chuck africa final project - consumer behavior - branding

PRESENTED BY CHUCK AFRICA

LEATHER WORK FORCE*

BRANDING RESEARCH

09 DECEMBER

2013

Consumer Research and Survey on Brand Licensing for Leather Bags

Business Background LWF Company and ObjecRves Target Market The Business of Licensing

Research Design and Methodology

Key Findings

Conclusions / RecommendaRon

Next Steps

Appendices

1

2 3 4 5 6

�

�

�

OUTLINE

THE COMPANY

•  Upstate NY luggage and leather bag company •  Modest success with their own LWF brand •  2014: Launching a new collecRon of

professional leather bags •  Wants to license in a new brand for young

male and female professionals

LWF’s TARGET MARKET

•  Males and Females, 22-‐30 •  JumpstarRng their professional careers •  College graduates or graduate students •  Career-‐oriented, price sensiRve •  Sub-‐segment: InternaRonal students

Working Women

InternaRonal

BACKGROUND: COMPANY

Working Men

THE BUSINESS OF LICENSING BACKGROUND: LICENSING

Brand or Trademark Licensing

Ge$ng a permit for a company (licensee) to use the brand or trademark of another company (licensor), in exchange for a fee (royalty fee)

Examples of Licensing:

RL Big Pony Perfume (by L’Oreal)

Polo Men’s Underwear (by HanesBrands)

Ralph Lauren Sunglasses (by Luxo_ca Group)

Polo / Ralph Lauren Owned by Ralph Lauren Corp.

Tiffany & Co. Brooks Brothers Tory Burch

Tiffany & Co. Sunglasses

Brooks Brothers Eyewear

Tory Burch Sunglasses

Luxo_ca Group (Eyewear Manufacturer)

OBJECTIVES •  To idenRfy strengths, associa4ons and fit of various

brands to be licensed for luggage/bags

•  To explore various segments and percep4ons/posi4ons of brands within the exisRng office bag market

BACKGROUND: BRANDS FOR

LWF

LWF is the licensor, looking for a brand for their new collecRon of professional leather bags •  Chosen based on: availability/openness to license, availability in mass retailers (these brands have no bags

currently in mass retailers), and royalty payments required

UNISEX MALES FEMALES

RESEARCH OUTCOME

Determine the right brand that’s fit for LWF leather bags and can compete against exisRng brands.

RESEARCH DESIGN &

METHODOLOGY

A. SAMPLE

B. QUESTION AREAS

C. ANALYTICAL PLAN

•  Online survey, Minimum of 50 respondents •  Male/Female, 23 to 30, in major ciRes across the U.S. •  Currently in an undergrad or graduate program, or who have

enrolled or completed in the last three years. •  Had/currently has an internship or any work experience •  Composed of both U.S. and internaRonal students

•  A?tudes on Work/Career and Style/Fashion •  Purchase & Usage behavior of Brands and Bags

•  Brand Evalua4on on AFributes

•  Brand-‐Fit for Brands on Professional Bags and Purchase Intent

•  Gender differences in a_tudes and bag usage •  SegmentaRon based on the a_tudes on career and style •  IdenRfy relevance of current brands •  Correspondence Analysis and Perceptual maps for exisRng brands

and consideraRon set (licensed brands) •  Test fit of licensed brand to the professional bag category based

on purchase intent.

*List of quesCons in the Appendix

KEY FINDINGS: TOPLINE

1%

SEX AND AGE

RACIAL BACKGROUND

EDUCATION AND WORK EXPERIENCE

Survey Average

97% have completed an undergraduate degree

66% are graduate students

58% are currently employed or studying & working at the same Rme

90% Have more than 1 year of work experience. 65% have 3 to 10 years.

Survey Average

No. of Years Work Experience

52% are current internaRonal students, with 68% of them living in the US for 1-‐2 years.

Survey respondents (n=71) come from the same target market as LWF.

46%

54%

1%

36%

24%

27%

11% 10%

16%

39%

26%

10%

KEY FINDINGS:

VALS

Respondents scored highly on the following aoributes: •  Career-‐orientaRon

(4.14)

•  PracRcality (3.94)

•  OrganizaRon(3.89)

KEY FINDINGS:

VALS

Aoributes which are similar/correlated can be classified using Factor Analysis using k-‐means 3-‐cluster. The analysis, aqer varimax rotaRon, showed three main aFributes groups.

CharacterisRcs D1 D2 D3 I like to Stand Out 0.702 -‐0.136 0.274 I see myself Stylish/Fashionable 0.694 0.050 0.247 Dress to Impress 0.673 0.100 0.406 Style more important than comfort 0.671 0.017 -‐0.019

Know the latest Trends or Fads 0.621 -‐0.181 0.155 Bags are criRcal to overall style 0.580 0.171 -‐0.030 Well Organized and Follow a RouRne -‐0.020 0.807 -‐0.046

Consider Myself a Formal Person 0.062 0.655 0.269 Not Carefree -‐0.172 0.260 -‐0.046 Consider Myself a PracRcal Person -‐0.178 0.238 0.446 Career-‐Oriented 0.219 0.066 0.821 Do everything for Career Goals 0.222 0.007 0.670 Financial Success 0.309 -‐0.135 0.452 Values in bold correspond for each variable to the factor for which the squared cosine is the largest

Factor paoern aqer Varimax rotaRon

C: CAREER

A. STYLISH

B: STRUCTURED

No. of Respondents: 33 (47%)



KEY FINDINGS: SegmentaRon

Aqer assigning each respondent in their D1-‐D3 groups, and examining each of the average scores for the clustered aoributes, a consumer segmenta4on emerged from the combinaRon of high-‐low indices among the aoributes.

Segments from Factor Analysis

STYLE STRUCTURE CAREER ResulRng segment profiles

(% to Sample Pop) Ave. Score of Aoributes

Index vs Total

Ave. Score of Aoributes

Index vs Total

Ave. Score of Aoributes

Index vs Total

D1 High 4.16 125 3.40 103 3.99 120 “Stylish Go-‐Geoers” (27.1%, Mostly Female)

D1 Low 2.39 72 3.43 103 3.77 114 “No-‐style Work Geek” (20.0%, Mostly Male)

D2 High 3.20 96 4.24 128 3.84 116 “Formal professionals” (17.1%, Mostly Female)

D2 Low 3.44 104 2.33 70 3.88 117 “Unorganized Careerist” (7.1%, 50:50 M-‐F)

D3 High 3.48 105 3.52 106 4.69 142 “Pure Workaholics” (12.9%, 50:50 M-‐F)

D3 Low 2.95 89 3.15 95 3.09 93 “Carefree Living” (15.7%, Mostly Female)

Total Ave 3.32 3.42 3.86

KEY FINDINGS: WORK BAGS

•  Men: 75% of men bring one bag to work •  Women: 50% bring one bag, 50% bring two •  Purchase: Men tend to purchase in department stores than in any other,

while women tend to purchase in bouRque stores and online.

3. Briefcase 18% 4. Tote Bag 16% 5. Laptop Bag 15%

1. Backpack 42% 2. Messenger 30% 1. Purse 79% 2. Tote Bag 64%

3. Lunch Bag 15% 4. Backpack 12%

82% of the surveyed men and women bring the following bags to work:

TOP BAGS USED BY MEN TO WORK TOP BAGS USED BY WOMEN TO WORK

Career%Oriented%

Stylish%/%Fashionable%Person%

Do%Everything%to%%Reach%Career%Goals%

Work%to%Live,%%Not%Live%to%Work%

People%to%think%I%am%%financial%success%

Well%Organized%

Carefree%Person%

Formal%Person%

Standout% PracHcal% Last%to%know%latest%%fads%and%trends%

Style%over%Comfort%

Comfort%over%Style%

Dress%to%Impress%

Bags%are%criHcal%to%style%

Bags%are%NOT%criHcal%to%style%

Casual&Backpack&+&Women&

Tote&bag&&+&Women&

Purse&&+&Women&

Regular&laptop&bag&

&&+&Women&

Hybrid&laptop&bag/backpack&&

&+&Women&

Messenger&bag&&+&Women&

Lunch&Bag&+&Women&

Casual&Backpack&+&Men&

Duffel&bag&&+&Men&

Tote&bag&&+&Men&

Purse&&+&Men&

Regular&laptop&bag&&+&Men&

Hybrid&laptop&bag/backpack&&+&

Men&

Messenger&bag&&+&Men&

Stroller&&+&Men&

Briefcase&&+&Men&

!0.8%

!0.6%

!0.4%

!0.2%

0%

0.2%

0.4%

!0.4% !0.3% !0.2% !0.1% 0% 0.1% 0.2% 0.3% 0.4% 0.5% 0.6%

F2&(21.42&%)&

F1&(30.33&%)&

Symmetric&plot&

(axes&F1&and&F2:&51.76&%)&

KEY FINDINGS: WORK BAGS MAPPING

Mapping the types of work bags used and the different customer segments can show the type of bags used by each segment.

Career%Oriented%





Well%Organized%

Carefree%Person%

Formal%Person%


Style%over%Comfort%

Comfort%over%Style%

Dress%to%Impress%




Tote&bag&&+&Women&

Purse&&+&Women&

Regular&laptop&bag&

&&+&Women&


&+&Women&


Lunch&Bag&+&Women&


Duffel&bag&&+&Men&

Tote&bag&&+&Men&

Purse&&+&Men&



Men&


Stroller&&+&Men&

Briefcase&&+&Men&

!0.8%

!0.6%

!0.4%

!0.2%

0%

0.2%

0.4%

!0.4% !0.3% !0.2% !0.1% 0% 0.1% 0.2% 0.3% 0.4% 0.5% 0.6%

F2&(21.42&%)&

F1&(30.33&%)&

Symmetric&plot&

(axes&F1&and&F2:&51.76&%)&



Formal Professionals

Unorganized Careerists

Carefree Living

Stylish Go-‐GeFer

Pure Workaholics No-‐style Work

Geek

Career%Oriented%





Well%Organized%

Carefree%Person%

Formal%Person%


Style%over%Comfort%

Comfort%over%Style%

Dress%to%Impress%




Tote&bag&&+&Women&

Purse&&+&Women&

Regular&laptop&bag&

&&+&Women&


&+&Women&


Lunch&Bag&+&Women&


Duffel&bag&&+&Men&

Tote&bag&&+&Men&

Purse&&+&Men&



Men&


Stroller&&+&Men&

Briefcase&&+&Men&

!0.8%

!0.6%

!0.4%

!0.2%

0%

0.2%

0.4%

!0.4% !0.3% !0.2% !0.1% 0% 0.1% 0.2% 0.3% 0.4% 0.5% 0.6%

F2&(21.42&%)&

F1&(30.33&%)&

Symmetric&plot&

(axes&F1&and&F2:&51.76&%)&





Carefree Living

Stylish Go-‐GeFer


Geek

Stroller-‐Men

Laptop Bag-‐Men

Hybrid Laptop Backpack-‐Men

Casual Backpack Women

Duffel Bag-‐Men

Purse-‐Women Laptop Bag-‐Women

Casual Backpack Men

Messenger Bag -‐Men / Women

Lunch Bag -‐Women

Tote Bag -‐Men/Women

Career%Oriented%





Well%Organized%

Carefree%Person%

Formal%Person%


Style%over%Comfort%

Comfort%over%Style%

Dress%to%Impress%




Tote&bag&&+&Women&

Purse&&+&Women&

Regular&laptop&bag&

&&+&Women&


&+&Women&


Lunch&Bag&+&Women&


Duffel&bag&&+&Men&

Tote&bag&&+&Men&

Purse&&+&Men&



Men&


Stroller&&+&Men&

Briefcase&&+&Men&

!0.8%

!0.6%

!0.4%

!0.2%

0%

0.2%

0.4%

!0.4% !0.3% !0.2% !0.1% 0% 0.1% 0.2% 0.3% 0.4% 0.5% 0.6%

F2&(21.42&%)&

F1&(30.33&%)&

Symmetric&plot&

(axes&F1&and&F2:&51.76&%)&


For LWF, the target should be the Stylish Go-‐Geoers and the Formal Professionals – largest in market size, which fits the type of new bags from LWF.



Carefree Living

Stylish Go-‐GeFer


Geek

Stroller-‐Men

Laptop Bag-‐Men

Hybrid Laptop Backpack-‐Men

Casual Backpack Women

Duffel Bag-‐Men

Briefcase -‐Men

Purse-‐Women

Lunch Bag -‐Women

Tote Bag -‐Men/Women

Laptop Bag-‐Women

Casual Backpack Men

Messenger Bag -‐Men / Women

VALUED SEGMENTS OF LWF

When asked what the respondents look for in a bag they bring to work:

KEY FINDINGS: WORK BAGS Aoributes

Pareto: Top 80%

Using a Pareto chart, we choose the top aoributes which can fulfill 80% of the requirements of bag users.

Looking into the top aoributes, we find that respondents go for func4on (high quality, fit and protecRon) and emo4on (Style + Professionalism) in choosing a bag for work. KEY

FINDINGS: WORK BAGS Aoributes

Pareto: Top 80%

FUNCTIONAL

EMOTIONAL

We also find similari4es and differences among male and female respondents on aoributes that are important for a work bag.

KEY FINDINGS: WORK BAGS Aoributes

Pareto: Top 80%

FUNCTIONAL

EMOTIONAL

FEMALES MOST IMPORTANT ATTRIBUTES

MaFers a lot (%) Index

1. "Be large enough to carry ALL my things in one place." 72.97 112

2. "Protect documents from becoming wet or damaged." 67.57 102

3. "Be made of high quality materials." 65.79 94 4. "Look stylish." 60.53 103 5. "Be lightweight." 56.76 93 9. "Match my oucit or shoes." 33.33 108

LEAST IMPORTANT ATTRIBUTES Does Not MaFer (%) Index

14. "Be different from the bag I used in college." 75.68 111

15. "Match my purse." 77.78 100

MALES MOST IMPORTANT ATTRIBUTES

MaFers a lot (%) Index

1. "Fit a laptop." 84.38 129 2. "Be made of high quality materials." 75.00 107 3. "Be tough and sturdy." 71.88 114 4. "Be lightweight." 65.63 108 5. "Protect documents from becoming wet or damaged." 64.52 97

10. "Alternate among the other bags I also bring to work." 25.81 114

LEAST IMPORTANT ATTRIBUTES Does Not MaFer (%) Index

14. "Be noRceable" 53.13 95 15. “Be different from the bag I used in college." 59.38 87

Note that only females have emoRonal aoributes among their top 5.

KEY FINDINGS: BRANDS

Brands surveyed have high overall awareness among both males and females.

100%$97%$97%$97%$

94%$91%$

88%$85%$85%$

61%$

100%$82%$

79%$70%$

67%$64%$

61%$36%$

33%$

0%$ 80%$

North$Face$Banana$Republic$

Zara$Louis$VuiBon$

Oakley$Kenneth$Cole$

Jansport$Victorinox$/$Swiss$Gear$

J.$Crew$TUMI$

RaySBan$Florsheim$Bentley$

Moleskine$Parker$Pen$

Porsche$Design$Tissot$

Warby$Parker$OBerBox$Case$

100%$97%$97%$97%$

94%$91%$

88%$85%$85%$

61%$

100%$82%$

79%$70%$

67%$64%$

61%$36%$

33%$

0%# 80%#

North#Face#Banana#Republic#

Zara#Louis#Vui:on#

Oakley#Kenneth#Cole#

Jansport#Victorinox#/#Swiss#Gear#

J.#Crew#TUMI#

RayKBan#Florsheim#Bentley#

Moleskine#Parker#Pen#

Porsche#Design#Tissot#

Warby#Parker#O:erBox#Case#

100%$100%$97%$

92%$92%$92%$

87%$76%$

71%$68%$

66%$

92%$66%$

61%$58%$58%$

39%$37%$

32%$32%$

0%# 70%#

Banana#Republic#Louis#Vui4on#

J.#Crew#Kenneth#Cole#

Zara#Michael#Kors#Tory#Burch#Longchamp#

Victorinox#/#Swiss#Gear#TUMI#

Jansport#

RayIBan#Gilt#Groupe#Moleskine#

Tissot#Ivanka#Trump#

dVb#by#Victoria#Beckham#Warby#Parker#O4erBox#Case#

Parker#Pen#

100%$100%$97%$

92%$92%$92%$

87%$76%$

71%$68%$

66%$

92%$66%$

61%$58%$58%$

39%$37%$

32%$32%$

0%# 70%#





Jansport#




Parker#Pen#

100%$100%$97%$

92%$92%$92%$

87%$76%$

71%$68%$

66%$

92%$66%$

61%$58%$58%$

39%$37%$

32%$32%$

0%# 70%#





Jansport#




Parker#Pen#Male Average = 78%

Female Average = 71%

% Aware among Men % Aware among Women

Brands Considered by LWF Brands Considered by LWF

However, the brands considered by LWF have drasRcally lower awareness. Only 3 of the considered brands for males and 1 for females have higher awareness than the average.

Licensed brands: 55% Licensed brands: 65%

Cheap&

Tough&Made&from&&High&Quality&&Materials&

Outgoing&

Sexy&

Stylish&

Casual&

Old&Fashioned&

Feminine&

Expensive&

On&the&Move&

Basic&

Professional& Able&to&protect&&my&things&

Cool&

Up&to&Date& Banana$$Republic$

Tumi$

Kenneth$Cole$

Victorinox$/$$Swiss$Gear$

Warby$$Parker$Zara$

Jansport$

Bentley$OCerBox$

Florsheim$

RayEBan$

North$Face$

Oakley$

J$Crew$

Parker$Pen$

Porsche$Design$Tissot$

Louis$VuiCon$ Moleskine$

!1.1$

!1$

!0.9$

!0.8$

!0.7$

!0.6$

!0.5$

!0.4$

!0.3$

!0.2$

!0.1$

0$

0.1$

0.2$

0.3$

0.4$

0.5$

!1.2$ !1.1$ !1$ !0.9$ !0.8$ !0.7$ !0.6$ !0.5$ !0.4$ !0.3$ !0.2$ !0.1$ 0$ 0.1$ 0.2$ 0.3$ 0.4$ 0.5$ 0.6$ 0.7$ 0.8$ 0.9$ 1$ 1.1$ 1.2$

F2$(2

2.21$%)$

F1$(41.42$%)$

Symmetric$plot$(axes$F1$and$F2:$63.63$%)$

These brands are then scored on 15 aoributes, as perceived by the respondent. The results will be plooed on a correspondence map. This will show how the brands in consideraRon by LWF will perform or posi4oned against the exis4ng brands in the market, based on the percep4on of the consumer. KEY

FINDINGS: BRAND

MAPPING

FUNCTION STYLE

INEXPENSIVE

HIGH END

MEN

On#the#Move#

Basic#

Professional#Able#to#protect##my#things#

Cool#Up#to#Date#Stylish#

Casual#

Old##Fashioned#

Feminine#

Cheap#

Tough#Made#of##

High#Quality##Materials#

Outgoing#Sexy#

Banana$$Republic$

TUMI$

Kenneth$Cole$

Victorinox$/$$Swiss$Gear$

Warby$$Parker$

Zara$ Jansport$

Ivanka$Trump$

OGerBox$Case$

Tory$Burch$

RayHBan$

Michael$Kors$

Moleskine$

J.$Crew$

Parker$Pen$ Tissot$dVb$by$$Victoria$Beckham$

Louis$VuiGon$

Gilt$Groupe$

Longchamp$

!0.5%

!0.3%

!0.1%

0.1%

0.3%

0.5%

0.7%

!1.2% !1% !0.8% !0.6% !0.4% !0.2% 0% 0.2% 0.4% 0.6% 0.8%

F2$(21.17$%)$

F1$(47.79$%)$

Symmetric$plot$(axes$F1$and$F2:$68.96$%)$

KEY FINDINGS: BRAND

MAPPING

FUNCTION STYLE

HIGH END

INEXPENSIVE

WOMEN

These brands are then scored on 15 aoributes, as perceived by the respondent. The results will be plooed on a correspondence map. This will show how the brands in consideraRon by LWF will perform or posi4oned against the exis4ng brands in the market, based on the percep4on of the consumer.

The following shows the compeRRve posiRoning summary of exisRng bags and the considered brands, coming the correspondence analysis. KEY

FINDINGS: BRAND

MAPPING

COMPETITIVE POSITIONING Exis4ng Brands LWF Considered Brands

COOL PROFESSIONALS Cool, Professional Kenneth Cole

HIGH END STYLE Expensive, High quality, Stylish Louis Vuioon

PROFESSIONAL TOOLS Made from high quality, professional

TUMI

HIGH UTILITY Able to Protect, Tough North Face, Victorinox

SEXY FASHION Feminine, Sexy

Tory Burch, Michael Kors

STYLISH BASICS Up to date, Stylish

Zara, J Crew, Banana Rep, Longchamp

BASIC FUNCTIONALITY Cheap, Casual, Basic Jansport none

From here, LWF will know which brands they will compete against depending on the brand they plan to use and license for their new line of bags.

88"

92"

95"

96"

96"

98"

104"

104"

111"

115"

O+erBox"

Parker"

Oakley"

Warby"Parker"

Florsheim"

Tissot"

Porsche"Design"

Bentley"

RayDBan"

Moleskine"

88"

92"

95"

96"

96"

98"

104"

104"

111"

115"

O"erBox(

Parker(

Oakley(

Warby(Parker(

Florsheim(

Tissot(

Porsche(Design(

Bentley(

Ray<Ban(

Moleskine(

The respondents were also shown the licensed brands and asked how likely they are to purchase the new line of bags. The top 4 brands, averaging above the average, are shown. KEY

FINDINGS: LWF

BRAND-‐FIT

86#

88#

88#

92#

94#

105#

105#

120#

121#

Ivanka#Trump#

O5erBox#

Parker#

Tissot#

Warby#Parker#

dVb#by#Victoria#Beckham#

Gilt#Groupe#

RayHBan#

Moleskine#

86#

88#

88#

92#

94#

105#

105#

120#

121#

Ivanka&Trump&

O-erBox&

Parker&

Tissot&

Warby&Parker&

dVb&by&Victoria&Beckham&

Gilt&Groupe&

Ray@Ban&

Moleskine&

Average Price Expected to be Paid: $122.50 •  Porsche and Bentley: 20-‐25% higher ($148-‐$150) •  Ray-‐Ban: At par ($122.50) •  Moleskine: 13% lower ($106.25)

Average Price Expected to be Paid: $115.14 •  dVB by Victoria Beckham: 20% higher ($137.50) •  Ray-‐Ban and GILT: At par ($115) •  Moleskine: 9% lower ($105)

% Likelihood of Purchase: Ranked based on Mean Score

Index Index MEN WOMEN

Moleskine and Ray-‐Ban : Consistent topped for both genders

Each gender then had specific brands that followed:

Bentley and Porsche for men (from the “High End Style” brand group)

and Gilt Groupe and dVB for women (from the “Sexy Fashion”

brand group).

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION

For Stylish Go-‐GeFers and Formal Professionals •  Largest market; LWF’s bag fits these segments

•  Score high on “Career” aoributes, with one being more “Stylish” while the other more “Organized”

Top Aoributes of work bags they are looking for: •  FuncRonal: High quality, ProtecRon, and Size

•  EmoRonal: STYLE: Especially for women

Brand recommendaRons: Ray-‐Ban and/or Moleskine for both genders •  Brand percepRon as “Cool Professionals” and “Professional Tools”

•  Have the highest awareness among the considered brands, can compete against exisRng brands

•  Already have high interest and openness to purchase among surveyed consumers.

•  If discussions with those companies don’t work out, they can be subsRtuted by Bentley / Porsche Design for men and Gilt Group or DVB for women.

NEXT STEPS ON RESEARCH AND FOR LWF

1.  Conduct larger scale quanRtaRve research in key ciRes 2.  Conduct in-‐depth qualitaRve survey on chosen brands

•  Can get or mine for deeper insights from consumers •  Check to see acceptance that an exisRng non-‐bag brand will

have a line of professional bags •  Refine posiRoning statements based on discussion points

from qualitaRve survey

3.  Possible conduct a controlled test market in a small locaRon •  As the licensed brand doesn’t have an exisRng bag collecRon

at mass retailers, this test can check whether the bag can stand on its own at the shelves.

•  This can also be a test whether there is market acceptance by mass retailers (ie. purchasing department at Walmart or Macy’s)

4. For LWF, share research with the target licensed brands.

PRESENTED BY CHARLES AFRICA

THANK YOU! LEATHER WORK FORCE*

BRANDING RESEARCH

09 DECEMBER

2013

Consumer Research and Survey on Brand Licensing for Leather Bags

chuck africa final project - consumer behavior - branding

Documents

analyticalplan onlinesurvey

pricesensirve subsegment

objectives toidenrfystrengths