Marketing Research Project On Starbucks

Marketing 5322
Team Marketing Research Project
“Team 3 - Starbucks”
22 April 2022
By:
F. Mathew Duenas
Lynda Pham
Salman Habib
Suzanne Long
MKT 5322 Team 3 - Starbucks
Team Marketing Research Project 22 April 2022
I. INTRODUCTION
Starbucks is an American-owned corporation, comprised of more than 30,000 coffee
shops worldwide; with a loyal consumer following. Starbucks’ locations include stand-alone
stores, some with drive-throughs. Starbucks can also be located inside malls, stadiums,
department stores, or larger service-based organizations such as airports, and libraries. The
purpose of our research was to determine which constructs of Starbucks’ business model
contribute to consumer loyalty.
II. RESEARCH DESIGN OVERVIEW
Our research was survey-based and executed in Qualtrics, a surveying program. The
survey included 28 questions (see Appendix A). The first of which was a filter question to
prevent respondents from taking the survey if they were not Starbucks consumers. The next three
questions were interval-based, open-ended questions to determine the respondents’ Starbucks
visit frequency, number of purchases in a week, and the amount spent per visit. The following
eight questions were dichotomous. These questions measured the respondents’ feelings toward
Starbucks’ price premium, potential feelings associated with purchasing Starbucks such as a
sense of community, trip planning, social media recipes, and Starbucks’ store atmospheres. The
next ten questions were Likert, interval-scaled questions, rated on a seven-point scale (one being
“strongly disagree” and seven being “strongly agree”). These questions continued the probing of
respondents’ feelings and reasons for purchasing from Starbucks. Of the Likert scaled questions,
two were dependent variable, behavioral-based questions. One question asked respondents if
they would pass other coffee shops to visit a Starbucks instead, and the other asked the
respondent if they were a loyal Starbucks consumer. Lastly, in the survey were six demographic
1
questions. The nominal scaled items measured were gender, age, income, relationship status,
level of education, and race/ethnicity.
The survey was distributed via a web link that would take respondents to the Qualtrics
platform to complete the survey. Four researchers distributed the link with family, friends, and
students at Texas State University and the University of North Florida. A business professor at
Texas State University shared the survey amongst students in their classes as well. The survey
was open for two weeks and 480 responses were collected. Before completing the analysis of the
survey data, the data set was cleaned by the removal of any incomplete responses. Of the 480
original responses, 302 responses were complete and passed our filter question.
III. DATA ANALYSIS
SPSS Output Analysis

The survey data from Qualtrics was imported directly to SPSS (Version 27). The data
was cleaned, and the variables were manually named for ease of interpretation. The first step of
the analysis was exploratory in nature.
We first evaluated the descriptive statistics for our demographic variables, Gender, Age,
Income, Relationship Status, Ethnicity, Weekly Purchases Amount, and Number of Visits per
Week (see Appendix 2). We noted a 9.3% difference in total Valid Percent and Raw Percent
Column because of missing data (see Appendix 2 Fig. 1). We choose to work with the Valid
Percent column for this analysis. The demographics data indicated the breakdown of survey
respondents by gender as 79.6% female, 19.3% male, and 1.1% non-Binary (see Appendix 2 Fig.
2). For the income demography, 46.4% of respondents earn $50,000 or less per year, followed by
27% earning $50,000-$150,000 per year, and 17.3% earning $100,000-$150,000 per year. Only
2
8.3% of our respondents earn more than $150,000 per annum. Our next demographic item
measured the relationship status of our respondents, the highest percentage of respondents were
married, or in a domestic partnership (53.2%), while 39.2% are single, 6.1% are divorced or
separated, and 1.4% are engaged in other forms of relationship. In the education demography
statistics, 42.9% of the survey respondents have completed a high school degree or equivalent,
followed by 41.1% of respondents who have a bachelor’s degree, 11.8% have a master’s degree,
and 2.9% have a Ph.D. degree. The ethnographic/racial statistics of our respondents are mostly
comprised of White/Caucasians and Hispanic/Latino with 49.8% and 33.5% respectively.
a. Frequencies
Next in our survey analysis frequency statistics were analyzed for
respondents’ age. These statistics were collected from the survey in an open-
ended format in numeric terms. We created a histogram for accurate visualization
and interpretation.
From the SPSS analysis, we collected a few useful frequency statistics such as Mean, Median,
Mode, Std, Deviation, Skewness, Kurtosis, etc. The total number of valid respondents for Age is
3
270, with a mean of 33.3 years, 30.0 years median, and a mode of 22. The histogram for ‘Age’ is
positively skewed or right-skewed.
b. Linear Multiple Regression
Multiple linear regression (MLR) is a statistical technique that uses several
explanatory variables to predict the outcome of a response variable. In SPSS, it
asks us to choose our dependent variable and the independent variables with
which we are trying to explain the dependent variable. In our research, the
behavioral intent we are trying to explain is the loyalty of Starbucks consumers.
Linear regression is better than bivariate analysis because, with linear regression,
we can look at multiple independent variables to explain our dependent variable.
The limitation of this type of regression is that we can only look at one dependent
variable at a time. Structural Equation Modeling helps offset that weakness.
c. Model Summary
In the Model Summary, the most important output is the R Square and
Adjusted R Square values. The R Square tells us how much variance we are
explaining in the outcome variable, with the independent variables we used. The
value range is between 0 and 1, and we interpret this value as a percentage.
d. Regression Analysis
The F value and significance value, are the most important statistics in the
regression analysis. These scores tell us how strong our model is. If our model is
not strong enough, we cannot test our hypothesis. We can tell that our model is
strong by looking at the F score. If the level of significance is lower than 0.05, the
4
model is said to be significant. The F score tells us the strength of the model. As
the F value increases, the significance level score gets lower.
e. Coefficients
The Coefficients table tells us how each independent variable correlates
with our dependent variable. This is a simultaneous assessment of how the
independent variables explain the dependent variable. Again, the t-score and
significance level score are the most important statistic in this table. If the t-score
is greater than 1.96, it indicates a significant relationship at the 0.05
level. Furthermore, the Standardized Coefficients Beta score is also an important
statistic which compares the strength of the effect of each individual independent
variable to the dependent variable. The higher the absolute value of the beta
coefficient, the stronger the effect.
f. Model 1
i. Summary
In our analysis, are R Square shows we are explaining 51.1% of
the variance in the dependent variable with the independent variables.
This is ideal for our research. Adjusted R Square takes into consideration
the number of independent variables in the model, and gives a more
accurate reflection of how much variance we are explaining. Our Adjusted
R Square results showed we are explaining 49.5% of the variance in the
dependent variable with the independent variables (see Appendix C Fig1).
5
ii. Regression Analysis
Our first regression model has an F score of 31.601 and a
significance level lower than .01 (see Appendix C Fig. 2).
iii. Coefficients
From the table, the significant independent variables are: “I go to
Starbucks because my friends/family always go there”, “I feel
calm/happy/peace/bliss when I receive my Starbucks coffee from my
barista”, “I buy from Starbucks due to their product consistency across
stores”, “I know a lot about the Starbucks secret menu”, “I would pass
other coffee shops to go to a Starbucks instead”, “I would rather visit
Starbucks than make coffee at home” (see Appendix C Fig. 3).
iv. Model Adjustment
Six out of nine independent variables are statistically significant
and explain the dependent variable (customer loyalty towards Starbucks).
Next, we took out the weakest variable, “I go to Starbucks because my
friends/family always go there” and re-run the model.
g. Model 2
i. Summary
After removing the weakest variable in the data, the model’s
Adjusted R Square is 49.7%. Thus 49.7% of the variance in the dependent
6
variable is explained with the independent variables (see Appendix D
Fig1).
Our second regression model has an F score of 35.682, which can
be interpreted as a stronger model than the first regression we ran (see
Appendix D Fig. 2).
iii. Coefficients
As the model has become stronger by measuring the F score, the t-
score has also increased for some of the independent items. An example of
this can be seen in the independent variable, “I buy from Starbucks due to
their product consistency across stores”, where the t-score increased from
2.258 to 2.556 (see Appendix D Fig. 3).
Next, we removed one more statistically insignificant variable,
“Carrying my Starbucks product makes me feel good” to experiment if we
can get the model stronger.
h. Model 3
i. Summary
After removing another statistically insignificant independent
variable, our model’s Adjusted R Square is now 49.8%; increasing the
percentage of the variance in the dependent variable that can be explained
with the independent variable. Our third model has a 0.1% increase from
7
the previous model and a 0.3% increase from the original model (see
Appendix E Fig1).
Our third regression model has an F score of 40.870, which can be
interpreted as a stronger model than the previous two regression we ran
(see Appendix E Fig. 2).
iii. Coefficients
From the Coefficients table, we can observe that the t-score has
increased across the table for most of the independent variables (see
Appendix E Fig. 3).
Looking at our model we removed the only statistically
insignificant variable remaining, which is “Carrying my Starbucks product
makes me feel good.”
i. Model 4
i. Summary
After removing the final statistically insignificant independent
variable, our model’s Adjusted R Square is now 49.9%. This is our ideal
model since 49.9% of the variance in the dependent variable can now be
explained with the remaining independent variables. Our final model’s
Adjusted R Square has a 0.4% increase from the original model. (see
Appendix F Fig1).
8
Our fourth and final regression model has an F score of 47.718,
indicating it is the strongest of our four models (see Appendix F Fig. 2).
iii. Coefficients
We have worked towards a regression model where all the
independent variables are statistically significant and statistically related to
the outcome variable. Hence, these are the most important variables we
should look at when evaluating our outcome variable, the loyalty of
Starbucks consumers (see Appendix F Fig. 3).
Bivariate Correlation
Simple bivariate correlation is a statistical technique that is used to determine the
existence of relationships between two different variables. As students of practical statistics, our
focus is on using the knowledge to help marketers or companies to improve their overall
operations and build brand value.
From the correlation matrix table in SPSS, we can see the Pearson r coefficient values.
This is useful to get an initial scan of the data; however, we cannot use this to build a model and
explain variance in the outcome variable. For comparing a variable with other variables, we can
only compare them if the values are statistically significant at the 0.05 or 0.01 level. This is
denoted with asterisks * and **. The inverse sign in the correlation coefficients tells us the
direction of the relationship.
9
A few notable correlations observed could be in the Age variable. As Age increases,
people feel less happy when consuming Starbucks. This interpretation is found by comparing the
“Age” column with the “I feel calm/happy/peace/bliss when I receive my Starbucks coffee from
my barista” column which have a -.171 value with a significance value at the 0.01 level.
Similarly, we can also observe that as age increases, people feel more reluctant to go to
Starbucks to have coffee than make coffee at home. Furthermore, with age people feel less happy
carrying Starbucks products. The behavioral/attitudinal traits are all positively related to each
other with a lot of significant positive relationships (see Appendix G Fig. 1).
K-Means Clustering
This analysis groups objects and data into a certain number of clusters based on their
characteristics. This is a method of identifying and grouping similar data points in larger datasets
without concern for the specific outcome. We are trying to understand group membership, and
from that we can run subsequent analysis.
We ran a K-Means Cluster analysis on SPSS based on some attitudinal responses, and the
resulting output is put on a Histogram to visualize the two Clusters we found in the analysis. The
variable items are put in two groups of clusters based on the value of mean scores. Cluster 1
would be those who did not answer favorably on a seven-point Likert scale. On the other hand,
Cluster 2 are those respondents who answered favorably on all 9 items. This lets us know we
have one segment of customers who strongly agree, and a segment of customers who are mostly
neutral or does not agree much. We have 138 respondents in Cluster 1 and 147 in Cluster 2.
10
All our items are significant at the 0.05 level, which means the variables have a
significant impact on cluster membership. The F scores are high, which shows a strong cluster
model (see Appendix H Fig. 1). The F tests should be used only for descriptive purposes because
the clusters have been chosen to maximize the differences among cases in different clusters. The
observed significance levels are not corrected for this and thus cannot be interpreted as tests of
the hypothesis that the cluster means are equal.
Now that the clusters are identified, the analysis on SPSS will save clusters and code
them for us. The new categories of clusters can be used to run difference tests, based on these
different clusters. This is useful within the scope of marketing, as we need to best understand our
consumers, so we can develop strategies to which they can favorably respond to with the hope
that they will buy and be loyal to Starbucks.
11
We can observe this table to look at the mean score of the variables based on the two
clusters. We can see that cluster 2 has a higher mean consistently. For example, for the first
variance, cluster 2 has a higher mean indicating they feel happier/calmer/at peace when receiving
their Starbucks coffee. Respondents in cluster 1 are less likely to visit Starbucks over brewing
coffee at home.
Independent Samples T-Test
Independent Samples T-Test was computed in SPSS and the output is analyzed to look
for statistical significance. All the variables are statistically significant at the 0.01 level. This
suggests all variables explain that there is a mean difference between the two clusters. For
example, there is a difference between loyal Starbucks consumers between the two groups.
The independent samples T-Test is used to examine cross-sectional data on nominal
variety where we would like to examine just two groups to see if we have any differences going
12
on with our metric scaled items. In this T-Test, we are trying to figure out the difference between
genders (male and female), and the importance they place on our independent variables.
For all of our independent variables listed in the table, there are 218 female and 53 male
respondents. The sample size does not have to be equal to compare means between groups
although we would like them to be closer to each other than farther apart. On a 7-point scale, the
software is comparing the means of the responses of the variable items. The bigger the mean
score, the more favorable the responses. For example: A higher mean for female (4.44)
compared to male (3.74) on the variable “I would rather visit Starbucks than make coffee at
home” suggests that females place higher importance on visiting Starbucks to buy coffee than
making it at home.
13
The column of importance for interpreting Independent Samples T-Test is the t-score
value and significance score. The negative sign on the t-score does not change the interpretation.
There are two t-scores in the table, and for ease of interpretation, we will take into account the
equal variances assumed t-score. We want to be as confident as possible in our results, hence we
want the significance score to be at the 0.05 or 0.01 level, or a t-score greater than 1.96 or 2.58.
This means that 95% of the time the result is accurately interpreting the variables. As the
difference between the mean widens between the variables, the t-score will increase. From our
table, we can see that there is a statistically significant difference in mean between men and
women in the variables; “I feel calm/happy/peace/bliss when I receive my Starbucks coffee from
my barista”, “I know a lot about the Starbucks secret menu”, “I would pass other coffee shops to
go to a Starbucks instead”, and “I would rather visit Starbucks than make coffee at home”.
Which simply means, women feel happier, calmer, more at peace or blissful when they receive
their Starbucks coffee from the barista compared to men, and so on. As marketers, we can now
focus on these specific variables based on male and female, to create customized marketing
campaigns. This is the value the independent samples T-Test provides for marketers (see
Appendix I Fig. 1).
ANOVA
The ANOVA test is more flexible than the independent samples T-Test as it helps us to
choose more than two categories to answer from, like Income, Education, Ethnicity items in our
research data. The SPSS software compares the different categories simultaneously. The
assumption is that the sample size is relatively equal for all groups. In ANOVA, the significance
14
score is associated with the F score. Although, the test does not indicate where the differences
are found within the different categories.
We are analyzing the test of variance using ANOVA test in SPSS. Here, we are trying to
explain the groups of Income with several Likert scale items. From the descriptive statistics in
the Income variable, we can see the biggest value lies in the respondent group with an income of
$50,000 or less. The second biggest group in the variable is with an income range of $50,001-
$100,000. Comparing these two groups makes sense.
The significance score for ANOVA is like the independent samples T-Test. The cut-off
value is at the 0.05 level. Then, we can conclude that the variable has statistically significant
difference between the mean of the income groups. The F score is like the t score we saw
previously for the independent samples T-Test. From our analysis, the statistically significant
variables are, “Carrying my Starbucks product makes me feel good”, and “I would rather visit
Starbucks than make coffee at home”. ANOVA works best if all the categories in the variable
item has a similar sample size. Since we have most of our respondents in the 2nd and 3rd
category, we can run an independent sample T-Test to get a better analysis (see Appendix J Fig.
1).
Independent Samples T-Test: Income
Now, we narrow our focus to the Income variable to predict if the groups $50,000 or less,
and $50,001-$100,000 has any statistical impact on our independent variables. We selected these
two groups from the income variable because the majority of the sample sizes are dominated by
those two groups in the item, 129 and 75 respectively (see Appendix K Fig. 1).
15
From the Independent Samples Test group, we can see the significance level is below the
0.05 level for the variables “Carrying my Starbucks product makes me feel good”, and “I would
rather visit Starbucks than make coffee at home”. This means, these two variables have a
significant difference between the means for the two Income groups. As we can see, the results
are similar to the ANOVA test we did earlier above (see Appendix K Fig. 2).
Independent Samples T-Test: Relationship status
For this independent sample T-Test, we only use the Single (not married) and Married
groups in the item to find statistically significant difference between the means of the
independent items, as the Single and Married group has the majority of respondents, and the
sample size is relatively similar (109 and 148 respectively) (see Appendix L Fig. 1).
From the T-Test table, we can see the t-score is greater than 1.96 or the significance level
is at or below 0.05 for three variable items, “I feel calm/happy/peace/bliss when I receive my
Starbucks coffee from my barista”, “Carrying my Starbucks product makes me feel good”, and “I
would rather visit Starbucks than make coffee at home”. The T-Test unravels three independent
variables whose means have statistically significant difference for the Single and Married people.
The ANOVA test previously only detected two statistically significant items (see Appendix L
Fig. 2).
Independent Samples T-Test: Education
This independent samples T-Test is conducted on only the High School degree (120) and
Bachelor’s degree (115) variable within the Education item as these two have the largest sample
size within that item and they are relatively similar (see Appendix M Fig. 1).
16
From the T-Test table, we can identify two variables which have a t-score greater than
1.96 which means their significance level is below 0.05. The variables are, “I would rather visit
Starbucks than make coffee at home”, “I buy Starbucks because of the quality of products”, and
“Carrying my Starbucks product makes me feel good”. This indicates that these variables have a
significant difference in means for people who have completed a high school degree and people
who have a Bachelor’s degree (see Appendix M Fig. 2).
Independent Samples T-Test: Ethnicity
This independent samples T-Test examines significant differences in mean between the
Hispanic and White ethnic group with the independent variables of our research. We chose those
two groups from the item as they hold the majority of our respondents and are fairly similar in
sample size, i.e., 94 and 140 respectively (see Appendix N Fig. 1).
From the T-test table, we can observe that there are two variables whose t-score is greater
than 1.96 and the significance level is below 0.05. The variables are: “I would rather visit
Starbucks than make coffee at home”, and “Carrying my Starbucks product makes me feel good”
(see Appendix N Fig. 2).
17
IV. MARKETING IMPLICATIONS
Based on the statistical analysis of our survey, we chose to focus on advertising to women
and focusing on the behavioral/emotional elements of coming to a Starbucks café and consuming
a cup of coffee. We choose not to advertise to men in this campaign because our research
demonstrated men were less loyal consumers to Starbucks and were less likely than women to go
to a Starbucks café vice brewing coffee at home. Further, the statistical analysis showed men
were less receptive than women to the behavioral emotional elements of consuming a cup of
coffee.
We would recommend running an advertising campaign targeting women aged 25-35.
With Mother’s Day approaching, we would have the components of the ad focus on how hard
moms work all year, and how much they deserve to feel that moment of peace and bliss while
they sip on their handcrafted Starbucks drink.
We would start the advertisement by showing the typical frenzied mom, running from school
drop-off; to work; to extracurricular activities; to cooking dinner; etc...
18
Then we would show the chaos fading away and mom peacefully sipping on her coffee
concoction on the outside patio.
We would then have the camera pan in on the cup to reveal foamed hearts and the narration of,
“all moms deserve this moment of calm… Starbucks.”
19
V. RESEARCH/METHODOLOGIES LIMITATIONS
For this project, we are trying to see what drives consumers to purchase Starbucks. We
used Likert scales for most of the questions, then saved the demographic questions for the end. If
the respondent isn’t a Starbucks customer, then they weren’t allowed to continue with the survey
after the first question. A sampling error within our research was that we did not have an even
number of males and females. This could’ve resulted in selection bias. A larger sampling size of
males may have produced different results in our statistical analysis resulting in us adjusting our
advertising campaign.
Another research limitation was the limitation of time. More time would have allowed us
to run a second survey, and possibly capture more male respondents. After completing our
survey, we realized that our question regarding respondents’ loyalty to Starbucks was
ambiguous, in the sense that loyalty might mean something different to each respondent. In the
future, writing a question like this would require some common explanations to attempt to
provide clarity on the measure of loyalty.
Lastly, when the initial survey was sent out, the income question had an error in it. Two
of the income brackets overlapped, which is known as a double-barreled question. Respondents
fit into two categories at once, but could only choose one answer. We corrected the issue, and
resent out the survey, but not before receiving some responses. This oversight introduced
possible errors in our data that could have been avoided.
20
Appendix A: Team 3 Qualtrics Survey
1
2
3
4
5
Appendix B: Demographics Frequency
Demographics Statistics
Relationship
Gender Income Status Education Ethnicity
N Valid 274 278 278 280 281
Missing 28 24 24 22 21
Fig. 1: The valid row shows the total number of responses recorded in the survey for the
demographics, and the missing column represents the respondents who did not answer
those items in the survey.
Fig. 2: The Pie Chart illustrates the proportion of sample size of each group by Gender.
1
Appendix B: Demographics Frequencies
Fig. 3: The Pie Chart illustrates the proportion of sample size of each group by Income.
Fig. 4: The Pie Chart illustrates the proportion of sample size of each group by
Relationship Status.
2
Appendix B: Demographics Frequencies
Fig. 5: The Pie Chart illustrates the proportion of sample size of each group by Education.
Fig. 6: The Pie Chart illustrates the proportion of sample size of each group by Ethnicity.
3
Appendix C: Model 1
Model Summary
Adjusted R Std. Error of
Model R R Square Square the Estimate
1 .715a .511 .495 1.227
Fig. 1 Regression Model 1 Summary
ANOVAa
Sum of
Model Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
1 Regression 427.898 9 47.544 31.601 .000b
Residual 409.225 272 1.505
Total 837.123 281
Fig. 2 Regression Model 1 ANOVA table F Test.
1
Appendix C: Model 1
Unstandardized Standardized
Coefficients Coefficients
Model t Sig.
Std.
B Beta
Error
(Constant) .289 .373 .776 .439
I look forward to the smell of Starbucks coffee
.026 .059 .021 .438 .662
when inside the store
I go to Starbucks because my friends/family
-.088 .043 -.090 -2.023 .044
always go there
I feel calm/happy/peace/bliss when I receive
.232 .069 .196 3.379 .001
my Starbucks coffee from my barista
Carrying my Starbucks product makes me feel
.037 .058 .035 .637 .524
good
1
I buy from Starbucks due to their product
.143 .063 .129 2.258 .025
consistency across stores
I buy Starbucks because of the quality of
-7.169E-7 .073 .000 .000 1.000
products
I know a lot about the Starbucks secret menu .149 .046 .148 3.250 .001
I would pass other coffee shops to go to a
.243 .051 .263 4.741 .000
Starbucks instead
I would rather visit Starbucks than make coffee
.201 .043 .240 4.627 .000
at home
Fig. 3 Regression Model 1 Coefficients Table
2
Appendix D: Model 2
Model Summary
Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate
1 .715a .511 .497 1.224
ANOVA
Sum of
Model Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
1 Regression 427.898 8 53.487 35.682 .000b
Residual 409.225 273 1.499
Total 837.123 281
1
Appendix D: Model 2
Coefficients
Model B Std. Error Beta t Sig.
1 (Constant) .289 .369 .785 .433
I look forward to the smell of .026 .057 .021 .450 .653

Starbucks coffee when inside the store
I go to Starbucks because my -.088 .043 -.090 -2.035 .043
friends/family always go there
I feel calm/happy/peace/bliss when I .232 .067 .196 3.443 .001

receive my Starbucks coffee from my
barista
Carrying my Starbucks product makes .037 .058 .035 .639 .524
me feel good
I buy from Starbucks due to their .143 .056 .129 2.556 .011
product consistency across stores
I know a lot about the Starbucks secret .149 .046 .148 3.258 .001
menu
I would pass other coffee shops to go .243 .049 .263 4.959 .000
to a Starbucks instead
I would rather visit Starbucks than .201 .043 .240 4.635 .000
make coffee at home
2
Appendix E: Model 3
Regression
Model Summary
R Adjusted R Std. Error of the
Model R Square Square Estimate
1 .715a .511 .498 1.223
ANOVA
Sum of Mean
Model Squares df Square F Sig.
1 Regression 427.594 7 61.085 40.870 .000b
Residual 409.528 274 1.495
Total 837.123 281
1
Appendix E: Model 3
Coefficients
1 (Constant) .373 .318 1.171 .243
I go to Starbucks because my -.088 .043 -.090 -2.040 .042
friends/family always go there
I feel calm/happy/peace/bliss when I .239 .066 .202 3.630 .000
receive my Starbucks coffee from my
barista
Carrying my Starbucks product makes .037 .058 .035 .635 .526
me feel good
I buy from Starbucks due to their .146 .055 .131 2.632 .009
product consistency across stores
I know a lot about the Starbucks secret .150 .045 .149 3.303 .001
menu
I would pass other coffee shops to go to .244 .049 .264 4.992 .000
a Starbucks instead
I would rather visit Starbucks than make .201 .043 .240 4.643 .000
coffee at home
2
Appendix F: Model 4
Model Summary
Adjusted R Std. Error of the
Model R R Square Square Estimate
1 .714a .510 .499 1.221
ANOVA
Sum of Mean
Model Squares df Square F Sig.
1 Regression 426.993 6 71.165 47.718 .000b
Residual 410.130 275 1.491
Total 837.123 281
1
Appendix F: Model 4
Coefficientsa
Standar
dized
Unstandardized Coeffici
Coefficients ents

1 (Constant) .385 .317 1.212 .227
I go to Starbucks because my friends/family always -.083 .042 -.085 -1.963 .051

go there
I feel calm/happy/peace/bliss when I receive my .252 .062 .213 4.049 .000
Starbucks coffee from my barista
I buy from Starbucks due to their product .151 .055 .136 2.764 .006
consistency across stores
I know a lot about the Starbucks secret menu .151 .045 .149 3.316 .001
I would pass other coffee shops to go to a Starbucks .248 .048 .269 5.126 .000
instead
I would rather visit Starbucks than make coffee at .206 .043 .246 4.841 .000
home
2
Appendix G: Bivariate Correlation Table
Fig. 1 Bivariate Correlation Table
1
Appendix H: Cluster ANOVA table
ANOVA
Cluster Error
Mean Mean
Square df Square df F Sig.
I look forward to the smell of Starbucks coffee when inside 61.981 1 1.728 283 35.87 .000
the store 6
I go to Starbucks because my friends/family always go there 16.696 1 3.094 283 5.397 .021
I feel calm/happy/peace/bliss when I receive my Starbucks 202.76 1 1.414 282 143.3 .000
coffee from my barista 4 60
Carrying my Starbucks product makes me feel good 270.94 1 1.699 283 159.4 .000
9 73
I buy from Starbucks due to their product consistency across 162.66 1 1.848 282 88.00 .000
stores 7 2
I buy Starbucks because of the quality of products 177.99 1 1.602 283 111.1 .000
2 33
I would pass other coffee shops to go to a Starbucks instead 410.15 1 2.060 283 199.0 .000
2 99
I would rather visit Starbucks than make coffee at home 526.80 1 2.400 283 219.4 .000
3 86
I know a lot about the Starbucks secret menu 76.291 1 2.673 281 28.54 .000
2
Fig. 1 Cluster ANOVA table
1
Appendix I: Independent Samples T-Test
Fig. 1 Independent Samples T-Test Table
1
Appendix J: ANOVA Test
Fig. 1 ANOVA Table
1
Appendix K: Independent Samples T-Test: Income
Fig. 1 Table T-Test Group Statistics: Income
1
Appendix K: Independent Samples T-Test: Income
Fig. 2 Independent Samples T-Test: Income
2
Appendix L: Independent Samples T-Test: Relationship status
Fig. 1 T-Test Group Statistics: Relationship status
1
Appendix L: Independent Samples T-Test: Relationship status
Fig. 2 Independent Samples T-Test: Relationship status
2
Appendix M: Independent Samples T-Test: Education
Fig. 1 T-Test Group Statistics: Education
1
Appendix M: Independent Samples T-Test: Education
Fig. 2 Independent Samples T-Test: Education
2
Appendix N: Independent Samples T-Test: Ethnicity
Fig. 1 T-Test Group Statistics: Ethnicity
1
Appendix N Independent Samples T-Test: Ethnicity
Fig. 2 Independent Samples T-Test: Ethnicity

Marketing Research Project On Starbucks

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Marketing Research Project On Starbucks

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Marketing 5322

Team Marketing Research Project

Starbucks is an American-owned corporation, comprised of more than 30,000 coffee

contribute to consumer loyalty.

II. RESEARCH DESIGN OVERVIEW

questions were interval-based, open-ended questions to determine the respondents’ Starbucks

level of education, and race/ethnicity.

III. DATA ANALYSIS

SPSS Output Analysis

the analysis was exploratory in nature.

comprised of White/Caucasians and Hispanic/Latino with 49.8% and 33.5% respectively.

Next in our survey analysis frequency statistics were analyzed for

ended format in numeric terms. We created a histogram for accurate visualization

positively skewed or right-skewed.

b. Linear Multiple Regression

Multiple linear regression (MLR) is a statistical technique that uses several

explanatory variables to predict the outcome of a response variable. In SPSS, it

behavioral intent we are trying to explain is the loyalty of Starbucks consumers.

we can look at multiple independent variables to explain our dependent variable.

variable at a time. Structural Equation Modeling helps offset that weakness.

value range is between 0 and 1, and we interpret this value as a percentage.

the F value increases, the significance level score gets lower.

The Coefficients table tells us how each independent variable correlates

with our dependent variable. This is a simultaneous assessment of how the

is greater than 1.96, it indicates a significant relationship at the 0.05

level. Furthermore, the Standardized Coefficients Beta score is also an important

coefficient, the stronger the effect.

In our analysis, are R Square shows we are explaining 51.1% of

the variance in the dependent variable with the independent variables.

the number of independent variables in the model, and gives a more

accurate reflection of how much variance we are explaining. Our Adjusted

R Square results showed we are explaining 49.5% of the variance in the

dependent variable with the independent variables (see Appendix C Fig1).

ii. Regression Analysis

Our first regression model has an F score of 31.601 and a

significance level lower than .01 (see Appendix C Fig. 2).

From the table, the significant independent variables are: “I go to

Starbucks because my friends/family always go there”, “I feel

calm/happy/peace/bliss when I receive my Starbucks coffee from my

barista”, “I buy from Starbucks due to their product consistency across

other coffee shops to go to a Starbucks instead”, “I would rather visit

Starbucks than make coffee at home” (see Appendix C Fig. 3).

iv. Model Adjustment

Six out of nine independent variables are statistically significant

and explain the dependent variable (customer loyalty towards Starbucks).

Next, we took out the weakest variable, “I go to Starbucks because my

friends/family always go there” and re-run the model.

After removing the weakest variable in the data, the model’s

Adjusted R Square is 49.7%. Thus 49.7% of the variance in the dependent

variable is explained with the independent variables (see Appendix D

ii. Regression Analysis

Our second regression model has an F score of 35.682, which can

be interpreted as a stronger model than the first regression we ran (see

Appendix D Fig. 2).

As the model has become stronger by measuring the F score, the t-

2.258 to 2.556 (see Appendix D Fig. 3).

iv. Model Adjustment

Next, we removed one more statistically insignificant variable,

“Carrying my Starbucks product makes me feel good” to experiment if we

can get the model stronger.

ii. Regression Analysis

Our third regression model has an F score of 40.870, which can be

interpreted as a stronger model than the previous two regression we ran