Market Research Report for:       Prepared for Dr. Hill          Prepared by:          Vickie Smith        Michelle Swalli...
Pet Product Research, Inc.99 Normal Avenue                                                          (973) 555-0001Montclai...
TABLE OF CONTENTSLetter of Transmittal ......................................................................................
EXECUTIVE SUMMARYBACKGROUNDThe US is a nation of animal lovers and pet owners. Of the over 63 million UShouseholds which o...
Independent Sample T-Test, Oneway ANova, and Univariate Analysis. Cross-tabulationwas also used to generate results that w...
should be asked to help in analyzing the data. A larger sample size and a random sample  technique should be used in order...
IPAWD ENTERPRISES SURVEY RESULTSINTRODUCTIONConsumer demand for pet apparel and accessories is a trend evident across the ...
population of Essex County, where our research was conducted, is approximately793,000. However, we will focus our attentio...
Ha6 There are attitudinal differences across the 11 consequences.Ho7 There are no attitudinal differences across the 11 co...
DATA ANALYSIS100 completed surveys were successfully collected, with minimal response omissions.After collecting our data,...
ATTITUDES TOWARDS PURCHASING IPOOCH!HypothesisHo1: There are no attitudinal differences towards purchasing iPooch! among d...
Independent Sample T Test:Out of 39 valid male responses the mean average was 77.2. Out of a valid 44 femaleresponses ther...
AGE COHORTHypothesisHo3: There are no attitudinal differences towards purchasing iPooch! among dogowners and age.Ha3: Ther...
INCOMEHypothesisHo4: There are no attitudinal differences towards purchasing iPooch! among dogowners and income.Ha4: There...
DOG SIZEHypothesisHo5: There are no attitudinal differences across towards purchasing iPooch!among dog owners and dog size...
ATTITUDINAL DIFFERENCES ACROSS THE 11 CONSEQUENCESHypothesisHo6 There are no attitudinal differences across the 11 consequ...
GENDER STACKHypothesisHo7: There are no attitudinal differences across the 11 consequences andgender.Ha7: There are attitu...
AGE COHORT STACKHypothesisHo8: There are no attitudinal differences across the 11 consequences and age.Ha8: There are atti...
Estimated Marginal Means of Consequences                                     4.00                                         ...
Tests of Between-Subjects Effects           Dependent Variable: Consequences                                  Type III    ...
DOG SIZE STACKHypothesisHo10: There are no attitudinal differences across the 11 consequences and dogsizeHa10: There are a...
CUMULATIVE ATTITUDES * POSITIVE ATTITUDES VERSUS NEGATIVEAND NEUTRAL ATTITUDESHypothesisHo 11 There is no significant atti...
Cumulative attitudes * Positive attitudes versus negative and neutral attitudesCross-tabulation                           ...
CONCLUSIONSAfter conducting our study, we found that there was a positive attitude overall across the11 consequences about...
RECOMMENDATIONSPrior to bringing iPooch! to market, a few things should be considered. This researchwas conducted to clari...
APPENDICES (See separate pdf files)        Questionnaire       SPSS PrintoutsOpen Ended Questions Responses         Slide ...
27
ReferencesAmerican Animal Hospital Association. Move Over Cindy Crawford – Fido Had MoreClout. Web Site: http://www.cyberp...
Stick It In Your Ear Again, Study on Safe Levels of Music Listening. (October 26, 2006)Gadgetbloggers. Retrieved from: htt...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Marketing Research Project - iPooch Product Launch

2,283

Published on

Published in: Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
2,283
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
50
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Marketing Research Project - iPooch Product Launch

  1. 1. Market Research Report for: Prepared for Dr. Hill Prepared by: Vickie Smith Michelle Swallick Al Almeida Nicholas Sinko Mike Dzioba December 21, 2006
  2. 2. Pet Product Research, Inc.99 Normal Avenue (973) 555-0001Montclair, NJ 07010 Fax (973) 555-0002November 19, 2006Mr. Mike Hilltop, PresidentiPawd Enterprises666 Dog AvenueWest Orange, NJ 00000Subject: Market Research Report for iPooch!Dear Mr. Hilltop:Enclosed is the market research report for iPooch! that you requested. In your request,you asked for a study to determine if your iPooch! product should go to market. Thisresearch study was approved on October 1, 2006 and is now completed.The results from the survey data collected were conclusive. You might want to do anactual usage study once the product is out in the real world.The project’s results are extremely informative and should be considered whenstructuring future studies. It will give you a general idea of what to expect about attitudesregarding the iPooch! product concept.We are grateful to iPawd Enterprises for giving us an opportunity for conducting aprimary research study on iPooch! Feel free to contact us for clarification of this report,or if any questions arise. Please keep us up to date with your decisions after reviewingthis report.Sincerely,__________________ ___________________ _________________Vickie Smith Michelle Swallick Al Almeida__________________ ___________________Nicholas Sinko Mike Dzioba 2
  3. 3. TABLE OF CONTENTSLetter of Transmittal ................................................................................................2Table of Contents.....................................................................................................3Executive Summary .................................................................................................4Survey Results .........................................................................................................7Data Analysis .........................................................................................................10Conclusions, Limitations & Recommendations ....................................................24Appendices.............................................................................................................26 Questionnaire SPSS Printouts Open-Ended Questions Responses iPooch! product concept photos Slide visuals Bibliography 3
  4. 4. EXECUTIVE SUMMARYBACKGROUNDThe US is a nation of animal lovers and pet owners. Of the over 63 million UShouseholds which own some kind of pet (over 60% of all US households), dogs are foundin 39%, according to a 2002 survey by the American Pet Products ManufacturersAssociation. Pet owners spend more per year on pet products and supplies than on petfood. Sales of pet products rose from $28.5 billion in 2001 to $35.9 billion in 2005. Thepet products and services business is almost independent of the state of the economy –Americans treat their pets as family members and do not scrimp on caring for them.Americans are becoming well known for treating animals like humans. iPawdEnterprise’s mission is to enter the booming luxury dog accessory market with their high-tech product concept.Consumer demand for pet apparel and accessories is a trend evident across the range ofretailers -- online specialty outlets, such as PamperedPuppycom, retail pet stores such asPetSmart and PetCo, and even large department stores such as Macys which launched itssecond pet department in Philadelphia earlier this year. The special relationship betweendog owners and their pets is the subject of many studies on the sharing of human interestswith dogs. Behavior studies show that dogs are affected by the type of music they arehearing. 65% of pet owners have admitted singing and/or dancing for their pets. Whynot share music?Over 33 million Americans are using digital media players (DMPs). Apple Computer’siPod holds over 75% of the marketshare in this market. Sales of an estimated 172million units in 2006 are projected to go to almost 215 million units in 2007. DMPAccessories accounted for over $412 million in sales for the first 9 months of 2005, upover 370% from the same period in 2004.iPawd Enterprises is planning to bring the iPooch! to market within 2 years. The purposeof this study is to learn if there is enough of a positive attitude about the product to gofurther in their mission. This information will be used by iPawd Enterprises to makedecisions regarding how they want to focus future research initiatives.An exploratory research study was conducted in the Northern NJ area for iPawdEnterprises which consisted of primary data gathering. iPawd Enterprises needed aninexpensive, convenient and efficient way of collecting data about dog owners’ attitudestowards purchasing the iPooch! product concept. Respondents were selected byconvenience sampling. The study was designed to determine the iPawd’s feasibility ofmarketing a new high-tech dog product to those who use DMPs and also own dogs,developing a new segment to the expanding luxury dog accessory market. Meeting thecriteria of being a dog owner AND owning a digital media player would need to besatisfied before proceeding with our questionnaire for the iPooch! product concept. Onehundred completed surveys were collected, and SPSS Statistical Analysis software wasused to analyze the results. A variety of tests were used to analyze the data, including an 4
  5. 5. Independent Sample T-Test, Oneway ANova, and Univariate Analysis. Cross-tabulationwas also used to generate results that will be reflected in our final reporting.PRODUCT CONCEPTThe iPooch! is high-tech dog accessory that will allow dog owners to listen to theirdigital media player along with their dog. The digital media player attaches with a miniplug, for compatibility with a variety of digital media players. The iPooch! is awaterproof pouch that fastens to the dog’s collar, housing the DMP. iPooch! has anexternal speaker, known as the patented “woofer,” through which the media will beheard. There are no external wires.RESULTSAlthough there were no actual attitudinal differences between our subjects (gender, age,income, dog size) and the consequences, we still found that overall there are significantattitudinal differences across the 11 consequences but just not between each subject. Wealso discovered that there is a significant attitudinal difference across the cumulative 11attitude consequences in relation to positive attitudes versus negative and neutral attitudesThe actual findings included that there was an overall positive attitude towards theiPooch! concept.CONCLUSIONSAfter conducting our study, we found that there was a positive attitude overall across the11 consequences about iPooch! We determine that there is enough interest in iPooch! togo to market, however, more research is needed at this time. Please see the followinglimitations section in the survey results portion of this report for a discussion on this.RECOMMENDATIONSPrior to bringing iPooch! to market, a few things should be considered. This researchwas conducted to clarify an ambiguous problem, “Are people interested in iPooch!” Thisquestion needs to be addressed before a great deal of money is invested in manufacturingand bringing the product to market. The results of this report are not intended to provideconclusive evidence from which to determine a particular cause of action. It should benoted that subsequent research will be required to provide such conclusive evidence.Future research should be directed to a target audience about specific objectives. Theresearch objectives should be reidentified which will in turn delineate the type ofinformation that should be collected and it will provide the framework for the scope ofthe new study. In the research study, one objective should be to see how the attitudes areAFTER the consumers have actually used it. Once problems have been identifiedthrough this research, they will be ready to be solved. Secondary data should also be collected on other competitors, such as other luxury dogaccessories. Some of the ideas that are implemented can be useful and adopted by iPawd Enterprises. This data can be gathered quicker and at a lower cost than primary data. The new research study should be conducted more scientifically to obtain the results needed to make business-related decisions. Also, ordinal and interval data questions 5
  6. 6. should be asked to help in analyzing the data. A larger sample size and a random sample technique should be used in order to obtain meaningful data. The new survey should address questions that were left out of this study. 6
  7. 7. IPAWD ENTERPRISES SURVEY RESULTSINTRODUCTIONConsumer demand for pet apparel and accessories is a trend evident across the range ofretailers -- online specialty outlets, such as PamperedPuppycom, retail pet stores such asPetSmart and PetCo, and even large department stores such as Macys which launched itssecond pet department in Philadelphia earlier this year. The special relationship betweendog owners and their pets is the subject of many studies on the sharing of human interestswith dogs. Behavior studies show that dogs are affected by the type of music they arehearing. 65% of pet owners have admitted singing and/or dancing for their pets. Whynot share music?Over 33 million Americans are using digital media players (DMPs). Apple Computer’siPod holds over 75% of the marketshare in this market. Sales of an estimated 172million units in 2006 are projected to go to almost 215 million units in 2007. DMPAccessories accounted for over $412 million in sales for the first 9 months of 2005, upover 370% from the same period in 2004.The purpose of this study is to learn more about people’s attitudes toward the iPooch!product concept to see if it was feasible to go to market. iPawd Enterprises hascontracted Pet Product Research, Inc. to conduct an exploratory study in order todetermine the market potential of the iPooch! digital media player carrier for the dog andtheir owners. This information will be used by iPawd Enterprises to get an idea ofgeneral attitude towards the iPooch! product concept and to make decisions regardinghow they want to focus future research projects.OBJECTIVESSeveral key areas were identifies when determining the boundaries of this study. Thefollowing describe the specific research objectives: Determining if there is a positivepurchase intent for iPooch!, what attitudes would drive that behavior, and answering themanagement decision problem “Should iPooch! go to market?”METHODOLOGYIn choosing our population of interest, we determined that two criteria would need to besatisfied for eligibility to participate in the research study: Owners of both a dog AND adigital media player. Both of those criteria would need to be satisfied before proceedingwith our questionnaire for the iPooch! product concept.Pet Product research conducted an exploratory research study in the Northern New Jerseyarea for iPawd Enterprises that consisted of primary data gathering. The opinions of thisspecific population were necessary in order to satisfy our research objectives. We choseto use a self-administered questionnaire for our primary data research. The surveyor waspresent to explain things to the respondent and clarify responses to open-ended questions,if necessary. Our sampling frame is from the population of Northern NJ. Currently the 7
  8. 8. population of Essex County, where our research was conducted, is approximately793,000. However, we will focus our attention to a more convenient sample size. Wechose to use a nonprobability sample on the basis of convenience and the appeal of lowercosts. We chose a mall intercept method, intercepting every 10th person that was enteringPetSmart on Route 23, Wayne, NY to create a more random sample. We determined thata sample size of 100 would be sufficient in our determination if iPooch! should go tomarket.RESEARCH OBJECTIVESSeveral key areas were identified when determining the boundaries of this study. Thefollowing were the specific research objectives: Determining if there is a positivepurchase intent for iPooch!, what attitudes would drive that behavior, answering themanagement decision problem “Should iPooch! go to market?”. We came up with ten(10) hypotheses for responding to the management decision problem:HYPOTHESESHo1 There are no attitudinal differences towards purchasing ipooch among dog owners.Ha1 There are attitudinal differences towards purchasing ipooch among dog owners.Ho2 There are no attitudinal differences towards purchasing ipooch among dog ownersand gender.Ha2 There are attitudinal differences towards purchasing ipooch among dog owners andgender.Ho3 There are no attitudinal differences towards purchasing ipooch among dog ownersand age.Ha3 There are attitudinal differences towards purchasing ipooch among dog owners andage.Ho4 There are no attitudinal difference towards purchasing ipooch among dog ownersand income.Ha4 There are attitudinal differences towards purchasing ipooch among dog owners andincome.Ho5 There are no attitudinal differences across towards purchasing ipooch among dogowners and dog size.Ha5 There are attitudinal differences across towards purchasing ipooch among dogowners and dog size.Ho6 There are no attitudinal differences across the 11 consequences. 8
  9. 9. Ha6 There are attitudinal differences across the 11 consequences.Ho7 There are no attitudinal differences across the 11 consequences and gender.Ha7 There are attitudinal differences across the 11 consequences and gender.Ho8 There are no attitudinal differences across the 11 consequences and age.Ho8 There are attitudinal differences across the 11 consequences and age.Ho9 There are no attitudinal differences across the 11 consequences and income.Ha9 There are attitudinal differences across the 11 consequences and income.Ho10 There are no attitudinal differences across the 11 consequences and dog size.Ha10 There are attitudinal differences across the 11 consequences and dog size.Ho 11 There are no attitudinal differences across the cumulative 11 attitude consequencesin relation to positive attitudes versus negative and neutral attitudes.Ha 11 There are attitudinal differences across the cumulative 11 attitude consequences inrelation to positive attitudes versus negative and neutral attitudes.QUESTIONNAIRE DESIGNUsing Fishbein’s attitude-toward-the behavior model, as this model seems to correspondmore closely to actual behavior than does the attitude-toward-object model, revealingmore about the act of purchasing iPooch! This is depicted by the following equation:Where Attitude(beh) is a separately assessed overall measure of effect for or againstcarrying out a specific action or behavior: bi is the strength of the belief that an ithspecific action will lead to a specific outcome; and Σ indicates that there are n salientoutcomes over which the b and e combinations are summated.Demographic data was collected at the end of the questionnaire, including gender, age,income and dog size. Two open-ended questions were included at the end of the surveyto include as a bonus for iPawd in their continuing research and development for theproduct to uncover if there was anything in particular that the respondent liked about theconcept and if they had any concerns. 9
  10. 10. DATA ANALYSIS100 completed surveys were successfully collected, with minimal response omissions.After collecting our data, we will analyze the responses to the surveys by running thetests through SPSS Statistical Analysis Software. The surveys were validated, coded andentered according to standard data analysis procedure. A variety of tests were used toanalyze the data, including an Independent Sample T-Test, Oneway ANova, andUnivariate Analysis. Cross-tabulation was also used to generate results that will bereflected in our final reporting.GUIDELINEThis diagram was arranged according to the scores of the 11 attitude questions in oursurvey, with 1 being “Very Important,” and 5 being “Very unimportant.” The lower thescore, the more positive an attitude that they have shown towards i-pooch for thatconsequence (i.e. innovativeness, comfort, etc.) We used this guideline to measure ifthere was a significant finding relating to attitude to measure against the stacked tests thatwe ran, which showed a cumulative total for each attitude by creating 11 new variables.If the cumulative score had not gone beyond (99), we can conclude that there was apositive attitude towards the iPooch! consequence. However if the cumulative totalwas beyond 135, we concluded that this participant had a negative attitude towards theiPooch! consequence. If the sum of the cumulative responses to the consequence wasbetween (99 – 135), we would have to conclude that this there is an indifferent attitude,neither positive or negative outlook. The neutral and negative are being treated equally,as marketing researchers, we are looking at the cumulative scores less than 99, whichwould be in the positive zone. 10
  11. 11. ATTITUDES TOWARDS PURCHASING IPOOCH!HypothesisHo1: There are no attitudinal differences towards purchasing iPooch! among dogowners.Ha1: There are attitudinal differences towards purchasing iPooch! among dogownersOne-sample t-test:Out of the one hundred possible attitudinal surveys, 84 contained valid responses, and 16are missing. The mean average of these attitudinal purchases was 74.2 which is below the99 test value, indicating that there is positive mean average of iPooch! in dog owners.After conducting the independent sample t- test, we concluded that there are attitudinaldifferences towards purchasing iPooch! among dog owners, we reject the null. One-Sample Statistics Std. Std. Error N Mean Deviation Mean attitudes towards purchasing 84 74.1786 33.22148 3.62476 iPooch! One-Sample Test Test Value = 99 95% Confidence Mean Interval of the Sig. (2- Differenc Difference t df tailed) e Lower Upperattitudes towardspurchasing -6.848 83 .000 -24.82143 -32.0309 -17.6119iPooch!GENDERHypothesisHo2: There are no attitudinal differences towards purchasing iPooch! among dogowners and gender.Ha2: There are attitudinal differences towards purchasing iPooch! among dogowners and gender. 11
  12. 12. Independent Sample T Test:Out of 39 valid male responses the mean average was 77.2. Out of a valid 44 femaleresponses there was a mean average of 71.7. Both have a positive attitude towardsiPooch! After conducting the independent sample t- test, we concluded that there are noattitudinal differences towards purchasing iPooch! among dog owners and gender, andwe retain the null. Group Statistics Std. Std. Error Gender N Mean Deviation Mean attitudes towards Male 39 77.1795 43.30241 6.93393 purchasing Female 44 71.7273 21.37741 3.22277 iPooch! 12
  13. 13. AGE COHORTHypothesisHo3: There are no attitudinal differences towards purchasing iPooch! among dogowners and age.Ha3: There are attitudinal differences towards purchasing iPooch! among dogowners and age.One-Way Anova Test:After conducting a one way ANOVA we observed that the age cohort of 25-34 had themost positive mean attitude out of all five age cohorts and 55 and above had the lowestpositive mean attitude. After conducting the test we found there are no attitudinaldifferences towards purchasing iPooch! among dog owners and age, and we retain thenull. attitudes towards purchasing iPooch! Sum of Mean Squares df Square F Sig. Between 5272.046 4 1318.012 1.235 .303 Groups Within Groups 83250.91 78 1067.319 8 Total 88522.96 82 4 90.00 Mean of attitudes towards purshasing ipooch 85.00 80.00 75.00 70.00 65.00 60.00 Less than 25 25-34 35-44 45-54 55+ Age Group 13
  14. 14. INCOMEHypothesisHo4: There are no attitudinal differences towards purchasing iPooch! among dogowners and income.Ha4: There are attitudinal differences towards purchasing iPooch! among dogowners and income.One Way Anova Test:After conducting the one way ANOVA test we observed that the income class of 50,001-65,000 had the highest positive mean attitude toward purchasing the iPooch! and the35,001-50,000 had the lowest positive mean attitude towards purchasing the iPooch!.However, we concluded that there are no attitudinal differences towards purchasingiPooch! among dog owners and income, and we retain the null. attitudes towards purchasing iPooch! Sum of Mean Squares df Square F Sig. Between 7836.413 5 1567.283 1.470 .210 Groups Within Groups 78907.53 74 1066.318 8 Total 86743.95 79 0 95.00 Mean of attitudes towards purshasing ipooch 90.00 85.00 80.00 75.00 70.00 65.00 60.00 Under $35,000 $35,001-$50,000 $50,001-$65,000 $65,001-$80,000 $80,000-$95,000 Over $95,000 Household Income 14
  15. 15. DOG SIZEHypothesisHo5: There are no attitudinal differences across towards purchasing iPooch!among dog owners and dog size.Ha5: There are attitudinal differences across towards purchasing iPooch!among dog owners and dog size.One-Way Anova Test:After conducting a one way ANOVA test we observed that owners of small canines hadthe highest positive mean attitude. The least positive mean attitude came from themedium sized canine group. However, we concluded that there are no attitudinaldifferences towards purchasing iPooch! among dog owners and dog size, and we retainthe null. attitudes towards purchasing iPooch! Sum of Mean Squares df Square F Sig. Between 5172.628 2 2586.314 2.344 .103 Groups Within Groups 86050.95 78 1103.217 2 Total 91223.58 80 0 85.00 Mean of attitudes towards purshasing ipooch 80.00 75.00 70.00 65.00 Small Medium Large Size of Dog 15
  16. 16. ATTITUDINAL DIFFERENCES ACROSS THE 11 CONSEQUENCESHypothesisHo6 There are no attitudinal differences across the 11 consequences.Ha6 There are attitudinal differences across the 11 consequences.One Way Anova Test:After conducting a one way ANOVA test, we found that the consequence of dog comfortwhile wearing iPooch! had the highest positive mean. The concept of innovativeness hadthe lowest positive mean consequence. After conducting the one way ANOVA we foundthere are significant attitudinal differences across the 11 consequences. The nullhypothesis was rejected, and we conclude that a difference does exist. Consequences Sum of Mean Squares df Square F Sig. Between 97.874 10 9.787 8.327 .000 Groups Within Groups 1259.995 1072 1.175 Total 1357.869 1082 3.00 2.75 Mean of Consequences 2.50 2.25 2.00 1.75 would be would be is an looks like it would draw would make would make would make would draw would cost would be comfortable enjoyable to innovative would break positive me feel my dog less my dog less negative more than i fun to use for my dog listen to with concept easy attention to confident distracted responsive attention to am willing while to wear my dog me that it is by other to me my dog to spend walking my waterproof dogs dog Consequence type 16
  17. 17. GENDER STACKHypothesisHo7: There are no attitudinal differences across the 11 consequences andgender.Ha7: There are attitudinal differences across the 11 consequences and gender.Univariate Analysis Of Variance Test:By conducting the univariate analysis of variance test, we observed that females have amore positive attitude towards the iPooch! concept. We concluded that there are noattitudinal differences across the 11 consequences and gender.Tests of Between-Subjects Effects Dependent Variable: Consequences Type III Sum of Mean Source Squares df Square F Sig. Corrected Model 111.508(a) 21 5.310 4.483 .000 Intercept 4788.57 5672.284 1 5672.284 .000 7 ComTyp 97.372 10 9.737 8.220 .000 genstacked 1.326 1 1.326 1.119 .290 ComTyp * 11.182 10 1.118 .944 .492 genstacked Error 1243.772 1050 1.185 Total 7028.000 1072 Corrected Total 1355.280 1071a R Squared = .082 (Adjusted R Squared = .064) Estimated Marginal Means of Consequences 2.325 Estimated Marginal Means 2.30 2.275 Male Female Gender Stacked 17
  18. 18. AGE COHORT STACKHypothesisHo8: There are no attitudinal differences across the 11 consequences and age.Ha8: There are attitudinal differences across the 11 consequences and age.Univariate Analysis Of Variance Test:By conducting the univariate analysis of variance test, we observed the estimatedmarginal means of consequences pertaining to the age cohort stack. We observed that the25-34 age cohort has the highest favorable attitude toward the iPooch! concept. The 55+has the lowest positive favorable attitude toward the iPooch! concept. Even though weobserved this we still concluded that there are no attitudinal differences across the 11consequences and age, and we retain the null. Tests of Between-Subjects Effects Dependent Variable: Consequences Type III Sum of Mean Source Squares df Square F Sig. Corrected Model 169.817(a) 54 3.145 2.735 .000 Intercept 3544.25 4074.817 1 4074.817 .000 2 ConType 106.537 10 10.654 9.267 .000 agestack 36.362 4 9.090 7.907 .000 ConType * 34.157 40 .854 .743 .880 agestack Error 1169.242 1017 1.150 Total 7081.000 1072 Corrected Total 1339.059 1071a R Squared = .127 (Adjusted R Squared = .080) Estimated Marginal Means of Consequences 2.60 2.50 Estimated Marginal Means 2.40 2.30 2.20 2.10 2.00 Less than 25 25-34 35-44 45-54 55+ Age Group Stacked 18
  19. 19. Estimated Marginal Means of Consequences 4.00 Age Group Stacked Less than 25 25-34 3.50 35-44 Estimated Marginal Means 45-54 55+ 3.00 2.50 2.00 1.50 1.00 would would is an looks would would would would would would would be be innovati like it draw make make make draw cost be fun to comfort enjoyabl ve would positive me feel my dog my dog negative more use able for e to concept break attention confiden less less attention than i while my dog listen to easy to me t that it distracte responsi to my am walking to wear with my is d by ve to me dog willing my dog dog waterpr other to spend oof dogs Consequence typeINCOME STACKHypothesisHo9: There are no attitudinal differences across the 11 consequences and income.Ho9: There are attitudinal differences across the 11 consequences and income.Univariate Analysis Of Variance Test:By conducting the univariate analysis of variance test, we observed that the estimatedmarginal means of consequences pertaining to income . We found that the income classof 50,001-65,000 had the highest positive mean attitude toward purchasing the iPooch!The 35,001-50,000 had the lowest positive mean attitude towards purchasing the iPooch!.We conclude that there are no attitudinal differences across the 11 consequences andincome, and we retain the null. 19
  20. 20. Tests of Between-Subjects Effects Dependent Variable: Consequences Type III Sum of Mean Source Squares df Square F Sig. Corrected Model 164.467(a) 65 2.530 2.250 .000 Intercept 4468.83 5025.125 1 5025.125 .000 5 ConType 95.637 10 9.564 8.505 .000 incomestack 24.960 5 4.992 4.439 .001 ConType * 47.592 50 .952 .846 .767 incomestack Error 1082.876 963 1.124 Total 6729.000 1029 Corrected Total 1247.343 1028a R Squared = .132 (Adjusted R Squared = .073) Estimated Marginal Means of Consequences 2.60 2.50 Estimated Marginal Means of Consequences Estimated Marginal Means 2.40 3.50 Income Stacked 2.30 Under $35,000 $35,000-$50,000 $50,001-$65,000 Estimated Marginal Means 2.20 3.00 $65,001-$80,000 2.10 $80,001-$95,000 Over $95,000 2.00 2.50 Under $35,000 $35,000-$50,000 $50,001-$65,000 $65,001-$80,000 $80,001-$95,000 Over $95,000 Income Stacked 2.00 1.50 would would is an looks would would would would would would would be be innovati like it draw make make make draw cost be fun to comfort enjoyabl ve would positive me feel my dog my dog negative more use able for e to concept break attention confiden less less attention than i while my dog listen to easy to me t that it distracte responsi to my am walking to wear with my is d by ve to me dog willing my dog dog waterpr other to spend oof dogs Consequence type 20
  21. 21. DOG SIZE STACKHypothesisHo10: There are no attitudinal differences across the 11 consequences and dogsizeHa10: There are attitudinal differences across the 11 consequences and dogsize.Univariate Analysis Of Variance Test:By conducting the univariate analysis of variance test, we observed that owners of largecanines had the highest positive mean attitude. The least positive mean attitude camefrom the medium sized canine group. There are no attitudinal differences across the 11consequences and dog size, and we retain the null. Tests of Between-Subjects EffectsDependent Variable: Consequences Type III Sum of Mean Source Squares df Square F Sig. Corrected Model 128.755(a) 32 4.024 3.379 .000 Intercept 4498.89 5356.346 1 5356.346 .000 1 ConType 98.235 10 9.823 8.251 .000 sizestack 16.364 2 8.182 6.872 .001 ConType * 15.351 20 .768 .645 .881 sizestack Error 1200.117 1008 1.191 Total 6816.000 1041 Corrected Total 1328.872 1040a R Squared = .097 (Adjusted R Squared = .068) Estimated Marginal Means of Consequences 2.50 Estimated Marginal Means 2.40 2.30 2.20 Small Medium Large Size of Dog Stacked 21
  22. 22. CUMULATIVE ATTITUDES * POSITIVE ATTITUDES VERSUS NEGATIVEAND NEUTRAL ATTITUDESHypothesisHo 11 There is no significant attitudinal difference across the cumulative 11 attitudeconsequences in relation to positive attitudes versus negative and neutral attitudes.Ha 11 There is a significant attitudinal difference across the cumulative 11 attitudeconsequences in relation to positive attitudes versus negative and neutral attitudes.Cross-Tabulation:This was the final test we ran to determine if there was enough of a cumulative positiveattitude towards iPooch! to conclude if iPawd Enterprises should or should not proceed tomarket with iPooch! This is the sum of all collected attitudes responses to our attitudequestions from our marketing research project. We compared the cumulative results, aseither totally positive (below 99), or indifferent/negative (above 99), compared with theguideline chart. We had to create another variable that would identify a particularparticipant’s weighted score as (1) for positive or (2) for either negative or neutral. Wethen conducted a frequency and cross tabulation to dissect our results.As you can see we had a total of 84 valid responses out of 100. To indicate if a weightedsum attitude average was missing, we labeled it with a -9. We found that out of the valid84 attitudes, 76 had a positive response towards purchasing the iPooch! This makes up90.5% of all attitudes, versus 9.5% of negative or neutral attitudes purchasing the iPooch!which had a valid count of 8.We conclude that there is a significant attitudinal difference across the cumulative 11attitude consequences in relation to positive attitudes versus negative and neutralattitudes, and we reject the null. Positive attitudes versus negative and neutral attitudes 80 60 Frequency 40 20 0 Positive attitude Negative or neutral attitude Positive attitudes versus negative and neutral attitudes 22
  23. 23. Cumulative attitudes * Positive attitudes versus negative and neutral attitudesCross-tabulation Positive attitudes versus negative and neutral attitudes Negativ Positiv e or e neutral attitude attitude Total Cumulat Positive attitudes Count 76 0 76 ive towards Expected 68.8 7.2 76.0 attitudes purchasing IPooch Count % of Total 90.5% .0% 90.5% Negative or neutral Count 0 8 8 attitudes towards Expected 7.2 .8 8.0 purchasing IPooch Count % of Total .0% 9.5% 9.5% Total Count 76 8 84 Expected 76.0 8.0 84.0 Count % of Total 100.0 90.5% 9.5% % Chi-Square Tests Asymp. Exact Exact Sig. (2- Sig. (2- Sig. (1- Value df sided) sided) sided) Pearson Chi- 84.000(b 1 .000 Square ) Continuity 72.796 1 .000 Correction(a) Likelihood Ratio 52.835 1 .000 Fishers Exact .000 .000 Test Linear-by-Linear 83.000 1 .000 Association N of Valid Cases 84a Computed only for a 2x2 tableb 1 cells (25.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .76. 23
  24. 24. CONCLUSIONSAfter conducting our study, we found that there was a positive attitude overall across the11 consequences about iPooch! We also received many questions and comments throughthe use of the open-ended questions that were provided on the questionnaire. There weremany comments regarding the dog’s safety and health, including things like “it will hurtmy dog’s ears” and “will it be comfortable for my dog to wear?” There were also manycomments on how much the iPooch! actually is considering that a price was not stated onthe questionnaire. On the other hand, we also received positive comments on the sleekstyle and versatility of the iPooch! and how “cute” it is. We determine that there isenough interest in iPooch! to go to market, however, more research is needed at this time.Please see the following limitations section for a discussion on this.LIMITATIONSAs with any research project, this one had several limitations. One very importantlimitation had to do with budget. As a result of limited resources, the methodology usedto collect the data was hindered. The selection of respondents was obtained byconvenience sampling because of this reason. Since this sampling method was used,projecting the results beyond the specific sample is inappropriate and unscientific.Another problem had to do with the sample size. Originally, we had chosen a samplesize of 250 for this research project, but because of budget limitations, we were limited toobtaining 100 completed questionnaires. If a larger sample size were used, this may havegenerated more significant statistical findings.Other problems that were encountered had to do with respondent error. Nonresponseerror was encountered minimally. This could have been eliminated if the interviewerchecked the survey for completeness. We were gracious when intercepting respondentswho sacrificed their time to participate in our survey, when on their way to make apurchase at PetSmart. Limitations might also include that some of the questions mighthave been falsified or answered with a certain slant. Those questions that weremisunderstood could also yield biased answers. Because this was an exploratory researchsurvey for a new company, iPawd, the intentions of subjects who have little knowledge orwho have not yet made any purchase plans cannot be expected to accurately predict theirpurchase behavior of a luxury dog product concept.More questions are needed involving the characteristics of peoples’ dogs and getting atthe underlying notion of why people would purchase iPooch. We might want to uncoverwhat breeds of dogs are more likely to be owned by people who have a positive attitudetowards purchasing iPooch!, how many dogs they own, what kind of digital media playerdo they own, etc.Quantitative Research alone has its limitations, as more in-depth analysis should be donethrough qualitative research. By seeing how the product works in action, and speaking topeople in a focus group setting, more would be revealed than just an open-ended questionat the end of a survey. 24
  25. 25. RECOMMENDATIONSPrior to bringing iPooch! to market, a few things should be considered. This researchwas conducted to clarify an ambiguous problem, “Are people interested in iPooch!” Thisquestion needs to be addressed before a great deal of money is invested in manufacturinga bringing the product to market. The results of this report are not intended to provideconclusive evidence from which to determine a particular cause of action. It should benoted that subsequent research will be required to provide such conclusive evidence.Future research should be directed to a target audience about specific objectives. Theresearch objectives should be reidentified which will in turn delineate the type ofinformation that should be collected and it will provide the framework for the scope ofthe new study. In the research study, one objective should be to see how the attitudes areAFTER the consumers have actually used it. Once problems have been identifiedthrough this research, they will be ready to be solved.Secondary data should also be collected on other competitors, such as other luxury dogaccessories. Some of the ideas that are implemented can be useful and adopted by iPawdEnterprises. This data can be gathered quicker and at a lower cost than primary data.The new research study should be conducted more scientifically to obtain the resultsneeded to make business-related decisions. Also, ordinal and interval data questionsshould be asked to help in analyzing the data. A larger sample size and a random sampletechnique should be used in order to obtain meaningful data. The new survey shouldaddress questions that were left out of this study. 25
  26. 26. APPENDICES (See separate pdf files) Questionnaire SPSS PrintoutsOpen Ended Questions Responses Slide visuals Bibliography 26
  27. 27. 27
  28. 28. ReferencesAmerican Animal Hospital Association. Move Over Cindy Crawford – Fido Had MoreClout. Web Site: http://www.cyberpet.com/cyberdog/articles/general/crawford.htmAylesworth, A. et al. (1999) Animal Companions and Marketing . Advances in ConsumerResearch. Volume 26, p. 385-391Brass, L. (December 2005) Developing the purrfect product. Knox News. Retrieved from:www.knews.comChamberlin, G. (August 2005) Pet Lovers Spend Millions Annually on Their Precious. SanDiego Daily Transcript. Retrieved from:http://www.sddt.com/Commentary/article.cfm?Commentary_ID=10&SourceCode=20050819tbcCrossen, C. (December 2003) Bowsers Get the Bling Bling; Whether They Like it Or NotFrom Owners in Holiday Mood.” Wall Street Journal Archives Retrieved from:http://proquest.umi.com.ezproxy.montclair.edu:2048/pqdweb?index=1&sid=1&srchmode=1&vinstDale, S. (2005) Pet Owner Survey Reveals Strong Bond Between People and Their Pets.Goodnewsforpets.com Retrieved from:http://www.goodnewsforpets.com/Articles.asp?ID=90Dillon, M. (January 2004) Global Market for Luxury Dog Products. Dillin Media LLCWebsite. Retrieved from: http://www.dillonmedia.com/luxury-dog-products.html?id=blogsideEdward, L. (July 20, 1997) A Dog’s Luxe Life. New York Times. Retrieved from:http://select.nytimes.com/search/restricted/article?res=FB0C10FE3D5F0C738EDDAE0894DF494D81Kindel, L. (October 2006) Dogs Shown to React to Music. Retrieved from:http://www.eternalanimals.com/Dogs_Shown_To_React_To_Music.htmDevaney, P. (June 2003) Wealth of Potential in the Rise of the ‘Gucci Poochie.’ MarketingWeek. p. 32Pets Can Drive. (March 2000) American Demographics. p. 10, 12.Randerson, J. (October 2002) Dogs Prefer Back to Britney. Newsscientist.com Retrievedfrom: http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn2962&print=trueSanders, C. (1990) The Animal ‘Other’: Self Definition, Social Identity and CompanionAnimmals. Advances in Consumer Research. Volume 17, p. 662-668 28
  29. 29. Stick It In Your Ear Again, Study on Safe Levels of Music Listening. (October 26, 2006)Gadgetbloggers. Retrieved from: http://www.gadgetbloggers.com/2006/10/23/stick-it-in-your-ear-again-study-on-safe-levels-of-music-listening/The Musical Preferences of Your Pets… CBC Continuous Music Network. Retrieved from:http://www.galaxie.ca/en/2/faitsinsolites.html 29

×