Colgate Edited

INTRODUCTION
Consumer decision to purchase the goods Irom the available alternative choice is known as
'consumer purchase decision. The various options oI the consumer may be classiIied into Iive main
types oI decisions. They are what to buy, how much to buy, where to buy, when to buy, how to buy. The
participants in the buying Colgate may be classiIied as the initiator, inIluencer, decider, buyer and users.
The marketing people oI Colgate should initiate the participants in the purchase decision to make the
purchases oI Colgate at diIIerent marketing strategies. There are number oI reasons why the study oI
consumer behavior developed as separate discipline. Marketers had long noted that consumer did not
always act or react, as marketing theory would suggest. The size oI the consumer market in the country
was vast and constantly expanding: 28 millions oI dollars were being spent on goods and services by
millions oI people. Consumer preIerences were changing and becoming highly diversiIied.
Colgate is undoubtIully one oI leading brand in oral industry. Around the world, Colgate has
consistently increased gross margin while at the same time reducing costs in order to Iund growth
initiatives, including new product development and increases in marketing spending. These, in turn,
have generated greater proIitability and customer preIerence. Colgate managers around the world are
dedicated to increasing market shares in all our core businesses. Colgate has achieved global leadership
in toothpaste, hand dishwashing liquid, liquid hand soap and specialty pet Iood.
COMPANY PROFILE
In a society that cares about appearances consumers continually look Ior new, innovative oral
care products to provide an extra sparkle to their smiles. Oral care companies are marketing their
products to diIIerent consumer segments in order to capture their share in the growing segment market.
Today`s consumers demand numerous beneIits Irom their tooth pastes and manuIacturers are responding
accordingly. The Personal Care and Household Cleaning Products Industry includes Companies that
make Personal Care and Hygiene Care Products such as cosmetics, perIumes and toiletries as well as
household cleaning products. Some leading companies in Personal Care and Household care are Procter
& Gamble, Unilever, Colgate Palmolive, Johnson & Johnson Gillette and Reckitt & Benckiser etc. Key
Market Players Colgate-Palmolive .Colgate-Palmolive headquartered in New York City is the biggest
seller oI toothpaste.
Colgate-Palmolive is Rs 1,300 crore company started in year 1937.In Rs 2,400 crore domestic
market it enjoys 50 oI market share. It spread across 4.5 million retails outlets out oI which 1.5 million
are direct outlets. The Company is having Iour wholly owned subsidiaries namely Colgate-Palmolive
(Nepal), MultiMate Leasing & Finance and Jigs Investments and Passion Trading & Investment
Company. In November 2007, it acquired a 75 equity interest in Advanced Oral Care Products,
ProIessional Oral Care Products and SS Oral Hygiene Products, the company is the Iastest growing and
one oI the oldest company catering to the personal care products. The company is regularly coming up
with new products and has been a consistent Iinancial perIormer
Products
Oral care-Under this segment the company oIIers product like toothpastes, toothbrush, tooth powder &
tooth whitening products. Personal care -In this segment it oIIer products skin care, hair care, body
wash, & shaving creams. Household care-Under this segment it has launched brand AXIOM-a dish
washing paste. It has also introduced new products namely Colgate dental Iloss, ORAGARD-B a mouth
ulcer cream etc.
It is certiIied by IDA (Indian Dental Association) and Guinness Book oI World Records.

Milestone
In 2003 Colgate was ranked as India`s Most Trusted Brand across all categories by Brand Equity`s Most
Trusted Brand Survey Ior Iour consecutive years Irom 2003 to 2007.
Colgate was also rated as the number one brand by the A&M MODE Annual Survey Ior India`s Top
Brands Ior eight out oI nine years during the period 1992 to 2001.
ey players:
HUL and Dabur are the major players in oral care industry.

METHODOLOGY:

Research:
'Research is careIul inquiry or examination to discover new inIormation and relationship and to
expand and to veriIy existing knowledge.
Types oI research:
Exploratory
Descriptive
Casual
The Research Design Iollowed here is 'Casual Research as my intention is Iind the Iactors eIIecting
and Iind the relationship between more than 2 variables.

$ources of data:
Primary: The primary data is we collect the details Ior the Iirst time Irom the market and is also
used Ior the Iirst time in the research.
Secondary: Secondary data are those data which are already collected by someone Ior some
purpose and are available Ior the present study.
Both Primary and secondary data are collected, since I collected data Irom people through questionnaire
(primary) and data which is available readily through company record and some magazines (secondary).

$caling:
Likert Scale is used over here to Iind out the customers preIerence towards Colgate. It consists:
Strongly agree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly disagree

"uestionnaire:

Customers preference for Colgate

Name:

Gender:

Age:

QualiIication:

SLrongly
dlsagree
ulsagree nelLher
agree
nor
dlsagree
Agree SLrongly
agree
l prefer ColgaLe for lLs quallLy 1 2 3 4 3
l overcame denLal lnfecLlons by uslng ColgaLe 1 2 3 4 3
l prefer ColgaLe as lL lnvolves ma[or
lngredlenLs LhaL makes LeeLh free from germs

1

2

3

4

3
lL creaLes more freshness and lL lasLs for a long
perlod

1

2

3

4

3
l belleve LhaL ColgaLe ls guaranLeed ln lLs
quallLy
1 2 3 4 3
1he prlce of ColgaLe ls reasonable
1

2

3

4

3
l would llke Lo repurchase Lhe producL as lL ls
low prlced and affordable

1

2

3

4

3
Any person lrrespecLlve of sLaLus can purchase
ColgaLe

1

2

3

4

3
A ColgaLe ls promoLed Lhrough dlfferenL klnds
of medla

1

2

3

4

3
1he adverLlsemenL plays a ma[or role Lo prefer
ColgaLe

1

2

3

4

3
lL ls uslng all Lhe sources of adverLlslng
1

2

3

4

3
romoLlon ls done such LhaL lL shows ColgaLe
ls Lhe besL one among oLher pasLes

1

2

3

4

3
l flnd Lhe package of ColgaLe ls aLLracLlve
1

2

3

4

3
1he package makes me clear Lo know Lhe
varleLy and lngredlenLs used ln lL

1

2

3

4

3
1he packlng ls lnLacL and Lhere ls no chance of
leakage
1 2 3 4 3
acklng helps ColgaLe Lo lasL for long perlod
aL leasL Llll explry daLe
1 2 3 4 3
l prefer ColgaLe over oLher brands
1

2

3

4

3
1he brand makes me prefer ColgaLe
1

2

3

4

3

The above questionnaire consists oI 20 items and I collected samples Irom 35 respondents.
Respondents: 35
Male: 28
Female: 7

Objectives oI study:
O To Iind out the customers preIerence towards Colgate.
O To Iind the Iactors which inIluence the purchase power oI customers.
O To Iind out which group oI people mostly preIers Colgate.
O To Iind the Ieatures which add value Ior the proIit oI the product.

Hypothesis:

Null Hypothesis: H0: There is no signiIicant diIIerence between the customer preIerence towards
Colgate.
Alternate Hypothesis: H1: There is signiIicant diIIerence between the customer preIerence towards
Colgate.

Quality:
H0: There is no signiIicant relationship between the Customer PreIerence and quality.
H1: There is signiIicant relationship between the Customer PreIerence and income level.
AIIordability:
H0: There is no signiIicant relationship between the Customer PreIerence and aIIordability.
H1: There is signiIicant relationship between the Customer PreIerence and aIIordability.
Promotion:
H0: There is no signiIicant relationship between the Customer preIerence and promotion.
H1: There is signiIicant relationship between the Customer preIerence and promotion.
Availability:
H0: There is no signiIicant relationship between the Customer preIerence and availability.
H1: There is signiIicant relationship between the Customer preIerence and availability.
Package:
H0: There is no signiIicant relationship between the Customer preIerence and package.
H1: There is signiIicant relationship between the Customer preIerence and package.

DATA ANALY$I$:
Reliability:
This problem relates to whether research results can be applied to a wider group than
those who took part in a study. In other words, would similar results be obtained iI another group
containing diIIerent respondents or a diIIerent set oI data points were used. Cronbach`s alpha is the
measure oI internal consistency reliability. Cronbach`s alpha is the average value oI the reliability
coeIIicients one would obtained Ior all possible combinations oI items when split into two halI-tests.
The closer Cronbach`s alpha coeIIicient is to 1.0 the greater the internal consistency oI the items in the
scale.

"uality:

$cale: All Variables

Case Processing $ummary

N
Cases Valid 35 100.0
Exclude
d(a)
0 .0
Total 35 100.0

A List wise deletion based on all variables in the procedure.

Reliability $tatistics

Cronbach's
Alpha
N oI
Items
.764 5

Item-Total $tatistics

Scale Mean
iI Item
Deleted
Scale
Variance iI
Item
Deleted
Corrected
Item-Total
Correlation
Cronbach's
Alpha iI
Item
Deleted
iv1 9.4571 8.844 .415 .760
iv1 8.7714 8.829 .397 .767
iv1 8.9714 7.440 .721 .655
iv1 8.9429 7.585 .647 .680
iv1 9.0000 7.882 .511 .731

Cronbach`s Alpha is greater than 0.6, this shows that the variable is reliable.

Affordability:



N
Exclude
d(a)
0 .0
Total 35 100.0
a List wise deletion based on all variables in the procedure.


Cronbach's
Alpha
N oI
Items
.789 3


Scale Mean
iI Item
Deleted
Scale
Variance iI
Item
Deleted
Corrected
Item-Total
Correlation
Cronbach's
Alpha iI
Item
Deleted
iv2 4.3714 2.534 .617 .727
iv2 4.0857 2.257 .667 .675
iv2 4.4000 2.776 .614 .734

Cronbach`s Alpha is greater than 0.6,the shows that the variable is reliable.

Promotion:



N
Exclude
d(a)
0 .0
Total 35 100.0


Cronbach's
Alpha
N oI
Items
.559 4


Scale Mean
iI Item
Deleted
Scale
Variance iI
Item
Deleted
Corrected
Item-Total
Correlation
Cronbach's
Alpha iI
Item
Deleted
iv3 7.0286 3.852 .340 .493
iv3 6.8571 3.479 .363 .470
iv3 6.7429 3.432 .382 .455
iv3 6.5429 3.197 .304 .532
Cronbach`s alpha is less than 0.6,but approximately equal to 0.6.ThereIore it can be considered as
reliable.

Availability:


N
Exclude
d(a)
0 .0
Total 35 100.0


Cronbach's Alpha N oI Items
.664 5


Scale Mean
iI Item
Deleted
Scale
Variance iI
Item
Deleted
Corrected
Item-Total
Correlation
Cronbach's
Alpha iI
Item
Deleted
iv4 8.6571 7.114 .357 .645
iv4 8.3143 6.163 .637 .500
iv4 8.4286 6.546 .568 .538
iv4 8.6286 8.182 .371 .634
iv4 8.6000 8.306 .202 .705
Package:

$cale: All Varialbles


N
Exclude
d(a)
0 .0
Total 35 100.0


.660 4


Scale Mean
iI Item
Deleted
Scale
Variance iI
Item
Deleted
Corrected
Item-Total
Correlation
Cronbach's
Alpha iI
Item
Deleted
iv5 6.4571 5.432 .209 .741
iv5 6.7429 4.903 .513 .559
iv5 6.8000 3.871 .625 .453
iv5 6.8286 4.205 .473 .570

Cronbach`s alpha is greater than 0.6,this shows that the variable is reliable.

Preference

$cale: ALL VARIABLE$

N
Exclude
d(a)
0 .0
Total 35 100.0
a Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure.

.780 2

Scale Mean
iI Item
Deleted
Scale
Variance iI
Item
Deleted
Corrected
Item-Total
Correlation
Cronbach's
Alpha iI
Item
Deleted
dv 2.0000 .941 .650 .017
dv 2.2286 1.358 .650 .032

Cronbach`s alpha is greater than 0.6,this shows that the variable is reliable.

FREQUENCY:

The graph (1) is leIt skewed, thereIore it is negatively distributed.

The above graph (2) is neither leIt skewed nor right skewed. ThereIore it is normally distributed.
quaIity
5.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 1.00
F
r
e
q
u
e
n
c
y
10
8
6
4
2
0
quaIity
Mean =2.26
Std. Dev. =0.692
N =35
promotion
4.00 3.00 2.00 1.00
F
r
e
q
u
e
n
c
y
10
8
6
4
2
0
promotion
Mean
Std. Dev
N =

The above graph (3) is neither leIt skewed nor right skewed. ThereIore it is normally distributed.
The graph (4) is leIt skewed, thereIore it is negatively distributed and the responses are negative.

The above graph (5) is right skewed and it is positively distributed. The responses are positive.
The above graph (6) is neither leIt nor right skewed. ThereIore it is normally distributed.

preference
6.00 5.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 0.00
F
r
e
q
u
e
n
c
y
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
preference
Mean =2.11
Std. Dev. =0.971
N =35
affortabIe
4.00 3.00 2.00 1.00
F
r
e
q
u
e
n
c
y
10
8
6
4
2
0
affortabIe
S
avaiIabiIity
3.50 3.00 2.50 2.00 1.50 1.00 0.50
F
r
e
q
u
e
n
c
y
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
avaiIabiIity
Mean =2.13
Std. Dev. =0.647
N =35
package
6.00 5.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 0.00
F
r
e
q
u
e
n
c
y
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
package
St

CHI $"UARE:

A test that uses the chi-square statistic to test the Iit between a theoretical Irequency distribution and a
Irequency distribution oI observed data Ior which each observation may Iall into one oI several classes.


Cases
Valid Missing Total
N Percent N Percent N Percent
demographic
*
qualityrecode
16 45.7 19 54.3 35 100.0
agerecode *
qualityrecode
16 45.7 19 54.3 35 100.0

Gender ` quality

Crosstab
Count

qualityrecode Total
High Low
Gender 1.00 10 1 11
2.00 5 0 5
Total 15 1 16
Based on the above 2*2 matrix, we observe that there is high preIerence by male customers based upon
the quality.

Chi-$quare Tests

Value dI
Asymp.
Sig. (2-
sided)
Exact
Sig. (2-
sided)
Exact
Sig. (1-
sided)
Pearson Chi-
Square
.485(b) 1 .486
Continuity
Correction(a)
.000 1 1.000
Likelihood Ratio .779 1 .377
Fisher's Exact
Test
1.000 .688
Linear-by-Linear
Association
.455 1 .500
N oI Valid Cases 16

age ` quality
Crosstab
Count

Quality recode Total
High Low
Age 1.00 12 0 12
2.00 3 1 4
Total 15 1 16
Based on the above 2*2 matrix, we observe that there is high preIerence by customers belonging to age
group (20-24)based upon the quality.

Crosstabs

Cases
Valid Missing Total
gender * aIIordability 22 62.9 13 37.1 35 100.0
age * aIIordability 22 62.9 13 37.1 35 100.0

Gender ` affordability
Crosstab
Count

aIIordability Total
High Low
gender 1 13 1 14
2 8 0 8
Total 21 1 22
the aIIordability.

Chi-$quare Tests

Value dI Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)
Exact Sig (2-
sided) Exact Sig. (1-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square .599(b) 1 .439
Continuity
Correction(a)
.000 1 1.000
Likelihood Ratio .931 1 .335
Fisher's Exact Test 1.000 .636
Linear-by-Linear
Association
.571 1 .450
N oI Valid Cases 22
a. Computed only Ior a 2x2 table
b. 2 cells (50.0) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .36.

age ` affordability

Crosstab
Count

aIIorecode Total
High Low
age 1 15 0 15
2 5 1 6
3 1 0 1
Total 21 1 22
Based on the above 3*2 matrix, we observe that there is high preIerence oI customers belonging to age
group (20-24) based upon the quality.

Chi-$quare Tests

Pearson Chi-
Square
2.794(a) 2 .247
Likelihood Ratio 2.729 2 .255
Linear-by-Linear
Association
1.256 1 .262
N oI Valid Cases
22

Crosstabs

Cases
Valid Missing Total
gender *
promotion
14 40.0 21 60.0 35 100.0
age *
promotion
14 40.0 21 60.0 35 100.0

Gender ` promotion
Crosstab
Count

promorecod
e Total
High
gender 1 10 10
2 4 4
Total 14 14
the promotion.
Chi-$quare Tests

Value
Pearson Chi-
Square
.(a)
N oI Valid Cases 14
a. No statistics are computed because promorecode is a constant.

age ` promotion

Cases
Valid Missing Total
gender * availability
18 51.4 17 48.6 35 100.0
age * availability 18 51.4 17 48.6 35 100.0

Crosstab

Count
promorecode Total
High
Age 1 10 10
2 3 3
3 1 1
Total 14 14
Based on the above 3*2 matrix, we observe that there is high preIerence the customers belonging to age
group(20-24) based upon the quality.

Gender ` availability
Crosstab

Count

availrecod
e Total
High
Gender 1 10 10
2 8 8
Total 18 18

the availability.

Chi-$quare Tests

Value
Pearson Chi-
Square
.(a)
N oI Valid Cases
18
a. No statistics are computed because availrecode is a constant.

age ` availability
Crosstab
Count

availrecod
e Total
High
age 1 13 13
2 4 4
3 1 1
Total 18 18
Based on the above 3*2 matrix, we observe that there ishigh preIerence by customers belonging to age
group(20-24) based upon the availability.

Chi-$quare Tests

Value
Pearson Chi-Square .(a)
N oI Valid Cases 18
a. No statistics are computed because availrecode is a constant.
Crosstabs

Cases
Valid Missing Total
gender* package
26 74.3 9 25.7 35 100.0
age * package 26 74.3 9 25.7 35 100.0

Gender ` package
Crosstab
Count

packarecode Total
High Low 1.00
gender 1 14 2 16
2 10 0 10
Total 24 2 26
the package.
Chi-$quare Tests

Value dI
Asymp. Sig.
(2-sided)
Exact Sig. (2-
sided) Exact Sig. (1-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 1.354(b) 1 .245
Continuity
Correction(a)
.166 1 .684
Fisher's Exact Test .508 .369
Linear-by-Linear
Association
1.302 1 .254
N oI Valid Cases 26

Age ` package
Crosstab
Count

packarecode Total
High Low 1.00
age 1 17 2 19
2 6 0 6
3 1 0 1
Total 24 2 26
group(20-24) based upon the package.

Chi-$quare Tests

Pearson Chi-Square .798(a) 2 .671
Linear-by-Linear
Association
.680 1 .409
N oI Valid Cases
26
a. 4 cells (66.7) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .08.

Crosstabs

Cases
Valid Missing Total
gender * preIerence
26 74.3 9 25.7 35 100.0
age * preIerence 26 74.3 9 25.7 35 100.0

Gender ` preference
Crosstab

Count

preIerecode Total
High Low 1.00
gender 1 14 2 16
2 10 0 10
Total 24 2 26

the preIerence.
Chi-$quare Tests

Value dI
Asymp.
Sig. (2-
sided)
Exact
Sig. (2-
sided)
Exact
Sig. (1-
sided)
Pearson Chi-
Square
1.354(b) 1 .245
Continuity
Correction(a)
.166 1 .684
Fisher's Exact
Test
.508 .369
Linear-by-Linear
Association
1.302 1 .254
N oI Valid Cases 26

Age ` preference
Crosstab

Count

preIerecode Total
High Low 1.00
age 1 17 2 19
2 6 0 6
3 1 0 1
Total 24 2 26

group (20-24) based upon the preIerence.

Chi-$quare Tests

Pearson Chi-
Square
.798(a) 2 .671
Linear-by-Linear
Association
.680 1 .409
N oI Valid Cases
26
a. 4 cells (66.7) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .08.

T-TE$T:
A statistical test involving means oI normal populations with unknown standard deviations;
small samples are used, based on a variable 9 equal to the diIIerence between the mean oI the sample and
the mean oI the population divided by a result obtained by dividing the standard deviation oI the sample
by the square root oI the number oI individuals in the sample.
Null Hypothesis:
Customer preIerence Ior Colgate:
H0: There is no signiIicant diIIerence between gender and customer preIerence.
H1: There exists signiIicant diIIerence between gender and customer preIerence.
Quality:
H0: There is no signiIicant diIIerence between gender and quality.
H1: There exists signiIicant diIIerence between gender and quality.
AIIordability:
H0: There is no signiIicant diIIerence between gender and aIIordability.
H1: There exists signiIicant diIIerence between gender and aIIordability.
Promotion:
H0: There is no signiIicant diIIerence between gender and promotion.
H1: There exists signiIicant diIIerence between gender and promotion.
Availability:
H0: There is no signiIicant diIIerence between gender and availability.
H1: There exists signiIicant diIIerence between gender and. availability.
Package:
H0: There is no signiIicant diIIerence between gender and package.
H1: There exists signiIicant diIIerence between gender and package.
Group $tatistics
demographic N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean
quality 1 22 2.2727 .79173 .16880
2 13 2.2308 .50890 .14114
aIIortable 1 22 2.1667 .71824 .15313
2 13 2.1026 .84311 .23384
promotion 1 22 2.2159 .58906 .12559
2 13 2.3462 .58219 .16147
availabilit
y
1
22 2.2364 .63736 .13589
2 13 1.9538 .64886 .17996
package 1 22 2.2045 1.08736 .23183
2 13 1.9615 .74893 .20772
preIerence 1 22 2.2045 1.08736 .23183
2 13 1.9615 .74893 .20772

Independent $amples Test

Levene's Test Ior
Equality oI
Variances t-test Ior Equality oI Means
F Sig. t dI
Sig. (2-
tailed)
Mean
DiIIeren
ce
Std.
Error
DiIIeren
ce
95 ConIidence
Interval oI the
DiIIerence
Lower Upper Lower Upper Lower Upper Lower Upper Lower
quality Equal
variances
assumed
2.109 .156 .171 33 .865 .04196 .24564
-
.45781
.54172
Equal
variances
not assumed
.191 32.677 .850 .04196 .22003
-
.40587
.48978
aIIortab
le
Equal
variances
assumed
.726 .400 .239 33 .812 .06410 .26797
-
.48108
.60929
Equal
variances
not assumed
.229 22.169 .821 .06410 .27951
-
.51532
.64352
promoti
on
Equal
variances
assumed
.008 .931 -.635 33 .530 -.13024 .20520
-
.54772
.28723
Equal
variances
not assumed
-.637 25.564 .530 -.13024 .20456
-
.55107
.29058
availabi
lity
Equal
variances
assumed
.035 .854 1.259 33 .217 .28252 .22444
-
.17410
.73914
Equal
variances
not assumed
1.253 24.950 .222 .28252 .22550
-
.18196
.74700
package Equal
variances
assumed
2.507 .123 .710 33 .482 .24301 .34211
-
.45302
.93903
Equal
variances
not assumed
.781 32.075 .441 .24301 .31127
-
.39097
.87699
preIere
nce
Equal
variances
assumed
2.507 .123 .710 33 .482 .24301 .34211
-
.45302
.93903
Equal
variances
not assumed
.781 32.075 .441 .24301 .31127
-
.39097
.87699

The t-test here gives the signiIicance between the gender oI the person and the diIIerent variables. From
the above table we see that the values are not signiIicant and thereIore gender does not play a role in the
preIerence oI customer. ThereIore the null hypothesis is accepted.

ANOVA (Analysis oI variance):
A statistical technique Ior examining the diIIerences among means Ior two or more populations.
F Statisticmean oI regression/mean square oI residual.
Descriptives

N Mean
Std.
Deviatio
n
Std.
Error
95 ConIidence
Interval Ior Mean Minimum Maximum

Lower
Bound
Upper
Bound
Lower
Bound
Upper
Bound
Lower
Bound
Upper
Bound Lower Bound Upper Bound
quality 1.0
0
26
2.207
7
.60526 .11870 1.9632 2.4522 1.00 3.40
2.0
0
7
2.257
1
1.01793 .38474 1.3157 3.1986 1.20 4.20
3.0
0
2
2.900
0
.14142 .10000 1.6294 4.1706 2.80 3.00
Tot
al
35
2.257
1
.69209 .11698 2.0194 2.4949 1.00 4.20
aIIorta
ble
1.0
0
26
2.153
8
.64794 .12707 1.8921 2.4156 1.00 3.67
2.0 7 2.142 1.06904 .40406 1.1542 3.1316 1.00 4.00
0 9
3.0
0
2
2.000
0
1.41421 1.00000 -10.7062 14.7062 1.00 3.00
Tot
al
35
2.142
9
.75531 .12767 1.8834 2.4023 1.00 4.00
promo
tion
1.0
0
26
2.355
8
.50583 .09920 2.1515 2.5601 1.25 3.50
2.0
0
7
2.035
7
.66815 .25254 1.4178 2.6537 1.00 3.00
3.0
0
2
1.875
0
1.23744 .87500 -9.2429 12.9929 1.00 2.75
Tot
al
35
2.264
3
.58140 .09827 2.0646 2.4640 1.00 3.50
availa
bility
1.0
0
26
2.169
2
.56764 .11132 1.9400 2.3985 1.00 3.40
2.0
0
7
2.028
6
.99618 .37652 1.1073 2.9499 1.00 3.40
3.0
0
2
2.000
0
.28284 .20000 -.5412 4.5412 1.80 2.20
Tot
al
35
2.131
4
.64706 .10937 1.9092 2.3537 1.00 3.40
packag
e
1.0
0
26
2.250
0
1.02225 .20048 1.8371 2.6629 1.00 5.00
2.0
0
7
1.714
3
.69864 .26406 1.0682 2.3604 1.00 3.00
3.0
0
2
1.750
0
1.06066 .75000 -7.7797 11.2797 1.00 2.50
Tot
al
35
2.114
3
.97079 .16409 1.7808 2.4478 1.00 5.00
preIere
nce
1.0
0
26
2.250
0
1.02225 .20048 1.8371 2.6629 1.00 5.00
2.0
0
7
1.714
3
.69864 .26406 1.0682 2.3604 1.00 3.00
3.0
0
2
1.750
0
1.06066 .75000 -7.7797 11.2797 1.00 2.50
Tot
al
35
2.114
3
.97079 .16409 1.7808 2.4478 1.00 5.00

ANOVA

Sum oI Squares dI Mean Square F Sig.
quality Between
Groups
.890 2 .445 .925 .407
Within Groups 15.396 32 .481
Total 16.286 34
aIIortable Between
Groups
.044 2 .022 .036 .964
Total 19.397 34
promotion Between
Groups
.886 2 .443 1.337 .277
Total 11.493 34
availabilit Between .146 2 .073 .166 .848
y Groups
Total 14.235 34
package Between
Groups
1.864 2 .932 .988 .383
Total 32.043 34
preIerence Between
Groups
1.864 2 .932 .988 .383
Total 32.043 34

CORRELATION
The correlation between two variables shows the degree that the variables are related. The data are
normally distributed by Pearson coeIIicient oI correlation. The sign oI the correlation coeIIicient
indicates the positive or negative direction.

Quality:
H0: Quality doesn`t have a relation with the customer`s preIerence.
H1: Quality has a relation with the customer`s preIerence.

AIIordability:
H0: AIIordability doesn`t have a relation with the customer`s preIerence.
H1: AIIordability has a relation with the customer`s preIerence.

Promotion:
H0: promotion doesn`t have a relation with the customer`s preIerence.
H1: promotion has a relation with the customer`s preIerence.

Availability:
H0: Availability doesn`t have a relation with the customer`s preIerence..
H1: Availability has a relation with the customer`s preIerence..
Package:

H0: package doesn`t have a relation with the customer`s preIerence.
H1: package has a relation with the customer`s preIerence.

Correlations

quality aIIortable promotion
availabilit
y package preIerence
quality Pearson Correlation 1 .565(**) .312 .487(**) .524(**) .524(**)
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .068 .003 .001 .001
N 35 35 35 35 35 35
aIIortable Pearson Correlation .565(**) 1 .537(**) .634(**) .532(**) .532(**)
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .001 .000 .001 .001
N 35 35 35 35 35 35
promotion Pearson Correlation .312 .537(**) 1 .456(**) .349(*) .349(*)
Sig. (2-tailed) .068 .001 .006 .040 .040
N 35 35 35 35 35 35
availabilit
y
Pearson Correlation .487(**) .634(**) .456(**) 1 .603(**) .603(**)
Sig. (2-tailed) .003 .000 .006 .000 .000
N 35 35 35 35 35 35
package Pearson Correlation .524(**) .532(**) .349(*) .603(**) 1 1.000(**)
Sig. (2-tailed) .001 .001 .040 .000 .000
N 35 35 35 35 35 35
preIerence Pearson Correlation .524(**) .532(**) .349(*) .603(**) 1.000(**) 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .001 .001 .040 .000 .000
N 35 35 35 35 35 35
** Correlation is signiIicant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
* Correlation is signiIicant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

Pearson correlation between quality and customer preIerence is 1.00, and the signiIicance level is 0.000
which is less than 0.05, then the correlation is signiIicant. Quality increases customer preIerence
increases.
Pearson correlation between aIIordability and customer preIerence is 0.565, and the signiIicance level is
0.000 which is less than 0.05, then the correlation is signiIicant. AIIordability increases customer
preIerence.
Pearson correlation between promotion and customer preIerence is 0.312, and the signiIicance level is
0.068 which is greater than 0.05, then the correlation is not signiIicant. Promotion doesn`t increase
customer preIerence.
Pearson correlation between availability and customer preIerence is 0.487, and the signiIicance level is
0.003 which is less than 0.05, then the correlation is signiIicant. Availability increases customer
preIerence increases.
Pearson correlation between package and customer preIerence is 0.524, and the signiIicance level is
0.001 which is less than 0.05, then the correlation is signiIicant. package increases customer preIerence
increases.
REGRE$$ION:
A statistical procedure Ior analyzing associate relationships between a metric dependent variable
and one or more independent variables.

Variables Entered/Removed (b)

Mode
l
Variables
Entered
Variables
Removed Method
1 package,
promotio
n, quality,
availabilit
y,
aIIortable
(a)
. Enter
a. All requested variables entered.
b. Dependent Variable: preIerence

Model $ummary

Mode
l R R Square
Adjusted
R Square
Std. Error
oI the
Estimate
1 1.000(a) 1.000 1.000 .00000

a. Predictors: (Constant), package, promotion, quality, availability, aIIordable

The co-eIIicient oI regression (R) is 1.000
The co-eIIicient oI determination 1.000
Adjusted r square value should be greater than 0.3. ThereIore the relation between independent and
dependent variables is1.000

ANOVA (b)

Mode
l
Sum oI
Squares dI
Mean
Square F Sig.
1 Regressio
n
32.043 5 6.409 . .(a)
Residual .000 29 .000
Total 32.043 34

a Predictors: (Constant), package, promotion, quality, availability, aIIordable
b Dependent Variable: preIerence

Coefficients (a)

Mode
l
Unstandardized
CoeIIicients
Standardized
CoeIIicients t Sig.
B
Std.
Error Beta B
Std.
Error
1 (Constant
)
.000 .000 . .
quality .000 .000 .000 . .
aIIortable .000 .000 .000 . .
promotio
n
.000 .000 .000 . .
availabili
ty
.000 .000 .000 . .
package 1.000 .000 1.000 . .

a. Dependent Variable: preIerence

FACTOR ANALY$I$:

MO and Bartlett's Test

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure oI
Sampling Adequacy.
.820
Bartlett's Test oI
Sphericity
Approx. Chi-
Square
59.844
dI 10
Sig. .000

Communalities

Initial
Extractio
n
quality 1.000 .554
aIIortabl
e
1.000 .725
promotio
n
1.000 .441
availabili
ty
1.000 .690
package 1.000 .609

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

Total Variance Explained

Componen
t
Initial Eigenvalues Extraction Sums oI Squared Loadings
Total
oI
Variance
Cumulative
Total
oI
Variance
Cumulative

1 3.018 60.370 60.370 3.018 60.370 60.370
2 .736 14.730 75.100
3 .521 10.416 85.516
4 .406 8.116 93.632
5 .318 6.368 100.000

Component Matrix(a)

Compon
ent
1
quality .744
aIIortabl
e
.852
promotio
n
.664
availabili
ty
.830
package .780

a.1 components extracted.
The extraction values in the communality is 1.000 and are greater than 0.005 so all my independent
variables have signiIicant impact on dependent variables. ThereIore here when there is increase in
dependent variables there is increase in independent variables.

CONCLU$ION:

The above study gives the idea about the customer preIerence oI Colgate. Most the people are
satisIied with the various Iactors oI Colgate which lead to their preIerence. By the analysis through
various techniques such as regression, correlation, Iactor analysis etc. the relationship between the
variables and impact oI the quality, aIIordability, promotion, availability, package upon the customer
preIerence oI Colgate.

Managerial Implication
Freshness oI Colgate is likely to be improved.
Packing can be modiIied and more attractive.
Flavours oI Colgate should be improved and can be tastier.

Colgate Edited

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Colgate Edited

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

INTRODUCTION

Вам также может понравиться