market survey on brand equity wrong
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
1/92
1
A STUDY ON THE MARKET SURVEY ON BRAND EQUITY AT
AUTO-MACHINE
MAIN PROJECT REPORT
Submitted to
SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT
In the partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of the degree of
MASTER OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
Submitted by
S.R.MONISH
3511010431
Under the guidance of
Mrs. DHANALAKSHMI
SRM SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT
SRM UNIVERSITY
KATTANKULATHUR 603 203
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
2/92
2
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
3/92
3
BONAFIDE CERTIFICATE
Certified that this project report titled A MARKET SURVEY ON BRAND
EQUITY AT AUTO-MACHINE LTD, is the Bonafide work of Mr.
S.R.MONISH (3511010431) who carried out the study under my supervision.
Certified further, that to the best of my knowledge the work reported here in
does not from part of any other project report or dissertation on the basis of
which a degree or award was conferred on an earlier occasion on this or any
other candidate.
Submitted for the viva-voice examination held on _____________________
Mrs.DHANALAKSHMI Dr.JAYSHREE SURESH
(INTERNAL GUIDE) DEAN / MBA
___________________________
External Examiner
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
4/92
4
ABSTRACT
Indian Automobile Industry
Following India's growing openness, the arrival of new and existing models,
easy availability of finance at relatively low rate of interest and price discounts
offered by the dealers and manufacturers all have stirred the demand for
vehicles and a strong growth of the Indian automobile industry.
The data obtained from ministry of commerce and industry, shows high growth
obtained since 2001- 02 in automobile production continuing in the first three
quarters of the 2004-05. Annual growth was 16.0 per cent in April-December,2004; the growth rate in 2003-04 was 15.1 per cent the automobile industry
grew at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 22 per cent between 1992
and 1997.
With investment exceeding Rs. 50,000 crore, the turnover of the automobile
industry exceeded Rs. 59,518 crore in 2002-03. Including turnover of the auto-component sector, the automotive industry's turnover, which was above Rs.
84,000 crore in 2002-03, is estimated to have exceeded Rs.1,00,000 crore (
USD 22. 74 billion) in 2003-04.
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
5/92
5
DECLARATION
I, S.R.MONISH, hereby declare that the Main Project, entitled A MARKET
SURVEY ON BRAND EQUITY AT AUTO MACHINE LTD submitted to
the SRM University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of
the Degree of Master of Business Administration is a record of original research
work done under the supervision and guidance of Mrs.Dhanalakshmi SRM
School of Management, SRM University, Kattankulathur Campus and it has not
formed the basis for the award of any Degree/Fellowship or other similar title
to any candidate of any University.
Place: Chennai
Date:
Signature of the Student
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
6/92
6
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Internship is an integral part of any Master of Business Administration program
and for that purposes I had joined the company AUTO-MACHINE LTD.
I take the opportunity to express my gratitude to all of them who are in some or
other way helped me to accomplish this challenging project. No amount of
written expression is sufficient to show my deepest sense of gratitude to them.
Also, I express my gratitude and sincere thanks to our Dean Dr. JAYSHREE
SURESH, for having given us spontaneous and wholehearted encouragement
for completing the project successfully.
I am very indebted to our Project guide, Mrs.Dhanalakshmi for her deluge of
ideas, assistance and invaluable support that has provided all through theproject.
My thanks to all other faculty and non-teaching staff members of our
department for their support and also those who helped me to complete this
project.
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
7/92
7
CONTENTS
INDEX PAGE NO
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
11
CHAPTER 2
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
15
CHAPTER 3
OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
16
CHAPTER 4
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
18
CHAPTER 5
METHODOLOGY AND LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY
34
CHAPTER 6
HOSPITAL PROFILE
38
CHAPTER 7
ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION
45
CHAPTER 8
FINDINGS
84
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
8/92
8
CHAPTER 9
SUGGESTIONS
85
CHAPTER 10
CONCLUSION
86
ANNEXURE 87
BIBLIOGRAPHY 92
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
9/92
9
LIST OF TABLES
SNO INDEX PAGE NO
1 BUY PRODUCT IF MANUFACTURED
INDEPENDENTLY
46
2 APPROPRIATE INDICATOR FOR BRAND EQUITY 48
3 TRUST PRODUCT GOT FROM LOCAL STORES 50
4 WHERE DO U PREFER BUYING OUR PRODUCT 52
5 APPEARANCE OF OUR PRODUCT 54
6 QUALITY OF OUR PRODUCT 56
7 INTANGIBLE FEATURES OF OUR PRODUCT 58
8 WILL U SPEND PREMIUM PRICE FOR REPUTEDCOMPANY PRODUCT
60
9 ASSOCIATE OUR PRODUCT WITH 62
10 WOULD U IDENTIFY OUR BRAND WITH
LITTELE OR NO ADVERTISING
64
11 COMPANY INVEST IN BUILDING BRANDEQUITY
66
12 WHICH IS WELL MANAGED, CUSTOMERLOYALTY OR SATISFACTION
68
13 IS OUR PRODUCT MARKET LEADER 70
14 MARKETING ACTIVITIES FOR BRANDBUILDING
72
15 UNDERTAKEN BRAND VALUE MEASUREMENTEXERCISE 74
16 DOES THE FIRM KEEP UP ITS PROMISES 76
17 IMPORTANT CRITERION FOR BRANDPREFERENCE
78
18 ARE U BULK PURCHASER OF OUR PRODUCT 80
19 BENEFITS COMPETITORS PROVIDE FOR YOURPRODUCT
82
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
10/92
10
LIST OF CHARTS
SNO INDEX PAGE NO
1 BUY PRODUCT IF MANUFACTURED
INDEPENDENTLY
47
2 APPROPRIATE INDICATOR FOR BRAND EQUITY 49
3 TRUST PRODUCT GOT FROM LOCAL STORES 51
4 WHERE DO U PREFER BUYING OUR PRODUCT 53
5 APPEARANCE OF OUR PRODUCT 55
6 QUALITY OF OUR PRODUCT 57
7 INTANGIBLE FEATURES OF OUR PRODUCT 59
8 WILL U SPEND PREMIUM PRICE FOR REPUTEDCOMPANY PRODUCT
61
9 ASSOCIATE OUR PRODUCT WITH 63
10 WOULD U IDENTIFY OUR BRAND WITH
LITTELE OR NO ADVERTISING
65
11 COMPANY INVEST IN BUILDING BRANDEQUITY
67
12 WHICH IS WELL MANAGED, CUSTOMERLOYALTY OR SATISFACTION
69
13 IS OUR PRODUCT MARKET LEADER 71
14 MARKETING ACTIVITIES FOR BRANDBUILDING
73
15 UNDERTAKEN BRAND VALUE MEASUREMENTEXERCISE 75
16 DOES THE FIRM KEEP UP ITS PROMISES 77
17 IMPORTANT CRITERION FOR BRANDPREFERENCE
79
18 ARE U BULK PURCHASER OF OUR PRODUCT 81
19 BENEFITS COMPETITORS PROVIDE FOR YOURPRODUCT
83
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
11/92
11
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
INDUSTRY PROFILE:
In the year 1769, a French engineer by the name of Nicolas J. Cugnot
invented the first automobile to run on roads. This automobile, in fact, was a
self-powered, three-wheeled, military tractor that made the use of a steam
engine. The range of the automobile, however, was very brief and at the most, itcould only run at a stretch for fifteen minutes. In addition, these automobiles
were not fit for the roads as the steam engines made them very heavy and large,
and required ample starting time. Oliver Evans was the first to design a steam
engine driven automobile in the U.S.
A Scotsman, Robert Anderson, was the first to invent an electric carriage
between 1832 and 1839. However, Thomas Davenport of the U.S.A. and
Scotsman Robert Davidson were amongst the first to invent more applicable
automobiles, making use of non-rechargeable electric batteries in 1842.
Development of roads made travelling comfortable and as a result, the short
ranged, electric battery driven automobiles were no more the best option for
travelling over longer distances.
The Automobile Industry finally came of age with Henry Ford in 1914 for the
bulk production of cars. This lead to the development of the industry and it first
begun in the assembly lines of his car factory. The several methods adopted by
Ford, made the new invention (that is, the car) popular amongst the rich as well
as the masses.
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
12/92
12
According the History of Automobile Industry US, dominated the automobile
markets around the globe with no notable competitors. However, after the end
of the Second World War in 1945, the Automobile Industry of other
technologically advanced nations such as Japan and certain European nations
gained momentum and within a very short period, beginning in the early 1980s,
the U.S Automobile Industry was flooded with foreign automobile companies,
especially those of Japan and Germany.
The current trends of the Global Automobile Industry reveal that in the
developed countries the Automobile Industries are stagnating as a result of the
drooping car markets, whereas the Automobile Industry in the developing
nations, such as, India and Brazil, have been consistently registering higher
growth rates every passing year for their flourishing domestic automobile
markets.
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
13/92
13
NEED FOR THE STUDY
The World Automobile Industry is turned to the developing markets.
With the developed markets almost saturated, the World Automobile Industry is
now focused on the developing markets of South America and Asia, and
Eastern Europe with special emphasis on BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India, and
China).
As per the reports of the International Organization of Motor Vehicle
Manufacturers or OICA(the association of the companies involved in World
Automobile Industry), for the fiscal end in 2006, the automobile manufacturers
in the U.S. have been overtaken by those in Japan, in terms of the total volume
of automobile units manufactured worldwide.
However, the struggling General Motors of the U.S. still remain the worldwide
leaders of the World Automobile Industry, ahead of the rapidly growing Toyota
Motor Corporation of Japan, by a substantial margin.
The Emerging Indian Automobile Market:
The Indian Automobile Market is a promising industrial sector that is growing
immensely every passing year. The passenger cars are referred to, through theuse of the word "automobile." The whooping growth experienced by the Indian
Automobile Market in the last financial year itself that is the financial year end
in February, 2007 was very close to an 18 percent over the previous fiscal. This
statistical fact is a glittering example of the potential of the growing Automobile
Industry in India.
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
14/92
14
As per the survey conducted by the Society of Indian Automobile
Manufacturers, the total number of automobiles manufactured by the
Automobile Industry in India, throughout the financial year 2006-07, was very
close to the 15.5 lakh (1.5 million) margin. The huge of number of automobiles
manufactured by the Automobile Industry in India was an enormous growth
upon the number of automobiles manufactured during the previous fiscal that
ended in 2006.
The total number of cars that were exported from India were very close to the
2.0 lakh (2.0 hundred thousand) margin, an encouraging sign for the
Automobile Industry in India. The export of cars manufactured in India
comprised nearly 13 percent of the total number of cars manufactured
domestically by the Automobile Industry in India.
The India Automobile Market looks set to prosper, largely due to the growing
market for automobiles that is developing in India. In the financial year that
ended in February, 2004, the Indian automobile markets were the fastestgrowing in the world, with the registered growth rate touching nearly 20
percent.
The Automobile Industry in India mainly comprises of the small car section,
which enjoys nearly a 2/3rd market share of the entire market for automobiles in
India. In this respect, the Indian markets are the largest in the world for small
cars, behind Japan.
The Indian passenger car market which ranks amongst the largest in the world,
is poised to become even larger and enter the top five passenger car markets in
the world in the next decade.
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
15/92
15
CHAPTER 2
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
Professional management is essence for improving overall efficiency and
effectiveness in every business, which makes business organization sustainable
in changing political and economic environment. Since couple of years more
and number of corporate sector companies have experienced the grave problems
of deciding promotional strategy and specifically sales promotion schemes towin the customers. Also, on the other hand, sales promotion initiatives taken
without keeping the long term objectives of the business may dilutes the brand
equity. It is felt that management practices of designing and implementing
promotional decisions should be well researched and rational to justify the
investment on promotions. It has been felt that large gap remain what has been
accomplished and what is remaining. Therefore the statement of the problem
under the study that has been selected is Effects of Sales Promotions on
Consumer Preferences & Brand Equity Perception .
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
16/92
16
CHAPTER 3
OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
1. To provide a useful strategic function and guide marketing decisions, it isimportant for marketers to fully understand the sources of brand equity,
how they affect outcomes of interest.
2. To know how these sources and outcomes change, if at all, over time.3. To understand the sources and outcomes of brand equity provides a
common denominator for interpreting marketing strategies and assessing
the value of a brand.
4. To study the sources of brand equity help managers understand and focuson what drives their brand equity.
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
17/92
17
SCOPE OF THE STUDY
To understand exactly how and where brands add value. Towards that goal, we
review measures of both sources and outcomes of brand equity in detail. We
then present a model of value creation, the brand value chain, as a holistic,
integrated approach to understanding how to capture the value created by
brands. We also outline some issues in developing a brand equity measurement
system. We conclude by providing some summary observations.
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY:
we propose an integrated approach to measuring and managing brand
equity using an econometric model of supply and demand that takes into
account both the perspectives of the firm and the consumer and illustrates the
structural link between consumer- and firm-based measures of brand equity. We
model firm-based brand equity in the form of product market performance
measures of the brands profit, profit premium, revenue, and revenue premium,
and model consumer-based brand equity using a logit model that not only
accounts for the products physical characteristics, price, and advertising, but
also consumer mindset measures of brand equity in the form of the consumers
perceived quality and satisfaction with the brand.
We also study the importance of incorporating such consumer mindset data in a
model of brand equity management vis--vis excluding such data, and discuss
its managerial usefulness in understanding a brands equity positioning among
competing brands and in assessing and predicting the brands performance in
the market.
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
18/92
18
CHAPTER 4
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Does consumption respond to promotion? Many studies have focused on
the effects of promotion on brand switching, purchase quantity, and stockpiling
and have documented that promotion makes consumers switch brands and
purchase earlier or more. The consumersconsumption decision has long beenignored, and it remains unclear how promotion affects consumption (Blattberg
et al. 1995). Conventional choice models cannot be used to address this issue
because many of these models assume constant consumption rates over time
(usually defined as the total purchases over the entire sample periods divided by
the number of time periods).
While this assumption can be appropriate for some product categories such as
detergent and diapers, it might not hold for many other product categories, such
as packaged tuna, candy, orange juice, or yogurt. For these categories,
promotion can actually stimulate consumption in addition to causing brand
switching and stockpiling. Thus, for product categories with a varying
consumption rate, it is critical to recognize the responsiveness of consumption
to promotion in order to measure the effectiveness of promotion on sales more
precisely.
Emerging literature in behavioral and economic theory has provided supporting
evidence that consumption for some product categories responds to promotion.
Using an experimental approach, Wansink (1996) establishes that significant
holding costs pressure consumers to consume more of the product. Wansink and
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
19/92
19
Deshpande (1994) show that when the product is perceived as widely
substitutable, consumers will consume more of it in place of its close
substitutes. They also show that higher perishability increases consumption
rates. Adopting scarcity theory, Folkes et al. (1993) show that consumers curb
consumption of products when supply is limited because they perceive smaller
quantities as more valuable. Chandon and Wansink (2002) show that
stockpiling increases consumption of high convenience products. More than that
of low-convenience products.
In an analytical study, Assuncao and Meyer (1993) show that consumption is an
endogenous decision variable driven by promotion and promotion-induced
stockpiling resulting from forward-looking behaviour. There are some recent
empirical papers addressing the promotion effect on consumer stockpiling
behaviour under price or promotion uncertainty. Erdem and Keane (1996) and
Gonul and Srinivasan (1996) establish that consumers are forward looking.
Erdem et al. (2003) explicitly model consumersexpectations about future priceswith an exogenous consumption rate. In their model, consumers form future
price expectations and decide when, what, and how much to buy. Sun et al.
(2003) demonstrate that ignoring forward looking behavior leads to an over
estimation of promotion elasticity.
Sales Promotion
Consumer promotions are now more pervasive than ever. Witness 215 billion
manufacturer coupons distributed in 1986, up 500% in the last decade
(Manufacturers Coupon Control Center 1988), and manufacturer expenditures
on trade incentives to feature or display brands totaling more than $20 billion in
the same year, up 800% in the last decade (Alsop 1986; Kessler 1986). So far,
not much work has been done to identify the purchasing strategies that
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
20/92
20
consumers adopt in response to particular promotions, or to study how
pervasive these strategies are in a population of interest. Blattberg, Peacock and
Sen (1976) define a purchase strategy as a general buying pattern which
"incorporates several dimensions of buying behavior such as brand loyalty,
private brand proneness and deal proneness." A greater understanding of the
different types of consumer responses to promotions can help managers to
develop effective promotional programs as well as provide new insights for
consumer behavior theorists who seek to understand the influence of different
types of environmental cues on consumer behavior.
Blattberg, Eppen, and Liebermann (1981), Gupta (1988), Neslin, Henderson,
and Quelch (1985), Shoemaker (1979), Ward and Davis (1978), and Wilson,
Newman,
and Hastak (1979) find evidence that promotions are associated with purchase
acceleration in terms of an increase in quantity purchased and, to a lesser extent,
decreased inter purchase timing. Researchers studying the brand choicedecision-for example, Guadagni and Little (1983) and Gupta (1988)-have found
promotions to be associated with brand switching. Montgomery (1971),
Schneider and Currim (1990), and Webster (1965) found that promotion-prone
households were associated with lower levels of brand loyalty.
Blattberg, Peacock, and Sen (1976, 1978) describe 16 purchasing strategysegments based on three purchase dimensions: brand loyalty (single brand,
single brand shifting, many brands), type of brand preferred (national, both
national and private label), and price sensitivity (purchase at regular price,
purchase at deal price). There are other variables that may be used to describe
purchase strategies, examples are whether the household purchases a major or
minor (share) national brand, store brand, or generic, or whether it is store-loyal
or not. McAlister (1983) and Neslin and Shoemaker (1983) use certain
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
21/92
21
segments derived from those of Blattberg, Peacock, and Sen but add a purchase
acceleration variable to study the profitability of product promotions.
A large body of literature has examined consumer response to sales promotions,
most notably coupons (e.g.. Sawyer and Dickson, 1984; Bawa and Shoemaker,
1987 and 1989; Gupta, 1988; Blattberg and Neslin, 1990; Kirshnan and Rao,
1995; Leone and Srinivasan, 1996). Despite this, important gaps remain to be
studied. It is generally agreed that sales promotions are difficult to standardize
because of legal, economic, and cultural differences (e.g., Foxman, Tansuhaj,
and Wong, 1988; Kashani and Quelch, 1990; Huff and Alden, 1998).
Multinational firms should therefore understand how consumer response to
sales promotions differs between countries or states or province.
Brand Equity Measurement:
According to Rust, Ambler, Carpenter, Kumar, & Srivastava (2004), it isimportant to measure marketing asset of a firm which they define as customer
focused measures of the value of the firm (and its offerings) that may enhance
the firms long-term value. To measure this, they focus on two approaches:
brand equity and customer equity. Measuring brand equity deals with the
measurement of intangible marketing concepts, such as product image
reputation and brand loyalty. Rajagopal (2008) supports the view of measuringthe marketing asset of a firm and highlights that the major advantage of a brand
measurement system is that it links brand management and business
performance of the firm and is a strategic management tool for continuous
improvement rather than a static snapshot in time of the brands performance.
An effective brand measurement system therefore helps businesses to
understand how the brand is performing with the framework of customer values
and against competing brands.
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
22/92
22
According to Ambler, 2003 many companies measure brand equity to ensure
that marketing activities are aligned with the companys strategy and to ensure
that investment is used for the right brands. Ambler (2003) further defines
marketing metrics as quantified performance measures regularly reviewed by
top management which can be classified into six categories such as:
1. Consumer intermediate: such as consumer awareness and attitudes. The
measure lies in inputs (advertising) and behaviour (sales).
2. Consumer behaviour: such as quarterly penetration.
3. Direct trade customer: distribution availability.
4. Competitive market measures: market share (measure relative to a competitor
or the whole market).
5. Innovation: such as share of turnover due to new products.
6. Financial measures: advertising expenditure or brand valuation.
Multinationals such as Coca Cola, PepsiCo, McDonalds, IBM and many othershave marketing metrics in place that are used globally to measure and track
brand equity. According to Kish, Riskey & Kerin (2001), PepsiCo measures and
tracks brand equity using a propriety model called Equitrak which is based on
two factors: (1): Recognitionhow broad and deep is a brands awareness and
(2): Regards: which measures how people feel about the brand and includes
brand reputation, affiliation, momentum and differentiation. The Equitrakmodel used by PepsiCo not only tracks the company brands but competitor
brands as well and is used by all subsidiaries in different countries.
McDonalds UK has key areas for metrics to track their marketing quarterly: 1.
Sales transaction (which also includes customer satisfaction, value for money
and cleanliness), 2. Market share and brand equity measures (awareness, and
advertising recall) and 3. Mystery diners who visit the stores to evaluate the
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
23/92
23
service level (Ambler, 2003). Shell also uses a global tracker which provides
metrics and diagnostics for their brand versus competitors across 70 countries
and has a range of questions including awareness, trial, purchase, loyalty and
image (Ambler, 2003).
The key therefore is to balance financial and non financial goals and many
authors do agree that top management must support this and regular review of
both financial and non-financial goals is necessary to drive a market orientated
business. Dunn and Davies (2004), suggest that having a brand focused business
should be a top bottom approach driven by the top executives. The concept of
market orientation therefore plays a significant role. According to Barwise &
Farley (2004), both external and internal forces are steadily forcing firms to be
more market oriented and research suggests that market-oriented firms tend to
enjoy superior performance.
This view is supported by Best (2005), who says that a strong marketorientation cannot be created by a mere proclamation but by adopting a market
based management philosophy whereby all members of the organization are
sensitive to customers needs and are aware of these needs. The benefits of
strong market orientation are: better understanding of competitors, customer
focus, customer satisfaction and high profits (Best, 2005; Ambler, 2003). Davis
(2002) adds that brands should be managed as assets using a top down approachwhere senior executives embrace the concept that marketing should have a
leading seat at the strategy table and use the brands to drive key strategic
decisions. Also if senior executives are vocal and show commitment to the
brands, then employees within an organization will start taking ownership of the
brand.
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
24/92
24
Sales Promotion
At this point, it is useful to define what mean by the terms "expected price" and
"price promotion." Following Thaler (1985), it is viewed that the price
consumersuse as a reference in making purchase decisions as the price they
expect to pay prior to a purchase occasion. Further, the expected price may also
be called the "internal reference price" (Klein and Oglethorpe 1987) as opposed
to an external reference price such as the manufacturers' suggested list price.
Finally, a brand is on price promotion when it is offered with a temporary price
cut that is featured in newspaper advertising and/ or brought to consumers'
attention with a store display sign.
The price expectations hypothesis has been used to provide an alternative
explanation for the observed adverse long-term effect of price promotions on
brand choice (Kalwani et al. 1990). Previous research has shown that repeat
purchase probabilities of a brand after a promotional purchase are lower thanthe corresponding values after a non promotional purchase (Dodson, Tybout,
and Sternthal 1978; Guadagni and Little 1983; Shoemaker and Shoaf 1977).
Consumers' reactions to a retail price then may depend on how the retail price
compares with the price they expect to pay for the brand. Specifically, during a
price promotion, they are apt to perceive a price "gain" and react positively;correspondingly, when the deal is retracted, they are apt to perceive a price
"loss" and are unlikely to purchase the brand. Neslin and Shoemaker (1989)
offer yet another alternative explanation for the phenomenon of lower repeat
purchase rates after promotional purchases.
They argue that the lower repeat purchase rates may be the result of statistical
aggregation rather than actual declines in the purchase probabilities of
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
25/92
25
individual consumers after a promotional purchase. Specifically, "if the
promotion attracts many consumers who under non promotion circumstances
would have very low probabilities of buying the brand, then on the next
purchase occasion the low probabilities of these consumers bring down the
average repurchase rate among promotional purchases".
The behavior of households that have low probabilities of buying a brand upon
the retraction of a deal can be explained readily in a price expectation
framework. It has been suggested that the price they expect to pay for the brand
may be close to the deal price and they may forego purchasing the focal brand
when it is not promoted because its retail price far exceeds what they expect to
pay for it. It has been investigated that the impact of price promotions on
consumers' price expectations and brand choice in an interactive computer-
controlled experiment.
Manohar U. Kalwani and Chi Kin Yim discussed that expected prices wereelicited directly from respondents in the experiment and used in the empirical
investigations of the impact of price promotions on consumers' price
expectations. Further, rather than studying the impact of just a single price pro-
motion and its retraction, they assessed the significance of the dynamic or long-
term effects of a sequence of price promotions.
They have concluded that both the price promotion frequency and the size of
price discounts have a significant adverse impact on a brand's expected price.
Consistent with the findings of Raman and Bass (1988) and Gurumurthy and
Little (1989), they also found evidence in support of a region of relative price
insensitivity around the expected price such that changes in price within that
region produce no pronounced change in consumers' perceptions.
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
26/92
26
Price changes outside that region, however, are found to have a significant
effect on consumer response. Further, they discussed that promotion
expectations are just as important as price expectations in understanding
consumer purchase behaviour. In particular, consumers who have been exposed
to frequent price promotions in support of a given brand may come to form
promotion expectations and typically will purchase the brand only when it is
price promoted. Added to it, in the case of price expectations, consumer
response to promotion expectations was asymmetric in that losses loom larger
than gains.
Applying Helson's (1964) adaptation-level theory to price perceptions, Sawyer
and Dickson (1984) suggest that price promotions may work in the short run
because consumers may use the brand's regular price as a reference and then are
induced by the lower deal price to purchase the brand. However, frequent
temporary price promotions may also lower the brand's expected price and lead
consumers to defer purchases of the brand when it is offered at the regular price.Tversky and Kahneman (1974) have shown that people rely on a limited
number of heuristic principles that reduce complex tasks of assessing
probabilities and predicting values to simpler judgmental operations. In some
cases, people may anchor and adjust their forecasts by starting with a
preconceived point and weigh that point heavily in arriving at a judgment.
When the frequency of past price promotions is "very low," consumers identifya price promotion offer as an exceptional event and may not modify the brand's
expected price. The brand's expected price then will be anchored around the
regular price because of insufficient adjustment. In other cases, people may
arrive at a judgment on the basis of how similar or representative the event is to
a class of events.
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
27/92
27
Therefore, when a brand is price promoted "too often," consumers come to
expect a deal with each purchase and hence expect to pay only the discounted
price on the basis of its representativeness. Clearly, given a certain level of price
discount, the brand's expected price will be bounded by the regular price and the
implied sale price. That line of reasoning suggests that the relationship between
the price promotion frequency and the expected price can be approximated by a
sigmoid function. Whether a price discount will affect the brands expected price
depends on how consumers perceive the discount.
Uhl and Brown (1971) postulate that the perception of a retail price change
depends on the magnitude of the price change. They report results from an
experiment indicating that 5% deviations were identified correctly 64% of the
time whereas 15% deviations were identified correctly 84% of the time. Della
Bitta and Monroe (1980) find that consumer' perceptions of savings from a
promotional offer do not differ significantly between 30%, 40%, and 50%
discount levels. However, they find significant differences between the 10% and30 to 50% levels.
Hence, the impact of the depth of price discounts on lowering the brand's
expected price is likely to occur when the price discount offered by the brand is
relatively large but not so large that it is seen as an exceptional event. Price
discounts ranging from 10 to 40%, a range commonly used in past research onprice discounts in the consumer packaged goods categories (Berkowitz and
Walton 1980; Curhan and Kopp 1986). Within that range, the findings of Uhl
and Brown (1971) and Della Bitta and Monroe (1980) suggest that it is
reasonable to expect the relationship between the brand's expected price and the
depth of price discounts to be concave.
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
28/92
28
However, Manohar U. Kalwani and Chi Kin Yim (1992) found that the brands
expected price is a linear function of the price promotion frequency and the
depth of price discounts at conventional significance levels. Nevertheless, the
results provide some directional support for nonlinear relationships between the
expected price and the two elements of a price promotion schedule. Given the
important implications of such potential nonlinear effects of price promotions
on brands' expected prices, further research testing those nonlinear effects of
price promotions should prove fruitful for the design of optimal price promotion
policies.
They also contributed that promotion expectations suggest that unfulfilled
promotion expectation events among consumers who have come to expect
promotions on a brand because of frequent exposure to them will have an
adverse impact on the brand. Analogously, unexpected promotion events will
enhance the probability of purchasing a brand among consumers who have not
been exposed to many price promotions and therefore do not as a rule expect thebrand to be available on a promotional deal. they suggest that those results are
consistent with the rational expectations view that "any policy rule that is
systematically related to economic conditions, for example, one observed with
stabilization in mind, will be perfectly anticipated, and therefore have no effect
on output or employment" (Maddock and Carter 1982). Policy actions that come
as a surprise to people, in contrast, will generally have some real effect. Clearly,the design of optimal price promotion schedules requires consideration of the
fact that an increase in the use of price promotions could erode long-term
consumer demand by lowering the prices that consumers anticipate paying for
the brand. Price promotional deals may come to be "perfectly anticipated" and
have much less impact on consumer response than they do when they come as a
surprise to consumers.
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
29/92
29
Apart of it they suggested that Evaluation of the trade off between the short-
term sales gain from a price promotion and the adverse effect on future sales
because of consumers forming price and promotion expectations requires
knowledge of how price promotions affect the formation of consumers'
expectations under different market conditions. Promotions have increased in
popularity during the past few decades.
The positive short-term impact of price promotions on brand sales is well
documented. A price promotion typically reduces the price for a given quantity
or increases the quantity available at the same price, thereby enhancing value
and creating an economic incentive to purchase. However, if consumers
associate promotions with inferior brand quality, then, to the extent that quality
is important, a price promotion might not achieve the extent of sales increase
the economic incentive otherwise might have produced.
It is well documented that building and maintaining positive brand equity
with ones consumer base is considered to be critical for long-term survival(Farquhar 1990; Keller 1993; Blackstone 2000; Ambler 2001). Fill C. (2005)
noted that in the changing and competitive marketing communication industry it
is of vital importance for companies finally to recognize that consumers
perceive a brand through all the communication touch-points. This, in turn,
implies the importance of a strategic focus in any marketing communications
plan, as brand building is a long-term exercise.
A brand entails a construct of, first, an identity that managers wish to
portray and secondly, images construed by audiences of the identities they
perceive. Given the potential link between promotion and brand equity, of
major concern is to know consumers perception towards consumer based brand
equity sources. Despite a wealth of literature on the separate issues of Brand
Equity and sales promotion, to date there has only been a relatively small
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
30/92
30
amount that specifically addresses the relationship between the two; further
support for Schultzs suggestion that they dont really know a lot yet.
The most recent literature on sales promotions (Chandon & Laurent 1999)
stresses the need to distinguish between two types, monetary and non-monetary,
because there are important differences between them. On the one hand,
monetary promotions (e.g. free product, coupons) are primarily related to
utilitarian benefits, which have an instrumental, functional and cognitive nature.
They help consumers to increase the acquisition utility of their purchase and
enhance the efficiency of their shopping experience.
On the other hand, non-monetary promotions (e.g. contests, sweepstakes, free
gifts, loyalty programmer) are related to hedonic benefits with a non-
instrumental, experiential and affective nature, because they are intrinsically
rewarding and related to experiential emotions, pleasure and self-esteem. So,
studying the consumer preference between cash discount (Price Promotion) and
free gift (Non Price promotion) has been identified as one of the objectives ofthis study.
These factors have been highlighted especially in the markets, characterized
usually by low involvement products; a lack of clear differentiation between
brands and extreme competiveness. Premium brands and market leaders have
not been exempted from these issues, as it has been found that followers andmarket leaders experience the same level of competition although their brand
characteristics may vary greatly.
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
31/92
31
IMPORTANCE OF BRAND EQUITY:
Brand equity is one of the most valuable assets that a firm can have, and
brand equity measurement and management continue to be important areas of
research in both academia and industry. Most of the extant research on brand
equity has looked at the issue from the perspective of either the consumer or the
firm. Brand equity research from a consumers perspective usually involves
collecting data on consumer mindset measures of brand equity from the
consumer through surveys or experiments, and using the data to assess the
consumers perceptions, feelings, and attitudes towards the brand.
It may also involve collecting data on the consumers revealed preference
behavior, using self-reported or actual purchase data, and using it to assess the
incremental value that the brand name has on the consumers utility and her
resulting choice behavior. On the other hand, brand equity research from a
firms perspective generally involves the use of observed market data to assessthe brands financial value to the firm. The market in question could be a
geographic or physical product market, where performance measures such as
market share or profit can be used, or it could be a financial market, where
performance measures such as the firms stock price or other financial variables
may be used to assess the brands value.
While studying brand equity using either a consumer-based or a firm-based
approach has yielded valuable insights on the different ways that brand equity
can be measured and managed, there is a need to better understand the link
between the brand metrics obtained from the two perspectives. In particular,
there is a general consensus that a brands performance in the marketplace is
determined in part by consumer perceptions, behavioral intentions, and attitudes
toward the brand.
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
32/92
32
For example, Srivastava and Shocker (1991) propose that brand equity
comprises of two components: brand strength, which consists of the set of
associations and behaviors on the part of the brands customers, channel
members, and parent company that allows the brand to enjoy a competitive
advantage; and brand value, which is the financial outcome of managements
ability to strategically leverage brand strength (the basis of brand value) to
produce profits.
Researchers such as Aaker and Jacobson (1994, 2001) and Kim, Kim, and An
(2003) have also shown the existence of a relationship between measures of
consumer brand perceptions and the brands financial performance. In addition,
related streams of research have looked at the link between marketing and
financial metrics, such as those between consumer satisfaction and a firms
market performance (e.g. Anderson, Fornell, and Lehmann 1994; Gomez,
McLaughlin, and Wittink 2003), as well as the relationship between consumerbrand ratings and a firms market share and penetration (e.g. Baldinger and
Rubinson 1996). These studies, among others, suggest that studying brand
equity solely from the perspective of either the firm or the consumer may be
inadequate. While assessing brand equity from the perspective of the firm can
provide a measure of the financial value of the brand to the firm, it neglects the
fundamental basis of the brand equity concept, which suggests that the equity ofa brand is not merely a dollar-metric value but also an intangible asset residing
in the minds of consumers.
Similarly, while measuring brand equity from the perspective of the consumer
gives an indication of the value that the brand name provides to the consumer in
the form of the consumers favorable (or otherwise) attitudes or perceptions of
the brand, or the increase in the consumers utility provided by the brand name,
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
33/92
33
it does not show how these mindset measures can be translated into more
tangible measures of a brands financial value or its market performance, which
may be more useful for managers.
A simultaneous firm-based and consumer-based approach to measuring and
managing brand equity will not only have significant implications for firms
attempting to improve the equity of their brands on both fronts, but will also be
useful in developing a more complete picture of the brand equity concept. Firm-
centric approach also does not assess how this financial value may be affected
by changes in these consumer mindset measures of brand equity.
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
34/92
34
CHAPTER 5
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Research Objectives:
1. To study the consumer attitude towards the cash discount as a sales
promotion scheme.
2. To compare the consumer preference between cash discount and free gift3. To study the deal proneness of consumer considering demographic variables.
4. To study the consumer perception towards brand equity sources considering
sales promotion schemes.
5. To understand the media preference to know the sales promotion schemes
information.
6. To study consumer preference of sales promotion schemes across
demographic variables.
7. To study the sales promotion schemes preference according to various
attributes.
Research Hypothesis:
Ho1: There is no significant difference between Consumer attitude towards the
cash discount as a sales promotion scheme and demographic variables.
Ho2: There is no significant difference between consumer preference of cash
discount and free gift as sales promotion schemes.
Ho3: There is no significant difference between Consumer deal proneness and
demographic variables.
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
35/92
35
Ho4: There is no significant difference between Brand equity perception and
demographic variables considering sales promotion schemes.
Ho5: There is no media preference to know the sales promotion schemes
information
Ho6: There is no significant difference between demographic variables and
sales promotion schemes preference.
Motivation for the study:
With the growth of population and spending power of the consumer has created
the opportunities and challenges for the companies in the world market.
Simultaneously, competition to win consumers has been increased drastically.
World is becoming the small village and Many MNCs have entered in India
and other countries. Marketing paradigm is shifting from consumer satisfaction
to consumer delight. Enticing consumers with the various sales promotion
schemes is the order of the day. If this tool is not used strategically, companyhas to follow the trend of promotions to maintain the market share. Considering
almost universal applications of designing the sales promotion schemes and
understanding its impact on business has motivated to take the steps in the
direction to study this crucial aspect of promotion management.
Research Design:
A research design is a framework or blue print for conducting the research
project. It details the procedures necessary for obtaining the information need to
structure and/or solve research problems. The research design lays the
foundation for conducting the project. The descriptive research design is being
used to study the formulated problem. Primary and secondary data has been
collected according to the need of the study. For collecting primary data,
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
36/92
36
structured questionnaire has been prepared considering objectives of the study.
More over important factors has been considered to measure the interested
variable of the study.
Sampling Element: Each and every individual who purchases the products in
the state of Gujarat has been identified as a sampling element.
DATA COLLECTION:
In this study, for primary data collection we have used questionnaire
method. This is written and in organized format containing all questions
relevant to soliciting type, in which all questions and answers is specified and
comments in the respondents own words are held to a minimum. The
unstructured questionnaire is useful in carrying out in depth interviews where
the aim is to probe for attitudes and reasons. For secondary data we have used
the data prepared by National Accreditation Board for Testing and Calibration
Laboratories (NABL).
DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION:
Data collection is the systematic recording of information; data analysisinvolves working to uncover patterns and trends in data sets; data
interpretation involves explaining those patterns and trends.
Scientists interpret data based on their background knowledge andexperience, thus different scientists can interpret the same data in
different ways.
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
37/92
37
By publishing their data and the techniques they used to analyze andinterpret that data, scientists give the community the opportunity to both
review the data and use it in future research.
LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY:
1. The samples size is not too much to generalize the result of the study.
2. This study is limited to Gujarat state only and result may differ if conducted
in other regions. Also it measures the consumer preference product categories.If the same study is repeated for other industry consumer preference of sales
promotion schemes may vary
3. The study is limited to sales promotion schemes of product categories only
and result may vary if study is conducted for non product categories.
4. There are other variables besides sales promotion schemes which affect brand
equity perception and consumer preferences.
5. Evaluation is based on the primary data generated through questionnaire and
accuracy of the findings entirely depends on the accuracy of such data and
unbiased responses of the customers.
Although sales promotion is an important strategy for producing quick, short-
term, positive results, it is not a cure for a bad product, poor advertising, or an
inferior sales team. After a consumer uses a coupon for the initial purchase of a
product, the product must then take over and convince them to become repeat
buyers. In addition, sales promotion activities may bring several negative
consequences, including due to the number of competitive promotions.
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
38/92
38
CHAPTER 6
INDUSTRY PROFILE
COMPANY PROFILE:
Auto - Machine, is one of the leading manufactures of pipe and tube
fittings components of brass and steel and automobile parts. Auto - Machine,
having established in 1983, have developed to a full fledged manufacturing unitwith annual capacity of more than 10 million components.
We are producing large varieties of compression fittings, flare type fittings and
high pressure couplings for hydraulic, pneumatic and refrigeration application,
in strict compliance of BS, IS, and SAE specifications in various ranges and
also we are manufacturing machined components as per the customer's
requirements.
Infrastructure
We have the backing of a state-of-the-art infrastructure aiding the operations.
The unit is well-equipped with advanced R&D wing assisted by sophisticated
machines and equipment. These machines have enabled us in bringing out cost-
effective products like Stainless Steel Rods, Steel Sheets & Plates. We have
developed to a full-fledged manufacturing unit for precision and machined
components supplying to all leading OEM groups of customers.
We do own the rare privilege of being the self certified supplier to all leading
earth movers and automobile manufactures. Our field activities are not confined
to the customers in India. We have been exporting Automobile products tomany of the countries since 1999.
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
39/92
39
Auto - Machine, have established Quality Assurance Laboratory, which is
responsible for inspection of components.
This industry includes manufacturers who produce a range of plastic pipes,plastic fittings for plastic pipes, and plastic profile shapes such as rods, tubes,
plates and car parts, but specifically excludes plastic hose or plastic plumbing
fixtures. The pipe products are sold to customers with fluid handling
requirements such as construction and irrigation supply vendors, water
treatment plants, oil rigs and farmers.
The essential steps of pipe and fitting production are to heat, melt, mix and
convey the raw material into a particular shape and hold that shape during the
cooling process. This is necessary to produce solid wall and profile wall pipe as
well as compression and injection moulded fittings.
Quality Management
Quality has been the integral part of our business policy. Our products are
available with an assurance of high quality and standards as they are tested on
different parameters before supply. This is to ensure that only flawless products
reach the hands of the clients.
Network
We are thriving on our well-established network that is spread not only in India
but also in the markets of Gulf countries. Our well-coordinated network has
enabled us in the timely and efficient delivery of the products. Subsequently, we
are acknowledged as one of the trusted Industrial Fasteners Manufacturers &
Suppliers in India.
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
40/92
40
Services
SAE Fittings
Pipe TEE, Clevis, Cock Pipe plug Olive type Ferrule type Flair type Hose fittings Forged and Machined components Elbow tee connector Pipe line fittings
AUTO MACHINE established its presence in India by opening a subsidiary
called Hyundai Motor India Limited with a total investment of US$ 614
Millions. The AUTO MACHINE project is the largest to be made by an MNC
in the automobile sector. The plant near Chennai, in the state of Tamil Nadu is
the largest manufacturing plant of AUTO MACHINE outside Korea and
contains nearly all facilities necessary for a self sufficient manufacturing and
production site for developing cars.
This assembly plant not only boasts its own assembly facilities but also a R&D
center, a performance experimenting and testing center, and a driving testing
ground. As such, the India plant represents a family-type combined automobile
assembly facility, capable of all production processes, research and
development, testing of products, marketing for sales and provision of after sale
service in India.
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
41/92
41
Measures to be adopted by global leaders of the World Automobile
Industry:
Several significant economic measures are being considered by the majorplayers of the World Automobile Industry in order to make a smooth entry into
the markets of the developing countries, and to make a name for them. The
effective measures include:
Reducing the selling prices of the automobiles manufactured in theirfactories
Improving the levels of after-sales services to keep customers satisfied Opening manufacturing factories in the developing nations, to reduce
effective costs of production as well as saving shipping charges, and
enhancing prompt delivery of automobile units.
Automobile Industry Trends:
In keeping with the Automobile Industry Trends, the leading automobile
manufacturers are turning to the Asian markets that appear set to grow
immensely over the next decade. The automobile markets in the U.S., Europe
and the Japan have almost matured as a result of saturation and appear set to
decline through the next decade. In contrast, the automobile markets spread
over the entire Asian continent (with the exception of Japan), are constantly
increasing in size and will be the destination for most of the globally leading
automobile manufacturers.
The Automobile Industry Trends reveal that the emerging markets of the
developing nations of Asia especially China, and India are backed by their
huge population growth rate, to add to the growing national economy of these
two nations.
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
42/92
42
The rapid growth of the national economy of the BRIC countries (including
Brazil, Russia, India, and China) has enabled a growing section of the
population of these countries to purchase automobiles. Global surveys
conducted recently reveal that within the next ten years, these emerging
automobile markets will account for nearly a whooping 90 percent of the global
automobile sales growth. As a result of this, leading Automobile manufacturers
of the world are setting up factories in the emerging markets, in order to serve
the potential consumers better as well as reduce manufacturing and shipping
costs. In addition, these arrangements are enabling the leading global
automobile manufacturers to compete with the local automobile manufacturers
that were flourishing in the absence of quality competition.
The prosperity of the national economy is reflected in the rising per capita
income of the developing nations. Therefore, increasing Gross Domestic
Product and per capita income have raised the purchasing ability of thepopulation that constitutes these emerging markets
As a growing percentage of the population in the developed nations age rapidly,
in comparison to the rest of the world, these aging numbers necessitate
automobiles to fit the physiological change of the world population.
The Emerging Indian Automobile Market:
In terms of Car dealer networks and authorized service stations, Maruti leads
the pack with Dealer networks and workshops across the country. The other
leading automobile manufactures are also trying to cope up and are opening
their service stations and dealer workshops in all the metros and major cities of
the country.
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
43/92
43
Major Manufacturers in Automobile Industry:
Maruti Udyog Ltd.
General Motors India Ford India Ltd. Eicher Motors Bajaj Auto Daewoo Motors India Hero Motors Hindustan Motors Hyundai Motor India Ltd. Royal Enfield Motors Telco TVS Motors DC Designs
Government has liberalized the norms for foreign investment and import of
technology and that appears to have benefited the automobile sector. The
production of total vehicles increased from 4.2 million in 1998- 99 to 7.3
million in 2003-04. It is likely that the production of such vehicles will exceed
10 million in the next couple of years.
The industry has adopted the global standards and this was manifested in theincreasing exports of the sector. After a temporary slump during 1998- 99 and
1999-00, such exports registered robust growth rates of well over 50 per cent in
2002-03 and 2003-04 each to exceed two and- a-half times the export figure for
2001-02.
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
44/92
44
Automobile Export Numbers:
Category 1998-99 2004-05 (Apr-Dec)
Passenger Car 25468 121478
Multi Utility Vehicles 2654 3892
Commercial Vehicles 10108 19931
Two Wheelers 100002 256765
Three Wheelers 21138 51535
Percentage Growth -16.6 32.8
Export growth rates have been high both for motorcycles and scooters.
Automotive spare parts and components is a lesser known industry yet a big
one. In past few years the industry has grown enormously, even more than the
automotive industry itself not only in the Indian but global scenario.This vast industry includes automotive components, accessories, gadgets, spare
parts and tools; the consumers being the OEM segment and the replacement and
aftermarket sector. Automotive spare parts replacement and aftermarket have in
themselves become a major industry.
In mid 1990s the quality of Indian products increased a lot and the prices were
considerably lowered. This posed an interesting situation where the Indianreplacement and aftermarket industry had geared up to meet the international
standards and awaited an ideal opportunity for global exposure.
The results are quite apparent, Indian automotive parts industry makes original
components of major automotive giants like General Motors and Mercedes
amongst others. They have, through consolidated efforts been positioned as
global players of the sector.
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
45/92
45
CHAPTER 7
ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION
The data after collection is to be processed and analyzed in accordance with the
outline and down for the purpose at the time of developing research plan.
Technically speaking, processing implies editing, coding, classification and
tabulation of collected data so that they are amenable to analysis. The term
analysis refers to the computation of certain measures along with searching for
pattern groups. Thus in the process of analysis, relationship or difference should
be subjected to statistical tests of significance to determine with what validity
data can be said to indicate any conclusions.
The analysis of data in a general way involves a number of closely relatedoperations, which are performed with the purpose of summarizing the collected
data and organizing them in such a manner that they answer the research
questions.
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
46/92
46
TABLE 1
BUY PRODUCT IF MANUFACTURED INDEPENDENTLY
particulars No of respondents %
Yes 60 60
No 30 30
May be 10 10
Cant say - -
Total 100 100
INTERPRETATION:
According to the above chart 60% of the people said yes product if it was
manufactured independently with company group. And 30% of the people said
no, product if it was manufactured independently with company group.10% of
the people said may be, and none of people said product if it was manufactured
independently with the group of company.
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
47/92
47
CHART 1
BUY PRODUCT IF MANUFACTURED INDEPENDENTLY
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
yesno
may becan't say
product if it was manufactured
independently with company
group
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
48/92
48
TABLE 2
APPROPRIATE INDICATOR FOR BRAND EQUITY
particulars No of respondents %
Brand value 30 30
Brand identity 30 30
Brand recall 20 20
Brand image 20 20
Total 100 100
INTERPRETATION
According to the above chart 30% of the people said brand value and
30% of the people said brand identity, and 20% of the people said brand recall,and 20% of the people said brand image the most appropriate indicator of the
brand equity.
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
49/92
49
CHART 2
APPROPRIATE INDICATOR FOR BRAND EQUITY
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
bran valuebrand
identitybrand
recallbrand
image
the most appropriate indicator
of brand equity
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
50/92
50
TABLE 3
TRUST PRODUCT GOT FROM LOCAL STORES
particulars No of respondents %
Yes 40 40
No 60 60
Total 100 100
INTERPRETATION
According to the above chart 40% of the people said yes our product
brought from local store, and 60% of the people said no, our product bought
from local store.
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
51/92
51
CHART 3
TRUST PRODUCT GOT FROM LOCAL STORES
40%
60%
do you trust our product bought from local
store
yes no
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
52/92
52
TABLE 4
WHERE DO U PREFER BUYING OUR PRODUCTS
particulars No of respondents %
Company stores 40 40
Local shops 10 10
Sales persons 30 30
online 20 20
other - -
Total 100 100
INTERPRETATION
According to the above chart 40% of the people said company stores buying the
product, and 10% of the people said local shops, and 30% of the people said
sales persons from buying the product, 20% of the people said online buying
from the product. None people said other.
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
53/92
53
CHART 4
WHERE DO U PREFER BUYING OUR PRODUCTS
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
company
storeslocal
shopssales
personsonline
other
from where do you prefer
buying our product
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
54/92
54
TABLE 5
APPEARANCE OF THE PRODUCT
RATING BETWEEN 1-5.
1 = least appealing, 5 = most appealing
particulars No of respondents %
1 20 20
2 30 30
3 30 30
4 10 10
5 10 10
Total 100 100
INTERPRETATION
According to the above chart 20% of the people said rate appearance of the
product 1, and 30% of the people said rate appearance of the product 2 or 3, and
10% of the people said rate appearance of the product 4 or 5.
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
55/92
55
CHART 5
APPEARANCE OF THE PRODUCT
Rate the appearance of the product. 1 = least appealing, 5 = most appealing
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
12
34
5
rate the appearance of the
product
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
56/92
56
TABLE 6
QUALITY OF THE PRODUCT
Rate the quality of our product. 1= of least quality, 5 = of highest quality
particulars No of respondents %
1 20 20
2 30 30
3 30 30
4 10 10
5 10 10
Total 100 100
INTERPRETATION
According to the above chart 20% of the people said rate of quality the
product 1, and 30% of the people said rate of quality and highest quality 2 or 3,
and 10% of the people said rate of quality of product and highest product 4 or 5.
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
57/92
57
CHART 6
QUALITY OF OUR PRODUCT
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
12
34
5
rate of quality
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
58/92
58
TABLE 7
INTANGIBLE FEATURES OF THE PRODUCT
particulars No of respondents %
Yes 60 60
No 40 40
Total 100 100
INTERPRETATION
According to the above chart 60% of the people said yes, intangible
features of the product, and 40% of the people said no, intangible features of the
product.
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
59/92
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
60/92
60
TABLE 8
WILL U SPEND PREMIUM PRICE FOR REPUTED COMPANY
PRODUCTS
particulars No of respondents %
Yes 60 60
No 40 40
Total 100 100
INTERPRETATION
According to the above chart 60% of the people said yes spend premium of the
product, and 40% of the people said no spend premium of the product.
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
61/92
61
CHART 8
WILL U SPEND PREMIUM PRICE FOR REPUTED COMPANY
PRODUCTS
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
yesno
spend premium price
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
62/92
62
TABLE 9
ASSOCIATE OUR PRODUCT WITH
particulars No of respondents %
Its advertisements 40 40
Its attributes 30 30
The parent group of
companies
20 20
Other 10 10
Total 100 100
INTERPRETATION
According to the above chart 40% of the people said its advertisement
associate of the product, and 30% of the people said attribute associate of
product, and 20% of the parent of the group of companies, and 10% of the
people said other associate of the product.
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
63/92
63
CHART 9
ASSOCIATE OUR PRODUCT WITH
05
101520
25303540
associate the product
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
64/92
64
TABLE 10
IDENTIFY OUR BRAND WITH LITTLE OR NO ADVERTISING
particulars No of respondents %
Yes 40 40
No 60 60
Total 100 100
INTERPRETATION
According to the above chart 40% of the people said yes, and 60% of
the people said no, identify our brand with little or no advertising.
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
65/92
65
CHART 10
IDENTIFY OUR BRAND WITH LITTLE OR NO ADVERTISING
yes no
40 60
identify our brand with little or no advertisting
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
66/92
66
TABLE 11
COMPANY INVEST IN BUILDING BRAND EQUITY
particulars No of respondents %
Yes 70 70
No 30 30
Total 100 100
INTERPRETATION
According to the above chart 70% of the people said yes, company investing
building brand, and 30% of the people said no, investing building brand.
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
67/92
67
CHART 11
COMPANY INVEST IN BUILDING BRAND EQUITY
70%
30%
company investing building brand
yes no
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
68/92
68
TABLE 12
WHICH IS WELL MANAGED CUSTOMER LOYALTY OR
SATISFACTION
particulars No of respondents %
Customer loyalty 50 50
Customer satisfaction 50 50
Total 100 100
INTERPRETATION
According to the above chart 50% of the people said customer loyalty,
and 50% of the people said customer satisfaction the brand is being managed
well.
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
69/92
69
CHART 12
WHICH IS WELL MANAGED CUSTOMER LOYALTY OR
SATISFACTION
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
customer
loyalty
customer
satisfaction
the brand is being managed well
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
70/92
70
TABLE 13
IS OUR BRAND MARKET LEADER
Particulars No of respondents %
Yes 60 60
No 40 40
Total 100 100
INTERPRETATION
According to the above chart 60 % of the people said yes, in the brand leader of
industry, and 40% of the people said no, in the brand leader of industry
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
71/92
71
CHART 13
IS OUR BRAND MARKET LEADER
60%
40%
the market leader in the industry
yes no
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
72/92
72
TABLE 14
MARKETING ACTIVITIES FOR BRAND BUILDING
particulars no of respondents %
Yes 50 50
No 30 30
To a good extent 20 20
Total 100 100
INTERPRETATION
According to the above chart 50% of the people said yes marketing
activities for brand building, and 30% of the people said no marketing activities
for brand building, and 20% of the people said to a good extents marketing
activities brand building.
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
73/92
73
TABLE 14
MARKETING ACTIVITIES FOR BRAND BUILDING
50%
30%
20%
marketing activities for brand
buliding
yes no to a good extent
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
74/92
74
TABLE 15
UNDERTAKEN BRAND VALUE MEASUREMENT EXERCISE
particulars No of respondents %
Yes 80 80
No 20 20
Total 100 100
INTERPRETATION
According to the people said 80% of the people said yes, undertaken a
brand value investment, and 20% of the people said no, undertaken a brand
value investment.
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
75/92
75
CHART 15
UNDERTAKEN BRAND VALUE MEASUREMENT EXERCISE
yes no
80 20
Chart Title
undertaken a brand value measurment exercise
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
76/92
76
TABLE 16
DOES FIRM KEEP ITS PROMISES
particulars No of respondents %
Completely successful 40 40
Moderately successful 30 30
Unsuccessful 20 20
Failed completely 10 10
Total 100 100
INTERPRETATION
According to the above chart 40% of the people said completely
successful, and 30% of the people said moderately successful, and 20% of the
people said unsuccessful, and 10% of the people said failed successful, do you
think the firm has been in keeping the promise.
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
77/92
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
78/92
78
TABLE 17
IMPORTANT CRITERION FOR BRAND PREFERENCE
particulars No of respondents %
Quality 30 30
Cost 20 20
Availability 20 20
durability 10 10
flexibility 20 20
other - -
Total 100 100
INTERPRETATION
According to the above chart 30% of the people said quality, and 20% of the
people said cost, and 20% of the people said availability or flexibility, and 10%
of the people said durability, and none of the people said product mostimportant brand preference.
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
79/92
79
CHART 17
IMPORTANT CRITERION FOR BRAND PREFERENCE
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
brand perferance
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
80/92
80
TABLE 18
ARE U BULK PURCHASER OF OUR PRODUCT
particulars No of respondents %
Yes 60 60
No 40 40
Total 100 100
INTERPRETATION
According to the above chart 60% of the people said bulk purchase, 40% of the
people said bulk purchase of the product
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
81/92
81
CHART 18
ARE U BULK PURCHASER OF THE PRODUCT
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
yesno
bulk purchase
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
82/92
82
TABLE 19
BENEFITS COMPETITOR PROVIDE FOR YOUR PRODUCT
Particulars No of respondents %
Yes 70 70
No 30 30
Total 100 100
INTERPRETATION
According to the above chart 70% of the people said yes, and 30% of thepeople said no benefits that your competitors provide over your product
CHART 19
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
83/92
83
BENEFITS COMPETITORS PROVIDE FOR YOUR PRODUCT
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
yes no
benefits that your compitors
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
84/92
84
CHAPTER 8
FINDINGS OF THE STUDY
Analyzing the information of sales promotion schemes on various
products, it can be inferred that cash discount and Free gift as one type of value
added sales promotion schemes widely used by marketers.
Sales promotion schemes on international brand are preferred therefore
managing the perception towards brand is also very important in sector. So, it is
suggested to manage the perception towards the brands. Word of mouth as a
medium of spreading sales promotion schemes awareness is preferred over
others. Considering this fact found in this research, promotion mix of the
company should be decided to take the benefits of the sales promotion schemes.
While deciding sales promotion schemes of products, immediate benefits
should be provided to consumers as this research highlights the preference of
immediate benefits compare to delayed benefits
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
85/92
85
CHAPTER 9
SUGGESTIONS
It can be suggested from this research that cash discount should be used
compare to free gift as a sales promotion scheme. Extending further, it can be
suggested from conjoint analysis considering various attributes and their levels
of sales promotion schemes value added schemes should be given preference
over other types of sales promotion schemes.
From Present research it can be suggested that consumers are deal prone which
signals the importance of timing of launching sales promotion schemes. Brand
type is the most important attribute among the selected attributes of the sales
promotion scheme followed by medium to spread awareness about sales
promotion schemes. These both should be given weighted and due
consideration while designing the sales promotion schemes
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
86/92
86
CHAPTER 10
CONCLUSION
Brand equity appears to play a significant role in industrial branding. It
was conceptualized as the result of past investments in the 5 Ps of the
marketing mix. That is, investments in product, place, people, promotion and
price. In the business-to business context, promotion was interpreted as
providing information. Buyers perceptions about the 5Ps have an influence onthe way they perceive and evaluate the brand.
This, in turn, has an effect on their purchase decisions. By investing in the
5Ps, companies create brand awareness and a positive brand image. In this
way, brand equity and loyalty are created. Two interrelated components of
brand equity were distinguished: product brand equity and corporate brand
equity. The results show that product brand equity is mostly influenced by
physical product attributes and distribution. Employees and information played
a lesser role. Corporate brand equity is mostly determined by service attributes,
and employees. Here distribution and value did not play a direct role. In terms
of direct effects, the corporate brand seems to be slightly more important in
industrial markets than the individual product brand; however, the product
brand contributes not only directly to behavioral intentions, but also indirectly
via corporate brand equity.
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
87/92
87
APPENDIX
Questionnaire
Name: ____________________
Address: ____________________
Phone Number: ____________________
Email id: ____________________
1. Would you have bought the product if it was manufactured independently
with no connection with the company group?
a) Yes b) No
c) May be d) Cant say
2. Can you list down some of our other brands belonging to our company?
_______________________________________________________________
3. Do you trust our product bought from local stores?
a) Yes b) No
4. From where do you prefer buying our products?
a) Company stores b) Local shops
c) Salespersons d) Online
e) Other __________________________________________________
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
88/92
88
5. Rate the appearance of the product. 1 = least appealing, 5 = most appealing
a) 1 b) 2 c) 3
d) 4 e) 5
6. Rate the quality of our product. 1= of least quality, 5 = of highest quality
a) 1 b) 2 c) 3
d) 4 e) 5
7. Do you value the intangible features of the product?
a) Yes b) No
8. Are you willing to spend premium price for products of reputed companies?
a) Yes b) No
9. What do you associate the product with?
a) Its advertisements b) Its attributes (smell, taste, flavour, etc)
c) The parent group of companies
d) Other __________________________________________________
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
89/92
89
10. Can you interpret what brand equity means to you?
___________________________________________________________
11 Does your company invest in building brand equity?
a) Yes b) No
12. If the answer to the above question is no, please provide a reason for not
doing so.
________________________________________________________________
If the answer to Q1 is yes, please proceed with the following questions.
13. What is the amount of investment in brand building as a percentage of the
total sinvestment in the company?
__________________________
14. What kind of marketing activities are undertaken to improve the brand
equity of the company?
a) ____________________
b) ____________________
c) ___________________
15. Do you think that the consumers are getting the messages through the
marketing activities for brand building?
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
90/92
90
a) Yes
b) No
c) To a good extent
16. Have you ever undertaken a brand value measurement exercise?
a) Yes b) No
17. If the answer to the above question is yes, please provide the result of the
brand value measurement in brief.
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
18. For your products, what is the most important criterion for brand
preference?
a) Quality
b) Cost
c) Availability
d) Durability
e) Flexibility
f) Other _________________________________
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
91/92
91
19. What should be the reason for customers to choose your products over that
of your competitors?
_______________________________________________________________
20. Name some of your brand competitors?
a) ____________________
b) ____________________
c) ____________________
21. Did you find any benefits that your competitors provide over your products?
a) Yes b) No
If yes, please list them
______________________________________________
-
8/2/2019 Market Survey on Brand Equity Wrong
92/92
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Aaker, David A. (1991),Managing Brand Equity, New York: Free Press.
Aaker, J. L. (1997), Dimensions of Brand Personality, Journal ofMarketing Research, 34 (August), 347-356.
Allenby, Greg and Peter E. Rossi (1999), Marketing Models ofconsumer Heterogeneity,Journal of Econometrics, 89 (1), 57-78.
Elrod, Terry and Michael P. Keane (1995), A Factor Analytic ProbitModel for Representing the Market Structure in Panel Data, Journal of
Marketing Research, 32 (1), 1-16.
Farquhar, Peter H. (1989), Managing Brand Equity, MarketingResearch, 1 (September), 24-33.