Indian Institute of Management Shillong

PGP'21
TERM I

Project On

STATISTICS FOR DECISION MAKING

PROJECT TITLE
DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS AND SOLUTIONS FOR FAST FOOD
BRANDS TARGETING BRAND EQUITY

Presented By: Group A Section D

Name Regn. No. Contribution

1 Ayesha 2021PGP198 • Interpreted all the descriptive analysis and
Anjum Khan tests and made all the charts
• Summarized hypothesis tests and its results
• Deduced conclusions and made
recommendations
• Made this report
2 Rahul Raja 2021PGP227 Age wise data analysis of 6 parameters:
• ANNOVA
• Descriptive analysis
3 Naval Mittal 2021PGP219 Brand and Region wise data analysis of 6
parameters each:
• ANNOVA
• Tukey
• Descriptive analysis
4 Himanshu 2021PGP206 Observed ANNOVA with Tukey and made
Parashar recommendations
5 R Rajsekar 2021PGP226 Observed ANNOVA with Tukey and made
recommendations
6 Ruchikha 2021PGP230 Observed ANNOVA with Tukey and made
Sharma recommendations
7 Tarun Kant 2021PGP245 • Parameter correlation, Regression and
inference
• Observed ANNOVA with Tukey and made
recommendations
Contents
ABSTRACT .............................................................................................................................. 3
METHODS AND METHODOLOGY: .................................................................................. 3
DATA ANALYSIS................................................................................................................... 4
Interpretation of kurtosis and skewness ........................................................................................... 4
CORRELATION: Demographic And Brand Related Parameters .................................... 5
Parameter Regression and Inference .................................................................................... 5
Brand Equity Parameter Correlation ............................................................................................... 16
Bin Frequency ................................................................................................................................. 16
Analysis across Brands .................................................................................................................... 16
Analysis across Age Groups ............................................................................................................. 19
Analysis Across Regions .................................................................................................................. 21
Hypothesis testing Summary .......................................................................................................... 24
Hypothesis testing for Age-Income ................................................................................................. 24
Hypothesis testing for Age-Uniqueness .......................................................................................... 25
Hypothesis testing for Age Relevance ............................................................................................. 26
Hypothesis testing for Age Familiarity ............................................................................................ 26
Hypothesis testing for Age Loyalty .................................................................................................. 26
Hypothesis testing for Age Popularity ............................................................................................. 27
Hypothesis testing for Region Popularity ........................................................................................ 28
Hypothesis testing for Region Loyalty ............................................................................................. 28
Hypothesis testing for Region Relevance ........................................................................................ 28
Hypothesis testing for Region Uniqueness ..................................................................................... 29
Hypothesis testing for Region Familiarity ....................................................................................... 29
Hypothesis testing for Brand Familiarity ......................................................................................... 29
Hypothesis testing for Brand Uniqueness ....................................................................................... 29
Hypothesis testing for Brand Relevance ......................................................................................... 30
Hypothesis testing for Brand Loyalty .............................................................................................. 30
Hypothesis testing for Brand Popularity ......................................................................................... 30
Hypothesis testing for Brand Income .............................................................................................. 30
MAJOR CONLCUSIONS ..................................................................................................... 31
RECOMMENDATIONS....................................................................................................... 31

Page 2 of 32
ABSTRACT
We made the brand center of our deduction and analyzed how a particular brand is
perceived across a parameter or is consumed in a segment.

The datasheet has 17 variables for a given BRAND as listed below:

1. Gender
2. Age
3. Children
4. Income
5. Familiarity
6. Uniqueness
7. Relevance
8. Loyalty
9. Popularity
10. Category
11. Family Bin
12. Uniqueness Bin
13. Relevance Bin
14. Loyalty Bin
15. Popularity Bin
16. Region
17. Brand Equity

METHODS AND METHODOLOGY:

There are various methodologies being followed in order to find the relation between
the five parameters mentioned in the fast-food data.

The first methodology is calculating correlation between the income and 5 parameters.
This is done in order to identify the variables that have negative, zero or positive
correlation and to what extent are they correlated.

The second methodology followed is finding the descriptive analysis. This is done in
two ways, one finding the overall analysis considering all the brands together and
second finding the detailed analysis while segregating all the 5 parameters into 3
different aspects; region, brand, and age group.

The third methodology that is used is finding the hypothesis test using ANOVA. Here
the testing is done to identify the comparability of the means for each of the
parameters with respect to each of the aspects. However, when the ANOVA test fails,
we need to identify the variables for which the mean values are not equal. And in
order to find so, TUKEY Test was performed whenever the ANOVA Test got rejected.

And lastly, the fourth methodology used was to identify the frequency of loyalty in
various ratings across the different parameters. And for the findings of those, we
created a Histogram.

Page 3 of 32
DATA ANALYSIS
We identified 6 primary parameters and deduced correlation amongst them. We also
mapped the bin frequency across these parameters and compared the means for these
parameters across Brands, Age Groups and Regions. Lastly we conducted Hypothesis
testing using ANNOVA and Tukey Test and made some recommendations.

Particulars Familiarity Uniqueness Relevance Loyalty Popularity

Mean 7.144096064 6.305221 5.890897 5.787333 7.2982574

Standard Error 0.07636493 0.071216 0.075585 0.077969 0.0699803
Median 8 7 6 6 8
Mode 10 8 5 8 10
Standard 2.956615001 2.752679 2.921525 3.019744 2.7030891
Deviation
Sample 8.741572263 7.57724 8.535309 9.118852 7.3066905
Variance
Kurtosis -0.554388159 -0.85656 -1.10001 -1.19474 -0.141052
Skewness -0.837381923 -0.40661 -0.2446 -0.22361 -0.914235
Range 9 9 9 9 9
Minimum 1 1 1 1 1
Maximum 10 10 10 10 10
Sum 10709 9420 8801 8681 10889
Count 1499 1494 1494 1500 1492
Confidence 0.149793543 0.139695 0.148264 0.152941 0.1372703
Level(95.0%)

Interpretation of kurtosis and skewness

familiarity
Fewer values in the tails and fewer values close to the mean. The curve
Kurtosis -0.554388159 has a flat peak and has more dispersed scores with lighter tails.
Skewness -0.837381923 Fairly skewed. Values are concentrated on the right side (tail)

Uniqueness
Kurtosis -0.85656 Almost like a semicircle.
Skewness -0.40661 Very close to normal but values are a little concentrated on the right tail.

Relevance
Kurtosis -1.10001 Kurtosis almost like a block.
Skewness -0.2446 Very close to normal but values are a little concentrated on the right tail.

Loyalty
Kurtosis -1.194744 Kurtosis almost like a block

Page 4 of 32
Skewness -0.223608 Very close to normal but values are a little concentrated on the right tail.

Popularity
Kurtosis -0.141051503 Very close to normal
Skewness -0.914234899 Fairly skewed. Values are concentrated on the right side (tail)

CORRELATION: Demographic And Brand Related Parameters

child inco uni rele loy popu brand_
gender age ren me famil qu v al l region equity
gender 1
age 0.01 1
children -0 0.279 1
income 0.11 0.13 -0.01 1
0.02
famil -0 -0.03 1 0.044 1
0.00
uniqu 0.01 -0.01 3 -0.04 0.63 1
0.5
relev 0.03 0.006 -0.05 -0.07 0.57 99 1
0.6 0.7
loyal 0.01 -0.02 -0.01 -0.04 0.64 24 7 1
0.02 0.6 0.5 0.6
popul 0 0.014 1 -0.03 0.7 08 8 5 1
-
0.0
region 0.04 -0.04 -0.04 0.094 -0.02 3 -0 -0 -0 1
brand_e 0.8 0.8 0.8
quity 0.02 0.002 -0.01 0.055 0.85 13 3 7 0.83 -0 1

Parameter Regression and Inference

Field: loyal and Field: brand_equity appear highly
correlated.
10
9
8
7
brand_equity

6
5
4
3
2
1
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
loyal

Page 5 of 32
 Field: famil and Field: gender
appear unrelated.
2.5

1.5
gender

0.5

0
0 5 10 15
famil

Field: unique and Field: gender appear unrelated.

2.5

1.5
gender

0.5

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
unique

Field: revel and Field: gender appear unrelated.

2.5

1.5
gender

0.5

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
relev

Page 6 of 32
 Field: loyal and Field: gender unrelated.
2.5

1.5
gender

0.5

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
loyal

Field: popul and Field: gender appear unrelated

2.5

1.5
gender

0.5

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
popul

Field: famil and Field: age appear unrelated.

70

60

50

40
age

30

20

10

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
famil

Page 7 of 32
 Field: unique and Field: age appear unrelated.
70

60

50

40
age

30

20

10

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
unique

Field: revel and Field: age appear unrelated.

70

60

50

40
age

30

20

10

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
relev

Field: loyal and Field: age appear unrelated.

70

60

50

40
age

30

20

10

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
loyal

Page 8 of 32
 Field: popul and Field: age appear unrelated.
70

60

50

40
age

30

20

10

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
popul

Field: famil and Field: family size appear

unrelated.
2.5

2
Family Size

1.5

0.5

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
famil

Field: unique and Field: family size unrelated.

2.5

2
Family Size

1.5

0.5

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
unique

Page 9 of 32
 Field: relev and Field: family size appear
unrelated.
2.5

2
Family Size

1.5

0.5

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
relev

Field: loyal and Field: family size appear

unrelated.
2.5

2
Family Size

1.5

0.5

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
loyal

Field: popul and Field: family size appear

unrelated.
2.5

2
Family Size

1.5

0.5

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
popul

Page 10 of 32
 Field: famil and Field: income appear unrelated.
4.5
4
3.5
3
Income

2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
famil

Field: unique and Field: income appear

unrelated.
4.5
4
3.5
3
Income

2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
unique

Field: relev and Field: income appear unrelated.

4.5
4
3.5
3
Income

2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
relev

Page 11 of 32
 Field: loyal and Field: income appear unrelated.
4.5
4
3.5
3
Income

2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
loyal

Field: popul and Field: income appear unrelated.

4.5
4
3.5
3
Income

2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
popul

Field: famil and Field: brand_equity appear highly

correlated.
10
9
8
7
brand_equity

6
5
4
3
2
1
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
famil

Page 12 of 32
 Field: unique and Field: brand_equity appear
highly correlated.
10
9
8
7
brand_equity

6
5
4
3
2
1
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
unique

Field: relev and Field: brand_equity appear highly

correlated.
10
9
8
7
brand_equity

6
5
4
3
2
1
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
relev

Field: loyal and Field: brand_equity appear highly

correlated.
10
9
8
7
brand_equity

6
5
4
3
2
1
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
loyal

Page 13 of 32
 Field: popul and Field: brand_equity appear
highly correlated.
10
9
8
7
brand_equity

6
5
4
3
2
1
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
popul

Field: famil and Field: region appear unrelated.

4.5
4
3.5
3
region

2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
famil

Field: unique and Field: region appear unrelated

5

3
region

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
unique

Page 14 of 32
 Field: loyal and Field: Region appear unrelated.
4.5
4
3.5
3
Region

2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
loyal

Field: Popul and Field: Region appear unrelated

4.5
4
3.5
3
Region

2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Popul

Field: relev and Field: region appear unrelated

5

3
region

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
relev

Page 15 of 32
Brand Equity Parameter Correlation
Parameter Correlation (on a scale of -1 to 1)
Income Familiarity Uniqueness Relevance Loyalty Popularity
Income 1.000
Familiarity 0.045 1.000
Uniqueness -0.041 0.629 1.000
Relevance -0.066 0.575 0.600 1.000
Loyalty -0.044 0.639 0.625 0.767 1.000
Popularity -0.026 0.703 0.612 0.579 0.648 1.000

Bin Frequency
Bin Frequency
1500
877 879 956 948 867
1000
622 615 538 552 625
500

0
Familiarity Uniqueness Relevance Loyalty Popularity

0 1

Analysis across Brands

Means of Brands
Mean of famil Mean of relev Mean of popul Mean of uniqu Mean of loyal

10.000
9.000
8.000
7.000
6.000
5.000
4.000
3.000
2.000
1.000
0.000
Brand 263 Brand 264 Brand 265 Brand 266 Brand 267 Grand Total

Page 16 of 32
 Brand Familiarity
Familiarity Mean of famil Familiarity SD(+) Familiarity SD(-)

12
10.57625411
9.816340207 9.89927405 10.10071106
9.654682735 9.619781341
10 8.785016287

8 6.982332155 7.16838488 6.993778468 7.144096064

6.310126582 6.476821192
6
4.148324104 4.43749571 4.187481063
4 3.333861043
2.96557043

0
Brand 263 (Count Brand 264 Brand 265 (Count Brand 266 (Count Brand 267 (Count Grand Total
283) (Count 291) 316) 307) 302) (Count 1499)

Brand Relevance
Relevance Mean of relev Relevance SD(+) Relevance SD(-)

10.000
9.000
8.000
7.000
6.000
5.000
4.000
3.000
2.000
1.000
0.000
Brand 263 Brand 264 Brand 265 Brand 266 Brand 267 Grand Total
(Count 281) (Count 289) (Count 315) (Count 308) (Count 301) (Count 1494)

Page 17 of 32
 Brand Loyalty
12.000

10.000
9.567
8.569 8.621 8.448 8.559 8.807
8.000
6.808
6.000 5.802 5.787
5.591 5.301 5.430
4.000 4.050
3.035 2.768
2.561 2.153 2.302
2.000

0.000
Brand 263 Brand 264 Brand 265 Brand 266 Brand 267 Grand Total
(Count 283) (Count 291) (Count 316) (Count 308) (Count 302) (Count 1500)

Loyalty Mean of loyal Loyalty SD(+) Loyalty SD(-)

Brand Popularity
Popularity Mean of popul Popularity SD(+) Popularity SD(-)

12.000 10.671
9.952 9.648 10.001
9.337 9.219 9.085
10.000
7.514 7.499 7.298
8.000 6.795 6.821
6.262
6.000 5.076 4.595
4.253 3.993
3.305
4.000
2.000
0.000
Brand 263 Brand 264 Brand 265 Brand 266 Brand 267 Grand Total
(Count 283) (Count 288) (Count 313) (Count 307) (Count 301) (Count 1492)

Brand Uniqueness
Uniqueness Mean of uniqu Uniqueness SD(+) Uniqueness SD(-)

12.000
9.815
10.000 8.853 8.695 9.088 9.058
8.528
7.325
8.000
6.228 5.979 6.153 6.305
5.822
6.000 4.835
3.603 3.430 3.217 3.553
4.000 2.948

2.000

0.000
Brand 263 Brand 264 Brand 265 Brand 266 Brand 267 Grand Total
(Count 281) (Count 290) (Count 314) (Count 308) (Count 301) (Count 1494)

Page 18 of 32
Analysis across Age Groups
Means across Age groups
Mean of famil Mean of uniqu Mean of relev Mean of loyal Mean of popul

8.000

7.000

6.000

5.000

4.000

3.000

2.000

1.000

0.000
Age group 20-29 Age Group 30-39 Age Group 40-49 Age Group 50-59 Age Group 60-69 Grand Total

Familiarity in Age Groups

Familiarity Mean of famil Familiarity SD+ Familiarity SD-

12.000 10.357 10.230 9.875 10.083 10.099

9.681
10.000
7.306 7.199 7.000 7.314 7.140
8.000 6.573
6.000 4.544
4.255 4.168 4.125 4.181
3.465
4.000

2.000

0.000
Age group 20-29 Age Group 30-39 Age Group 40-49 Age Group 50-59 Age Group 60-69 Grand Total
(Count 222) (Count 523) (Count 392) (Count 239) (Count 96) (Count 1472)

Page 19 of 32
 Uniqueness in Age Groups
Uniqueness Mean of uniqu Uniqueness SD+ Uniqueness SD-

10.000 8.997 9.129 9.000 9.073 9.058 9.060

8.000
6.203 6.382 6.300 6.363 6.011 6.306
6.000
3.408 3.636 3.600 3.653 3.552
4.000 2.963

2.000

0.000
Age group 20-29 Age Group 30-39 Age Group 40-49 Age Group 50-59 Age Group 60-69 Grand Total
(Count 222) (Count 523) (Count 390) (Count 237) (Count 95) (Count 1467)

Popularity in Age Groups

Popularity Mean of popul Popularity SD+ Popularity SD-

12.000 10.200 9.981 10.101 10.001

9.955 9.535
10.000
7.303 7.201 7.354 7.599 7.294
8.000 6.781
4.727 5.098 4.587
6.000 4.406 4.448 4.027
4.000
2.000
0.000
Age group 20-29 Age Group 30-39 Age Group 40-49 Age Group 50-59 Age Group 60-69 Grand Total
(Count 221) (Count 522) (Count 390) (Count 237) (Count 96) (Count 1466)

Relevance in Age Group

Relevance Mean of relev Relevance SD+ Relevance SD-

10.000 8.988 8.785 8.703 8.986 8.755 8.823

9.000
8.000
7.000 5.914 5.891 5.833 6.084 5.708 5.898
6.000
5.000
4.000 2.841 2.997 2.963 3.183 2.974
2.662
3.000
2.000
1.000
0.000
Age group 20-29 Age Group 30-39 Age Group 40-49 Age Group 50-59 Age Group 60-69 Grand Total
(Count 222) (Count 523) (Count 389) (Count 237) (Count 96) (Count 1467)

Page 20 of 32
 Loyalty in Age Groups
Loyalty Mean of loyal Loyalty SD+ Loyalty SD-

10.000 9.077 8.816 8.908 8.795

8.616 8.455
8.000
5.905 5.830 5.634 5.941 5.775
5.344
6.000

4.000 2.734 2.843 2.651 2.974 2.756

2.232
2.000

0.000
Age group 20- Age Group 30- Age Group 40- Age Group 50- Age Group 60- Grand Total
29 (Count 222) 39 (Count 523) 49 (Count 393) 59 (Count 239) 69 (Count 96) (Count 1473)

Analysis Across Regions

Means across Regions
8.000
7.000
6.000
5.000
4.000
3.000
2.000
1.000
0.000
Mean of famil Mean of uniqu Mean of Loyalty Count of popul Mean of relev

Region 1 (Count 117) Region 2 (Count 349) Region 3 (Count 554)

Region 4 (Count 474) Grand Total (Count 1494)

Page 21 of 32
 Familiarity in region
Mean of famil SD+ SD-

12.000
10.000
8.000
6.000
4.000
2.000
0.000
Region 1 (Count 119) Region 2 (Count 350) Region 3 (Count 553) Region 4 (Count 477) Grand Total (Count
1499)

Uniqueness in Region
Mean of uniqu SD+ SD-

10.000
9.000
8.000
7.000
6.000
5.000
4.000
3.000
2.000
1.000
0.000
Region 1 (Count 117) Region 2 (Count 350) Region 3 (Count 554) Region 4 (Count 473) Grand Total (Count
1494)

Relevance in Region
Series1 Series2 Series3

10.000
9.000
8.000
7.000
6.000
5.000
4.000
3.000
2.000
1.000
0.000
Region 1 (Count 117) Region 2 (Count 349) Region 3 (Count 554)Region 4 (Count 474) Grand Total (Count
1494)

Page 22 of 32
 Loyality in Region
Series1 Series2 Series3

10.000
9.000
8.000
7.000
6.000
5.000
4.000
3.000
2.000
1.000
0.000
Region 1 (Count 119) Region 2 (Count 350) Region 3 (Count 554)Region 4 (Count 477) Grand Total (Count
1500)

Popularity in Region
Series1 Series2 Series3

12.000

10.000

8.000

6.000

4.000

2.000

0.000
Region 1 (Count 117) Region 2 (Count 346) Region 3 (Count 554)Region 4 (Count 475) Grand Total (Count
1492)

Page 23 of 32
Hypothesis testing Summary
Testing parameter Test outcome Rejected tests
Hypothesis testing for Age-Income Rejected 4/10 rejections in Tukey
test
Hypothesis testing for Age-Income Rejected 5/10 rejections in Tukey
test
Hypothesis testing for Age Relevance Rejected 8/10 rejections in Tukey
test
Hypothesis testing for Age Accept NA
Familiarity
Hypothesis testing for Age Loyalty Rejected 4/10 rejections in Tukey
test
Hypothesis testing for Age Rejected 4/10 rejections in Tukey
Popularity test
Hypothesis testing for Region Accept NA
Popularity
Hypothesis testing for Region Rejected 4/6 rejections in Tukey
Loyalty test
Hypothesis testing for Region Rejected 4/6 rejections in Tukey
Relevance test
Hypothesis testing for Region Rejected 4/6 rejections in Tukey
Uniqueness test
Hypothesis testing for Region Accept NA
Familiarity
Hypothesis testing for Brand Accept NA
Familiarity
Hypothesis testing for Brand Accept NA
Uniqueness
Hypothesis testing for Brand Accept NA
Relevance
Hypothesis testing for Brand Loyalty Accept NA
Hypothesis testing for Brand Accept NA
Popularity
Hypothesis testing for Brand Income Accept NA

Hypothesis testing for Age-Income

ANOVA
Source of
Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit
Between
Groups 27413.3 4 6853.33 8.40194 0.00092 4.89321 Reject

Page 24 of 32
Within
Groups 12235.3 15 815.683

Total 39648.6 19

Tukey Test
T-
Difference value Result
AB 75.25 50.5514 Reject
AC 42.75 50.5514 Pass
AD 4.25 50.5514 Pass
AE 31.5 50.5514 Pass
BC 32.5 50.5514 Pass
BD 71 50.5514 Reject
BE 106.75 50.5514 Reject
CD 38.5 50.5514 Pass
CE 74.25 50.5514 Reject
DE 35.75 50.5514 Pass

Hypothesis testing for Age-Uniqueness

ANOVA
Source of P-
Variation SS df MS F value F crit
Between 10968.9 11.6061 1.47E- 3.76742
Groups 2 4 2742.23 8 06 7 Reject
Within 236.273
Groups 10632.3 45 3

21601.2
Total 2 49

Tukey Test
Difference T-value Result
AB 30.1 16.23494 Reject
AC 16.8 16.23494 Reject
AD 1.5 16.23494 Pass
AE 12.7 16.23494 Pass
BC 13.3 16.23494 Pass
BD 28.6 16.23494 Reject
BE 42.8 16.23494 Reject
CD 15.3 16.23494 Pass
CE 29.5 16.23494 Reject
DE 14.2 16.23494 Pass

Page 25 of 32
Hypothesis testing for Age Relevance
ANOVA
Source of P-
Variation SS df MS F value F crit
Between 10910.1 19.0792 3.09E- 3.76742
Groups 2 4 2727.53 7 09 7 Reject
Within 142.957
Groups 6433.1 45 8

17343.2
Total 2 49

Tukey Test
Difference T-value Result
AB 30.1 12.62812 Reject
AC 16.7 12.62812 Reject
AD 1.5 12.62812 Pass
AE 12.6 12.62812 Pass
BC 13.4 12.62812 Reject
BD 28.6 12.62812 Reject
BE 42.7 12.62812 Reject
CD 15.2 12.62812 Reject
CE 29.3 12.62812 Reject
DE 14.1 12.62812 Reject

Hypothesis testing for Age Familiarity

ANOVA
Source of
Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit
Between 10945.7 3.45309 0.01522 3.76742 Accep
Groups 2 4 2736.43 2 3 7 t
Within 792.457
Groups 35660.6 45 8

46606.3
Total 2 49

Hypothesis testing for Age Loyalty

ANNOVA
Source of
Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit

Page 26 of 32
Between 5.58E-
Groups 10965.32 4 2741.33 10.2347 06 3.767427 Reject
Within
Groups 12053.1 45 267.8467

Total 23018.42 49

Tukey Test
Difference T-value Result
AB 30.1 17.28591 Reject
AC 17.1 17.28591 Pass
AD 1.7 17.28591 Pass
AE 12.6 17.28591 Pass
BC 13 17.28591 Pass
BD 28.4 17.28591 Reject
BE 42.7 17.28591 Reject
CD 15.4 17.28591 Pass
CE 29.7 17.28591 Reject
DE 14.3 17.28591 Pass

Hypothesis testing for Age Popularity

ANOVA
Source of
Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit
Between 10897.8 3.87843 0.00863 3.76742
Groups 8 4 2724.47 3 1 7 Reject
Within 702.466
Groups 31611 45 7

42508.8
Total 8 49

Tukey Test
T-
Difference value Result
AB 30.1 27.9937 Reject
AC 16.9 27.9937 Pass
AD 1.6 27.9937 Pass
AE 12.5 27.9937 Pass
BC 13.2 27.9937 Pass
BD 28.5 27.9937 Reject
BE 42.6 27.9937 Reject
CD 15.3 27.9937 Pass

Page 27 of 32
 CE 29.4 27.9937 Reject
DE 14.1 27.9937 Pass

Hypothesis testing for Region Popularity

ANOVA
Source of Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit
Between Groups 10943 3 3647.66667 3.4177828 0.02744382 4.37709562 Accept
Within Groups 38421.4 36 1067.26111

Total 49364.4 39

Hypothesis testing for Region Loyalty

ANOVA
Source of Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit
Between Groups 10860.6 3 3620.2 10.6848345 3.6294E-05 4.37709562 Reject
Within Groups 12197.4 36 338.816667

Total 23058 39

Tukey Test
Difference T-value Result
AB 23.1 17.4508324 Reject
AC 43.5 17.4508324 Reject
AD 35.8 17.4508324 Reject
BC 20.4 17.4508324 Reject
BD 12.7 17.4508324 Pass
CD 7.7 17.4508324 Pass

Hypothesis testing for Region Relevance

ANOVA
Source of Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit
Between Groups 10907.3 3 3635.76667 17.3549551 3.8864E-07 4.37709562 Reject
Within Groups 7541.8 36 209.494444

Total 18449.1 39

Tukey Test
Difference T-value Result
AB 23.2 13.7218693 Reject
AC 43.7 13.7218693 Reject
AD 35.7 13.7218693 Reject

Page 28 of 32
 BC 20.5 13.7218693 Reject
BD 12.5 13.7218693 Pass
CD 8 13.7218693 Pass

Hypothesis testing for Region Uniqueness

ANOVA
Source of Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit
Between Groups 10882.5 3 3627.5 9.5205809 9.1104E-05 4.37709562 Reject
Within Groups 13716.6 36 381.016667

Total 24599.1 39

Tukey Test
Difference T-value Result
AB 23.3 18.5056999 Reject
AC 43.7 18.5056999 Reject
AD 35.6 18.5056999 Reject
BC 20.4 18.5056999 Reject
BD 12.3 18.5056999 Pass
CD 8.1 18.5056999 Pass

Hypothesis testing for Region Familiarity

ANOVA
Source of
Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit
Between 0.0442824 4.377095
Groups 10824.875 3 3608.29167 2.97692683 5 62 Accept
Within
Groups 43635.1 36 1212.08611

Total 54459.975 39

Hypothesis testing for Brand Familiarity

ANOVA
Source of Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit
Between Groups 67.88 4 16.97 0.02167914 0.99904859 3.76742708 Accept
Within Groups 35225.1 45 782.78

Total 35292.98 49

Hypothesis testing for Brand Uniqueness

ANOVA

Page 29 of 32
 Source of
Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit
Between 0.0714685 0.9903732 3.7674270
Groups 71.48 4 17.87 7 1 8 Accept
4 250.0
Within Groups 11251.8 5 4

11323.2 4
Total 8 9

Hypothesis testing for Brand Relevance

ANOVA
Source of Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit
Between Groups 76.48 4 19.12 0.13479977 0.96868765 3.76742708 Accept
Within Groups 6382.8 45 141.84

Total 6459.28 49

Hypothesis testing for Brand Loyalty

ANOVA
Source of Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit
Between Groups 69.4 4 17.35 0.07242176 0.99012814 3.76742708 Accept
Within Groups 10780.6 45 239.568889

Total 10850 49

Hypothesis testing for Brand Popularity

ANOVA
Source of
Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit
Between 0.056600 0.993827 3.778409
Groups 202.53356 4 50.63339 08 41 35 Accept
Within 894.58156
Groups 39361.5889 44 6

Total 39564.1224 48

Hypothesis testing for Brand Income

ANOVA
Source of P-
Variation SS df MS F value F crit
Between
Groups 173.5 4 43 0.216 0.9254 4.89321 Accept

Page 30 of 32
Within
Groups 3012.5 15 201

Total 3186 19

MAJOR CONLCUSIONS
• Income has no impact on relevance or loyalty or popularity of the product
• Most of the products that are familiar to the people are the only ones that come
in their income bracket
• Familiarity builds popularity
• Uniqueness of the product makes it relevant to the people
• Loyalty comes from relevance

RECOMMENDATIONS
1. As can be observed in the age group 30-39, the income is highest fast food
chains can perform specific demographic targeting.
2. In the age group 60-69, as the mean average becomes the least, these could act
as the lesser targeted audience.
3. As the uniqueness is more preferred in the age group of 30-39, this could be
the parameter kept in mind while performing demographic targeting.
4. Increasing the relevance for the age groups 20-29 and 50-59 can help create
larger consumer base
5. Since across all age groups, familiarity is equally spread, a given fast food
company needs to invest heavily in marketing that targets emotional aspect to
convert familiarity into loyalty and thus get an edge over other companies
6. As most loyalty is shown by the age-group 30-39, special offers can be provided
to the loyal customers and simultaneously to increase the loyalty in the age
group 20-29 and 50-59, primary research to understand their consumption
pattern can be observed, using which they can be converted into loyal
customers.
7. As we have observed in the previous parameters as well, fast food networks
are most popular in the age bracket of 30-39, as they are the high income
bracket who might be able to spend more, however the other two age groups

Page 31 of 32
 20-29 and 50-59 are also the emerging demographies and hence could act as
potential demographies.
8. Popularity across all regions is same for all fast-food companies. Therefore, to
compete in such a geography, the company may conduct a thorough PESTLE
analysis and appeal to the segment that has been ignored by expanding its
market.
9. Most loyalty is observed in region 3 and 4 while region 2 appears to be the
emerging market and is show casing growing loyalty towards these fast food
networks and hence increasing loyalty in this region would help create better
profitability
10. Relevance in region 1 can be increased by understanding their consumer
behavior
11. Though in region 2 the relevance for fast food is growing but still there is a lot
of potential to get at par with region 3 and 4
12. Familiarity across regions is not similar therefore competing fast food
companies should extend familiarity to loyalty to retain their customers
otherwise the customers will switch to other products.
13. More uniqueness is preferred in the region3, therefore understanding the needs
of the customers more variations can be introduced in their product categories
14. The Hypothesis tests for Brand Equity across Brand Familiarity, Uniqueness,
Relevance, Loyalty, Popularity and Income were all accepted. This shows that
it is a highly competitive market. Primary recommendation for the company
here is to invest in the Customer Experience and make connections with the
customer by leveraging social media.

Page 32 of 32