benefit segmentation in restuarant industry

8/8/2019 Benefit Segmentation in Restuarant Industry

1/22

B e n e f i t S e g m e n t a t i o n in t h eR e s t a u r a n t I n d u s t r yK e n n e t h D . B a h n

Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State Universityant i

K e n t L . G r an z i nUniversity of UtahINTRODUCTION

Re s ta u r a n t p a t r o n a g e c o n t in u e s t o f o r m a n in c r ea s in g ly imp o r t a n t p a r t o fA m e r i c a n s ' g r o w in g e x p e n d i tu r e s fo r s e rv i c e s . T h e r e st a u r an t i n d u s t r y re -por ted reven ues o f 125 b i l l ion do lla rs in 1981 (Wal lace and Riggs 1984) , as i z e a b le l e v e l o f c u s to me r sp e n d in g w h e n c o mp a r e d w i th e x p e n d i tu r e s o f874 .1 b i l l ion do l la r s fo r the o f fe r ings o f the en t i r e se rv ice sec tor o f thee c o n o m y in 1 98 1 ( U . S . D e p t . o f Co m m e r c e 1 9 8 2 - 8 3 ) . I n a d d i ti o n , A m e r -icans were r epor ted to ea t about th i r ty pe r cen t o f the i r mea ls ou ts ide theh o m e ( Sh a w a n d P in to 1 9 7 8 ). T o da y, th e p e r c e n ta g e o f me a l s c o n su m e da w ay f r o m h o m e h a s i n c r e a se d to a p p r o x im a te ly 3 6 % ( W a l la c e a nd R ig g s1984) .

Because of the s ize o f th i s impor tan t marke t , the losses due to f au l tyma n a g e me n t c a n b e g r e a t . I f ma n a g e r s a r e t o su c c e e d in s e r v in g p r e se n ta n d p o te n t i a l c u s to me r s , t h e y mu s t k n o w th e n e e d s o f t h e p a r t i c u l a r c u s -tomers they seek to se rve . F i r s t , o f course , marke te r s mus t iden t i fy the i rta rge t segment( s ) in te rms of r ecognizab le cha rac te r i s t ic s o f the pa t ronsw h o c o n s t i t u t e th o se m a r k e ts t h e y s e e k to s e r v e . O n c e th e t a r g e t s eg me n t shave been iden t i f ied , m arke te r s can de te rm ine the r equ i reme nts o f the iden-t i f ied pa t rons , and shape marke t o f fe r ings to mee t the needs of ta rge t seg-me n t s . T h e imp o r t a n c e o f t h is t a sk o f c h a r a c t e ri z in g ma r k e t s e g me n t s i nthe r e s tauran t indu s t ry sugges ts the ne ed for con t inu ing a t ten t ion f rom m ar -ke t ing schola r s . A s a by-pro duc t , f ind ings , f ro m resea rch in to the re s tauran t

9 1985, Academyof Marketing Science,Journal of the Academy of Marketing ScienceSumm er, 1985, Vol. 13, No. 3,2 26-2 470092-0703/85/1303-0226 $2.0 0226


2/22

BAHN AND GRANZIN 227

marke t , may have impl ica t ions for marke t ing s t r a tegy in o the r , r e la ted se r -v i c e i ndus tr ie s w he r e m a r ke t er s c a t e r p r ima r i ly t o c onsum e r s .Cer ta in ly , r e s tauran ts a re no t new to the marke t ing sc ience , and re sea rch-

e r s ha ve d i s c ove r e d in f o r ma t ion u se f u l t o t he f o r mu la t ion o f ma r ke t ings t ra tegy . None the less , much remains to be lea rned about the na ture of themarke t and i t s segm ents . For one th ing , th is m arke t is no t s ta t ic . C hangesin t he c u l tu r a l c ha r a c t e ri s t ic s o f the A m e r i c a n soc i e ty ma y r e qu i r e som ein te res t ing changes in the mix of r e s tauran ts tha t wi l l be r equi red to se rvepa t rons in the fu ture (Marketing N ew s, 1983) . For example , the r equi re -ments cus tomers p lace on re s tauran ts may re f lec t the changing va lues he ldby e thn ic a nd o the r s e gme n t s o f t he popu la t ion .

O the r c ha nge s i n A m e r i c a n soc i e ty ca n be e xp e c t e d to ha ve the ir i n flu -e nc e on the ma r ke t , a s w e l l . Cus tome r s ' r e qu i r e me n t s ma y a l so be i n f lu -enced by such fac tor s a s va ry ing l i f e s ty le s , changes in such demographicsas the age compos i t ion of the count ry , and an inc reased emphas is on nu t r i -t ion . However , the ex ten t to which such fac tor s in f luence the needs ofpa t rons mus t f i r s t be de te rmined so re s taura teur s wi l l know to wha t ex ten tthey m us t adapt to such chang es . T he presen t r e sea rch s tudy a ids th is sea rchfor in form at ion re levant to m arke t ing s t r a tegy in the r e s tauran t indus t ry . Inpa r t icu la r , th i s paper r epor ts f ind ings conce rn ing the re la t ionsh ip be tweenthe needs of r e s tauran t pa t rons and seve ra l types of va r iab les expec ted tobe use fu l fo r unders tanding the na ture of th i s marke t .

A s a m e a ns f o r ide n t if y ing c us tom e r s ' n e e ds , t h is s tudy f oc use s on thebenef i t s r equi red by cus tomers . Requi red benef i t s se rve a s the cen t ra l con-c e p t i n the s c he m e p r opose d by H a le y ( 1968 , 1971 ). H a le y sugge s t ed tha tmarke t segments f i r s t be de l inea ted by the benef i t s cus tomers cons ide r tobe mos t impor tan t . Then , a f te r they a re so c la ss i f ied , the segments can bed i s t i ngu i she d in t e r ms o f suc h me a su r e s a s de mogr a ph ic s , c onsumpt ionpa t te rns , media hab i t s , l i f e s ty le , and o the r cha rac te r i s t ic s deemed use fu lf o r s e tt ing ma r ke t ing s t ra t egy . H a le y ' s s c he m e ha s be e n va l ida t e d th r ougha num ber o f em pir ica l s tud ies in va r ious s to re and prod uc t ca tegor ie s (Saw-yer and Arb e i t 1973; Sharp e and Gran z in 1974; Mi l le r and Gra nz in 1979;G r a nz in a nd P a in t e r 1979 ) . T hus , r e qu i r e d be ne f i ts ho ld p romise f o r p r o -v id ing the means for be t te r unders tanding of the r e s tauran t marke t .

Th e pu rpos e o f th i s s tudy i s to : (1 ) deve lop a conceptu a l iza t ion based onHaley ' s theore t ica l scheme tha t i s use fu l fo r v iewing the re ta i l r e s tauran tmarke t ; (2 ) empir ica l ly te s t the l inks spec i f ied (a s hypotheses) by the con-cep tua l iza t ion ; and (3) p rovide impl ica t ions of the f ind ings . The cen t ra lc ons t r uc t i n t h i s de ve lopm e n t is H a le y ' s c onc e p t o f be ne f i t se gme n ta t ion .


3/22

228 BEN EFIT SEGMENTATION NTH E RESTAURANT NDUSTRY

CO N C E P T U A L B A C KG RO U N DH ale y ' s sche m e ca l ls fo r looking a t causa l , r a the r than desc r ip t ive , in f lu -

ence s on m arke t behavior . In th is v iew, benef i t s a re the basic r eason for thee x i s t e nc e o f s e gm e n t s i n a m a r ke t. O f c ou r se , t he c ha r a c te r i z a tion o f ma r -ke ts in te rms of the i r r equi red benef i t s can be qu i te complex , la rge ly be -caus e the re a re m any d i f fe ren t types of benef i t s to cons ide r . In h is o r ig ina lc onc e p tua l i z a t ion , H a le y ( 1968 ) p r e se n te d a n e xa mp le i nvolv ing too thpa s tewh ich co ns ide red bo th the cha rac te r i s t ic s tha t the use r s des i red to ga in f ro musing the produ c t ( e .g . , b r igh tness of tee th) and the a tt r ibu tes o f the produ c t( e . g . , p r i c e ) .

He la te r (1971) ex tended the conceptua l iza t ion to cons ide r the benef i t ssought by pa t rons in te rms of the a t t i tudes they ho ld .

H a le y ' s conc eptua l iza t ion i s qu i te gen era l in i t s appl icab i l ity . In f ac t , fo ra pa r t icu la r s tudy , th i s concept mus t be na r rowed cons ide rab ly to a l low aresea rche r to focus on those va r iab les cons ide red mos t use fu l to the mar -ke t ing dec is ions to be m ade . Als o , g iven the many va r iab les tha t f i t wi th inh is sch em e , any s ing le s tudy mus t necess a r i ly be ra the r r e s tr ic ted in scope .For these reasons , the presen t s tudy inves t iga tes whe the r seve ra l types ofva r ia b l e s p r e v ious ly show n to be r e l a t e d to f ood u sa ge c a n be l i nke d to t hebenef i t s r equi red by re s tauran t pa t rons .

B ecau se re s tauran ts p rovide a bundle of se rv ices , i t seems approp r ia te tocons ide r benef i t s in te rms of a t t r ibu tes o f the se rv ice bundle provided . Forth i s r e a son , " be ne f i t s " i s t a ke n to me a n the a t t r i bu t e s impor t a n t t o c us -tome r s i n t he c on te x t o f f ood pu r c ha se a nd p r e pa r a t ion . T h i s f oc us ona t t r ibu tes fo l lows tha t o f Sawyer and Arbe i t (1973) , who used a t t r ibu teim por tanc e as the i r foca l po in t in the s tudy o f the r e ta i l banking marke t .O f c ou r se , H a le y ' s s c he me p r e sc r ibe s t ha t be ne f i t s be u se d in c on junc -t ion wi th o the r va r iab les , those bo th preceding and succeeding th is con-s t ruc t , in the f low of in f luence tha t leads to behavior in the marke tp lace .H a le y u r ge s t he r e se a r c he r t o w or k f o r w a r d a nd ba c kw a r d f r om be ne f i tsegments to e s tab l i sh the pa th of in f luence lead ing to marke t ing behavior :" O nc e pe op le ha ve be e n c l a s s i f i e d i n to s e gme n t s i n a c c o r da nc e w i th t hebenef i t s they a re seek ing , each seg m ent i s cont ras ted wi th a l l o f the o the rse gme n t s i n t e r ms o f i t s de mogr a phy , it s vo lume o f c onsumpt ion , i ts b r a ndpercep t ions , i t s media hab i t s , i t s pe r sona l i ty and l i f e s ty le , and so for th , "(Ha ley 1968 , p . 31) .

As a bas is fo r empir ica l inves t iga t ion , the conceptua l bas is fo r th i s s tudyholds tha t the cons t ruc t o f r equi red benef i t s r e f lec ts the in f luence of f ivep r e de c e s so r c ons t ruc t s , a nd i t s e l f a ff e c t s re s t a u ra n t pa t r ona ge. T he c onc e p -


4/22


tual iza t ion emp has izes those re la t ionships that involve requi red bene f i ts asa central con struct (see Figure 1) .More specif ical ly, these concep tual linksprovide the hypotheses t es ted in th i s s tudy . The benef i t s sought by a cus-tom er are hy pothe s ized to be re la ted to the inf luence of personal values ,those re la t ively permanent , deep-seated representa t ions of what i s he ldimpor tan t by the ind iv idual . At a more mani fes t l evel , the ind iv idual maybe character ized by demographics , l i fe s ty le , concern for nu t r i t ion , andeat ing pat terns . T hese mo re m ani fes t variab les can a l so be taken to ref lec tthe inf luence of the more bas ic values . In tu rn , the benef i t s requi red bycus tom ers should inf luence thei r pa t ronage pat terns .

Values have been prev ious ly examined in a market ing contex t . S tudieshave show n values are re la ted to a t ti tudes toward products (V inson , S cot t ,and La m ont 1977) and to consump t ion behavior (He nry 1976) . A t thecon cep tual level , Steelm an (1976) su ggested that values underlie fo od hab-i t s . Her conceptual iza t ion fur ther l inked l i fe s ty le to food habi t s (ea t ingpat terns ) . I f l i fe s ty le i s v iewed in t erms of the a c t iv i t ies one pursues in theprocess of l iv ing on e ' s l i fe , then v i s i t ing res taurants and choos ing par t i cu larfood a l ternat ives can be seen as one of th i s se t o f ac t iv i t i es tha t def ineson e ' s l i fe s ty le . S tee lm an a l so proposed the hypothes ized l ink betwee ndemographics and food habi t s . Her hypothes ized re la t ionships involv ingthree pred ic tor var iab les and fo od habi t s w ere la ter g iven empi r ica l suppor t(G ranz in and B ahn 1982). M ore direct ly relevant to the present s tudy,em pi r ica l ev idence has l inked demograp hics to res taurant patronage (Shawand Pinto 1978).

Co ncern for nu t r i tion provides the l as t cons t ruct in the concep tual iza tion .Recent ly , researchers have begun to examine the l ink between the concernfor nu t r i tion and fo od co nsum pt ion . S evera l s tud ies have provided suppor tfor th i s re la tionship (Andres 1978; W ood 1978, 197 9; Brow n and Pest le1981) . Th us , th i s conceptual iza t ion ref lec t s the schem e proposed by S teel -m an and the f ind ings of the o ther s tud ies c i t ed .

This parad igm sugges t s values and demographics represent foundat ioneleme nts in the behav iora l p rocess . Values and dem ographics in teract wi theach o ther , bu t re m ain re la t ively bas ic in f luences on the behaviora l p rocess .At a more mani fes t l evel , l i fe s ty le and a t t i tud inal concems ref lec t theinf luence of values and dem ographics . In tu rn , these variab les af fec t ea t ingpat terns , which both ref lec t and inf luence the benef i t s requi red f rom thesou rce o f supp ly fo r food .

The s cope and na tu re o f t h is s t udy do no t pe rmi t the exam ina t ion o f a l ll inks among var iab les fea tured in the conceptual iza t ion . The re la t ionshipsof greates t in teres t, and o f d irec t concern here , a re those between requi red


5/22

230 BENEFIT SEGMENTATION IN THE RESTAURANT INDUSTRY

i."4

b

qlw A ~

ow.~*J

J ~

i


6/22


be ne f i t s a nd those c ons t r uc t s c onc e p tua l i z e d to p r e c e de o r suc c e e d be ne f i t sin the f low of in f luence . In pa r t icu la r , r equi red benef i t s a re hypothes izedto be re la ted to on e ' s va lues , dem ograph ics , l i f e s ty le , concern for nu t r i t ion ,ea t ing pa t te rns , and pa t ronag e pa t te rns . T hese hypo thes ized re la t ionshipsa r e p r e se n te d in F igu r e 2 .

M E T H O D

D a t a C o l l e c t io nResidents of a la rge we s te rn metrop ol i tan a rea furn ished the da ta used in

th is s tudy . A sample o f 180 adul t s was se lec ted in accordance wi th a quotatha t m a tche d sam ple charac te r i s t ic s to the age and sex charac te r i s tic s of theS MS A r e po r t e d in the mos t r e c e n t c e nsus . The sa mpl ing sc he me a l so e n -su r e d r e p r e se n ta t ion w i th r e sp e c t t o soc ioe c onom ic c ha ra c t e ri s t ic s , by a s -s ign ing in te rv iewers to va r ious sec t ions of the metropol i tan a rea .

D a ta w e r e c o l l e c t e d by me a ns o f i n - pe r son a dmin i s t r a t ion o f a s e l f -comple t ion ques t ionna i re . P resence of the in te rv iewers se rved to mot iva tethe respondents , moni tor the progress of the da ta co l lec t ion , and provideanswers to any ques t ions tha t might a r i se .M e a s u r e s

B e ne f i t s r e qu i r e d by c us tome r s w e r e me a su r e d by r e f er r ing to ba si c ne e dsfor a t t r ibu tes of food . F ive i tems asce r ta ined the respondents ' benef i t sr e qu i r e d o f f ood pu r c ha se d , a nd f ive i t e ms de te r mine d the i r be ne f i t s r e -qu i r e d o f f ood p r e pa r e d f o r c onsum pt ion . The se be ne f it s , w h ic h a r e show nin Ta b le 2 , w e r e m e a su r e d u s ing se ve n - po in t s c a le s a nc ho r e d by " n o t a t a lli m p o r t a n t " a n d " e x t r e m e l y i m p o r t a n t . "

Ea t ing pa t t er n s w e r e me a su r e d u s ing s ix t e e n i t e ms g iv ing a d i c ho tomou sc ho ic e o f tw o i t e ms tha t migh t e a s i ly subs t i tu t e f o r one a no the r in a g ive ncon sum pt ion s i tua t ion . F or exam ple , one choice involved f ru i t vs . cake .The r e sponde n t i nd ic a te d tha t f ood i t e m se l e c te d m os t o f t e n . F o r e a ch suc hcompar ison , one a l te rna t ive i tem was coded as more nut r i t ious , a s basedon repor ts of the f ind ings of nu t r i t iona l r e sea rch . Table 2 presents thesei tems, wi th the more nut r i t ious food i tem l i s ted f i r s t .Co ncern for nu t r i t ion was m easured us ing f ive -poin t L ike r t sca les . Th eseven i tems in th is se t r epresented a t t i tudes toward a va r ie ty of i s sues basedon nut r i t iona l concerns such as the impor tance of nu t r i t ion in prevent ingd i se a se . T he se i t e ms a ppe a r i n Ta b le 2.


7/22

232 BEN EF IT SEG MEN TA TIO N IN TH E R ESTA U R A N T IN D U STR Y

F i g u r e 2H y p o t h e s i z e d R e l a t i o n s h i p s o f A n t e c e d e n ta n d S u b s eq u e nt V a r i a b l e s w i t h B e n e f i ts

A t t i t u d e s

D e m o g r a p h i c s

V a l u e s

L i f e S t y l e

E a t i n gP a t t e r n s

P a t r o n a g e


8/22


Li f e s ty l e da ta c a m e f r om the r e por t e d f r e que n c y o f pa r ti c ipa t ion in n inele isure - t ime ac t iv i t ies . These ac t iv i t ies were chosen because they representthe c ho ic e s m a de by pe r sons whe n the y a r e f r e e f r om the r e qu i r e m e n t s o fthe i r job (W il l iams 1975) . F req uen cy of par t ic ipa t ion was re fe r red to atypica l month , quar te r , or year , as appropr ia te to the type of ac t iv i ty con-s idered . These i tems were se lec ted on the bas is of previous research in tole isure -ac t iv i ty pa t te rns o f loca l res idents (Granz in and W il l iams 1968) .Table 2 presents these i tems.

For th is s tudy, va lues were measured us ing twelve i tems cons idered tore f lec t var ious d imensions of one ' s or ienta t ion toward l i fe in genera l andcons um pt ion in par t icu la r. T he i tem s were se lec ted f rom ear l ie r s tudies tha tinvolved on e ' s v a lue or ienta t ion (England 1967; Schiebe 1970; Kabish andCol l ie r 1981) . F ive-poin t Liker t sca les were used in the opera t iona l iza t ionof va lues . T able 2 g ives the i tems used to measure va lue orienta tion .

De m ogr a ph ic s inc lude d a num be r o f c om m only use d m e a su r e s o f soci -oeconomic charac te r is t ics . To re f lec t the concepta l iza t ion of th is s tudy asan inv es t iga t ion in to var iables usefuI to those charged wi th dec is ion-m akingin th is re ta i l marke tp lace , media habi ts were inc luded, as wel l . The i temsused have a l l been found to successfu l ly predic t marke t behavior in ea r l ie rs tudies . These i tems appear in Table 2 .

Data An alysisGiven the conceptua l iza t ion of benef i t (marke t ) segments as the foca l

poin t for th is researc h , i t was ne cessa ry to ana lyze the responses of thesample of res taurant cus tom ers in to groups tha t represent benef i t segments .To th is end, h ie ra rchica l c lus te r ana lys is was employed (Blashf ie ld 1976) .Da ta we r e p r oc e sse d us ing a c om pute r p r ogr a m de ve lope d by Ve ldm a n(1967) . Based on the e r ror te rm sup pl ied by th is program , and the judgm entof the researchers , four benef i t segments were ident i f ied .

Th us , the ana lyses involved d isc re te groups of cus tom ers and continuousme asures of the var iables in the f ive se ts of predic tor var iables hypothes izedto be re la ted to requ i red benef i t s . U nivar ia te AN OV A and d isc r iminantana lys is were used to exam ine the na ture of these four segments . E ach se tof hypothes ized predic tor var iables was examined separa te ly .The n , to p r ov ide a sum m a r y p r o f i l e o f the m e m be r s o f the f ou r be ne f i tsegments , a s tepwise d isc r iminant ana lys is was used to f ind the bes t se t ofpredic tors . Th is las t ana lys is provided a compac t por traya l o f the d i f fe rencesa m on g the f ou r be ne f i t s e gm e n t s .


9/22

234 BENEFIT SEGMENTATION INTHE RESTAURANT INDUSTRY

F I N D I N G SThe f i r s t subsec t ion dea ls wi th the resul t s of the ana lyses used to de l in-

ea te the four benef i t segments . Succee ding subsec t ions present the findingsf rom the ana lyse s involv ing the severa l se ts of hypo thes ized predic torvar iables .C r it e ri o n M e a s u r e s

Table 1 presents the descr ip t ive s ta t i s t ics tha t show the resul t s of thec lus te r ana lys is . Th e table g ives group m eans and F- ra t ios for the c r i te r ionvar iables . Because the var iables shown are those used in c lus te r ing , infe r -ence s to a popu la t ion a re ne i the r poss ib le n or in tended. How ever , the s ta t is -t ics do indica te the re la t ive cont r ibut ion made by each var iable to thec om pos i t ion o f the m a r ke t s e gm e n t s l a be le d A th r ough D in the ta b le. B a se don the i r F- ra t ios , the f ive var iables making the grea tes t cont r ibut ion togroup format ion a re qua l i ty requi red for mea l prepara t ion , tas te requi redfor mea l prepara t io n , tas te requi red for purchase , d ie t res t r ic tions acknowl-e d g e d f o r m e a l p r e p a r a t i o n , a n d d ie t r e s t r i c ti o n s a c k n o w l e d g e d f o rpur c ha se .

G roup A s tands h ighes t on i ts requi reme nts for a l l benef i t s cons id ered inth is s tudy. W heth er th is grou p of respondents is m ere ly predisposed toindica te a h igh leve l of requi rem ent , r egardless o f the s t imulus presen teddur ing a survey, might seem problemat ica l . However , the resul t s repor tedshow the m to d i f f e r f r om the o the r g r oups wi th r e spe c t to a num be r o fpredic tor var iables . T hus , i t appears the i r ra t ings do re f lec t requi rem ents inthe marke tp lace .

Gr ou p B e m pha s iz e s t a s t e a nd qua l i ty in bo th pu r c ha se a nd p r e pa r a t ion ,but shows a re la t ive lack of concern for d ie t res t r ic t ions in purchase andprepara t ion , and a re la t ive d is in te res t in pr ice of purchase and t ime ofp r e pa r a t ion . Gr oup C f a l l s be twe e n the e x t r e m e s f o r a lm os t a l l i t e m s ,except for i t s low ra t ing in re la t ive (but not absolu te ) te rms for the impor -tance of tas te as a requi red purchase benef i t . Group D gives re la t ive ly lowra t ings to a l l benef i t s except for the pr ice of purchased food.

Whi le essent ia l ly an infe rent ia l tool , d isc r iminant ana lys is can be usedin a descr ip t ive sense to fur ther charac te r ize the four benef i t segmen ts . A sshown in Table 1 , three func t ions can b e used to charac te r ize the segm ents .Th e f unc t ions e xp la in 56 .1 , 3 4 .2 , a nd 9 .7 p e r c en t o f the va r ia nc e ,respec t ive ly .

The f i r s t func t ion represents an emphasis on tas te and qua l i ty in bothpurch ase and prepara t ion . T he segm ents ra te th is d imension in the descend-


10/22

B A H N A N D G R A N Z I N 2 35

o

c

E

o

o

9 =

. . . . _ ~

" ' J . . . . = ' ~ ' i "L I

L

> ~

~eg~ c

~ e

o o =

~S g

~dgm o

gd~


11/22

236 BENEFIT SEGMENTATION NTHE RESTAURANT NDUSTRY

ing order of B. A , C, and D. The second func t ion re f lec ts , for the mo stpart , an interest in diet restric t ions and nutri t ional value. On this dim ensio n,the groups rank in the order of A, C, B, and D. T he th i rd func t ion predom-inant ly indica tes an in te res t in tas te and pr ice of purchased food, anddis in te res t in the qua l i ty of prepared food . The groups rank in the order ofD, A , B , and C on th i s leas t important func t ion .

On th is bas i s , Group A may be charac te r ized as those persons who a rein te res ted in the hea l th aspec ts of food. For convenience , Grou p A wi l l bere fe rred to as the Hea l th segment . S imi la r ly , Gro up B beco mes the Gou rmetsegm ent , Grou p C the Unconcerned segment , and Grou p D the (Purchased)Value segment .Values

Three of the twelve values reached significance at the .05 level in testsusing u nivaria te AN OV A. Th e three sig nificant values are Venturing Risk,Autonomy, and Rel ig ion. The Value segment emerges as most wi l l ing toa s sume r i sk and l e a s t conce rned w i th au tonomy. The G ourme t segmentm ost apprec ia tes au tonom y but leas t ca res for re l ig ion. Th e Hea l th segm entva lues re lig ion, but show s the leas t concern for taking r i sks .

The two s ign i f icant d i sc r iminan t func t ions , wh ich expla in 50.8 and 40.1per cent o f the v ar iance , respec t ive ly , expand th is por traya l of the segments .The f i rs t func t ion re f lec ts the va lues of taking r i sks and f inding success inon e ' s oc cupa t ion , b ut not autonom y and control ( i . e . , a quas i -cont inuum oftaking chances vs . independence) . The segments rank in the descendingorder of Value , U nconcerned, G ourm et , and Hea l th on th i s func t ion . Th us ,the Value segment can be assoc ia ted wi th taking chances , and the Hea l thsegm ent wi th a deep-sea ted need for independence.

Th e second fu nc t ion may be charac te r ized a t one end by an emphas is onsuccess in on e ' s f ie ld , t aking r i sks , and autonom y, and a t the o ther end byre l ig ion. T he segments rank in the order of Gou rm et , Value , Unconcerned,and Hea l th . Here , the Gourmet segment most h ighly va lues independentventur ing and the H ea l th segm ent most h igh ly va lues re l ig ion.Demographics

Four o f the e ighteen demographic m easures reached s igni f icance in uni -var ia te ana lys i s . Sex, readership of g lamour magaz ines , readership ofnewspapers , and pre fe rence for count ry music on the radio d is t inguishamo ng the segmen ts wh en taken s ingly . The Value segmen t conta ins ahighe r propor t ion o f m ales than the o ther segments . In an apparent anom aly ,


12/22


which i s examined be low, i t s tands h ighes t on reading newspapers andg la m ou r m a ga z ine s , a s we l l a s on l is t e n ing to c oun t r y m us ic .The mul t ivar ia te ana lys is produced two s igni f icant func t ions , which ac-

c oun te d f o r 47 .4 a nd 32 .5 pe r c e n t o f the e xp la ine d va r ia nc e , r e spe c t ive ly .The mul t ivar ia te ana lys is i l lumina tes the apparent anomaly presented bythe s impler univar ia te ana lyses . R egardless of i ts in te rna l hom oge ne i ty wi thr e spe c t to o the r va r i a b le s, whe n de m ogr a ph ic m e a su r e s a r e c ons ide r e d , t heValue segment can be separa ted in to two sub-segments based on gender .

The f i r s t func t ion re f lec ts h igher readership , lower income, and lesse rpre fe rence for rock music . Group cent ro ids on th is func t ion rank in these que nc e o f Va lue, He a l th , U nc onc e r ne d , a nd Gour m e t . On th is ba s is , t heValue segment inc ludes those who a re more l ike ly to turn to ce r ta in pr in tm edia , but a re re la tive ly poor . Co nverse ly , the G ourm et segment compr isesthose wh o a re m ore w ea l thy , but a re less avid readers of the m edia involved.

The se c ond f unc t ion i s de f ine d by m or e t e l e v i s ion v ie wing , a g r e a te rp r opor t ion o f m a le s , s t ronge r p r e f e r e nc e f o r c oun t r y m us ic r a the r than e a syl i s t e n ing p r ogr a m m ing , a nd h ighe r r e a de r sh ip o f Playboym a ga z ine . Theor de r o f c e n t ro ids r uns f r om Va lue, t h r ough Go ur m e t a nd U nc onc e r ne d , toHea l th . Thus , the Value segment a lso inc ludes males who a re most l ike lyto r e a d a l e a d ing m e n ' s m a ga z ine , a nd to l i s t e n to c oun t r y m us ic on ther a d io . Th e H e a l th se gm e n t , o f c our se , m a y be c ha r a c te r iz e d by the c onve r sepa t te rn of demographic charac te r is t ics .L i f e S t y l e

Analyses fea tur ing l i fe s ty le measures produced one var iable was s igni f -i c an t by AN OVA : C hur c h wor k o the r tha n S unda y se r v ic e s . The Va lue a ndHeal th segments repor ted a grea te r in te res t in these re l ig ious ac t iv i t ies ,whi le the Unconcerned segment repor ted a lesse r in te res t . The mul t ivar ia teana lys is w as no n-s igni f icant a t p = .056.C o n c e r n f o r N u t r i t i o n

Four of the i tems used to measure concern for nut r i t ion reached s igni f i -cance by univar ia te ana lys is . These resul t s show the Hea l th segment toexpress the grea tes t concern tha t nut r i t ion i s impor tant in mea l p lanning,chi ldren need proper d ie ts for deve lopment , and nut r i t iona l informat ion bep la c e d on l a be l s . T he Un c onc e m e d se gm e n t f e e l s m os t s t r ong ly tha t pe op leuse too much whi te sugar . The Value segment repor ts the lowest concernfor a ll fou r of these i tems.


13/22


The mul t ivar ia te analys i s produced two s ign i f ican t d i scr iminant func-t ions , which furn i shed 64 .0 and 32 .3 per cen t of the expla ined var iance ,respect ively . The f i r s t funct ion represents concerns for nu t r i t ion in mealp lanning , p roper d ie t s for ch i ldren , nu t r i tional in format ion on label s , andthe use o f too m uch w hi te sugar . T he order of segments is Heal th , Unco n-cerne d , G ourm et , and Value . Thus , the Heal th segm ent expresses a fa i r lygene ral interest in issues involved with nutr i t ion, w hi le the Va lue seg m entshows the least interest in these issues .

The second funct ion represents the fee l ing that people (presumablyadul t s , l ike the respondents ) are heal thy regard less of the i r d ie t , a l ack ofconcern that people use too much whi te sugar . I t a l so ref lec t s a concernthat ch i ldren n eed proper d ie ts for developm ent and the bel ief tha t nu t r i tionhelps prevent d i sease . This m ixed se t o f concerns (and lack of concerns)d i f fers f rom those o f the f i r st funct ion , m os t ly in i t s express ion that peopleare heal thy regard less of the i r d ie t . Th e H eal th segmen t a l so s tands h ighes ton th i s se t o f conc erns , whi le the Unconc erned segm ent stands lowest .Eat ing Patterns

Univar ia te analyses fou nd three of the s ix teen ea ting pat terns to be s ig-n i f ican t ly re la ted to segm ent mem bersh ip . In Table 2 , the more nut r i t iouschoice i s l is t ed f i r s t. The data ind icate the He al th segmen t is m ore l ike ly tochoose cooked cereal s over pas t r ies and herbal t eas over coffee . The Un-con cem ed se gm ent a l so leads in se lec t ing herbal t eas over coffee , and leadsin choo s ing vegetab le s t i cks over po ta to ch ips . T he Value segm ent s tandslowes t in m aking the nut r i tious choice for a l l th ree ca tegor ies of foods .

The d i scr iminant analys i s produced one s ign i f ican t funct ion , which ex-plained 64 .3 per ce nt of the variance. T his func t ion represents severalnutr i t ious choices: those involving herbal teas , vegetable s t icks , cookedcereal s , and unsugare d cereal s. A gain , the cent ro id for the Heal th segm entshows them to be mos t l ike ly to make the nut r i t ious choice . The o thers e g m e n t s f o l lo w i n th e o r d e r o f U n c o n c e r n e d , G o u r m e t , a n d V a lu egroupings .P a t r o n a g e P a t te r n s

Pat ronage a t bo th fas t - food and f ine-d in ing res taurants d i f fered s ign i f i -can t ly amo ng the segm ents . T he Value segm ent is m os t l ike ly to v i s i t fas t -food res taurants and the H eal th segmen t leas t l ike ly . The G ourm et segm enti s mos t l ike ly to pat ronize f ine res taurants and the Unconcerned segmentleas t l ikely.


14/22

B A H N A N D G R A N Z I N 2 3 9

IABL[ 2Oisorlminant Analysis n l Ihree Beneflt Segments in l e r l n s of f ive Sets of Predictor Variables

MeansV a r i a b le s G r o u p A Group B G l O k ( p C G r o u p D F - R a i l 9 ~ L o a d ~ q ~L S) n = g S ) ) n = 6 6 3 In 5 2 ) ( n = 1 7 ) I I I

V a h , e S bC o m p e t i t i o n ( 6 - p o i n t s c a l e )S u c c e s s i n o c c u p a t ) o nA c h i e v e m e n tV e n t u r i n g r i s kU n i q u e n e s sM o n e yCentre)Strong governmentAcceptance o f o t h e r sC o m p r o m i s eA u t o n o m yR e l i g i o n

Demographics cA g e ( y e a r s )Sex ( O : m a l e ; l : r e m a l e )E d u c a t i o n ( I ~ t I . S , ; 2 = s o m e c o l l e g e ;3 : c o l + e g e d e g r e e ; ~ g r a d t l a t e d e g r e e )B a c k g r o t u ~ d ( O = r u r a l ; l = L l r b a n )O C C t l p a t i o n a l p r e s t i g e ( N O R C s c a l e )M a r i t a l s t a L t l s ( 0 = s i n g l e ; l = m a r r i e d jR e a d s a n e w s w e e k l y m a g a z i n e ( O = n o ; l = y e s )R e a d s R e a d e r ' s D i g e s t

3.2/ 3.61 3+63 3+B2 +.52 .211 +29 .193.29 3.61 3.+18 g. UO 2.1 5 .096 .32 .32h , ~ l ~ q , 5 2 h+iIP 4 , 3 b O , h 8 . 6 9 3 , 1 1 . 1 83 . O2 3 . 5 7 3 , gu 3 . 9 g h . 2 6 90 O 6 . 3 9 94 9~ . o 4 1 1 . 1 2 3 . 9 q h . (1 () ( I . 7 1 . 5 5 0 - . 1 2 . 2 ~h + 1 8 g . l h N . 0 8 q . 0 6 ( I . ) 9 . g 0 1 - , 1 1 + 0 1h . 2 9 q . 4 1 q . 3 3 3 . 8 8 2 . 2 6 . O B 3 - . 3 ~ , 1 53 . 5 6 3 . 2 / J , b o 3 + 3 5 0 . 6 8 .56w - , 0 4 - + 2 72 . 8 o 3+03 P . l l 3+29 1 , 1 2 . 3 g l . ) 6 , 2 42 6 8 2 . 6 8 2 5 O 2 . 8 2 O . 5 2 + 6 6 7 + o o , u 6h.hO 4+56 h , 21 3+76 q .79 ,oo3 - . 5 6 . 3 2~.3 6 3 .5 8 4 . ~ 5 b. i2 5 , 2 2 . o u 2 .06 - , 7 5

115. 18 39.68 g0. 38 39.65 1.()~ ,376 .10 - . 2 61 7 1 , ~ 8 . %i1 4 1 ~ . 7 h . ( 1 ~ 1 0 - , ~2 . 3 8 2 . 3 5 2 . 0 8 2 . 5 3 1 + 8 6 , 1 3 9 . 1 1 . 1 2. T 1 , 6 8 , 7 5 . S P o . 5 g . 6 5 Z . 1 5 .O FF/ 5 0 q l l + g 8 6 g + 8 3 1 2 1 6 1 . 8 9 . 1 3 ~ . 1 2 - . 1 6. 6 q . 5 8 . 6 3 , S g 0 . 2 3 . 8 1 2 . O g - . 1 2,5 1 . 6 5 5 6 ,Sg 0 ,1 8 . 5 0 5 - . 1 3 , 2 0.2g . 3 0 .q2 .ql 0 . 9 5 . g 1 6 .0B +DOR e a d s P l a y b o y ,(Jh . 2 1 . l Z . I P 2 . 3 1 .D79 - . 2 6 . 3 1R e a d s g l a m o u r m a g a z ~ n e s +r e 1 5 . 1 0 , g l 3 + 2 3 . 0 2 ~ + 3 ~ + 2 2R e a d s h o m e - o r i e n t e d m a g a z i n e s ( O = n o ; l = y e s ) . ~ 2 , 3 0 , 2 9 , 2 h 1 , 0 1 . 3 9 2 . 0 2 - . 2 6T e l e v i s i o n v i e w i n g ) l - p o i n t f r e q u e n c y s c a l e ) 1 . 8 h 2 , 3 9 2 , 2 3 2 . 6 5 2 . 3 9 . 0 / 1 - . 0 5 + ~ 5N e w S p a p e r r e a d i n g ( m i n u t e s p e r d a y ) 3 2 . h 2 2 4 + 9 2 3 2 , 8 1 ~ 3 + O 0 2 . 6 6 . 0 5 0 + 3 8 ~ . 0 3I n cO m e { b - p o i n t s c a l e ) 2 . 6 7 3 2 ] 2 6 5 P . h / ? . O 6 + 1 0 8 - + 3 1 . 1 1P r e f e r s r o c k m u s i c r a d i o p r o g r a m m t n q . u S . 2 3 + 1 3 0 6 1 . 8 9 . 1 3 3 - . 3 1 . 1 4P r e f e r s c o n t e m p o r a r y p o p t l l a r p r o g r a m m l n g . 3 3 . 3 3 + 3 5 : 2 9 0 . 0 5 . ~ 8 ~ - . O h - . 0 ~P r e f e r s e a s y l i s t e n i n g r a d i o p r o g r a m m + n g , q 2 , 2 3 , g P . 2 9 2 . 3 2 . 0 7 7 . 1 7 - . 3 3P r e f e r s c o u n t r y m u s i c p r o g r a m m i n g , 1 ~ , } 2 ,( ~8 , 3 5 3 + 1 2 . 0 2 8 , 2 9 . 3 5

L i f e S t y l e ~C h u r c h w o r k ( m o l ) t h l y o c c a s i o n s ) 3 . 9 6 l+g? 2 , 9 6 q + 1 2 2 . B 9 . 0 3 7R e s t i n g , l o a f i n g , j n s t r e l a v l n g ( m o n t h l y ) 3 , 7 3 5 + 2 4 h . / I 5 + b ~ 0 . 6 ? , 5 7 1M o v i e s ( m o n t h l y ) 1 . 3 6 2 + O 6 1 . 1 9 3 . 2 4 2 . 2 1 . 0 8 9S p e c t a t o r s p o r t s { q u a r t e r l y ) 1 1 .1 6 g . 6 1 g O 2 ~ . 8 8 O . l ~ . 9 3 5S y m p h o n i e s , o p e r a s , b a l l e t , t h e a t e r ( q t r l y ) 1 , 8 2 2 . 3 6 3 . 0 8 1 . q ? 1 . 3 0 , 2 7 7I n d = v i d u a l a n d te.la s p o r t s { q u a r t e r l y ) 1 1 6 9 1 1 , 3 9 15.50 6 2 9 1 2 6 , 2 9 1s n o w s k i i n g ( y e a r l y ) 3 . ~ g 1 3 , 7 3 1 1 , 6 3 8 . 2 q ~ 3 9 . U 7 1Camping, hik ing , backpacking (ye arl y)V a e a t l o n s of a w e e k e n d or longer )yearl y)

Concern f o r NUtrl t ioneP e o p + e a r e h e a l t h y r e g a r d l e s s o f d i e tP e o p l e u s e t o o m u c h w h i t e s u g a rP r e - p a c k ~ g e d f o o d s h a v e + o w n u t r + t i o nN u t r i t i o n is i m p o r t a n t i n m e a l p k a n n i n gC h i l d r e n n e r o p r o p e r d i e t s f o r d e v e l o p m e n tN u t r i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n o n l a b e l is

i m p o r t a n tN u t r i t i o n h e l p s p r e v e n t d i s e a s eE a t i n g P a t t e r n s f

f l s h O V e r beef [ O l=yes)F r e S h f r u i t o v e r c a k eC h i c k e n o v e r p o r kF r e i t a n d r a w v e g e t a b C e s o v e r c a n d ~ChiCken o v e r beef

5 . 5 6 9 , 9 5 6 . 3 3 7 . 7 6 1 . 5 6 . 2 u u5 , e l 5 . H a . . P 3 . 0 . 1 . s u . 2 n 5

3 . O U 3 . 1 4 2 . 6 3 ] . l g 1 . 9 2 . 1 2 7 - . 1 9 .5 33 . 8 4 3 8 3 4 . 0 O 3 , 3 5 z . g 4 . 0 3 U . h g - , 3 12 . 9 3 2 , 9 5 3+13 3 + 0 0 0 + 3 8 . 7 6 6 . O l m , 2 8J + .q 9 ~ . 2 6 h . 3 5 3 . 7 6 h . 5 3 . D O g . 6 7 . 1 0h . 4 0 ~ . 2 2 ~ , ) 0 3 , 6 5 4 . / 5 . 0 0 3 . D O . ~ 83.96 3.1U 3.83 3 .1Z 3 . 1 ~ ,02B .Sb .03a .s h . ? l ~ , l O 4 . 0 0 1 , 8 9 + 1 1 9 . z B . g 7

. 2 2 . 1 5 . 2 1. 9 * , S 6 .S 58 9 1 . / 9 . B 5. 8 9 . 1 9 . 7 g. Z U 0 . U ~ + l U O . l O, 8 2 0 . q l . l u g + O g. 8 2 0 . 6 8 . 5 6 7 - + 1 8.76 0 .8 0 .~9 5 . 1 6,3 5 * o . 8 0 . ~ g 5 . 1 08 ,39 ,50. . . . . . . . ~ t j ,,+ . . . . . . . . . e. ~ 1 6 . 7 . . 6 2 1 . 5 g , . 3 ; . 2 , 1 DOU n s t + g a r e d c e r e a l s o v e r p r - s t e n e d c e r e a l s . a S . 7 3 . 8 3 . 6 5 2 . 2 7 . o 8 2 . + 6Y o g t t r t o v e r i c e c r e a m , 3 1 + 2 3 .3 9 + 1 2 ~ . 5 1 + P l g + 2 7M i l k a n d w a t e r o v e r s o d a p o p . 9 3 8 3 , 8 3 + B 2 I ) , 9 d +g()~ . t 6Vegetable st ich s over pot ato chips .53 .33 .62 .)8 5.6g ,OOl +5 3Wholewbeat bread (h igh Fib er) ove r whqte bread .5) .61+ +67 .65 ()+gg ,]gB m . 1 2C o O k e d c e r e a ( s o v e r p a s t r y , d O m l t S , s w e e tr o l l s . 7 6 ~ . 4 e z g 5 . 3 ~ . o u z . ~ 5

H e r b a l t e a s o v e r c o f f e e + 6 U . 2 9 . 6 0 5 "9 35 5.16 + D O 1 .g6N u t s a n d s e e d s o v e r c h O C O l a t e c a n ~ y b a r s 6 2 . 6 1 . 6 2 . 5 g . 0 2 . 9 9 5 . 0 3F i s h . . . . p o r k .6 3 ] ) ~ "gO .Sg ,26 .S?7 -.06RQWst lgar (brow+q. honey) over ref ine d sugar .71 .6g .76 .18 .9 tl -. 09P a t r o n a g e P a t t e r n s g

F a s t - r o o d r e s t a u r a n t s 33+0~ 6 3 . 2 1 4 5 .6 9 8 6 . 1 2 3 .6 8 , 0 1 3 .6 0f i n e - O e f l n i n g r e s t a u r a n t g g + g l 2 1 1 .3 5 7 . 9 6 1 3 . 4 7 5 . 6 0 + DO 1 . 8 4

b o i s c r i m i n a n t a n a ~ y s l s s l gn i f, c a~ i t a L p = . O 0 5 , f i r s t rL l nC t lO n s , ~ n l f [ c ~ n ~ ~ t p = . O 0 6 . G r O l l p c e n t r o i d s a r e : A = - . h 3 ;B : - . 1 6 ; C . 2 0; D : I . 1 6 . S e c o n d f ,~ n et l on s i g n i f i c a n t ~ t P ' . 0 1 5 G r o u p c e n t r o l d s a r e: A = - . 4 0 ; 8 = . q 9 ; C = - . 2 g ; 0 = . 0 2 .C o l s c r l m i n a n t a n a y s ~ s s i g n , f t c a n t a t p = . f l 0 1, f i r s t f u n c t i o n s i g n i f i c a n t a t p ~ . O 0 3, G r o u p c e n t r o ~ d s ar e : A = . 3 5 ;B ~ m . 5 3 ; C = m . O 3 ; 0 = 1 . 2 5 + S e c o ~ f l m c t ~ n n s i g n i f i c a n t a t p = . 0 3 6 . G r o u p C e n L r o l d $ a r e : A = - . 6 0 ; B = . 2 7 ; C = - . t O ; O = . b 7 ,d D i s e r ~ m i n a n t a n a l y S , S n o n - s , g n i f ie a n t a t p = . O 5 6 . I h e r e f o r e , n o I o a d i . g s a r e s h o w n 9e o , s c r , m l n a n t a n a l y s i s s , g n ~ f , e a n t a t p : . o o 3 . F , r s t f n h C L , O n s l g n i f , e a n t a t p : , O O 1 G r o u p c e n t r o i d s a r e ; A = . 3 0 ~B . O 3 ; C = , 1 6 ; 0 = - t , 1 9 . S e c o n d f t , n e t l o n s i g n i f i c a n t a t b = , O J l g . G r o n p c e n t r o q d s a r e : A ~ . 2 9 ; B = , l g ; C : m . ~ 3 ) D = O 0 .fDls c(i minan t analy sis stg nif ,can t at p .OZ9, Fir st ft~netlon siqn lfl cant at p=.O0l Group cent rol ds are: A=,62:B=- .5 1 ; C : . 3 6 ; D - - . ( 6 .ggkse, imlnant anaqysis s lgmr iea nt a t p .Dol l Fi rs t Function s~gn, fic ant at p=,l)O~, Group cen tro ids are: A=-.33;R : . g l ) ; C - - . 3 1 ; D = 2 8 .


15/22


The resu l t s o f the d isc r iminant ana lys is p roduced one s ign i f ican t func -t ion . This func t ion thus d is t inguishes among the marke t segments wi threspec t to the i r use of r e s tauran ts , wi th f ine -d in ing cont r ibu t ing to thefunc t ion more than pa t ronage a t f a s t - food ou t le t s . However , the func t ionsugges ts p r imar i ly a genera l pa t te rn of r e s tauran t pa t ronage , r a the r than aspec i f ic pa t te rn o f f avoring one type o f p re fe rence to the o the r type .A C om pact Portrayal

T he suc c e s s o f t he s e ve ra l a na ly se s t ha t e xa mine d e a c h s e t o f va r i ab l e shypo the s i z e d to be r e l a te d to s e gme n t m e mb e r sh ip ju s t i fi e s a f u r the r a na l-y s i s t o sum ma r i z e t he se f ind ings . T o p r ov ide a mor e c om pa c t , un i f i e dpor t raya l , a s tepwise d isc r iminant ana lys is was pe r formed on a l l po ten t ia lpred ic tor s . F i f teen va r iab les were re ta ined in the ana lys is to adequa te lysum ma r i z e t he r e la t i onsh ip be tw e e n the l a rge num be r o f hypo the s i z e d p r e -d i c to rs a nd the c r i t e rion m e a su r e o f m e mb e r sh ip i n f ou r s e gme n t s . T a b le 3presen ts the r e su l t s o f th i s ana lys is .

The d isc r iminant ana lys is was h igh ly s ign i f ican t , and a l l th ree of thed isc r iminant func t ions r eached s ign i f icance in th is ana lys is . The func t ionsexpla in ed 46 .2 , 34 .7 , and 19 .1 pe r cen t o f the va r iance , re spec t ive ly .

The f i r s t func t ion i s de f ined pr imar i ly by the conce rn tha t ch i ld ren needproper d ie t s , a d is in te res t in count ry mus ic , the choice of vege tab le s t icksover po ta to ch ips , va lu ing au tonomy, and the fee l ing tha t people use toomuch whi te sugar . This pa t te rn ind ica tes independent dec is ion-making anda spec i f ic o r ien ta t ion toward nu t r i t ion in bo th a t t i tude and prac t ice . Thisd im ens ion m os t desc r ibes the Hea l th segmen t , and leas t desc r ibes the Va luese gme n t .

T he s e c ond f unc t ion r e p re se n t s c ho ic e o f he r ba l t ea s a nd c ook e d c e r e a l s ,and d is in te res t in a ssum ing r i sk and sk i ing . Th is func t ion re f lec ts the prac -t i c e o f nu t r it ious c h o ic e , t o som e e x te n t i n c on c e r t w i th a t e nde nc y to a vo idtak ing chances . This func t ion cont ras t s the Hea l th segment , which i t cha r -ac te r izes in a pos i t ive sense , wi th the Gourmet segment . Thus , the la t te rpe r son s a re m ore l ike ly to take r i sks and sk i , bu t le ss l ike ly to choose m orenut r i t ious foods . The o the r two segments l ie be tween these two groupings .

T he th i rd f unc t ion r e f l e c ts c ho ic e o f c o f f e e a nd po ta to c h ip s f o r one - se l f ,a h ig her leve l o f educa t ion , h igher occup a t iona l p res t ige and grea te r in te res tin au tonomy. H owev er , th i s func t ion a l so sug ges ts a g rea te r conce rn for thed ie ts o f ch i ld ren . Th is d imen s ions sugges ts a d is rega rd for on e ' s o wn d ie t ,bu t a co nce rn for the d ie t o f ch i ld ren , and a mo t iva t ion toward independencea nd a c h ie ve m e n t . T h ose mo s t c ha r a c t e r i z e d by inde pe nden t a ch ie ve me n t ar e


16/22


T A B L E 3A C o m p a c t C h a r a c t e r i z a t i o n o fF o u r B e n e f i t S e g me n t s

V a r i a b l e s a C a n o n i ca l L o a d i n g sI 1 1 I I I

C h i l d r e n n e ed p r o p e r d i e ts f o rd e ve l o p m e n t ( 7 ) , 3 4 . 0 6 . 3 0P r e f e r s c o u n t r y m u s i c r a d i op r o g r a mm i n g ( 9 ) - , 3 1 . 0 5 . 0 9V a l u e s a u t o n o m y ( 3 ) , 3 0 - . 2 1 . 2 9People use too much whi tesu g a r ( 1 3 ) . 2 9 - . 0 6 . 1 8Reads g lam our magaz ines (5 ) - .28 .15 .18H e r b a l t e a s o v e r co f f e e ( 1 ) . 1 8 . 3 8 - . 3 4V e n t u r i n g r i s k ( 4 ) - ,2 1 - . 3 4 - . 1 3C o o k ed c e r e al s o v e r p a s t r y , d o n u t s ,swe et ro l ls (2) .27 .33 .23S n o w s k i i n g ( y e a r l y ) ( 1 2 ) -.O 1 - . 3 1 - . 1 ]Income (6 -p t . sca le ) ( ]1 ) .07 - .2 5 .21N e w s p a p e r r e a d i n g ( m i n u t e s p e rd a y ) ( 8 ) - . 1 7 . 2 4 - . 1 9T e l e v i s i o n v i e w i n g ( 7 - p t . f r e q u e n c ysca le ) ( 1 0 ) - . 1 9 - , 2 3 - . 0 7V e g e t a b l e s t i c k s o v e r p o t a t och ips (6 ) .31 .20 - .37E d u ca t i o n ( 4 - p t . sca l e ) ( 1 4 ) - . 1 3 . 0 5 . 3 2O c c u p a t i o n a l p r e s t i g e ( N O R Cscale) (15) .00 .17 .31

a F i r s t c a n o n i c a l d i s c r i m i n a n t f u n c t i o n s i g n i f ic a n t a t p = . O 0 0 ; s e c o n d f u n c t i o ns i g n i f ic a n t a t p = . O 0 0 ; t h i r d f u n c t i o n s i g n i f i c a n t a t . 0 0 2. B e n e f i t g r o u p c e n -t r o i d s f o r f i r s t s t a n d a r d i z e d f u n c t i o n a r e : A , . 4 2 ; B , . 0 4 ; C , . 2 8 ; D ,- 2 . 14 . C e n t r o i d s f o r s e c o n d f u n c t i o n a r e : A , . 8 7 ; B , - . 6 9 ; C , - . 0 2 ; D ,. 4 0 . C e n t r o i d s f o r t h i r d f u n c t i o n a r e : A , . 3 G ; B , . 3 2 ; C , - . 6 9 ; D , - . 0 7 .

a N u m b e r s a p p e a r i n g i n p a r e n t h e s e s a f t e r v a r i a b l e n a m e s i n di c a t e o r d e r o fe n t r y i n t o s t e p w i s e a n a l y s is .


17/22


t he m e m be r s o f the H e a l th a nd G our m e t s e gme n t s , a nd those le a s t c ha r a c -te r ized in th is way a re the pe rsons in the Unconcerned segment .IM P L I C A T I O N S O F T H IS S T U D Y

Th e r e su l ts o f t h i s s tudy suppor t t he hyp o the s i z e d r e la t ionsh ips be tw e e nm e m be r sh ip in be ne f i t se gme n t s a nd va lue s, de m ogr a ph ic s , c onc e r n f o rnut r i t ion , ea t ing pa t te rns , and the va l ida t ion va r iab les represent ing pa t ron-age . Only l i f e s ty le d id not r ece ive empir ica l suppor t for i t s hypothes izedl ink to s e gm e n t me m be r sh ip . O n th i s ba si s , t he p r opose d c onc e p tua l i z a tion ,based on be nef i t s a s a cen t ra l cons t ruc t , appears use fu l to our unders tandingof the process lead ing to pa t ronage in th is r e ta i l , se rv ice indus t ry . Theuse f u lne s s o f f oc us ing on the be ne f i t s c us tome r s r e qu i r e f r om ma r ke te r sa ppe a r s t o be suppo r t e d onc e a ga in .

Th e r e su l t s o f a ny suc h s tudy a r e , o f c ou r se , de pe nde n t on the p r e d ic to rand c r i te r ion va r iab les tha t were hypo thes ized to be re la ted . He re , f ive se tso f p r e d ic to r s ( a nd the pa t r ona ge se t) w e r e e xpe c te d to be l i nked to m e m -be r sh ip in a m a r ke t s e gme n t de f ine d by the be ne f i t s r e qu i r e d by c us tome r sof re s taurants . T hes e pred ic tor s were based on a conceptua l iza t ion tha tdrew var iab les f rom the resu l t s o f prev ious resea rch . S imi la r ly , the benef i t swere se lec ted to be cons is ten t wi th ea r l ie r work . Al l in a l l , the success ofthe ra the r genera l se t o f benef i t s used h e re augurs we l l for the use of benef i tsegmenta t ion in pa r t icu la r marke ts tha t can be de l inea ted in more spec i f ict e r ms .

P r o f i le s o f po te n t ia l ma r ke t s e gme n t s c a n be de ve lope d on the ba s is o fr e qu i r e d be ne f i t s a nd o the r va r i a b le s f ound to p r e d ic t be ne f i t c l a s s me m-bersh ip . These prof i le s may be used by marke te r s in deve loping s t ra teg iesa ime d a t r e s t a u r a n t pa t r ona ge . The p r e se n t s tudy de l ine a t e d f ou r be ne f i ts e gme n t s .

Th e H ea l th segm ent appears to s t r ive for independen ce , to va lue re l ig ion ,and to be co nse rv a t ive in r isk tak ing . Addi t iona l ly , th is segm ent has a lowerinc ome tha n the U nc onc e r ne d o r G our me t s e gme n t s , bu t a h ighe r i nc ometha n the V a lue s e gme n t . Th i s s e gme n t i s mos t ly c ompr i se d o f fe ma le s w hor e a d w ome n ' s ma ga z ine s a nd do no t l i s t e n to c oun t r y mus ic . The H e a l thsegment i s h ighly concerned wi th i ssues involv ing nut r i t ion , and a re mostl ike ly to cho ose m ore nu t r i tious foo d over le ss nu t r it ious food . F ina l ly , theHea l th segment i s leas t l ike ly to f requent f a s t - food res taurants . To captureth is bene f i t segm ent , r e s taura teurs would be wise to s t re ss the nutr i tious-ne s s o f t he i r f ood o f f e r ings in , bu t no t limi t e d to , w o m a n ' s ma ga z ine s suc has Glamour, Ladies' Hom e Journal, and Cosmopolitan. Addit ionally, a gen-


18/22


e r a l t he m e o f " in de pe nd e n c e " o r " 't h ink ing f o r on e se l f " shou ld be s t r es se din adver t i sements a t tempt ing to reach the hea l th segment . One addi t iona la dve r t i s ing the me c ou ld be a ime d a t t he w oma n w ho pe r c e ive s e a t ing nu -t r i t ious ly as a w ay of l i f e and not fo r nove l ty seeking .

The G our m e t s e gme n t c a n be c ha r a c t e r iz e d a s ri sk ta ke rs w ho a r e inde -pe nde n t and va lue a u tonomy . Th i s s e gm e n t i s c ompr i se d o f bo th ma le s a ndf e ma le s w ho a r e w e a l th i e r t ha n m e mb e r s o f t he o the r t h r e e s e gme n t s , bu tr e a d ne w spa pe r s a nd ma ga z ine s l e s s . The G our me t s e gme n t i s l e s s c on -ce rn ed w i th i ssues involv ing nut r i tion ; they pro jec t the a t t i tude tha t peoplea re hea l thy regard less of the i r d ie t . Addi t iona l ly , th is segment i s le ss con-ce rne d wi th choo s ing nut r i t iona l foo d a l te rna t ives , and they a re most l ike lyto f requent f ine res taurants . This segment has the pe rsona l va lues of the" j e t s e t . " The r e f o r e , me ssa ge s w h ic h c a p i t a l iz e on a t tr ibu te s suc h a s inde -pendence , au tonomy, r i sk tak ing and f ree - th inking should enhance thechan ce of a t tr ac t ing the Go urm et segment . F ine res tauranteurs should st ressthe qua l i ty o f the i r food of fe r ings to th is segmen t , w hich could be ind ica tedby p r i c e . La s t ly , pe r sona l f o r ms o f c omm unic a t ion shou ld be u se d in s te a do f the no r ma l p r in t me d ia ou t l e ts t o c a p tu r e the G o ur m e t s e gme n t .P rof i l ing the Va lue segment revea ls tha t success in one ' s occupa t ion andtak ing r i sks a re h ighly impo r tan t to these pa t rons . Th e Va lue segment tendsto be c ompr i se d o f ma le s w ho r e a d ma le ma ga z ine s a nd l i s t e n to c oun t r ym usic . Th is segm ent a lso has the lowes t incom e leve l o f the four segments .The Va lue segment i s leas t concerned wi th i ssues involv ing nut r i t ion andare leas t l ike ly to choose nut r i t iona l food a l te rna t ives . Addi t iona l ly , th issegm ent i s m ost l ike ly to pa t ronize fas t - foo d res taurants . I t appears tha t theValue segm ent judg es qua l i ty (a s a r equi red purchase b enef i t ) on ind ica tor so the r than nut r i t ion . At t rac t ing the va lue segment cou ld be accompl ished byde ve lop ing a dve r t i s ing me ssa ge s a ime d p r e domina n t ly a t ma le s , w i th atheme of seeking success in one ' s occupa t ion . Sui tab le ou t le ts for adver t i s -ing to th i s be ne f i t s e gme n t w ou ld be the m e n ' s s e c tion o f ne w spa pe r s , a ndspor ts segm ents o f te lev is ion v iewing . Th e va lue segm ent could be a t tr ac tedby messages which imply ~ 'Va lue" in the dec is ion to pa t ronize a fa s t - foodres taurant .

The Unconcerned segment i s cha rac te r ized as va lu ing au tonomy. Thesecus tomers a re le ss wea l thy than the Gourmet segment , and a re leas t l ike lyto be a v id ne w spa pe r o r ma ga z ine r e a de r s . Th i s s e gme n t c ompr i se s bo thma le s a nd f e ma le s w ho a r e no t l ike ly to p r e f e r c oun t r y mus ic . The U nc on-ce rned segment i s more concerned wi th i ssues involv ing nut r i t ion thane i the r the V a lue o r t he G o ur m e t s e gme n t s , bu t l es s c onc e r ne d than theH e a l th g r oup . F ina lly , t he U n c onc e r ne d se gme n t i s mor e l i ke ly to c hoose


19/22

244 BEN EFIT SEGMENTATION NTH E RESTAURANT NDUSTRY

nutr i t iona l fo od a l te rna t ives than e i the r the Go urm et or the Va lue segm ents ,and i s mo re l ike ly to v is i t a f ine res taurant . O vera l l , me m bers of the Un-c onc e r ne d se gme n t ( i . e . , U nc onc e r ne d a bou t r e qu i r e d f ood pu r c ha se o rfood prepara t ion benef i t s ) appear to be or ien ted towards nut r i t ion in the i ra t t i tudes about i ssues involv ing nut r i t ion and in choos ing nut r i t iona l foodi t ems . To r e a c h th i s g r oup a s a s e c ond a r y t ar ge t se gme n t , m a na ge r s o fHea l th and f ine -d in ing res taurants should a im adver t i s ing involv ing au ton-om y to the U nc onc e r ne d se gm e n t . M e ssa ge s c ou ld be d i r e c te d to bo th ma le sa nd f e m a le s w ho a r e c onc e r ne d a bou t t he e a t ing o f nu tr it ious f ood a nd thero le nu t r i tion p lays in the i r da i ly l ives . As an a l te rna t ive to newspapers andma ga z ine s , b r oa dc a s t me d ia , suc h a s r a d io a nd t e l e v i s ion , shou ld be u se da s ve h ic l e s f o r c a r ry ing a dve r ti s ing me ssa ge s to the U nc onc e r ne d se gm e n t .

Adver t i s ing and promot iona l campa igns a imed a t a t t r ac t ing any of thesef ou r m a r ke t s e gme n t s ma y be de ve lope d on the ba s is o f t he p r o f il e s j u s tpresented . M arke te r s of f ine -d in ing , f a s t - foo d d in ing , and hea l th- foo d d in-ing es tab l i shments need to know the charac te r i s t ic s of the i r p resent andpoten t ia l marke ts . Fur the r , an unders tanding of the benef i t s pa r t icu la r seg-men ts requi red can prov ide inform at ion use fu l in c rea t ing produc t and pr icestra tegies .

Al though prof i l ing poten t ia l segments may be he lpfu l to re s taurant mar -ke te r s in gen era l , g rea t ca re shou ld be g iven to inves t iga t ing pred ic tor s andbenef i t s appropr ia te to pa r t icu la r marke ts . The benef i t and pred ic tor va r ia -b l e s u se d in th is s tudy mus t be c on s ide r e d e xp lo r a to r y be c a use the y a r era the r genera l in na ture . For use in a pa r t icu la r marke t , the pred ic tor s andbenef i t s may have to be rev ised comple te ly . For example , in th is s tudy thel inks be tw e e n se gme n t , me mbe r sh ip a nd de mogr a ph ic s suppor t t he f u r the rinve s t iga t ion o f t he u se f u lne s s o f de mogr a ph ic s . F u r the r r e se a r c h c ou lde xa mine the p r e d ic t ive va lue o f o the r de mogr a ph ic s , a nd e xa mine the mmor e tho rough ly . F u tu r e s tud ie s c ou ld f oc us on the ne e ds o f ma r ke te rs w hoseek to se rve marke ts for r e s taurants tha t a re re la t ive ly na r rowly de f ined ,a nd c ou ld c ons ide r t hose de m ogr a ph ic s t ha t c an be e xp e c te d to ha ve d i re c timpl ica t ions for marke t ing s t ra tegy . Those pr in t and e lec t ronic media tha tmigh t be used for adver t is ing would rep lace the broad ly conc e ived va r iab lesused in th is genera l inves t iga tion of the use fu lness o f severa l se ts o f pred ic -to rs o f m e m be r sh ip in be ne f it s e gme n t s .

Whi le the benef i t s used in th is s tudy were re la t ive ly genera l in na ture ,the f ind ings ap pear to b e fa i r ly cons is ten t ac ross the severa l se ts o f pred ic -to rs e m p loye d . Th e na tu r e o f t he be ne f i t s e gme n t s , a s c ha r a c t e ri z e d by thepredic tor va r iab les , m eshed wi th the por t raya ls tha t cam e f rom the c r i te r ionbe ne f i t me a su r e s . F o r e xa mple , t he H e a l th s e gme n t e me r ge d a s a g r oup


20/22


tha t cons iders nut r i t ion and d ie t res t r ic t ions to be impor tant and ac ts ac -cordingly . The Value segment ignores such cons idera t ions , apparent ly g iv-ing i t s marke t ing emphasis to a search for moneta ry savings , tas te , andqua l i ty in f ood c onsum pt ion . The Gour m e t se gm e n t doe s no t ignor e d ie tcons idera t ions , but appears more in te res ted in the tas te and qua l i ty aspec tso f f ood c onsum pt ion a nd in f ood p r e pa r a t ion . The Unc onc e r ne d se gm e n tr e ve a ls a r a the r r a ndom a nd non - c om m i t t a l s e t o f a t ti tude s f o r r e qu i re d f oo dpur c ha se a nd m e a l p r e pa r a t ion be ne f i t s .

Such f indings a re cons is tent wi th the exposi t ion of benef i t segmenta t iongiven by Haley (1968) . In the main example g iven in h is a r t ic le , Ha leyfound i t use fu l to charac te r ize each benef i t segmen t in te rms o f a key wordtha t was readi ly in te rpre table and found to be descr ip t ive of the na ture ofthe segm ent : sen sory , soc iab le , w or r ie r , and independent. Th e resul ts of thepresent s tudy lent themse lves to such s imple , succ inc t charac te r iza t ions ofth r e e o f the se gm e n t s : He a l th , Go ur m e t , a nd Va lue. The c onc e p t o f u singa cent ra l foca l poin t to p or t ray a ta rge t marke t i s the reby suppo r ted by th iss tudy. The abi l i ty to draw a sharp focus on the ta rge t marke t holds impl i -ca t ions for the formula t ion of marke t ing s t ra tegy. Given a s ingle poin t offocus , marke te rs can org anize and co ncentra te the i r e f for ts toward a l imi tedobjec t ive , tha t of sa t i s fy ing re la t ive ly uncompl ica ted des i res .

The re la t ionships found be tween benef i t s and the var iables conceptua l -ized to both precede and succeed the benef i t s cons t ruc t fur ther va l ida teH a le y ' s no t ion tha t be ne f it s l ie in t e rm e d ia te be twe e n pur c ha se a nd the m or edeep sea ted pred ic tors . F ur the r s tudies can p rof i tab ly inves t iga te the extentto which bene f i t s l ink d i rec t ly to o ther measures of pa t ronage and con-sum pt ion . S uc h r e se a r c h shou ld c ons ide r no t on ly the type o f r e s ta u r a n tpa t r on iz e d , bu t a l so the e l e m e n t s o f suc h pa t r ona ge . S tud ie s c a n c ons ide rthe t im e o f da y a nd we e k o f e a ting ou t , t he s i z e o f the g r oup , the pe r sonwho ha s se l e c te d the p la c e o f d in ing , t he a m oun t o f m o ne y spe n t, t he t im edevoted to d in ing , the loya l ty shown var ious out le ts , and o ther such aspec tso f pa t r ona ge a nd c onsum pt ion .

S U M M A R Y A N D C O N C L U S IO N SThis a r t ic l e c onc e n t r a t e s on H a le y ' s c ons t r uc t o f be ne f i t s r e qu i r e d by the

cus tom er to provide an imp roved unders tanding of the marke t for res taurantse rv ices . Required benef i t s were l inked to four se ts of hypothes ized pred-ecessor var iables and one se t of successor var iables . Mul t ivar ia te ana lys isp r ov ide d r e su l ts t ha t suppor t e d the hypo the se s tha t va lue s, de m ogr a ph ic s ,concern for nut r i t ion , and ea t ing pa t te rns re la te to the benef i t s requi red in


21/22

246 BENEFIT SEGMEN TATION INTH E RESTA U RA N T IN D U STRY

f o o d p u r c h a s e a n d c o n s u m p t i o n . A l s o , t h e h y p o t h e s i s t h a t b e n e f i ts i n f lu -en ce patronage pat t em s found emp ir i ca l support f rom the data . O f cou rse ,the nature o f this s tudy did not al low the invest igat ion o f the cau sal l ink ss u g g e s t e d b y t h e c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n .

Th ese f indings prov ide addi ti ona l support for the conce ptua l i za t ion o frequired benef i t s as a centra l cons truct in the process o f cus tomer cho icein the marketplace. Th e present resul ts extend earl ier pos i t ive f indings ino t h e r m a r k e t s t o t h e s e r v i c e m a r k e t f o r f o o d c o n s u m e d o u t s i d e t h e h o m e .This s tudy shows that marketers in the restaurant industry can gain greaterins ight into the nature of their market by us ing required benef i t s as a pointof emphas i s in the i r research e f for t s . On the bas i s o f these resu l t s , ga inedfrom a general treatment of the restaurant market , future research shouldbe des ig ne d to ga in informat ion for establ ishing ma rket ing s trategy w ithinthe context o f the i r more spec i f i c market s .

REFERENCESAndres , C. 1978, "C on sum er Nutr it ion Awareness i s Changing Pro cessing ," Food P rocess-

ing, 39 (August), 38-40.Blashfield, Roger K. 1976, "M ixtu re Model Tes ts of Cluster Analysis: Accuracy of FourAgglomerative Hierarchical Methods," Psychological Bu lletin, 83 (May), 377-88.

Brown, Amanda and Ruby E. Pest le 1981, "Dietary Intake and Food Behavior Practices:Long Term Effects of the Georgia Expanded Food and Nutri t ion Program," Home Econom-ics Research Journal, 10 (September 1981), 62-68.

England , George W . 1967, "Person al Value Systems of Am erican M anag ers ," Academy o fManagem ent Journal, 10 (March), 53-68.

Gran zin , Kent L. and K enneth D. B ahn 1982, "p ersona l Values as an Explanation of FoodUsage Habi t s , " Hom e Economics Research Journal, 10 (June), 401-10.

_ _ and John J. Painter 1979, "U sin g Benefits as a Bas is for Multi-Criterion MarketSegmentation," a paper presented at the annual conference of the Southwestern MarketingAssociation, Houston, TX.

and Robe rt H. W ill iams 1978, "P atte rns of Behavioral Characteristics as Indi-cants of Recreation Preference: A Canonical A na lys is," Research Quarterly, 49 (May),1 3 5 - 4 5 .

Haley , Russel l I. 1968, "B ene fi t Segm enta t ion ," Journal of M arketing, 32 (July), 30-35.1971 , "Beyond Bene f i t Segmen ta t i on , " Journal o f Advertising Research, 11 ,

(August), 3-8.Henry, W alter A. 1976, "C ul tura l Values Do Correlate wi th Consumer Behavior ," Journal of

Marketing Research, 13 (May ), 121-27.Kabish, Richard A., and Kenneth W. Coll ier 1981, Exploring Hu man Values, Monterey, CA:Brooks/Cole Publishing Co."A lter nat ive s Increasing to the Fast Food Hamburger and Fries ," Marketing News 1983, 17

(4 March) , 6 .Miller, Kenneth E. , and Kent L. Granzin 1979, "Simultaneous Loyalty and Benefi t Segmen-

ta t ion of Retai l Store Cu stom ers ," Journal o f Retailing, 55 (Spring), 47-60.


22/22


Sawyer, Alan G., and Stanley Arbeit 1973, "Benefit Segmentation in a Retail BankingMarket," Co mb ined Proceedings o f the American M arketing Association, 1973, Spring andFall Conferences, 124-27.

Schiebe, Karl E. 1970, Beliefs an d V alues, New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Sharpe, Louis K. and Kent L. Granzin 1974, "Brand Attributes That Determine Purchase,"

Journal o f Advertising R esearch, 14 (April), 39-42.Shaw, Russell E. and David Pinto 1978, "Where's Your Next Meal Coming From?" Nielsen

Researcher, (No. 1 , 2-19.Steelman, Virginia P. 1976, "'Attitudes Toward Food and Indicators of Subcultural Value

Systems," Home Economics Research Journal, 5 (September), 21-32.U. S. Department of Commerce 1982-83, Statist ical Abstract of the United States, 103rd

edition.Veldman, Donald J. 1967, Fortran Programming for the Behavioral Sciences, New York:

Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Vinson, Donald E., Jerome E. Scott, and Lawrence M. Lamont 1977, "The Role of Personal

Values in Marketing and Consumer Behavior," Journal of Marketing, 41 (April),44-50.Wallace, Jane Y. and Sylvia Riggs 1984, "Food Service Market Celebrates Good News:

Customers Are Eating Out Again," Restaurants an d Institutions, 94 (January), 86-92.Williams, Robert H. 1975, Customer Characteristics for Market Segmentation: A Multivariate

Using Five Product Types With Five Sets of Customer Descriptor Variables, Unpublisheddoctoral dissertation, Department of Marketing University of Utah.

Wood, L. 1978. "Nutrition at Home vs. Restaurants: How Do Patrons View It?" Foo d ServiceMarketing, 40 (December), 8-12.Wood L. 1979, "Restaurant Operators See Patrons Ordering More Healthy Selections," Food

Service Marketing, 41 (April), 8-13.

A B O U T T H E A U T H O R SKE N NE TH D. B AH N is Ass i s tan t P ro fes so r o f Marke t ing a t V i rg in ia Tech .Dr . B ahn received h i s Ph .D . f rom the Univers ity of Utah . H is ar ti c les havebeen publ i shed in The Journal o f Consumer Research, The Home EconomicsResearch Journal and e l sewhere .KE N T L . G R A N ZIN , P ro fes so r o f Marke t ing , Un iver si ty o f Utah rece ivedhis Ph .D. f rom the Univers i ty of I l l ino is , Champaign-Urbana. His ar t i c leshave been publ i shed in The Journal o f Retailing, Journal o f AdvertisingResearch, Journal o f Business Research, and e l sewhere .

benefit segmentation in restuarant industry

Documents