Jake Soderberg
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/jakesoderberg
Twitter Profile: http://twitter.com/jakesoderberg (@jakesoderberg)
McDonald’s
Management Decision Problem
By Jake Soderberg
Jake Soderberg, Alyssa Burke, Jessica Hull, Caitlin O’Leary

Jake Soderberg
University of St. Thomas
Marketing Research MKTG 340
McDonald’s Management Decision Problem
Spring 2008
Table of Contents
Part I: Executive Summary _____________________________________________________ 3
Part II: Company Overview & Management Decision Problem ________________________ 4
Part III: Marketing Research Problem & Components ________________________________ 5
Part IV: Research Approach & Design ____________________________________________ 7
Part V: Field Work ___________________________________________________________ 9
Part VI: Data Analysis ________________________________________________________ 10
Part VII: Conclusion __________________________________________________________ 13
Appendices:
A: Focus Group Screener ________________________________________________ 15
B: Discussion Guides ___________________________________________________ 17
C: Survey ____________________________________________________________ 20
D: Frequency Charts ____________________________________________________ 25
E: Crosstabulation Charts ________________________________________________ 30
F: Two Independent Same T-Test _________________________________________ 35
G: Paired Sample T-Test ________________________________________________ 39
H: PowerPoint Presentation ______________________________________________ 42
2

Jake Soderberg
University of St. Thomas
Marketing Research MKTG 340
McDonald’s Management Decision Problem
Spring 2008
I. Executive Summary
The Beta Marketing Team is pleased to submit this proposal for McDonald’s Premium
Beverage Line Management Research Problem. The information contained in this
proposal is intended to illustrate what the team believes to be a proper course of action
for McDonald’s in respect to whether the company should expand its premium beverage
line.
We have taken upon ourselves to complete a focus group, surveys, SPSS computations,
and multiple tests designed to significantly assist in a successful outcome to the potential
addition of a premium beverage line.
Based on our statistical conclusions, we recommend that McDonald’s expand its
premium beverage line, focusing on the latte, cappuccino, and mocha as the new
beverages to introduce. The following report includes a variety of research and data that
support our conclusion.
3

Jake Soderberg
University of St. Thomas
Marketing Research MKTG 340
McDonald’s Management Decision Problem
Spring 2008
II. Company Overview & Management Decision Problem
a. McDonald’s Overview
• McDonald’s is world-renowned for its Big Mac, McNuggets, amusing characters, and
kid-friendly dining. Children and adults alike can recognize the infamous gold arches
all over the world. McDonald’s has been very successful over the years with its sales
and continues to branch out to provide its customers with new tastes and enjoyments.
• McDonald’s is the leading global foodservice retailer with more than 30,000 local
restaurants serving 52 million people and operating in more then 100 countries
around the world. It offers a varied, yet limited, value-priced menu. Individual
restaurants are operated either by the company or by independent entrepreneurs under
a franchise agreement. It operates Boston Market and as a minority ownership in the
United Kingdom-based Pret A Manger. It recently disposed of its investment in
Chipotle Mexican Grill. McDonald’s main competitors (in order of sales) are
Starbucks, Wendy’s and Burger King.
• McDonald’s has sales of over 22 billion, which has grown 9% in the last year.
• McDonald’s has approximately 2,800 corporate employees who provide a wide
variety of support functions to the 30,000 McDonald’s restaurants. It also has 67,000
restaurant mangers worldwide. In addition, more then 300,000 people have graduated
from its Hamburger University facility with expertise knowledge and skills
concerning the McDonald’s products.
b. Key Issues
• The Key issue that McDonald’s is facing is competition from premium coffee
restaurants such as Caribou and Starbucks. Since the introduction of the “Premium
Blends” coffee and the “Iced Coffee,” McDonald’s has faced tough competition from
a new range of food restaurants. The company must answer questions about the
future, such as whether or not McDonald’s should plan to compete directly with the
competition by increasing the variety and quality of McCaffeine Drinks, in order to
move forward with new ideas.
4

Jake Soderberg
University of St. Thomas
Marketing Research MKTG 340
McDonald’s Management Decision Problem
Spring 2008
c. Management Decision Problem
• Should McDonald’s invest in a new line of premium beverages?
III. Marketing Research Problem & Components
a. Marketing Research Problem
• How much will a new premium beverage line generate in incremental sales in
addition to the existing coffee and iced coffee line?
Marketing Research Problem Components:
• How much new traffic will be generated with the introduction of a premium beverage
line?
• What do consumers value in a premium beverage? (Examples include: speed of
service, cleanliness, employee friendliness, quality, location, affordability, drive thru,
variety, consistency, atmosphere)
• What do consumers value about the McDonald’s brand and service? (Examples
include: speed of service, cleanliness, employee friendliness, quality, location,
affordability, drive-thru, and variety)
• How would the introduction of a premium beverage line impact the consumer’s
perception of McDonald’s?
• What are the competitive advantages that the competitors have in the premium
beverage market that McDonald’s could/should invest in? (Machinery – see research
design notes)
• What Premium Beverages should be introduced? (Examples include: Latte,
Cappuccino, Mocha, Espresso, Chai, Tea)
• What time of day should the Premium Beverages be available? (Morning or all 24
hours)
b. Methods of Research:
• We used secondary qualitative research, using the Internet, to find out the main
issues that McDonald’s is facing.
5

Jake Soderberg
University of St. Thomas
Marketing Research MKTG 340
McDonald’s Management Decision Problem
Spring 2008
o Secondary Research was used to find out what McDonald’s is serving now in
terms of beverages, and what other premium beverage restaurants (such as
Starbucks) offer.
• We used direct (non-disguised) qualitative research to better define and understand
the problem. (exploratory)
o The challenge with our topic is in obtaining the qualitative research that was
needed to compare two seemingly different companies: McDonald’s and
coffeehouses such as Starbucks and Caribou.
o It was important for us to determine what customers value in their favorite
coffeehouses so that we could translate that experience into the experience of
buying coffee at McDonald’s.
o It was also important to know what customers value in McDonald’s so that
these values remain intact while new ones are being added to facilitate a new
premium beverage line at McDonald’s.
• Focus Group: We conducted a focus group in order to obtain this qualitative research.
o The focus group was used to understand why people purchase coffee, how
they buy coffee, and what they value in the coffee purchasing experience.
o In addition, we addressed the question of why people visit McDonald’s and
probed into the possible benefits and consequences of McDonald’s offering a
new premium beverage line.
• One on one interview: We also saw it important to perform one-on-one interviews,
which is also direct qualitative research.
o We made sure to talk to people who not only regularly visit McDonald’s but
also regularly drink coffee and visit coffeehouses.
o The one-on-one interviews helped us understand what McDonalds can do to
better the overall food/beverage buying experience while introducing a new
line of premium beverages.
6

Jake Soderberg
University of St. Thomas
Marketing Research MKTG 340
McDonald’s Management Decision Problem
Spring 2008
o Since our focus group consisted mostly of college students, it was important
that our one-on-one interviews were with adults. This allowed us to assess
their attitudes, beliefs, and feelings towards this issue compared to those of
college students.
IV. Research Approach & Design
a. Marketing Research Approaches
Exploratory:
Key Information Research Technique
What consumers value about McDonald’s Focus group and in-depth interviews
What consumers value about coffeehouses Focus group and in-depth interviews
What consumers value in a premium beverage Focus group and in-depth interviews
What types/flavors of beverages to introduce Focus group and in-depth interviews
What other factors should be considered One-on-one interviews
Descriptive:
Key Information Research Technique
Record and measure new consumer traffic Observational research (mechanical)
What consumers value about McDonald’s Surveys
What consumers value about coffeehouses Surveys
The suggested retail price of the beverage In-store surveys
The beverage size (small, medium, large) In-store surveys
What types/flavors of beverages to introduce In-store surveys and mail surveys
What types/flavors of beverages to introduce Observational research (test market)
What time/hour of the day to offer beverages Observational research (test market)
What other factors should be considered Surveys
Causal:
7

Jake Soderberg
University of St. Thomas
Marketing Research MKTG 340
McDonald’s Management Decision Problem
Spring 2008
Key Information Research Technique
The suggested retail price of the beverage Test marketing
The beverage size (small, medium, large) Test marketing
What types/flavors of beverages to introduce Test marketing
What time/hour of the day to offer beverages Test marketing
Miscellaneous:
Key Information Research Technique
Demographics of average consumer Secondary research
What beverages to introduce (types/flavors) Panel of consumers (longitudinal)
What time of day to offer beverages Panel of consumers (longitudinal)
Determine competitive competencies Secret shopping
b. Process & Technique Rationale
The first step was to use exploratory research to determine the problem or issue. We
needed to determine what customers value about premium coffee beverages and the
atmosphere at McDonald’s and local coffeehouses. We decided to perform several one-
on-one interviews and a focus group to determine consumer tastes and thoughts (both
were exploratory research techniques). The focus group was used to understand why
consumers purchase coffee and why consumers come to McDonald’s. Towards the
conclusion of the focus group, the participants were questioned to try to determine the
benefits and consequences of McDonald’s offering a new premium coffee beverage line.
The second step was to perform descriptive marketing research. We put together a
survey focusing on the topics that came out of the exploratory research. We had a
screener question first because we wanted participants of the survey to be able compare
local coffeehouses and their experience at McDonald’s. We handed out the surveys
personally (rather then mail or online) to control who was taking the survey and because
of time constraints. The target population was coffee drinkers who also ate at a
8

Jake Soderberg
University of St. Thomas
Marketing Research MKTG 340
McDonald’s Management Decision Problem
Spring 2008
McDonald’s restaurant on a regular basis (a majority of those participants asked to fill out
the survey were college students at the University of St Thomas).
The main scale used was a semantic differential scale (noncomparative scaling) because
of its versatility. The semantic differential scale is easy for the respondent to answer, and
the researcher gets a true view of the preferences of the respondent rather then compared
to another product or service. We also used a ranking scale (comparative), which has
advantages that include: it comes closer to resembling the shopping environment; it is
easily understood; and it can be used to rate overall performance between coffeehouses
(or other locations that serve coffee). Then the last scale used was a Likert scale
(noncomparative). The advantages of a Likert scale include: it is easy for the researcher
to construct and administer; it is easy for the respondent to answer; it also helps to get the
degree to which consumers agree or disagree with the statement rather then a yes or no.
The sample size for the surveys was determined for us with 200 participants needed (that
is a large enough sample to make a projection about the population). The next step that
would follow in the future would be a test market if a good amount of positive responses
were collected from the consumers questioned.
V. Field Work
Throughout the project we have done a lot of things well and we have also made our fair
share of mistakes. In terms of our qualitative research, given the opportunity to do the
focus group over we would have probed more into the questions. In order to do better
probe into ideas it would have been beneficial for us to come up with a set of questions or
statements which could have be used to gather further information. The problem that we
found was the mediator, even though she knew she needed to probe, could not come up
with the right questions to further discuss an idea. If we were given more time, or if we
would have thought of it sooner, it would have been a good idea for us to go to a
McDonalds and do our own secret shopping or just sit observe. It would have been
9

Jake Soderberg
University of St. Thomas
Marketing Research MKTG 340
McDonald’s Management Decision Problem
Spring 2008
interesting to see how fast the drive-thru was, where the coffee is stored, how often the
coffee is change, how many people actually order coffee, how the coffee is made, when
coffee was ordered, what kind of other food coffee was ordered with and how long it took
to make and serve the coffee. However, what we did do well in terms of the qualitative
research was obtain valuable information which we used help create our surveys. For
example, we found through qualitative research that people don’t think to buy coffee at
McDonald’s because McDonald’s does not have that “coffee house image.” Therefore,
we made our survey so that we would get, from it, information about what people want in
a coffee house and where McDonald’s measures on those qualities.
Through quantitative research the first thing we learned was that it is hard to make
surveys. In the end, we ended up with, what we felt, was a good base of questions which
would provide the data we wanted to help aid us in making a decision. However, if we
could have done it differently we would have made a few minor changes to the survey.
First, our screener question which asked how often the respondent has purchased coffee
provided too short of a window. Instead of asking how often in the last week, we should
have asked how often in the last month. The issue in handing out surveys was that we
were only getting respondents who purchased coffee weekly and in reality we care not
only about weekly purchasers but monthly purchasers as well. Also, we could have taken
out questions within our survey which pertained to places where people generally
purchase coffee. No only was this data hard to code but we ended up not using it in our
analysis.
VI. Data Analysis
Using Crosstabulation
• Null: No relationship between variables
• Want 95% confidence level
Relationship between gender and likelihood of trying drink:
10

Jake Soderberg
University of St. Thomas
Marketing Research MKTG 340
McDonald’s Management Decision Problem
Spring 2008
• Rejecting null with 99.5% confidence level of relationship between gender and
likelihood of trying latte
• Not rejecting null because no relationship between gender and likelihood or trying
cappuccino
• Rejecting null with 97% confidence level of relationship between gender and
likelihood of trying mocha
• Not rejecting null with 67% confidence level for relationship between gender and
likelihood of trying espresso
• Not rejecting null with 92% confidence level for relationship between gender and
likelihood of trying chai because below 95%
• Not rejecting null with 93.3% confidence level for relationship between gender and
likelihood of trying tea because below 95%
Relationship between gender and purchase of premium beverage:
• Not rejecting null because one can assume there is high likelihood of no relationship
existing between gender and the purchasing of premium coffee. Women are not more
likely to purchase a premium beverage than men, and vice versa.
Relationship between gender and how often coffee is purchased:
• Not rejecting null because one can assume there is high likelihood of no relationship
existing between gender and the purchasing of coffee in general. The assumed
significance would be that the purchasing behavior of purchasing coffee in general
and purchasing McDonald’s premium coffee in relation to gender are almost the
same.
Note:
• Based on frequencies, latte, cappuccino, and mocha are the best drinks for
McDonald’s to introduce if it follows through with expanding on its premium
beverage line. Espresso, chai tea, and tea based on their low frequency would not be
11

Jake Soderberg
University of St. Thomas
Marketing Research MKTG 340
McDonald’s Management Decision Problem
Spring 2008
as successful if introduced with the McDonalds Premium Coffee Line expansion.
(insert tables)
• Although there is no relationship between gender and the purchasing of coffee, there
is however a relationship in some cases between gender and the likelihood of trying
certain premium coffee beverages. For example, we can say with 99.9% confidence
that there is a relationship between gender and the likelihood of trying a latte. With
97% confidence we can also say that there is a relationship between gender and the
likelihood of trying a mocha. In the case of cappuccino, we can only reject the Null
Hypothesis with 20% Confidence. This means that there is more than likely no
relationship between gender and the likelihood of trying a cappuccino.
Using Hypothesis Tests
• Null: No relationship between variables
• Want 95% confidence level
Two Independent T-tests:
• We compared the purchasing of McDonald’s coffee and likelihood of trying new
beverages studied in the survey to see if the previous McDonald’s coffee purchasing
pattern had an effect on the likelihood of trying one of the new beverages.
• With 99.9% confidence the findings show that whether or not a customer has
purchased McDonald’s coffee in the past has an effect on whether or not the customer
would try the new latte.
• With 98% confidence the findings show that whether or not a customer has purchased
McDonald’s coffee in the past has an effect on whether or not the customer would try
the new cappuccino.
• With 99.6% confidence the findings show that whether or not a customer has
purchased McDonald’s coffee in the past has an effect on whether or not the customer
would try the new mocha.
12

Jake Soderberg
University of St. Thomas
Marketing Research MKTG 340
McDonald’s Management Decision Problem
Spring 2008
• The likelihood of a customer trying a new premium beverage is higher if he or she
has made a previous McDonald’s coffee purchase.
Paired Sample:
• With 100% confidence we can say that there is a difference between the importance
of the speed of service in a coffeehouse compared to how McDonald’s is rated for its
speed of service. Typically McDonald’s speed of service is not up to the standards
that people have for coffeehouses.
• With 100% confidence we can say that there is a difference between the importance
of the cleanliness of a coffeehouse compared to how McDonald’s is rated for its
cleanliness. McDonald’s cleanliness falls far below what is expected of
coffeehouses.
• With 100% confidence we can say that there is a difference between the importance
of the friendliness of employees a coffeehouse compared to how McDonald’s is rated
for its friendliness of employees. McDonald’s employees are not viewed as friendly
as baristas in coffeehouses are expected to be.
• With 100% confidence we can say that there is a difference between the importance
of the friendliness of employees in a coffeehouse compared to how McDonald’s is
rated for its friendliness of employees. McDonald’s employees are not viewed as
friendly as baristas in coffeehouses are expected to be.
• With 100% confidence we can say that there is a difference between the importance
of food and beverage quality in a coffeehouse compared to McDonald’s is rated for
its food and beverage quality. McDonald’s food and beverages are not viewed as
high quality as food and beverages in coffeehouses are expected to be.
• With 100% confidence we can say that there is a difference between the importance
of the location a coffeehouse compared to how McDonald’s is rated for its locations.
On our seven-point scale, location was ranked highly for both how people view both
coffeehouses and McDonald’s.
13

Jake Soderberg
University of St. Thomas
Marketing Research MKTG 340
McDonald’s Management Decision Problem
Spring 2008
• With only 80% confidence, we can say that there is no difference between how
people rate the importance of affordability at a coffeehouse and how they view the
affordability of McDonald’s. We can assume, therefore, that there is no difference
between the importance of affordability of a coffeehouse and the importance of
affordability of McDonald’s.
• With 100% confidence we can say that there is a difference between the importance
of a drive-thru at a coffeehouse compared to how McDonald’s is rated for its drive-
thru. People do not view a drive-thru to be important for a coffeehouse to have;
however, McDonald’s drive-thru is rated highly on importance.
• With only 86.4% confidence, we can say that there is no relationship between the
variety of food and beverages offered at McDonald’s and the importance of food and
beverage variety at a coffeehouse. Variety of food and beverages, however, is rated
low in importance for people who visit coffeehouses.
• With 100% confidence we can say that there is a difference between the importance
of the atmosphere at a coffeehouse compared to how McDonald’s is rated for its
atmosphere. There is a substantial difference between the importance of a good
atmosphere in a coffeehouse compared to how people view McDonald’s overall
atmosphere, which tends to have low number ratings.
VII. Conclusion
McDonald’s is not commonly viewed as a coffeehouse. In order to be preferred as a
coffeehouse, an establishment must be clean, have a good atmosphere, sell high quality
food and beverages, and have a good location. McDonald’s, however, does not rate
highly in many of these areas, with the exception of prime locations and affordability.
Based on frequency, we recommend that McDonald’s should decide to expand on the
premium coffee line. The company should focus on the latte, cappuccino, and mocha as
the new drinks to introduce. As described earlier, however, there is no relationship
between gender and the purchasing of premium coffee from McDonald’s. There is a
relationship between gender and the likelihood of purchasing a specific coffee drink
14

Jake Soderberg
University of St. Thomas
Marketing Research MKTG 340
McDonald’s Management Decision Problem
Spring 2008
(such as a latter or mocha). Therefore, we recommend that if McDonald’s introduces the
cappuccino, it uses a marketing strategy which is gender-neutral since there is no
relationship between gender and the likelihood of trying a cappuccino.
We also found that people who have purchased McDonald’s premium coffee before are
more likely to purchase the new premium coffee drinks. Marketing strategies that
include coupons on cups of premium coffee for example, these loyal customers have a
higher potential of trying the new beverages and hopefully inspire others to try the new
beverages as well.
If McDonald’s does follow through with our suggestion of introducing a latte,
cappuccino, and mocha premium beverage, we strongly recommend first that
McDonald’s improves its overall atmosphere, cleanliness, quality of food and beverages,
and employee friendliness if it wishes to successfully move into the market share of
premium coffee beverages. Secondly, since McDonald’s is viewed highly on its
affordability, which is something that coffee drinkers find important, we suggest that
McDonald’s focuses on the positive attribute of affordable beverages through its
marketing campaign. It should attempt to show customers that affordability is important
when buying coffee beverages.
15

Jake Soderberg
University of St. Thomas
Marketing Research MKTG 340
McDonald’s Management Decision Problem
Spring 2008
Appendix A
16

Jake Soderberg
University of St. Thomas
Marketing Research MKTG 340
McDonald’s Management Decision Problem
Spring 2008
Appendix B
17

Jake Soderberg
University of St. Thomas
Marketing Research MKTG 340
McDonald’s Management Decision Problem
Spring 2008
Appendix C
18

Jake Soderberg
University of St. Thomas
Marketing Research MKTG 340
McDonald’s Management Decision Problem
Spring 2008
Appendix D
19

Jake Soderberg
University of St. Thomas
Marketing Research MKTG 340
McDonald’s Management Decision Problem
Spring 2008
Frequency Charts
How often do you purchase Coffee?
Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid 1-2 103 55.4 55.4 55.4
3 to 4 42 22.6 22.6 78.0
5 to 6 22 11.8 11.8 89.8
7 or more 19 10.2 10.2 100.0
Total 186 100.0 100.0
What Time of Day do you Purchase Coffee?
Early Morning
Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid no 127 68.3 68.3 68.3
yes 59 31.7 31.7 100.0
Total 186 100.0 100.0
Mid-Morning
Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid no 80 43.0 43.2 43.2
yes 105 56.5 56.8 100.0
Total 185 99.5 100.0
Missing 2.00 1 .5
Total 186 100.0
Afternoon
Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid no 145 78.0 78.4 78.4
yes 40 21.5 21.6 100.0
Total 185 99.5 100.0
Missing 3.00 1 .5
Total 186 100.0
20

Jake Soderberg
University of St. Thomas
Marketing Research MKTG 340
McDonald’s Management Decision Problem
Spring 2008
Early Evening
Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid no 150 80.6 80.6 80.6
yes 36 19.4 19.4 100.0
Total 186 100.0 100.0
Late Evening
Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid no 165 88.7 88.7 88.7
yes 21 11.3 11.3 100.0
Total 186 100.0 100.0
How often have you Purchased McDonalds in the Last month?
Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid never 46 24.7 24.7 24.7
1 to 3 103 55.4 55.4 80.1
4 to 6 24 12.9 12.9 93.0
7 to 9 7 3.8 3.8 96.8
10 or more 6 3.2 3.2 100.0
Total 186 100.0 100.0
Have you purchased McDonalds Premium Coffee?
Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid Yes 53 28.5 28.8 28.8
No 131 70.4 71.2 100.0
Total 184 98.9 100.0
Missing 3.00 1 .5
4.00 1 .5
Total 2 1.1
Total 186 100.0
21

Jake Soderberg
University of St. Thomas
Marketing Research MKTG 340
McDonald’s Management Decision Problem
Spring 2008
Age
Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid 18 and younger 14 7.5 7.5 7.5
19-25 135 72.6 72.6 80.1
26-35 11 5.9 5.9 86.0
36-45 8 4.3 4.3 90.3
46-55 14 7.5 7.5 97.8
56 and Older 4 2.2 2.2 100.0
Total 186 100.0 100.0
Gender
Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid Female 116 62.4 62.4 62.4
Male 70 37.6 37.6 100.0
Total 186 100.0 100.0
Likelihood you will try:
Latte
Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid 1.00 56 30.1 30.1 30.1
2.00 86 46.2 46.2 76.3
3.00 44 23.7 23.7 100.0
Total 186 100.0 100.0
Cappuccino
Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid 1.00 56 30.1 30.1 30.1
2.00 92 49.5 49.5 79.6
3.00 38 20.4 20.4 100.0
Total 186 100.0 100.0
22

Jake Soderberg
University of St. Thomas
Marketing Research MKTG 340
McDonald’s Management Decision Problem
Spring 2008
Mocha
Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid 1.00 51 27.4 27.4 27.4
2.00 87 46.8 46.8 74.2
3.00 48 25.8 25.8 100.0
Total 186 100.0 100.0
Espresso
Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid 1.00 77 41.4 41.4 41.4
2.00 83 44.6 44.6 86.0
3.00 26 14.0 14.0 100.0
Total 186 100.0 100.0
Chai
Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid 1.00 106 57.0 57.0 57.0
2.00 58 31.2 31.2 88.2
3.00 22 11.8 11.8 100.0
Total 186 100.0 100.0
Tea
Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid 1.00 97 52.2 52.2 52.2
2.00 65 34.9 34.9 87.1
3.00 24 12.9 12.9 100.0
Total 186 100.0 100.0
23

Jake Soderberg
University of St. Thomas
Marketing Research MKTG 340
McDonald’s Management Decision Problem
Spring 2008
Appendix E
24

Jake Soderberg
University of St. Thomas
Marketing Research MKTG 340
McDonald’s Management Decision Problem
Spring 2008
Crosstabulations – Chi Squared
How often Do you purchase Coffee * Gender
Count
Gender
Total
Female Male Female
How often Do you 1-2 61 42 103
purchase Coffee 3 to 4 29 13 42
5 to 6 14 8 22
7 or more 12 7 19
Total 116 70 186
Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 1.253(a) 3 .740
Likelihood Ratio 1.270 3 .736
Linear-by-Linear
.323 1 .570
Association
N of Valid Cases
186
Have you purchased McDonalds Premium Coffee * Gender
Count
Gender
Total
Female Male Female
Have you purchased Yes 34 19 53
McDonalds Premium
Coffee No
82 49 131
Total 116 68 184
Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. Exact Sig. Exact Sig.
Value df (2-sided) (2-sided) (1-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square .039(b) 1 .843
Continuity Correction(a) .001 1 .977
Likelihood Ratio .039 1 .843
Fisher's Exact Test .868 .491
Linear-by-Linear
Association .039 1 .843
25

Jake Soderberg
University of St. Thomas
Marketing Research MKTG 340
McDonald’s Management Decision Problem
Spring 2008
N of Valid Cases 184
Gender * Likelihood you will try
Latte
Count
Likelihood You will try: Latte Total
1.00 2.00 3.00 1.00
Gender Female 26 56 34 116
Male 30 30 10 70
Total 56 86 44 186
Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 10.503(a) 2 .005
Likelihood Ratio 10.608 2 .005
Linear-by-Linear
10.239 1 .001
Association
N of Valid Cases
186
Cappuccino
Count
Gender
Total
Female Male Female
Likelihood You will 1.00 35 21 56
try: Cappuccino 2.00 59 33 92
3.00 22 16 38
Total 116 70 186
Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square .446(a) 2 .800
Likelihood Ratio .442 2 .802
Linear-by-Linear
.145 1 .704
Association
N of Valid Cases
186
26

Jake Soderberg
University of St. Thomas
Marketing Research MKTG 340
McDonald’s Management Decision Problem
Spring 2008
Mocha
Count
Gender
Total
Female Male Female
Likelihood 1.00 24 27 51
You will try: 2.00 60 27 87
Mocha
3.00
32 16 48
Total 116 70 186
Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 7.084(a) 2 .029
Likelihood Ratio 6.954 2 .031
Linear-by-Linear
4.173 1 .041
Association
N of Valid Cases
186
Espresso
Count
Gender Total
Female Male Female
Likelihood 1.00 48 29 77
You will try: 2.00 55 28 83
Espresso
3.00
13 13 26
Total 116 70 186
Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 2.232(a) 2 .328
Likelihood Ratio 2.187 2 .335
Linear-by-Linear
.486 1 .486
Association
N of Valid Cases
186
Chai
27

Jake Soderberg
University of St. Thomas
Marketing Research MKTG 340
McDonald’s Management Decision Problem
Spring 2008
Count
Gender Total
Female Male Female
Likelihood 1.00 59 47 106
You will try: 2.00 40 18 58
Chai
3.00
17 5 22
Total 116 70 186
Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 5.190(a) 2 .075
Likelihood Ratio 5.340 2 .069
Linear-by-Linear
5.076 1 .024
Association
N of Valid Cases
186
Tea
Count
Gender Total
Female Male Female
Likelihood 1.00 53 44 97
You will try: 2.00 47 18 65
Tea
3.00
16 8 24
Total 116 70 186
Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 5.394(a) 2 .067
Likelihood Ratio 5.465 2 .065
Linear-by-Linear
3.336 1 .068
Association
N of Valid Cases
186
28

Jake Soderberg
University of St. Thomas
Marketing Research MKTG 340
McDonald’s Management Decision Problem
Spring 2008
Appendix F
29

Jake Soderberg
University of St. Thomas
Marketing Research MKTG 340
McDonald’s Management Decision Problem
Spring 2008
Two Independent Sample T-Test
Users and Non-Users of McDonald’s Premium Coffee * Likelihood of Trying New Drinks
Group Statistics
Have you purchased
McDonalds Premium Std. Error
Coffee N Mean Std. Deviation Mean
Likelihood You will Yes 53 2.2075 .81709 .11224
try: Latte No 131 1.8244 .66194 .05783
Likelihood You will Yes 53 2.0943 .74069 .10174
try: Cappuccino No 131 1.8244 .68479 .05983
Likelihood You will Yes 53 2.2264 .80004 .10989
try: Mocha No 131 1.8855 .68659 .05999
Likelihood You will Yes 53 1.9434 .76999 .10577
try: Espresso No 131 1.6412 .64532 .05638
Likelihood You will Yes 53 1.6415 .78677 .10807
try: Chai No 131 1.5038 Equality of Means
t-test for .64895 .05670
95% Confidence Interval of
Likelihood You will Yes 53 1.7170 .81753 .11230 the Difference
try: Tea No 131 1.5649 .65749 .05745 Upper Lower
Equal variances
assumed 3.316 182 .001 .38312 .11554 .15515 .61109
Equal variances not
assumed 3.034 80.997 .003 .38312 .12626 .13190 .63434
Equal variances
assumed 2.364 182 .019 .26991 .11415 .04468 .49515
Equal variances not
assumed 2.287 89.884 .025 .26991 .11803 .03542 .50440
Equal variances
assumed 2.905 182 .004 .34092 .11735 .10939 .57245
Equal variances not
assumed 2.723 84.602 .008 .34092 .12520 .09197 .58987
Equal variances
assumed 2.717 182 .007 .30217 .11123 .08271 .52164
Equal variances not
assumed 2.521 83.070 .014 .30217 .11986 .06379 .54056
Equal variances
assumed 1.224 182 .223 .13769 .11251 -.08430 .35969
Users and Non-Users of McDonald’s Premium Coffee * Ratings of McDonalds
Equal variances not
assumed 1.128 82.078 .263 .13769 .12204 -.10508 .38047
Equal variances
assumed 1.322 182 .188 .15210 .11508 -.07497 .37916
Equal variances not
assumed 1.206 80.569 .231 .15210 .12614 -.09890 .40309
30

Jake Soderberg
University of St. Thomas
Marketing Research MKTG 340
McDonald’s Management Decision Problem
Spring 2008
Group Statistics
Have you purchased
McDonalds Premium Std. Error
Coffee N Mean Std. Deviation Mean
Rating McDonalds on the Yes 53 5.4340 1.27866 .17564
Following Qualities:
Speed No
131 4.8855 1.75254 .15312
Rating McDonalds on the Yes 53 3.9057 1.59644 .21929
Following Qualities: No
Clean 131 3.7328 1.71789 .15009
Rating McDonalds on the Yes 53 4.0377 1.20834 .16598
Following Qualities: No
Employees 131 3.5573 1.59885 .13969
Rating McDonalds on the Yes 53 4.3396 1.35793 .18653
Following Qualities: No
Quality 131 3.6718 1.61456 .14106
Rating McDonalds on the Yes 53 5.7925 1.00687 .13830
Following Qualities: No
Location 131 5.1527 1.87072 .16345
Rating McDonalds on the Yes 53 6.1132 .80049 .10996
Following Qualities: No
Affordable 131 5.2977 1.71282 .14965
Rating McDonalds on the Yes 53 5.5094 1.69414 .23271
Following Qualities: No
Drive Thru 131 5.0382 1.86632 .16306
Rating McDonalds on the Yes 53 4.5660 1.29361 .17769
Following Qualities: No
Variety 131 4.3969 1.59653 .13949
Rating McDonalds on the Yes 53 3.8491 1.44643 .19868
Following Qualities: No
Atmosphere 131 3.7252 1.53950 .13451
31

Jake Soderberg
University of St. Thomas
Marketing Research MKTG 340
McDonald’s Management Decision Problem
Spring 2008
32

Jake Soderberg
University of St. Thomas
Marketing Research MKTG 340
McDonald’s Management Decision Problem
Spring 2008
t-test for Equality of Means
Mean Std. Error 95% Confidence Interval
t df Sig. (2-tailed) Difference Difference of the Difference
Upper Lower
Speed Equal
variances 2.065 182 .040 .54847 .26556 .02450 1.07243
assumed
Equal
variances not 2.354 130.847 .020 .54847 .23301 .08751 1.00942
assumed
Cleanliness Equal
variances .630 182 .529 .17284 .27416 -.36810 .71377
assumed
Equal
variances not .650 103.085 .517 .17284 .26573 -.35418 .69985
assumed
Employees Equal
Friendliness variances 1.971 182 .050 .48048 .24381 -.00058 .96155
assumed
Equal
variances not 2.215 126.391 .029 .48048 .21694 .05118 .90979
assumed
Quality Equal
variances 2.654 182 .009 .66787 .25161 .17142 1.16432
assumed
Equal
variances not 2.856 113.626 .005 .66787 .23386 .20457 1.13116
assumed
Location Equal
variances 2.353 182 .020 .63978 .27189 .10333 1.17624
assumed
Equal
variances not 2.988 167.775 .003 .63978 .21411 .21709 1.06248
assumed
Affordability Equal
variances 3.319 182 .001 .81550 .24574 .33064 1.30036
assumed
Equal
variances not 4.391 178.322 .000 .81550 .18570 .44904 1.18195
assumed
Drive Thru Equal
variances 1.592 182 .113 .47127 .29609 -.11294 1.05547
assumed
Equal
variances not 1.659 105.433 .100 .47127 .28415 -.09213 1.03466
assumed
Variety Equal
variances .685 182 .494 .16909 .24682 -.31791 .65609
assumed
Equal
variances not .749 117.923 .456 .16909 .22590 -.27826 .61644
assumed
: Atmosphere Equal
variances .503 182 .616 .12387 .24639 -.36227 .61001
assumed
Equal
variances not .516 102.016 .607 .12387 .23993 -.35203 .59977
assumed
33

Jake Soderberg
University of St. Thomas
Marketing Research MKTG 340
McDonald’s Management Decision Problem
Spring 2008
Appendix G
34

Jake Soderberg
University of St. Thomas
Marketing Research MKTG 340
McDonald’s Management Decision Problem
Spring 2008
Paired Sample T-Test
Importance of Qualities in a Coffee Shop * Rating of McDonalds Qualities
Std. Error
Mean N Std. Deviation Mean
Pair 1 Importance of Speed Of
Service In a Coffee Shop 5.6720 186 1.26703 .09290
Rating McDonalds on the
Following Qualities: Speed Of 5.0484 186 1.64492 .12061
service
Pair 2 Importance of Cleanliness In a
5.9355 186 1.12760 .08268
Coffee Shop
Rating McDonalds on the
Following Qualities: 3.7849 186 1.67558 .12286
Cleanliness
Pair 3 Importance of Friendliness In
a Coffee Shop 5.3226 186 1.36093 .09979
Rating McDonalds on the
Following Qualities: 3.6989 186 1.50520 .11037
Friendliness
Pair 4 Importance of Quality of Bev.
In a Coffee Shop 6.5215 186 .92536 .06785
Rating McDonalds on the
Following Qualities: Quality 3.8710 186 1.56465 .11473
Pair 5 Importance of Location In a
Coffee Shop 5.8763 186 1.27376 .09340
Rating McDonalds on the
Following Qualities: location 5.3387 186 1.68885 .12383
Pair 6 Importance of Affordability In
a Coffee Shop 5.3548 186 1.45673 .10681
Rating McDonalds on the
Following Qualities: 5.5376 186 1.54611 .11337
Affordability
Pair 7 Importance of Drive-Thru In a
Coffee Shop 3.9409 186 1.95123 .14307
Rating McDonalds on the
Following Qualities: Drive 5.1828 186 1.82147 .13356
Thru
Pair 8 Importance of Variety In a
Coffee Shop 4.6720 186 1.54044 .11295
Rating McDonalds on the
4.4516 186 1.51044 .11075
Following Qualities: Variety
Pair 9 Importance of Atmosphere In
a Coffee Shop 5.3730 185 1.32547 .09745
Rating McDonalds on the
Following Qualities: 3.7838 185 1.49519 .10993
Atmosphere
35

Jake Soderberg
University of St. Thomas
Marketing Research MKTG 340
McDonald’s Management Decision Problem
Spring 2008
Paired Samples Test
Paired Differences Sig. (2-
Std. 95% Confidence Std. tailed)
Std. Error t Deviatio Std. Error
Mean Deviation Mean Mean n Mean
Lower Upper Lower Upper Lower Upper Lower Upper
Pair Importance of Speed
1 Of Service In a Coffee
Shop - Rating
.62366 2.02905 .14878 .33014 .91717 4.192 185 .000
McDonalds on the
Following Qualities:
Speed Of service
Pair Importance of
2 Cleanliness In a
Coffee Shop - Rating
2.15054 2.10249 .15416 1.84640 2.45468 13.950 185 .000
McDonalds on the
Following Qualities:
Cleanliness
Pair Importance of
3 Friendliness In a
Coffee Shop - Rating
1.62366 2.05289 .15053 1.32669 1.92062 10.787 185 .000
McDonalds on the
Following Qualities:
Friendliness
Pair Importance of Quality
4 of Bev. In a Coffee
Shop - Rating
2.65054 1.81924 .13339 2.38737 2.91371 19.870 185 .000
McDonalds on the
Following Qualities:
Quality
Pair Importance of
5 Location In a Coffee
Shop - Rating
.53763 1.98131 .14528 .25102 .82425 3.701 185 .000
McDonalds on the
Following Qualities:
location
Pair Importance of
6 Affordability In a
Coffee Shop - Rating
-.18280 1.94490 .14261 -.46414 .09855 -1.282 185 .202
McDonalds on the
Following Qualities:
Affordability
Pair Importance of Drive-
7 Thru In a Coffee Shop
- Rating McDonalds -1.24194 2.47377 .18139 -1.59979 -.88409 -6.847 185 .000
on the Following
Qualities: Drive Thru
36

Jake Soderberg
University of St. Thomas
Marketing Research MKTG 340
McDonald’s Management Decision Problem
Spring 2008
Pair Importance of Variety
8 In a Coffee Shop -
Rating McDonalds on .22043 2.14597 .15735 -.09000 .53086 1.401 185 .163
the Following
Qualities: Variety
Pair Importance of
9 Atmosphere In a
Coffee Shop - Rating
1.58919 1.97371 .14511 1.30290 1.87548 10.952 184 .000
McDonalds on the
Following Qualities:
Atmosphere
37

Jake Soderberg
University of St. Thomas
Marketing Research MKTG 340
McDonald’s Management Decision Problem
Spring 2008
Appendix H
LinkedIn and Twitter
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/jakesoderberg
Twitter Profile: http://twitter.com/jakesoderberg (@jakesoderberg)
38