TECHNICKÁ UNIVERZITA V LIBERCI
Hospodářská fakulta Katedra podnikové ekonomiky Akademický rok: 2007/2008
ZADANÍ BAKALÁŘSKÉ PRÁCE
pro Michala ŠVADLENKU
program č. B 6208 Ekonomika a management ober č. 6208R085 Podniková ekonomika
Vedoucí katedry Vám ve smyslu zákona č. lil/ 1998 Sb. o vysokých školách a navazujících předpisů určuje tuto bakalářskou práci:
Název tématu: AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE BEHAVIOUR AND BRAND
LOYALTY OF BEER DRINKERS IN HUDDERSFIELD (UK) AND LIBEREC (CR)
Pokyny pro vypracování:
1. Přehled britského a českého pivovarnictví
2. Teoretický rozbor charakteristik chování spotřebitele 3. Metody zkoumající chováni a věrnost spotřebitelů 4. Výzkum a analýza výsledků
5. Diskuse nad výsledky, zhodnocení a doporučení
Rozsah grafických prací:
Rozsah původní zprávy: 50 - 70 stran tištěného textu + nutné přílohy
Forma zpracování: tištěná
Seznam odborné literatury:
Allsopp, J., 1986. The Distribution of On-Licence Beer and Cider Consumption and its Personality Determinants among Young Men. European Journal of Marketing. [Online]. 20(3/4).
Available at: http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?vid=1&hid=21&sid=f16784dcba9e- 439f-9a21-6df014c91397%40sessionmgr2 [accessed at 17 Feb 2008].
Bearden, W., Netemeyer, R., Teel, J., 1989. Measurement of Consumer Susceptibility to Interpersonal Influence. Journal of Consumer Research. [Online]. 15(4). Available at:
http://content.epnet.com/pdf19_22/pdf/1989/JCR/01Mar89/4656990.pdf?T=P&P=AN
&K=4656990&EbscoContent=dGJyMNXb4kSeqLU4xNvgOLCmrlCep7BSsqq4TbS WxWXS&ContentCustomer=dGJyMPGqsUqwp7FLuePfgeyx%2BEu3q64A&D=buh [accessed at 17 Feb 2008].
Bettman, J. R., Luce, M. F., 1998. Constructive consumer choice processes. Journal of Consumer Research, [Online]. 25 (3). Available at:
http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?vid=1&hid=103&sid=f51c7f23-6093-46ab- 8004-8cced8331b21%40sessionmgr106 [accessed at 17 Feb 2008].
Blackwell, R.D. et al. 2001. Consumer Behavior, Harcourt, Inc. USA, 9th edition.
Burgess, T., 2001. Guide to the Design of Questionnaires: A general introduction to the design of questionnaires for survey research. [Online]. Available at:
http://www.leeds.ac.uk/iss/documentation/top/top2.pdf [accessed at 16 March 2008].
Cook, M., Farquharson, C., 1998. Business economics : strategy and applications. London : Financial Times/Prentice Hall.
Czech Statistical Office, Consumption of alcoholic beverages and cigarettes in the Czech Republic.
[internet]. Available at: http://vdb.czso.cz/vdbvo/en/tabdetail.jsp?cislotab=3004-05- 02&&kapitola_id=14 [accessed at 17 Feb 2008].
Datamonitor, 2005. Beer in the United Kingdom: Industry Profile. [internet]. Available at:
http://content.epnet.com/pdf17_20/pdf/2005/WE4/01Oct05/19698945.pdf?T=P&P=A N&K=19698945&EbscoContent=dGJyMMvl7ESeqLM4xNvgOLCmrlCeprRSrqe4S6 6WxWXS&ContentCustomer=dGJyMPGqsUqwp7FLuePfgeyx%2BEu3q64A&D=buh [accessed at 17 Feb 2008].
Vedoucí bakalářské práce: Ing. Světlana Myslivcová
Konzultant: Bob Warmington
Termín zadání bakalářské práce: 31.10.2007 Termín odevzdání bakalářské práce: 11.5.2008
doc. Dr. Ing. Olga Hasprová doc. Ing. Ivan Jáč, CSc.
děkanka vedoucí katedry
Prohlášení
Byl jsem seznámen s tím, že na mou bakalářskou práci se plně vztahuje zákon č. 121/2000 Sb. O právu autorském, zejména § 60 - školní dílo.
Beru na vědomí, že Technická univerzita v Liberci (TUL) nezasahuje do mých autorských práv užitím mé bakalářské práce pro vnitřní potřebu TUL.
Užiji-li bakalářskou práci nebo poskytnu-li licenci k jejímu využití, jsem si vědom povinnosti informovat o této skutečnosti TUL; v tomto případě má TUL právo ode mne požadovat úhradu nákladů, které vynaložila na vytvoření díla, až do jejich skutečné výše.
Bakalářskou práci jsem vypracoval samostatně s použitím uvedené literatury a na základě konzultací s vedoucím bakalářské práce a konzultantem.
Datum: 11.5.2008
Podpis: ………
Michal Švadlenka
TECHNICKÁ UNIVERZITA V LIBERCI Hospodářská fakulta
Studijní program Ekonomika a management Studijní obor Podniková ekonomika
AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE BEHAVIOUR AND BRAND LOYALTY OF BEER DRINKERS IN HUDDERSFIELD (UK) AND LIBEREC (CR)
VÝZKUM CHOVÁNI SPOTŘEBITELŮ PIVA V HUDDERSFIELDU (UK) A V LIBERCI (CR) S DŮRAZEM NA VĚRNOST ZNAČCE
B P -P E -K P E -2 0 0 8 0 4
Michal Švadlenka
Vedoucí bakalářské práce: Ing. Světlana Myslivcová
Konzultant: Bob Warmington
Počet stran: 77
Datum odevzdání: 11.5.2008
VÝTAH
Tato bakalářská práce zkoumá chování spotřebitelů piva v Huddersfieldu (UK) a v Liberci (CR). Tato práce měla dva hlavní cíle. První cíl bylo určit vlivy několika faktorů na věrnost značce, zatímco druhý cíl bylo zjistit, zda se tyto faktory významně liší u českých a
britských spotřebitelů. Primární data byla získána během výzkumu který proběhl v Huddersfieldu a v Liberci. Pro získání primárních dat byly použity dotazníky zhotovené formou rozhovorů. Dotazníky byly předloženy vrstvenému vzorku populace. Následně byla data analyzována několika statistickými metodami. Výsledky tohoto výzkumu ukazují, že je zde podstatný rozdíl ve vnímání charakteristik piva jakož i hodnot poskytovaných značkou mezi Čechy a Brity. Další podstatné zjištění ukazuje že věrnost značce se výrazně liší mezi Brity a Čechy. Nicméně, tato práce neprokazuje podstatný vliv budování sebe-pojetí, předchozích nákupů ani potřeby přizpůsobení se většině na věrnost značce.
AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE BEHAVIOUR AND BRAND LOYALTY OF BEER DRINKERS IN HUDDERSFIELD (UK) AND LIBEREC (CR)
BY
MICHAL ŠVADLENKA
DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE UNIVERSITY OF HUDDERSFILED
FOR THE DEGREE
BA (HONS) EUROPEAN BUSINESS 2008
ABSTRACT
This dissertation has investigated the behaviour of beer drinkers in Huddersfield (UK) and Liberec (CR). There were two major goals of the current study. The first goal was to determine the influences of several factors on brand loyalty while the second goal was to find out whether are these factors significantly different for Czech and British drinkers. The primary data were obtained during survey which was carried out in Huddersfield and Liberec. Interview administrated questionnaires were used for collecting of data from stratified sample of population. Consequently, the data were analysed through several statistical methods. The results of this investigation show that there is a significant difference between perception of beer characteristics and values provided by brand between Czechs and Britons. The second major finding was that the brand loyalty of Czechs and Britons diverge significantly. However, this study could not prove a significant influence of building of self-concept, the past purchases and the need of conformity with others on brand loyalty.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Firstly I would like to thank Bob Warmington for his guidance and helpful comments.
I would also like to acknowledge the staff of the following venues for allowing me to carry on my primary research in their pubs: Atelier, Kozlovna, The Lord Wilson, Potrefená Husa, Salamandr, Stamina, Top Spot Snooker Club, The Royal Swan, The Warehouse, Varsity, Vokno and Zephyr.
Then I would like to express my appreciation to my friends for their support.
Special thanks to Aline Wagner.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION... XIV
1. INDUSTRY REVIEW ... 1
1.1 British beer industry ... 1
1.2 Czech beer industry ... 2
2. LITERATURE REVIEW ... 6
2.1 Theory of customer behaviour... 6
2.1.1 The nature of Consumer Behaviour... 6
2.1.1.1 Internal influences...8
2.1.1.2 External influences...8
2.1.2.2 Situational Influences...9
2.1.2.3 Consumer decision process...10
2.1.2 Characteristics embodied in the goods ... 15
2.2 Application of consumer behaviour in brewery industry ... 16
2.2.1 Applications of consumer behaviour ... 16
2.2.1.1 Market segmentation...16
2.2.1.2 Marketing Strategy...20
2.2.1.3 Outcomes...25
2.3 Conclusion... 26
3. METHODOLOGY... 29
3.1 Research approach and strategy ... 29
3.2 Questionnaire design ... 30
3.2.1 Pilot study... 31
3.3 Sampling ... 32
3.4 Data collection... 34
3.5 Ethical issues ... 35
3.6 Data processing ... 35
3.6.1 Missing data ... 36
3.6.2 The profile of respondents... 36
3.6.3 Analysis of hypotheses ... 36
3.7 Limitations of Research... 38
Hypothesis 1:... 42
Hypothesis 2:... 47
Hypothesis 3:... 50
Hypothesis 4: ... 52
Hypothesis 5:... 57
Hypothesis 6:... 62
5. DISCUSSION ... 66
5.1 Hypothesis 1... 66
5.1.1 Consistency of taste... 67
5.1.2 Alcohol level ... 68
5.1.3 Aroma... 68
5.1.4 Number of calories ... 69
5.1.5 Price... 69
5.1.6 Method of delivery ... 70
5.1.7 Special production ... 70
5.2 Hypothesis 2... 71
5.3 Hypothesis 3... 72
5.4 Hypothesis 4... 73
5.5 Hypothesis 5... 73
5.6 Hypothesis 6... 74
6. CONCLUSION... 76
APPENDIX A – DATA REQUREMENTS TABLE ... 78
APPENDIX B – QUESTIONNAIRE IN ENGLISH ... 79
APPENDIX C – QUESTIONNAIRE IN CZECH ... 82
APPENDIX D – LIST OF BRANDS ... 85
APPENDIX E – THE METHOD OF DELIVERY VIDEO... 89
REFERENCES ... 90
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1.1: United Kingdom Beer Market Segmentation; Share by Value, Source: Datamonitor (2005) Table 1.2: United Kingdom Beer Market Share; Share by Volume, Source: Datamonitor (2005) Table 1.3: United Kingdom Beer Distribution; Share by Volume, Source: Datamonitor (2005) Table 1.4: Czech Republic Beer Market Segmentation; Share by Value, Source: Datamonitor (2006) Table 1.5: Czech Republic Beer Market Share; Share by Volume, Source: Datamonitor (2006) Table 1.6: Czech Republic Beer Distribution; Share by Volume, Source: Datamonitor (2006) Table 4.1: Locality of research
Table 4.2: Respondent was guest of a pub or bartender Table 4.3: Allocation of gender
Table 4.4: Age stratification of respondents
Table 4.5: Allocation of respondents who drink beer in a pub Table 4.6: Hierarchy of factors considered when purchasing beer Table 4.7: Group statistics for beer characteristics and locality of research Table 4.7.1: Frequencies of answers on “I tend to stick to the same brand”
Table 4.7.2: Frequencies of answers on “My choice of pub is influenced by brands of beers which are served there”
Table 4.8: Group statistics for brand loyalty and location of research
Table 4.9: Influence of self-concept on brand loyalty – the red field highlights the segment which is significant for both variables
Table 4.10: Influence of self-concept on brand loyalty – significant*insignificant Table 4.11: Chi-Square test of influence of self-concept on brand loyalty Table 4.12: Effect size measures of influence of self-concept on brand loyalty
Table 4.13: Relationship between level of consumption and brand loyalty in short term – the red field highlights the segment which is significant for both variables
Table 4.14: Influence of past behaviour on brand loyalty in short term – significant*insignificant Table 4.15: Chi-Square test of influence of past behaviour on brand loyalty in short term
Table 4.16: Relationship between level of consumption and brand loyalty in long term – the red field
Table 4.19: Relationship between group behaviour (Q13) and brand loyalty – the red field highlights the segment which is significant for both variables
Table 4.20: Influence of group behaviour (Q13) on brand loyalty – significant*insignificant Table 4.21: Chi-Square test of influence of group behaviour (Q13) on brand loyalty Table 4.21: Chi-Square test of influence of group behaviour (Q13) on brand loyalty
Table 4.22: Relationship between group behaviour (Q14) and brand loyalty – the red field highlights the segment which is significant for both variables
Table 4.23: Influence of group behaviour (Q14) on brand loyalty – significant*insignificant Table 4.24: Chi-Square test of influence of group behaviour (Q14) on brand loyalty
Table 4.25: Relationship between group behaviour (Q15) and brand loyalty – the red field highlights the segment which is significant for both variables
Table 4.26: Influence of group behaviour (Q15) on brand loyalty – significant*insignificant Table 4.27: Chi-Square test of influence of group behaviour (Q15) on brand loyalty Table 4.28: Group statistics for locality of research and values provided by beer brand
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2.1: Adult Male UK per capita Weekly Consumption for Draught Bitter and Draught Lager Combined, Source: Allsopp, 1986
Figure 2.2: Cumulative Consumption as Proposition of Total Consumption for 18-21 year-old Craftsmen and 18-21 year-old Students Ranged by Consumption Level, Source: Allsopp, 1986
Chart 4.1: Hierarchy of considered factors when purchasing beer – Huddersfield Chart 4.2: Hierarchy of considered factors when purchasing beer – Liberec
INTRODUCTION
Research on consumer behaviour is in the focus of marketers since 1950’s. Producers realized that detailed knowledge of their customers is the key element in successful running of any business. More recently, literature has emerged that offers a deep insight into the motives which drives consumers during the process of beer purchase (Pettigrew 2002, Rundle-Thiele 2006). However, there have been no controlled studies which compared differences in behaviour of Czech and British beer drinkers.
In recent years the major Czech brands were introduced on British beer market, namely Budweiser Budvar, Staropramen and Pilsner Urquell (Gray 2004). This paper will help Czech marketers to find out what are the differences between preferences of Czech and British beer consumers. While some marketing practices uncommon in the Czech Republic (CR) are vital at British market, the marketers need to distinguish strategies for each market.
During reviewing of the industry and literature two major gaps in previous studies has been found: The purchase behaviour of Czechs in the terms of brand loyalty has not been described by any research yet. In addition, no research has been found that surveyed the adequacy of branding strategies on the Czech and British beer market.
Consequently, two major goals of the study were stated. The first goal was to determine the influences of several factors on brand loyalty while the second goal was to find out whether are these factors significantly different for Czech and British drinkers.
Brand loyalty is widely described by number of authors, however the most significant
reaching the first objective of current research. The main idea of this theory is that decisions are not made spontaneously, but are results of combination of self-identity and past behaviour. The theory of planned behaviour stresses a considerable role of group behaviour. This aspect has been comprehensively explored by research carried out by Pettigrew (2002) which provided a rich source of suggestions for the current research.
Finally, the four values provided by branded beer to consumers introduced by Charnatony and McDonald (1994 cited in Lewis et al 2001) were employed in this study.
This paper has been divided into six parts. The first part describes the backgrounds of brewing industry of both United Kingdom (UK) and the Czech Republic. Chapter 2 begins by laying out the theoretical dimensions of the research, and looks at the literature related to the goals of this paper. Chapter 3 describes the research approach, the sampling methods, the questionnaire design and the process of primary data collection. Chapter 4 deals with the data analysing where several statistical methods were used. Chapter 5 discusses the results of data analysis, evaluates them and suggests possible explanations. The last chapter assesses which objectives of that research were reached and subsequently suggests implications of findings into the practice.
1. INDUSTRY REVIEW
The Czech Republic and United Kingdom are both countries with a long tradition of beer production. And beer “plays important role in the culture of both countries” (Lewis et al 2001).
CR was for a long time at the top place in the world beer consumption. The Czechs has consumed 159 litres of beer per capita in 2006 (Czech Statistical Office 2008). UK is with its 90 litres of beer per capita on the 6th place in 2005 (National Statistics Online 2008; Datamonitor 2005).
1.1 British beer industry
Speciality of British beer market is a historical domination of top-fermented ale (Lewis et al 2001). However, lager has gained dominance during past years even on British market. See table 1.1. There is an assumption that the market share of lager will further grow on the British beer market.
Category % Share
Premium lager 39.2%
Ales, stouts & bitters 32.2%
Standard lager 28.3%
Low/no alcohol 0.3%
Specialty beer 0.1%
Total 100.0%
Table 1.1: United Kingdom Beer Market Segmentation; Share by Value Source: Datamonitor (2005)
innovation. In the end of this consolidation process there were only 94 mainstream breweries in 1993 (Millns 1998 cited in Lewis et al 2001). The leading company on British beer market today is Scottish & Newcastle which controls 27.1% of the market's volume (Datamonitor 2005). See Table 1.2.
Company % Share
Scottish & Newcastle 27.1%
Adolph Coors Company 19.7%
Interbrew S.A. 18.8%
Other 34.4%
Total 100.0%
Table 1.2: United Kingdom Beer Market Share; Share by Volume Source: Datamonitor (2005)
The British breweries are allowed to own bars and pubs which is a significant advantage for small breweries which would not survive in the competition with large players.
Britons consumed traditionally most of the beer in pubs; 75% in 2001 which was the highest proportion in the world. However the proportion of sales is changing in favour of supermarkets (Datamonitor 2005). See table 1.3.
Channel % Share
On-trade 60.6%
Supermarkets/hypermarkets 21.0%
Other 18.4%
Total 100.0%
Table 1.3: United Kingdom Beer Distribution; Share by Volume Source: Datamonitor (2005)
1.2 Czech beer industry
Category % Share
Standard lager 61.1%
Premium lager 33.9%
Low/no alcohol 2.7%
Specialty beer 1.8%
Ales, stouts & bitters 0.4%
Total 100.0%
Table 1.4: Czech Republic Beer Market Segmentation; Share by Value Source: Datamonitor (2006)
Similarly to UK, the Czech brewing industry was dispersed into a number of small breweries. However, the effect of concentration could not pass entirely because of German occupation in 1938. The Second World War, followed by forty years of communist totality has frozen the Czech industry until 1990’s. Therefore, there were 77 breweries in 1989 (Lewis et al 2001), which is much for market of 10 million people.
Table 1.5 shows the major mainstream players on Czech beer market.
Company % Share
SABMiller 43.3%
Interbrew S.A. 18.2%
Budejovicky Budvar 7.2%
Other 31.4%
Total 100.0%
Table 1.5: Czech Republic Beer Market Share; Share by Volume Source: Datamonitor (2006)
First look at the table 1.5 disclose that the most of main Czech breweries are owned by foreign corporations. This trend is given by political development of CR as a transition country in early 1990’s. The privatisation of companies, liberalisation of business, development of convertible currency and move from a centralised economy to the free market economy represented a severe shock for all Czech companies. Managers had to
Slightly more than a half of the Czech beer sales are made in pubs while the rest is destined to home consumption. See table 1.6.
Channel % Share
On-trade 59.1%
Special retailers 12.2%
Other 28.7%
Total 100.0%
Table 1.6: Czech Republic Beer Distribution; Share by Volume Source: Datamonitor (2006)
The relative price of Czech beer is still considerably low in comparison with the prices in Western Europe. The low prices has protected home producers from competition from abroad but on the other hand caused low profits of Czech brewers. Lewis et al (2000 cited in Lewis at al 2001) describes branding policy of Czech brewers. Brand positioning is made on the traditional bases of price and quality proportions. Most of the products are branded; some of them just carry logo of a producer. Lewis et al (2001) claims, that only the biggest brewers have developed brand personality of their products. For example the Pilsen breweries have build their personality on the fact that they have actually invented lager, whereas original is the best.
Lewis et al (2001) illustrates that branding is usually more developed in countries where marketing has a long tradition than in post-communist countries. Furthermore, recent research showed that there is certain resistance of Czech consumers towards branding.
As supposed, UK brewers perform more developed branding strategy than the Czech ones. Brands in Britain are carefully targeted on particular segments, effectively positioned and supported by heavy television advertising. However, that does not mean that beer brands are perceived more by British than by Czechs. The purchase behaviour
In contrast with CR, UK is country with a stable capitalist tradition where the consumer behaviour is well examined. There was no research carried out which would compare the adequacy of branding strategies on the Czech and UK beer market.
This paper will fill the gap in literature by examination of the perception of beer brands by consumers in both CR and UK. Further the brand loyalty of Czechs and Britons will be investigated.
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
A considerable amount of literature has been published on consumer behaviour. Few text books were used for gaining awareness about fundaments of theory. Academic journals appeared to be the most useful source of information. There is a whole range of authors who published results of their researches of customer behaviour in beer industry. Those researches provided author of this paper a solid base for building of his own hypothesis and consequent broadening of findings in this field.
2.1 Theory of customer behaviour
“Customer behaviour is the study of people and the products that help to shape their identities” (Solomon 2002).
“Costumer behaviour is the study of individuals, groups, or organisations and the processes they use to select, secure, use, and dispose of products, services, experiences, or ideas to satisfy needs and the impacts that these processes have on the consumer and society” (Hawkins et al 2007).
”We define consumer behaviour as those activities directly involved in obtaining, consuming, and disposing of products and services, including the decision processes that precede and follow these actions” (Engel et al 1995).
”Consumer buying behaviour refers to the buying behaviour of ultimate consumers, those who purchase products for personal or household use, not for business purposes” (Dibb et al 1991).
2.1.1 The nature of Consumer Behaviour
Hawkins et al (2007) describes consumer behaviour according to conceptual model.
This model reflects believes on which basis people develop their self-concepts and consequently their lifestyles through consumption. Pettigrew (2002) has confirmed conceptual model by wide researches. Pettigrew (2002) examined the process when beer consumers regulate their consumption in order to enhance their self-image. Bearden et
In contrast, Blackwell et al (2001) uses more traditional marketing concept to describe consumer behaviour. This marketing concept expresses believes that success of organisation depends on good knowledge and implementation of consumer behaviour into “every aspect of the firm’s marketing program”. Blackwell et al (2001) concentrates on the “process of planning and executing the conception, pricing, promotion, and distribution of ideas, goods, and services to create exchanges that satisfy individual and organizational objectives”. Blackwell et al (2001) further demonstrates that the key point of marketing concept is exchange of product between marketer and consumer. The value and price of the product must bring satisfaction to both sides of this exchange.
Tauber (1972) has defined consumer behaviour much wider as “function of many variables, including motives such as role playing, self-gratification, diversion, peer group attraction and communication.” Finally, Ajzen presented theory of planned behaviour (1985) one of the most influential psychological theories on predicting of human behaviour. The main idea of this concept is that decisions are not made spontaneously, but are results of combination of self-identity and past behaviour.
Majority of used models belongs to behavioural economics. Besides it, there is the neoclassical or general equilibrium approach represented by Lancaster (1969 cited in Cook et al 1998).
Hawkins et al (2007) believes that lifestyle produces needs and desires which are subsequently satisfied by consumption. Otherwise, the way how individuals see themselves (the self-concept) is determined by their resources. The number of situations which are people dealing with every day is changing their preferences of purchase. The decisions which people make during purchasing process are re-evaluated. The re- evaluation can be than cause of change of the preferences and even of the very self-
A consumer is in the focus of this paper. Marketing strategies are mentioned just in order to draw complex picture of the situation. Therefore the conceptual model and the theory of planned behaviour are cited more often in this work.
Hawkins et al (2007) admits that customer behaviour is far more chaotic and unpredictable than any model can describe. Nevertheless, the model of self-concept and lifestyle will be useful for further exploration of customer behaviour in respect of brand loyalty. Further Hawkins et al (2007) gives examples of both internal (psychological aspects of consumer) and external (the consumers environment) influences.
2.1.1.1 Internal influences
Internal influences starts with perception which is process when consumers receive stimuli and allocate significance to this stimuli (Hawkins et al 2007). Then different traits of personality are involved in process of decision-making. Lesch, as cited in Kropp et al (1999) demonstrates that depression, hopelessness, and alienation positively correlate with alcohol consumption.
2.1.1.2 External influences
The external influences are for example family, age, friends, culture and subculture (Hawkins et al 2007). Talking about beer consumption the social groups are crucial for understanding the customer’s choices. Similarly, the cultural context limits the beer consumption. The attitude towards alcohol varies through different cultures from absolute prohibition to general tolerance. However, this paper limits its concentration on consumers in CR and UK, where beer “plays important role in the culture of both countries” (Lewis et al 2001). Therefore it is expected that culture, religion and ethnicity are not significant factors for research of consumer behaviour with regard to
2.1.2.2 Situational Influences
It is necessary to understand situations when consumption occurs before examining the same process of decision. Situational influences are characterised by group behaviour and ritual situations (Blackwell et al 2001).
Group Behaviour
The group behaviour is determined by the other people who are present while the buying process runs (Hawkins et al 2007). According to Hawkins et al (2007), there is a strong social influence on buying behaviour of individual because there is a tendency of individuals to comply with majority.
Especially publicly consumed brands (as is case of this paper) are strongly effected by social influence (Pettigrew 2002). Recent studies revealed that consumer behaviour in privacy differs to behaviour in public. Kropp et al (1999) demonstrates that interpersonal influence plays significant role in description and prediction of beer consumption. Bearden et al (1989) supports the idea that presence of others influences individual’s behaviour. He further adds that “consumer susceptibility to interpersonal influence” is trait of personality which varies for each individual and situation.
Individuals tend to fulfil expectations of others through consumption (Bearden et al 1989). This effect of consumer behaviour is applied in the research of beer brands in
Pettigrew (2002) and Smith (2007). Both authors confirm that there is a significant influence of other people on individual when purchasing beer.
Ritual Situations
“A ritual situation can be described as a socially defined occasion that triggers a set of interrelated behaviours that occur in a structured format and that have symbolic meaning” (Gainer 1995). Ritual situations can be entirely private but also entirely public or anywhere on the scale between these extremes. Hawkins et al (2007) notes that ritual situations are in the centre of interest of all market agents because rituals are connected with prescribed consumption. Beer consumption is traditionally connected with watching of sport events, binges at college campuses and other activities which are occurrences of ritual behaviour.
It is essential to note, that consumers do not occur in situations randomly. On the contrary, they encounter situations according to pattern of their daily schedule.
Subsequently, the situations can be predicted by marketers and the appropriate product can be offered to consumer in the right time (Blackwell et al 2001). The traditional and still generally most used (in UK and CR – see tabs 1.3 and 1.5) ritual situation for beer consumption – the evening in a pub - was used in this research for approaching respondents.
2.1.2.3 Consumer decision process
John Dewey has introduced model of consumer decision process already in 1910
mentioned in practical part of literature review with regards to beer consumption.
Therefore, consumer decision process is described in three stages as follows:
- problem recognition - information search
- alternative evaluation and choice
Problem Recognition
The consumption offers solution to problems. Even problems on emotional bases like boredom or anxiety are often recognized as problems which can be solved by purchasing of a product or service..
“Problem recognition is the result of a discrepancy between a desired state and an actual state that is sufficient to arouse and activate the decision process” (Hill 2001).
When actual state is the way how consumer sees his condition at a present time while the desired state is a condition how the consumer wants to feel instead.
The marketers react on problem recognition through restructuring of marketing mix.
This covers developing of new product; varying of existing one, change of distribution channels and change of pricing or improving of advertising strategy. There is a whole range of new beer types in the market. For example low-caloric beer was released as a response to problems with frequent obesity problems. Another example of selective problem recognition is new beer developed in Czech Research Institute of Brewing and Malting in Prague. The researchers have developed low-alcoholic beer which significantly helps women to deal with problems caused by menopause, thanks to natural source of hormone phytoestrogen which corrects hormonal misbalance caused
However, the marketer’s endeavours to solve (recognize or create) problems will not be mentioned further in this paper. Instead, the focus is concentrated on the consumer and his perception of problem.
Beer consumption is often affected by phenomena of variety-seeking. Variety-seeking occurs when consumers are not satisfied with one feature of the brand (for example the temperature of served beer). Variety-seeking is an unpredictable occurrence because consumers switch brands for reasons which are out of company’s control. Seetharaman et al (1998) presents stochastic model which incorporates variety – seeking and habitual behaviour.
The desired state is changing during life as an individual develops. Therefore, different age groups will be in focus of this research.
Information Search
When problem is identified, the consumers start to search information about product which would provide the most efficient solution to their problem. Consumer must put number of mental and physical activities forth, in order to perform good information search (Blackwell et al 2001). Good search for information provides certain benefits to consumer. According to theory is the process of information search divided among two levels. First level is internal search, when consumer uses long-time memory to acquire relevant information. Second level is external search, when consumer employs independent, personal and market-based sources which are different from his own experience (Hawkins et al 2007).
Theory further divides information search according to effort which customer applies:
- Nominal decision-making – consumer uses only information obtained during his previous experience, no further search occurs.
- Limited decision-making – is caused by attention-attracting power; e.g. new product is aggressively advertised.
- Extended decision-making – consumer looks for other brands which could provide the same performance for lower price.
The consumer is collecting data about desired characteristics of product during the information search. Those characteristics are his evaluative criteria (Hawkins et al 2007). Evaluative criteria of beer consumers are consistency of taste, alcohol level, aroma, price and method of delivery.
Hawkins et al (2007) identifies the brands which are thought as potential solution of consumers’ problem as awareness set. The awareness set is further divided into three subsections according to attention which is paid to them by consumer.
- Evoked set – brands which are for some reason in the focus of consumer’s attention; evoked set includes not only brands from same category. Thus, in addition to different beer brands also wine, spirits, cocktails and other alcoholic drinks may be included in evoked sets of consumers examined in this paper.
- Inept set – brands which are knowingly disliked and avoided by consumer.
Positive information about these brands is not going to be taken in consideration by consumer.
- Inert set – is a set of brands which is consumer aware of, but purchase of them is not considered until brands from evoked set are available. Consumer will likely accept new information about brands from inert set, which is good opportunity for marketers.
In sum, consumers undertake internal and external search for evaluative criteria which leads to several potential solutions. However, wide search takes place only in few cases, when the costs of a wrong choice would be too high. The most of purchases are made solely using the internal search which is particularly true for beverage industry.
For the purposes of this paper mainly internal search and limited external search are adequate. External search mainly depends on personal sources considering beer consumption practice. Marketing messages has a limited value in consumer’s decision.
Wider external search is also connected with wider product differentiation which is represented by production of special beers in this paper. Nominal decision-making can be replaced by extensive decision-making (with stress on cheaper alternatives).
Concretely, it is investigated how big role plays label, group of peers and past behaviour on decision-making of respondents. These factors often represents “shortcut” in information search.
Alternative Evaluation and Choice
Once the information search has been conducted and evaluative criteria has been identified the alternative brands with different combinations of benefits are evaluated.
How the consumer does make a choice? As was intimated above, choices are often emotional, circular and incomplete. It was also mentioned that situation has important influence on choice. Bettman et al (1998) illustrates, that consumers have well developed hierarchy of goals based on different priority of goals and metagoals. In contrast, Fletcher (1988) notes, that the process of choice of the best solution is sometimes skipped. Consumption is then triggered without deliberate decision-making.
The more complex is the problem the more deliberate decision-making occurs (Fletcher 1988).
2.1.2 Characteristics embodied in the goods
Lancaster (1969 cited in Cook et al 1998) has introduced model of consumer behaviour which is based on assumption that consumers do not decide solely on the basis of price and quantity. He has established an idea of “characteristics embodied in the goods”
(Cook et al 1998, p.96). Price still plays an important role in decision-making but these characteristics have at least the same position.
Lancaster (1969 cited in Cook et al 1998) claims that utility maximisation does not occur by purchasing the physical product itself, but through purchasing of those characteristics. He further affirms, that it is responsibility of producer to find out which are characteristics of his product (Cook et al 1998). Subsequently, the producer shall use these characteristics in order to attract consumer’s attention with non-price characteristics.
Lancaster (1969 cited in Cook et al 1998) admits that his model can not span all the influences which are present in a real market. For example, products have more than two characteristics while consumers evaluate each characteristic with different degree of importance. Consumers develops sets of believes about strong and weak characteristics of different brands. These sets of believes are called the brand image. Cook et al (1998) comments that there are other obvious weaknesses of Lancaster’s model. Firstly, not all characteristics can be measured. Secondly, different consumers have different ratios to evaluate characteristics. Thirdly, it is important for marketer to understand which mixes of different characteristics results in highest consumer satisfaction. Seven characteristics (or evaluative criteria according to Hawkins et al 2007) significant for purchase of beer in pub were chosen and examined.
2.2 Application of consumer behaviour in brewery industry
2.2.1 Applications of consumer behaviour
Hawkins et al (2007) divided the process of application of consumer behaviour into a chain of four links:
1. Market analysis 2. Market segmentation 3. Marketing strategy 4. Outcomes
This research will not deal with analysing of the market. Short description of brewery industry in CR and UK was already given in the industrial review. This research is focused on the market segmentation as a result of customer analysis. Marketing strategy as a tool for providing a maximal value to a target group will be examined only from the consumer’s perspective. Outcomes will be pursued only slightly; especially customer satisfaction and issues connected with injurious consumption are mentioned.
2.2.1.1 Market segmentation
The idea how to divide market into segments comes from Smith (1956). He defined segmentation as “developments on the demand side of the market and represent a rational and more precise adjustment of product and marketing effort to consumer or user requirements”. Foxall et al as cited by Williams (1998) defines segmentation as
“the subdivision of large mass markets into smaller segments each containing a
one segment. However, the narrower the target segment is, the more expensive is the production for the segment. Hawkins et al (2007) divides market segmentation into four steps:
1. Identifying product-related need sets.
2. Grouping customers with similar need sets.
3. Describing each group.
4. Selecting an attractive segment(s) to serve.
This paper aims for brand loyalty of consumers, therefore only first three stages are in its focus.
Identifying product-related need sets
Hawkins et al (2007) demonstrates that there is not only one consumer’s need related to one product. That is why the term need set has been established. Some consumers buy beer for its taste, while others for its alcohol content. Still others purchase beer for both of these characteristic. Before the need sets can be examined the target consumers must be identified. That is done through demographics (Blackwell et al 2001).
- age - life-stage - gender - social class - ethnic group - lifestyle
Further discussion on these demographics is given in the following section.
Grouping customers with a similar need set
Previous researches showed significant importance of age, sex, and social class as factors influencing beer consumption. Allsopp (1986) demonstrates importance of personality as an important determinant of beer consumption. Eysenck (1988) examined relationships of personality and social behaviour in his study. However the investigation of consumers’ personality is out of scope of this research.
Firstly, Allsopp (1986) stated the importance of age on beer consumption. The highest consuming age group is 18-24 year-olds, who have markedly higher consumption as the lowest consuming age group, the over 50s. (Allsopp 1986) (figure 2.1). It is estimated that 27% of adult males visit pubs once a week, and that these consumers account for 78% of total beer market.
Figure 2.1: Adult Male UK per capita Weekly Consumption for Draught Bitter and Draught Lager Combined
Source: Allsopp, 1986
Describing each group
When the groups of customers are defined, the groups will be subscribed into the sociological system in terms of lifestyle.
The figure 2.2 reveals that curves of cumulative consumption for craftsmen and students are very similar. Just these two groups of consumers account for most of beer consumption in total. Specifically, the 25% of heaviest consumers accounts for 64% of total consumption (Allsopp 1986).
Figure 2.2: Cumulative Consumption as Proposition of Total Consumption for 18-21 year-old Craftsmen and 18-21 year-old Students Ranged by Consumption Level
Source: Allsopp, 1986
The segment of 18-21 year-old
students hard consumers of alcohol, can be divided into two groups. First group represented by Lipkus, Lynch, Bonnie and Wood (cited in Rundle-Thiele 2006) offered explanation as sensation-seeking and feelings of invulnerability. Second group represented by Eysenck (cited in Allsopp 1986) explains drinking behaviour on the basis of psychological traits of personality. Finally, Kropp et al (1999) describes values and interpersonal influence of young drinkers.
Biddle cited in Kropp et al (1999) claims that parents are most influential for adolescents – they establish normative drinking standards. On the other hand there are peers, who model the influence of parents. Hutchinson (1998) concurs, that impulsivity is also indicator of alcohol use among students.
2.2.1.2 Marketing Strategy
Formulating of “general marketing strategy for each segment” is next step in application of customer behaviour. The consumer seeks for the maximal value when buying a product. The customer value is the difference between perceived benefits and sacrifices connected with the purchase (Jobber 2004).
The purpose of marketing strategy can be formulated as answer on question: “How can we provide superior customer value to our target market?” (Hawkins et al 2007, p.19).
This question can be answered through statement of marketing mix which consists of:
- the product - brand - price
- communications - distribution
From marketing mix product – brand and price are significant for this paper. Brown as cited in Williams (1998) highlights that pub sector in UK has undertaken major changes; fragmentation of markets, growth of strategic alliances, marketing allusions and growth of anarchistic marketing practice. Firat as cited in Williams (1998) suggests that greater awareness of consumer diversity is required. Elliot as cited in Williams (1998) notes that nowadays it is not marketers who formulates meanings of marketing strategy but consumers through interpretation.
The Product – brand
The product is characterized as anything which leads to satisfaction of consumers needs.
The physical attributes of product are actually irrelevant from the perspective of customer behaviour (McMahon 1996 cited in Hawkins et al 2007). Ulrich (2004) has identified five benefits which make consumers buy beer: “functional, value for money, social, positive and negative emotional benefit”. The attributes of beer which leads to satisfaction of consumers needs will be examined.
A brand serves as a simplifier in the consumer process. A brand is kind of a shortcut through consumers’ memory to previous purchases (Lewis et al 2001). Actually, past behaviour has important influence on consumers’ intention. Especially in the case of beer, when product is purchased repeatedly. The theory that past behaviour has a significant influence on beer consumption was confirmed by a wide research carried out by Smith (2007).
Ulrich (2004) states, that “brand adds a value of its own independently from the one of
between brand and product is that product offers functional value while a brand increases value not on its functional basis.
Branding is important especially in industries which products have limited possibilities for diversification, as is beer industry. Producers have limited possibility to distinguish their products without brands (Lewis et al 2001). Ulrich (2008) adds that beer consumers perceive and evaluate rather brands than products. Vrontis (1998) adds that European breweries must concentrate on brand development by reason of stagnating sales and growing homogenisation of western beers.
Research carried by Charnatony and McDonald (1994 cited in Lewis et al 2001) revealed four values which branded bier provides to British consumers:
1. Identification by sight.
2. Assurance of consistent quality.
3. Rapid purchase decision.
4. Subject of self-concept.
Possibilities of beer diversification
Lewis et al (2001) demonstrates that there are very limited ways how beer can be diversified because beer is produced from simple ingredients. Possibilities of beer diversification are following:
- Variations at colour, taste, alcohol amount.
- Elimination of pasteurization and filtration.
- Serving methods and gas propellant.
heavily advertised. However, the promotion is not centred on quality which is in the case of biggest producers consistent but advertising of these brands uses humour, heritage and social settings.
Brand loyalty
Lancaster (1969 cited in Cook et al 1998) sees consumer as brand loyal person in short term. Consumer would change a brand only in case that he would reach a higher indifference curve.
Mittal (1998) claims, that “recruiting new customers is five times more expensive than retaining existing customer.” Therefore consumer loyalty means saving of costs for company. One of the first researches on loyalty by Day (1969) proposed that loyalty should be perceived as composite of “both attitudinal and behavioural concepts”. East as cited in Rundle-Thiele (2006) defines loyalty as situation when “persons do not undermine others by what they say or do. A person who has undisclosed misgivings, yet still behaves supportively, is seen as loyal”. Oliver as cited in Rundle-Thiele (2006) transfers term loyalty into field of consumer behaviour when describing loyalty as
“deeply held commitment to re-buy a preferred product consistently in the future…, despite situational influences and marketing efforts having the potential to cause switching behaviour.” Rundle-Thiele (2006) objects to this definition, that it does not suppose any commitment from side of company.
On the other hand, Trout and Rivkin (2000) as cited in Rundle-Thiele (2006) claims that there is no space for loyalty in a modern market where consumers face “more choices than ever”. Rundle-Thiele (2006) undertook a research which examines how is brand
Rundle-Thiele (2006) claims, that there is a loyalty in beer category. However, Allen (2003) cited in Rundle-Thiele (2006) demonstrates that consumers generally have a repertoire of four brands of beer from which they choose occasionally. Allen (2003) is supported by Dawes (2008) who argues, that beer drinkers are not very loyal to one brand; they have “repertoire of brands” from which they buy occasionally. Rundle- Thiele (2006) continues that there is always “promiscuous group of consumers” who choose beer solely according to price. Rundle-Thiele (2006) concludes that loyalty in beer industry can not be bought but earned. Consumers are not retained through expensive promotion but they are sensitive on fair treatment form the side of producers.
For example reducing pack sizes for the same price is eroding consumers’ loyalty.
Summarized in one sentence: “Loyalty in beer market is reciprocal” Rundle-Thiele (2006).
Price
Blackwell (2001) defines the price as amount of money which consumer must pay in exchange for ownership of the product. Hawkins et al (2007) further argues with economical supply-and-demand model which assumes that more products will be purchased if the price is low. According to Hawkins et al (2007), price plays more symbolic role for two reasons. Firstly, low price intimates low quality of product.
Secondly, ownership of expensive product sends a message about the owner while consumer actually purchases this message (I can afford to consume this product). The perception of beer prices are observed in this paper.
2.2.1.3 Outcomes
According to Hawkins et al (2007) there are three types of outcomes when applying consumer behaviour:
- firm outcomes: product position, sales and customer satisfaction - individual outcomes: need satisfaction, injurious consumption
- society outcomes: economic outcomes, physical environment outcomes, social welfare
From firm outcomes the product position and social welfare from the society outcomes are significant for this paper.
Product Position
According to Hawkins et al (2007) product position is the image of a brand in the minds of consumers. The image is composed from believes, visual symbols and emotions about the brand. Product position does not necessitate the acquisition of it but it is more important than immediate profit from sales. The product which is successfully positioned in the target group is likely to be purchased every time when the need arises.
Social Welfare
The social cost of alcoholism is stunning (Hawkins et al 2007). This is not immediate point of interest of this work; on the other hand, the negative impact of alcoholism on
bases his statement on inelastic demands for beer. This is supported by researches undertaken by Guis (2005). He claims that taxes have a minor effect on alcohol consumption. On the other hand Laixuthai and Chaloupka (1993) argue that excise taxes have reduced teen consumption of alcohol. Ulrich (2004) points out that marketing of beer has several peculiarities in contrast to marketing of other products. For example advertising of beer targeted on minors or “binge” drinking is abolished.
2.3 Conclusion
The aim of this paper is to examine purchase behaviour of individuals in the terms of brand loyalty and to find out which intentions and beer characteristics are most employed when purchasing beer. As previous researches in beer consumption revealed, there is number of attributes significant for consumers when making decisions about beer consumption. Only some of them will be employed in this research.
Firstly, the importance of age and sex on beer consumption has been approved many times. Therefore, these factors must be employed even in this research.
Secondly, as claims Rundle-Thiele (2006), there is loyalty in beer category. The brand loyalty of Czechs and Britons will be measured and consequently compared. Allen and Danes (2003) claim, that consumers generally have a repertoire of four brands of beer from which they occasionally make choices. In this project, the repertoires of consumers in Liberec and Huddersfield will be identified.
Thirdly, product characteristics as illustrated by Lancaster (1969 cited in Cook et al
(2008). Following characteristics were chosen for deeper examination: the consistency of taste, alcohol level, aroma, number of calories, price, method of delivery and special production.
Fourthly, intentions originated in self-identity as described by Pettigrew (2002), Hawkins et al (2007) and Smith (2007) will be examined. Factor of perceived behavioural control will be included.
Fifthly, Smith (2007) proved the importance of past purchase behaviour of consumers.
Therefore past behaviour will be employed in this research.
Seventhly, a group behaviour as described by Bearden et al (1989), Kropp et al (1999), Pettigrew (2002) and Smith (2007) will be examined as major intentions driving consumer when choosing brand of beer.
Eighthly, a hierarchy of benefits which is provided to consumers through brand is examined. In this research results of researches done by Charnatony and McDonald (1994 cited in Lewis et al 2001) were used.
These factors will be measured in Huddersfield (UK) and the Liberec (CR). Finally purchasing behaviour of Czech and English customers will be compared.
After reviewing literature, following objectives of this work were formed:
4. To build up hierarchy of most significant characteristics.
5. To compare hierarchy (of most significant characteristics) of consumers from Huddersfield and Liberec.
6. To conclude whether beer consumers are loyal.
7. To find out whether is choice of pub influenced by beer brand which is served there.
Consequently, six hypotheses were stated:
H1: There is a difference in beer characteristics important for Czechs and for Britons.
H2: Brand loyalty (regarding beer) of Czechs is higher than loyalty of Britons. In Czech the beer brand has an influence on the choice of a pub.
H3: There is a significant influence on consumer's self-concept on his choice of beer brand.
H4: There is a significant influence of past behaviour on choice of beer brand.
H5: There is a significant influence of group behaviour on choice of beer brand.
H6: Believes about values provided by brand of Czech drinkers differ from believes of British beer drinkers.
3. METHODOLOGY
This chapter explains which methods were used to reach the objectives, which were described in the end of previous chapter. That includes justification of appropriate research strategy, research method, the process of questionnaire design and the pilot study. Further the system of stratifying sample will be defined. Consequently, the data collection process and research limitations will be stated.
3.1 Research approach and strategy
The task of this research is observing the social reality which results in generalisations.
The philosophy of positivism was followed in this research. The philosophy of positivism assumes objective data analysing with consequent data interpretations.
Further, the deductive approach was chosen. The deductive approach includes the hypotheses development and subsequent testing. Finally, the research strategy was used to test these hypotheses.
Previous researches used mostly in-depth interviews with beer consumers (Pettigrew 2002, Rundle-Thiele 2006). However, none of these researches was aimed at comparison of consumer behaviour in different localities. Comparison of qualitative data gained through in-depth-interviews would be difficult and dubious.
The main objective of this research is matching of consumer behaviour in Liberec (CR) and in Huddersfield (UK), therefore the strategy of a survey with use of questionnaires
high acceptance among people which is beneficial for validity of collected data (Saunders 2000).
However, a survey approach of research includes some negatives as well. First disadvantage of a survey is the high time consumption. Much time was spent to questionnaire design, piloting, data collection and subsequent analysing. Second disadvantage of a questionnaire is that its range is quite narrow in comparison with an interview. The number of questions had to be limited in order not to discourage respondents by proportions of time and energy they would need to invest into the research (Burgess 2001).
3.2 Questionnaire design
The validity and reliability of the collected data does largely depend on the questionnaire design, structure of questionnaire and the authenticity of pilot study (Saunders 2000).
Some questions were inspired by previous researches while others were developed originally for this research. About 60 valid questions were gathered and consequently 18 most suitable questions were chosen. The data requirement table was found as a useful tool for the process of question-selection (see appendix A).
The questionnaire contains a combination of open and closed questions. The closed questions are usually easier to answer because they provide a number of alternative answers. Another advantage of closed questions is that they are easier to compare
question is present in the questionnaire. It is question 8 where the respondents were asked to state their four most favourite brands. Further, two types of closed questions were used. First type is a list where the respondents marked their choice from predefined items. Second type is a scaling device in question 4.
The scaling device in question 4 did not offer any kind of neutral answer since it is natural that respondents have certain estimation of particular beer characteristics. Yet, other questions allowed a neutral point of view.
Respondents were asked to state their most favourite brand in question 8. Even through this question does not lead directly to research objectives (for additional findings see appendix D); it was helpful with a view to improving of validity. It was vital that respondents relate their answers on final page to one particular brand. The probability that this condition is fulfilled was enhanced through forcing the respondents to write down name of their favourite brand. This method was inspired by research carried out by Rundle-Thiele (2006).
It was desired that the collected data are highly consistent. When the research is repeated in a future the difference in results would reflect the difference in consumer behaviour (Saunders 2000). For questionnaire in English see appendix B; for questionnaire in Czech see appendix C.
3.2.1 Pilot study
advantage of choice of pilot-respondents between students is their experience with their own researches.
The researcher found out that it is important to use a font size which is big enough to read in bad light conditions. A few repetitions are as well useful for helping to answer questions. Most important is using a language which is spoken by public, not only under academic conditions.
Question 12 was changed since the pilot-respondents appeared not answering honestly.
Thus, formulation “drinking my favourite brand makes me feel more satisfied with my appearance” was changed to “drinking my favourite brand fits to my personality” which was more acceptable by respondents and is still faceable for examination of building of self-concept through choice of brand
The pilot study revealed that there is a segment of market which does not care about brands at all, while price is the only relevant factor. Therefore, question 6 as a second filtrating question was added. Last part of questionnaire is dedicated to one favourite brand and consumers who do not have any favourite brand are asked not to participate on the rest of the questionnaire. Similarly, the respondents who do not drink any beer were asked not to continue after question 3. The pilot study helped the researcher to realize that there is a segment of consumers called “promiscuous group of consumers”
described in research of Rundle-Thiele (2006).
3.3 Sampling
significant were generalised. Then, certain implications valid for the whole population were designed.
The full set of respondents (the population) of this research is compound of inhabitants of Huddersfield and Liberec, which were older than 18 years. While a survey was used as the research strategy, probability sampling was used for data collection. Probability sampling allows the researcher to estimate characteristics statistically of the whole population. The chance of each element to be selected is the same (Saunders 2000). The sampling frame of this research is the complete list of pub visitors in Huddersfield and Liberec.
The largest possible sample size was chosen because “the larger the sample’s size is the lower the likely error in generalising to the population” (Saunders 2000, p.155).
However the limitations of the research affected the maximum of manageable sample size. There is more information about research limitations further in this chapter. The sample size was established at level of 200 elements. Half of them were collected in Huddersfield and the second half in Liberec.
The stratified random sampling was chosen as stratifying technique. This technique is a modification of random sampling divided into number of significant strata.
Stratification makes sample more representative (Saunders 2000). However, stratifying of sample made the data collection more difficult and time consuming. The population was divided into strata according to two variables: gender and age. For gender the similar ratio as is in the whole population was persuaded. In the case of age, the experience of previous researchers of beer consumption was used. Allsopp (1986) claims, that most of the beer drinkers fall into the category of 18-24 aged while the beer
