been grouped into one category.

Q 5) . Do You agree Ariel's Measure of BRAND EQUITY ?

In an era of high competition and expectations, customer satisfaction surveys are essential tools for listening to customers about their satisfaction levels, and for developing strategies for improvement. Now that, Brand Equity and Quality has become a deciding factor in product selection for the customer. I think whatever the method was adopted by Ariel Research , a market research company to measure Brand Equity is appropriate. They asked the survey respondents to rate their satisfaction, using a scale from 1 to 10 .The more they agreed with a questions, the closer the score was to 10, the less they agreed ,the closer the score was to 1. So, Ariel decided that a response of 8,9 or 10 indicated high brand loyalty

Potrebbero piacerti anche