Chapter 4 DATA ANALYSIS and RESULT
4.3 Brand Equity Measurement Over 8 Brands
In this test, 8 brands were used as categorical independent variables and 15 attributes were used as dependent variables. From the table below, significant differences were found among the 8 brands on the 15 attributes (Wilks’ λ =0.69, F = 2.83, p < .0001.) Usually, the multivariate Wilks' λ is quite strong at 0.35. Univariate analyses of variance (ANOVAs) for each dependent variable were also conducted as follow-up tests to the MANOVA. The result revealed that the ANOVA of all the 15 attributes except Q9_9 and Q9_13 were significant
Table 4.13 MANOVA results of overall attributes and each attribute
Attribute F value P value Result
Overall 2.83 <.0001 * Significant
Q9_1. Even when other brands are cheaper, I am still willing to buy this brand.
2.4 0.0194 * Significant
Q9_2. I will recommend this brand to others. 5 <.0001 * Significant Q9_3. I will buy this brand next time when I need to
buy skincare products.
3.8 0.0005 * Significant
Q9_4. Compared with other brands, this brand delivers better quality.
2.48 0.0159 * Significant
Q9_5. I think this brand value innovation more than other brands.
3.61 0.0008 * Significant
Q9_6. I think this brand is in its leadership position in the market.
11.42 <.0001 * Significant
Q9_7. This brand has consistent quality. 3.46 0.0012 * Significant Q9_8. I think this brand is worth more than what I
paid for.
2.45 0.0173 * Significant
Q9_9. Compared with other brands, this brand makes me feel a greater sense of value.
1.57 0.1403 NS
Q9_10. It is easier for me to have a clear image toward the consumer of this brand.
4.08 0.0002 * Significant
Q9_11. I trust the brand company. 4.33 0.0001 * Significant Q9_12. I think the skincare product of this brand is
significantly different from others.。
2.77 0.0074 * Significant
Q9_13. This brand is attractive to me. 1.15 0.3287 NS Q9_14. I’ve heard about this brand. 1.73 0.0982 * Significant Q9_15. When it comes to skincare products, I can
speak out the name of this brand specifically.
2.97 0.0044 * Significant
Pair-wise comparison (using α=0.1)
Pair-wise test is also used to among 8 brands over the 15 attributes.
Q9_1. Even when other brands are cheaper than this brand, I’m still willing to buy this brand.
From the table below, we can separate 8 brands into 4 groups according to the comparative evaluations on this attribute. SHISEIDO and KIEHL’S can be regarded as the first leading group while ESTEE LAUDER, LANCOME, and BIOTHERM as the second leading group. Clinique and SKII are in the third group, while SISLEY is in the weakest group.
Table 4.14 Pair-wise comparison-Q9_1
Q9_2. I will recommend this brand to others.
From the table below, we can divide 8 brands into 5 groups. SHISEIDO is in the first leading group followed by KIEHL’S. ESTEE LAUDER and LANCOME are in the third leading group while SKII and BIOTHERM are in the fourth group. Lastly,
CLINIQUE and SISLEY are in the weakest group.
Brands Mean SHISEIDO ESTEE
LAUDER LANCOME SKII CLINIQUE SISLEY BIOTHERM KIEHL'S SHISEIDO 3.18 - 0.3005 0.3809 0.0799 0.0946 0.0009 0.1303 0.9365
ESTEE
LAUDER 3.05 0.3005 - 0.8734 0.4734 0.5239 0.0211 0.6326 0.2648 LANCOME 3.07 0.3809 0.8734 - 0.3809 0.4257 0.0137 0.5239 0.3392 SKII 2.96 0.0799 * 0.4734 0.3809 - 0.9365 0.1113 0.8111 0.0672 * CLINIQUE 2.97 0.0946 * 0.5239 0.4257 0.9365 - 0.0946 0.8734 0.0799 * SISLEY 2.76 0.0009 * 0.0211 * 0.0137 * 0.1113 0.0946 * - 0.0672 * 0.0006 * BIOTHERM 2.99 0.1303 0.6326 0.5239 0.8111 0.8734 0.0672 - 0.1113
KIEHL'S 3.19 0.9365 0.2648 0.3392 0.0672 0.0799 0.0006 0.1113 -
Table 4.15 Pair-wise comparison-Q9_2
Q9_3. I will buy this brand next time when I need to buy skincare products
From the table below, we can separate 8 brands into 4 groups. SHISEIDO and KIEHL’S are the first leading group, while ESTEE LAUDER and LANCOME are in the second leading group. Clinique and BIOTHERM are in the third group. Lastly, SKII and SISLEY are in the weakest group.Table 4.16 Pair-wise comparison-Q9_3
Q9_4. Compared with other brands, this brand delivers better quality.
From the table below, we can separate 8 brands into 4 groups. SHISEIDO is in the
Brands Mean SHISEIDO ESTEE
LAUDER LANCOME SKII CLINIQUE SISLEY BIOTHERM KIEHL'S SHISEIDO 3.5 - 0.0645 0.0367 0.001 0.0001 <.0001 0.0081 0.1477
LAUDER LANCOME SKII CLINIQUE SISLEY BIOTHERM KIEHL'S SHISEIDO 3.35 - 0.0974 0.2136 0.0004 0.013 <.0001 0.0081 0.4554
first leading group, while ESTEE LAUDER, LANCOME and KIEHL’S are the second leading group. SKII and BIOTHERM are the third group. Lastly, Clinique and SISLEY are the weakest group.
Table 4.17 Pair-wise comparison-Q9_4
Brands Mean SHISEIDO ESTEE
LAUDER LANCOME SKII CLINIQUE SISLEY BIOTHERM KIEHL'S SHISEIDO 3.36 - 0.2577 0.2577 0.0733 0.0007 0.0019 0.0302 0.1572
Q9_5. I think this brand value innovation more than other brands.
From the table below, we can separate 8 brands into 4 groups. ESTEE LAUDER and LANCOME are the leading group, followed by SHISEIDO, SKII, BIOTHERM and KIEHL’S. CLINIQUE is in the third group. Finally, SISLEY is the weakest brand.
Table 4.18 Pair-wise comparison-Q9_5
Brands Mean SHISEIDO ESTEE
LAUDER LANCOME SKII CLINIQUE SISLEY BIOTHERM KIEHL'S SHISEIDO 3.14 - 0.0945 * 0.1634 0.8525 0.3527 0.0094 0.6421 0.9259
Q9_6. I think this brand is in its leadership position in the market.
From the table below, we can separate 8 brands into 4 groups. SHISEIDO is in the first leading group, while ESTEE LAUDER, LANCOME and SKII are the second leading group. KIEHL’S is in the third group followed by CLINIQUE, SISLEY, and BIOTHERM.
Table 4.19 Pair-wise comparison-Q9_6
Q9_7. This brand has consistent quality.
From the table below, we can divide 8 brands into 5 groups. SHISEIDO is in the first leading group, followed by KIEHL’S. ESTEE LAUDER and LANCOME are the third leading group, while SKII, Clinique and BIOTHERM are the fourth group. Lastly, SISLEY is in the weakest group.
Table 4.20 Pair-wise comparison-Q9_7
Brands Mean SHISEIDO ESTEE
LAUDER LANCOME SKII CLINIQUE SISLEY BIOTHERM KIEHL'S SHISEIDO 3.74 - 0.083 0.0194 0.0303 <.0001 <.0001 <.0001 <.0001
Brands Mean SHISEIDO ESTEE
LAUDER LANCOME SKII CLINIQUE SISLEY BIOTHERM KIEHL'S SHISEIDO 3.53 - 0.0169 0.0169 0.0023 0.0002 <.0001 0.0042 0.0851
Q9_8. I think this brand is worth more than what I paid for.
From the table below, we can separate 8 brands into 3 groups. SHISEIDO, LANCOME, BIOTHERM and KIEHL’S are in the first leading group, while ESTEE LAUDER and CLINIQUE are the second leading group. SKII and SISLEY are in the weakest group.
Table 4.21 Pair-wise comparison-Q9_8
Brands Mean SHISEIDO ESTEE
LAUDER LANCOME SKII CLINIQUE SISLEY BIOTHERM KIEHL'S SHISEIDO 3.09 - 0.4034 1 0.0205 0.3533 0.0055 0.6425 0.8527
ESTEE
LAUDER 3 0.4034 - 0.4034 0.1377 0.926 0.0515 0.7103 0.3072 LANCOME 3.09 1 0.4034 - 0.0205 0.3533 0.0055 0.6425 0.8527 SKII 2.84 0.0205 * 0.1377 0.0205 * - 0.1639 0.6425 0.0636 * 0.0123 * CLINIQUE 2.99 0.3533 0.926 0.3533 0.1639 - 0.0636 0.6425 0.2654
SISLEY 2.79 0.0055 * 0.0515 * 0.0055 * 0.6425 0.0636 * - 0.0205 * 0.003 * BIOTHERM 3.04 0.6425 0.7103 0.6425 0.0636 0.6425 0.0205 - 0.5158
KIEHL'S 3.11 0.8527 0.3072 0.8527 0.0123 0.2654 0.003 0.5158 -
Q9_9. Compared with other brands, this brand makes me feel a greater sense of value.
From the previous MANVONA test, we know the difference in evaluations on this attribute among the 8 brands is not statistically significant. From the table below, we can find the similar result. Only CINIQUE has comparative lower evaluations on this
attribute.
SISLEY 3.08 <.0001 * 0.0558 * 0.0558 * 0.2135 0.5657 - 0.1512 0.0099 * BIOTHERM 3.23 0.0042 * 0.6321 0.6321 0.8481 0.3889 0.1512 - 0.2508
KIEHL'S 3.35 0.0851 * 0.5028 0.5028 0.1803 0.0446 0.0099 0.2508 -
Table 4.22 Pair-wise comparison-Q9_9
Brands Mean SHISEIDO ESTEE
LAUDER LANCOME SKII CLINIQUE SISLEY BIOTHERM KIEHL'S SHISEIDO 3.22 - 0.858 0.858 0.858 0.0202 0.2832 0.1798 0.5914
Q9_10. It is easier for me to have a clear image toward the consumer of this brand.
From the table below, we can separate 8 brands into 5 groups. SHISEIDO is in the first leading group, while LANCOME and SKII belong the second leading group.
ESTEE LAUDER and KIEHL’S are the third group followed by BIOTHERM.
CLINIQUE and SISLEY are in the weakest group.
Table 4.23 Pair-wise comparison-Q9_10
Brands Mean SHISEIDO ESTEE
LAUDER LANCOME SKII CLINIQUE SISLEY BIOTHERM KIEHL'S SHISEIDO 3.66 - 0.0172 0.0334 0.0886 <.0001 <.0001 0.0017 0.0172
Q9_11. I trust the brand company.
From the table below, we can separate 8 brands into 5 groups. SHISEIDO is in the first leading group, followed by ESTEE LAUDER and KIEHL’S. LANCOME belongs
to the third leading group, while SKII and BIOTHERM are the fourth group. Lastly, CLINIQUE and SISLEY are in the weakest group.
Table 4.24 Pair-wise comparison-Q9_11
Brands Mean SHISEIDO ESTEE
LAUDER LANCOME SKII CLINIQUE SISLEY BIOTHERM KIEHL'S SHISEIDO 3.75 - 0.0233 0.0089 0.0003 <.0001 <.0001 0.0002 0.0233
Q9_12. I think the product of this brand is significantly different from others.
From the table below, we can separate 8 brands into 5 groups. KIEHL’S is in the first leading group, while ESTEE LAUDER and SKII are in the second leading group.
SHISEIDO, LANCOME and BIOTHERM belong to the third group. Lastly, CLINIQUE and SISLEY are in the weakest group.
Table 4.25 Pair-wise comparison-Q9_12
Brands Mean SHISEIDO ESTEE
LAUDER LANCOME SKII CLINIQUE SISLEY BIOTHERM KIEHL'S SHISEIDO 3.15 - 0.4379 0.9313 0.1431 0.3011 0.5463 0.8631 0.0099 *
Q9_13. This brand is attractive to me.
attribute among the 8 brands is not statistically significant. From the table below, we can find the similar result. Only SKII and KIEHL’S have slightly higher evaluations on this attribute.
Table 4.26 Pair-wise comparison-Q9_13
Brands Mean SHISEIDO ESTEE
LAUDER LANCOME SKII CLINIQUE SISLEY BIOTHERM KIEHL'S SHISEIDO 3.16 - 0.9314 0.7307 0.6057 0.1023 0.4387 1 0.4913
Q9_14. I’ve heard about this brand.
From the table below, we can separate 8 brands into 5 groups. SHISEIDO and LANCOME are in the first leading group, followed by ESTEE LAUDER and SKII.
CLINIQUE and BIOTHERM belong to the third group while KIEHL’S is in the fourth group. Lastly, SISLEY is in the weakest group.
Table 4.27 Pair-wise comparison-Q9_14
Brands Mean SHISEIDO ESTEE
LAUDER LANCOME SKII CLINIQUE SISLEY BIOTHERM KIEHL'S SHISEIDO 4.4 - 0.7155 0.9419 0.466 0.1662 0.0088 0.3076 0.0493
Q9_15. When it comes to skincare products, I can speak out the name of this brand specifically.
From the table below, we can separate 8 brands into 4 groups. SHISEIDO is in the first leading group, while ESTEE LAUDER, LANCOME, SKII and BIOTHERM are in the second leading group. CLINIQUE and KIEHL’S belong to the third group. Lastly, SISLEY is in the weakest group.
Table 4.28 Pair-wise comparison-Q9_15
Brands Mean SHISEIDO ESTEE
LAUDER LANCOME SKII CLINIQUE SISLEY BIOTHERM KIEHL'S SHISEIDO 4.33 - 0.1546 0.2001 0.3929 0.0464
The table below summarizes the results generated from ANOVAs above indicating which brands are doing better or worse in each attribute.
Table 4.29 List of leaders and laggards on 15 attributes
Dimension Indicators Attributes Status
Brand Loyalty Price Premium Q9_1
Price premium
Laggard: CLINIQUE(3.02), SISLEY(2.86) Q9_3
Repurchase
Leader: SHISEIDO(3.53), KIEHL’S(3.26) Laggard:SKII(2.92), SISLEY(2.87)
Perceived Perceived Q9_4 Leader: SHISEIDO(3.36)
Quality Quality Better quality Laggard: CLINIQUE(3.0), SISLEY(3.03)
Laggard: CLINIQUE(3.11), SISLEY(3.2)
Q9_13
Attractiveness
Leader: SKII(3.24), KIEHL’S(3.22)
Company Association
Q9_11 Trustful
Leader: SHISEIDO(3.75)
Laggard: CLINIQUE(3.29), SISLEY(3.21) Differentiation Q9_12
Differentiation
Leader: KIEHL’S(3.45)
Laggard: CLINIQUE(3.03), SISLEY(3.08) Brand