1

Louisiana State University Students Coffee

Consumption Survey Including Opinions About and
Use of Community Coffee House Burbank




A Team Project
As part of the requirements for
MKT 3413, Marketing Research
Fall 2013




Team Members:
Katie Canizaro
Ashley Citron
Kathleen Garcia
Jessica Macaluso
Michelle Mobley
2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................... 8
Background of CCs Community Coffee House ................................................... 8
CCs Community Coffee House Burbank Menu ............................................. 10
CCs Community Coffee House Location near Louisiana State University
Campus....................................................................................................................10
Organization of the Report: .................................................................................. 12
OBJECTIVES ........................................................................................................ 13
Descriptive Research Objectives .......................................................................... 13
Manager-Specific Objectives and Hypotheses .................................................... 15
Differences and Relationship Objectives ............................................................. 16
Other Objectives .................................................................................................... 17
RESEARCH METHOD ........................................................................................ 18
Data Collection Method ......................................................................................... 18
Questionnaire Design ............................................................................................. 18
Questionnaire Layout ............................................................................................ 18
Sample Design ........................................................................................................ 21
Sample Size and Accuracy .................................................................................... 21
Statistical Analysis ................................................................................................. 22
DESCRIPTIVE FINDINGS .................................................................................. 23
Respondents Gender............................................................................................. 24
Student Classification ............................................................................................ 25
Business/Nonbusiness Major ................................................................................ 26
Work Status ............................................................................................................ 27
Age ........................................................................................................................... 29
General Lifestyle .................................................................................................... 30
3
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
Coffee-Specific Life style Dimensions .................................................................. 31
Coffee Shop Purchases in a Typical Month ........................................................ 32
Use of Coffee Shops ................................................................................................ 33
CCs - Burbank Usage and Purchases in the Past Month ................................. 36
Recall of CCs Advertising .................................................................................... 36
What LSU Students Purchase at CCs - Burbank .............................................. 38
Evaluation of CCs Burbank Performance ...................................................... 39
Satisfaction with CCs Burbank ........................................................................... 41
CCs Managers Findings ..................................................................................... 42
HYPOTHESIS TESTS AND SALES ESTIMATES .......................................... 48
Hypothesis Tests ..................................................................................................... 48
Sales Estimates for CCs - Burbank Purchases by LSU Students .................... 49
DIFFERENCES ANALYSES FINDINGS .......................................................... 50
Differences between LSU Female and Male Students ........................................ 50
Differences between LSU Students by Where They Live .................................. 53
RELATIONSHIPS ANALYSES FINDINGS...................................................... 56
Identification of LSU Student Coffee Shop Purchases ....................................... 56
Identification of CCs - Burbank LSU Student Target Market ........................ 57
Factors That Are Key to Satisfaction with CCs - Burbank.............................. 58
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS .................................................................... 59
LSU Students Use and Evaluations of Papa Johns Pizza ................................ 60
Manager-Related Objectives ................................................................................ 62
Differences Between Types of LSU Students ...................................................... 62
Coffee Shop Purchases Market Definition .......................................................... 63
CCs - Burbank LSU Target Market ................................................................... 64

4
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
Keys to CCs - Burbank Success with LSU students .......................................... 64
LIMITATIONS OF RESEARCH ........................................................................ 65
Research Errors ..................................................................................................... 65
Respondent Errors ................................................................................................. 65
Sampling Error ...................................................................................................... 65


TABLE OF TABLES
TABLES PAGE
Table 1 .....................................................................................................................29
Table 2 .....................................................................................................................30
Table 3 .....................................................................................................................31
Table 4 .....................................................................................................................32
Table 5 .....................................................................................................................35
Table 6 .....................................................................................................................36
Table 7 .....................................................................................................................40
Table 8 .....................................................................................................................43
Table 9 .....................................................................................................................44
Table 10 ...................................................................................................................46
Table 11 ...................................................................................................................47
Table 12 ...................................................................................................................49
Table 13 ...................................................................................................................51
Table 14 ...................................................................................................................51
Table 15 ...................................................................................................................52
Table 16 ...................................................................................................................53
Table 17 ...................................................................................................................53
Table 18 ...................................................................................................................53
Table 19 ...................................................................................................................54
Table 20 ...................................................................................................................54
Table 21 ...................................................................................................................54
Table 22 ...................................................................................................................55
Table 23 ...................................................................................................................55
5
TABLE OF TABLES
TABLES PAGE
Table 24 ...................................................................................................................55
Table 25 ...................................................................................................................56
Table 26 ...................................................................................................................57
Table 27 ...................................................................................................................59

TABLE OF FIGURES
FIGURE PAGE
Figure 1 Gender .....................................................................................................24
Figure 2 Classification ...........................................................................................25
Figure 3 Non/Business Major ...............................................................................26
Figure 4 Work Status .............................................................................................27
Figure 5 Full-Time/Part-Time Work Status .......................................................27
Figure 6 Dwelling Type .........................................................................................28
Figure 7 Dwelling Location ...................................................................................28
Figure 8 CC's Coffee Shop Use .............................................................................33
Figure 9 Purchasing at Othe Establishments ......................................................34
Figure 10 Recall of CC's Advertising ...................................................................37
Figure 11 Recall of CC's Particular Advertising Outlets...................................38
Figure 12 Typically Purchased Items ...................................................................39
Figure 13 Overall Satisfaction with CC's - Burbank .........................................41
Figure 14 Drive Thru Vs. In Shop Purchases .....................................................42
Figure 15 Seasonal Beverage Purchasing Behavior ...........................................45












6
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Objectives

This study was an investigation of how LSU student CCs Burbank users view CCs -
Burbank; how much and what CCs - Burbank items they purchase, and what constitutes CCs -
Burbank LSU student target market.

Method

A survey was conducted with a convenience sample of about 265 LSU students who
filled out and submitted an Internet-based questionnaire.

Findings Highlights

About one-quarter of LSU students purchase items from CCs - Burbank each month,
averaging about 4.5 purchases per month at about $4 per purchase.

It is estimated that LSU students make about 34 thousand purchases monthly and spend a
total of slightly more than 1$ million on CCs Burbank products annually.

LSU students rate CCs - Burbank as very good in performance on about three-fourths
of its performance characteristics, and rate the other characteristics as good.

With LSU student users, the most popular CCs - Burbank item is coffee with fresh
pastries following up at second.

Approximately two- thirds of LSU CCs Burbank product buyers are satisfied overall
with CCs - Burbank. Key drivers of this satisfaction are: atmosphere and value for the
price.

While only less than half of LSU student users recall CCs advertising in the past 30
days, the most effective form is the store sign along with social media. The other types of
advertising are not recalled by most LSU students.

LSU students rate the quality of frequently purchased coffee products from CCs
Burbank high. Students stated the coffee products to be enjoyable, good, appetizing, and
say they would recommend.

Compared to female LSU students, male LSU students usually attend the same coffee
shop and prefer an ice coffee while LSU females are more worried about how man
calories are in the coffee that they drink.
7
In regards to LSU students going into CCs Burbank to make a purchase, on-campus
students on average sometimes make their purchase and leave while students who live
off-campus more-often make their purchase and leave.

CCs Burbank target market is LSU students who: are underclassmen, live on the South
side of LSU campus, work, wake up early, and usually attend the same coffee shop.

Conclusions

CCs Burbank accounts roughly $1 million in sales per year. There do not appear to be
any weak aspects of CCs Burbank, and the atmosphere and value for price are the most
important drivers of LSU students satisfaction with CCs Burbank. Except for their store sign
and somewhat social media, CCs Burbank advertisements are not reaching large numbers of
people. If CCs Burbank wishes to gain more LSU students customers, it should consider
targeting those who: do not study harder than the average student, believe they have more ability
than most, do not like excitement in their life, believe that coffee does increase their energy, and
do not worry about the amount of calories in their coffee drink selection.

At the same time, CCs Burbank should be aware that its most loyal LSU student customers are
those who: are underclassman, live on the South side of campus, work, wake up early, and
usually attend the same coffee shop. If CCs Burbank wishes to gain more sales, offering
frequent buyer punch cards or reward cards would help to increase the amount of purchases
being made by the target market of those who usually attend the same coffee shop.















8
INTRODUCTION

As students in Dr. Alvin Burns marketing 3413, market research course, at Louisiana
State University, we are enrolled in an intensive learning class. This class requires hands on
learning and communication. This document is the main team project summary that was required
to be complete in order to pass the course. Dr. Burns instructed each team to choose a certain
establishment (general or location specific), brand, organization, or product to perform research;
each team was provided with general marketing research objectives, the opportunity to attend
class lectures to further our knowledge and understanding of the project, and multiple
opportunities to work on the project in class. The marketing research project required us to apply
the learned in-class concepts to a real life situation. The project allowed for research of consumer
behavior of Louisiana State University Students in regards to the topic chosen by the team.
This team chose to research Community Coffee House Burbank, Baton Rouge. The
research team included the following members: Katie Canizaro, Ashley Citron, Kathleen Garcia,
Jessica Macaluso, and Michelle Mobley.
Background of CCs Community Coffee House
Looking back four generations and through today, the Saurage
familys main focus is quality and service. In 1919, Henry Norman
Cap Saurage, owner of a small country store located on the north
edge of Baton Rouge, began the family journey of making great-
tasting coffee. In honor of his small country community store, he named the newly discovered
great-tasting coffee Community. In 1942, Mr. Saurage had a new plan. He closed up shop and
converted his backyard to a coffee mill. A local roaster sold coffee beans to Mr. Saurage to use
in his backyard coffee mill adventure. With quality being a main focus, Mr. Saurages son took

9
Community for a turn. To ensure quality was delivered at every step of the process, Saurage Jr.
bought the company its first coffee roaster, and in 1946, Communitys first roasting plant was
built in Baton Rouge.
As the company grew and the word spread, quality was still the center focus of
Community. In less than 30 years, many new developments within community took place, but
the striking ones in 1955, 1970, and 1980 particularly portrayed the companys focus on quality
of the product. In 1955, Community began importing specialty coffee beans from an assortment
of coffee plantations in Brazil. The imported green coffee beans were an important factor in
increasing the quality of the coffee being made. Twenty-four years after the first roasting plant
was built, a new plant was built along the Mississippi River, in Port Allen. This new location,
which was built in 1970, would allow re-evaluation, updating, and possible expansion.
Communitys opportunities and expansions into new markets increased quickly. By 1980,
the first vacuum-sealed coffee package was introduced by Community. Fifteen years later, in
1995, the first CCs Community Coffee House opened in New Orleans. The coffee house
location opened on the corner of Magazine Street and Jefferson. The rapid expansion of
Community continued in the following decade, as multiple CCs Community Coffee House
locations opened.
Through the four generations of rapid growth and expansion of Louisianas famous CCs
Community Coffee House, the Saurage family has run the company and stuck to their mission
To share our passion for great coffee with our customers.

______________________

1
Source of this information contained in this section is CCs Community Coffee House Website
(http://communitycoffee.com).

10
CCs Community Coffee House Burbank Menu

Community Coffee House Location near Louisiana State University Campus

With approximately 10 CCs coffee house locations in the greater Baton Rouge, we chose
the location on Burbank closest to campus. Our choice was based off the research criteria
assigned by Dr. Burns. We wanted to be able to investigate this specific location in relation to
the LSU students because they were in a closer proximity based off of its distance from campus
and near off campus living. We also chose the off campus location because we did not want the
research to be confined due to the specific research use of the on campus CCs establishments.
The CCs Community Coffee House at 3930 Burbank Drive is located on the south side of LSU
campus. Below is a picture of the CCs Burbank location on a map, LSU campus, and the
surrounding area; also, a few detail pictures of the CCs Burbank location.

11























CCs Burbank
LSU Campus

12


Organization of the Report:
The report is divided into seven sections: executive summary, introduction, objectives,
survey methods, findings, limitations, and conclusions of the study.

13
OBJECTIVES
The research was undertaken to satisfy a requirement in MKT 3413, and this team
investigated the CCs Burbank purchasing behavior of LSU students, particularly their
purchases of, opinions about, and satisfaction with CCs Burbank.
Descriptive Research Objectives

The following descriptive objectives were formulated for this research effort.
1. How much do they use CCs Community Coffee House - Burbank?
a. Do they purchase products from CCs Community Coffee House Burbank?
(What percent of LSU students use CCs Burbank?)
b. How often do they use CCs - Burbank? (How much do LSU students use CCs -
Burbank?)
c. How much do they typically spend per visit when they visit CCs - Burbank?
d. What are the typical purchases of CCs Burbanks customers? (e.g., coffee,
seasonal drink options, other beverage options, pastries, prepackaged food, etc.)?
e. How much do they typically spend on the category? (e.g. how much is
typically spent on ALL coffee shop purchases this pertains to products being
purchased from any coffee shop, not limited to only CCs.)
2. How do they rate CCs Burbanks performance on its various aspects?
a. Atmosphere
b. Employees
c. Value for the Price
d. Quality of Food
e. Cup Sizes Offered
14
f. Freshness of Coffee
g. Cleanliness
h. Internet Access
i. Hours of Operation
j. Waiting time for order
k. Location
l. Comfort
3. Overall, how satisfied are they with CCs Community Coffee House Burbank? (very
dissatisfied to very satisfied)
4. What CCs advertising do they recall, and/or where do they recall advertising?
a. Billboard
b. Coupon Books
c. Local Paper
d. Social Media
e. Flyers
f. Radio
g. Store Sign
5. What is the market share of this business as compared to CCs Burbanks competitors?
6. Provide demographic profiles of the sample.
7. Provide lifestyle profiles of the sample.
8. General life-style profile
9. Category-specific lifestyle profile
15
Manager-Specific Objectives and Hypotheses
The team met with the manager on duty of the CCs Community Coffee House on
Burbank. The team reviewed the initially set research objectives with the manager and discussed
three additional detailed objectives to be included in the research project objectives. Overall, the
managers objectives focused on bringing customers into the location on Burbank and providing
the best quality coffee, service, and overall experience.
1. Rate the quality of the coffee products that are frequently purchased by the participant.
2. Should holiday coffee be available year round?
a. Does it make it more likely to buy the item in the time period holiday coffee is
sold?
3. Does the store atmosphere bring the most customers?
a. If not, is it the convenience of the drive-thru?
4. The manager has the opportunity to revamp the location and wants to know what do
college students look for in a coffee shop when forming their consideration set?
a. Desks
b. Multiple food options
c. Prices
5. How likely is a students attention drawn to the different types of advertisement?
a. Billboard
b. Coupon Books
c. Sponsorships
d. Flyers
e. Store Signs
16
In conclusion of the project explanation and development of specific research objectives,
the team prompted the manager in providing three hypotheses or beliefs about LSU students use
of CCs Community Coffee House Burbank. The hypotheses provided by the manager as
follows:
Hypothesis 1: 80% of LSU students use CCs on Burbank at least 1 time per month.
Hypothesis 2: LSU students who purchase products from CCs on Burbank on average
spend $5 - $10 per visit.
Hypothesis 3: LSU students who purchase products from CCs on Burbank, on average,
will be very satisfied in regards to overall satisfaction.
Differences and Relationship Objectives
The project assignment included the following differences and relationship objectives.
1. Does usage of CCs - Burbank differ by or relate to type of student?
2. Do key performance ratings for CCs - Burbank differ by type of student?
3. Does overall satisfaction with CCs Burbank differ by type of student?
4. Does overall satisfaction specifically with CCs coffee differ by type of student?
5. Does recall of CCs - Burbank advertising differ by type of student?
6. In relation to student demographics, does the purchasing differ by the type of student?
7. Does coffee-specific life style differ by or relate to type of student?
8. Are there other interesting or meaningful differences or relationships found in the survey?
17
Other Objectives
Finally, two objectives were formulated pertaining to the LSU student target market, and
another objective related to understanding overall satisfaction with CCs Community Coffee
House.
1. What is the LSU student target market profile for coffee?
2. What is CCs Burbanks LSU student target market profile?
3. What factors determine satisfaction with CCs Community Coffee House?


18
RESEARCH METHOD
Data Collection Method
Each team was guided to take advantage of LSUs business school access with a site
license to Qualtrics. Qualtrics is a website that users must purchase before use. It is a
questionnaire design system that allows its licensed members to create questionnaires to be
published via Internet. The respondents who choose to respond are brought to the Qualtrics
website where they will proceed to answer questions and their answers are internally saved on
the website. Being marketing 3413 students, we were directed to make a login and group
collaboration on the Qualtrics website under the LSU business school license. Our team created a
questionnaire on the system with a focus on CCs Burbank near LSU and Dr. Burns then shared
our survey on the Internet to other students. Students who are enrolled in Marketing 3401 at LSU
were invited to answer the questionnaires, our 3413 teams developed, for extra credit. Here they
would answer the questions and submit their answers online. With hundreds of students in
Marketing 3401, Dr. Burns set to leave the questionnaires open until the target sample size was
reached at a minimum of 200 respondents.
Questionnaire Design
As noted above, the team used Qualtrics to design its CCs Community Coffee House
Burbank survey questionnaire. Details on Qualtrics can be found on this companys website:
(www.qualtrics.com).
Questionnaire Layout
Each team was required to put a standard format for the beginning of the questionnaire
that is titled Consent Form. The consent form section was for 3401 students to indicate that
they were willing to participate, and if they wanted extra credit, they also had to enter their last
19
name, first name, and instructors last name. If the student did not provide their initials in the
original consent space, the survey was not continued.
The questionnaire was opened up with warm-up questions and kicked off asking
respondents whether or not they purchased anything from CCs on Burbank in the past month. If
the respondent selected no, they were reverted to the end of the survey, and if they selected yes,
they were sent immediately to the next question where they were asked how often does the
respondent purchase products from CCs on Burbank in a typical month. The students who stated
that they have purchased products from CCs on Burbank were directed to multiple different
short warm-up questions such as: how often per month do they purchase from CCs on Burbank,
how much do they typically spend per visit, and which products are typically purchased (check
all that apply). For respondents who checked all the applied and included other, they were
directed to the open-ended response question where they were to list the other product they
typically buy when purchasing from CCs on Burbank. The next three questions dealt with one
of the managers set objectives. The respondents were asked, when going to CCs on Burbank to
buy a product, do they go through the drive-thru or go into the shop (check all that apply). For
those included going into the shop in any answer format, they were directed to two questions that
dealt with reasons why they would be going into the coffee shop to make their purchase and
what is important to them in regards to the atmosphere and interior amenities in a coffee shop.
For those who answered, I only go through the drive-thru, they were directed further into the
survey. The next set of questions focused on competitors. The respondents were asked if CCs on
Burbank is the only coffee shop they purchase from and they were also asked how often do they
make purchases at ANY coffee shop location and how much do they spend on all of these
adventures as generalization questions in regards to the competitor objective. Students were then
20
to select other establishments where they would possibly buy these same product offerings
(check all that apply) and then rate each of the listed coffee shops on how often they purchase
products from these coffee shops off campus, the 4-point scale ranging from Never to Often.
Students then had to rate twelve explicit aspects of CCs Burbank on a 6-point scale ranging
from Poor to Outstanding. The students were then directed to rate their overall satisfaction
of CCs-Burbank on a 7-point scale ranging from Very Dissatisfied to Very Satisfied.
Students were also presented with adjectives in regards to CCs Burbank coffee, and were asked
to rate each.
Respondents were then directed to a set of questions dealing mainly with the managers
objectives. The respondents were asked if they purchase the available seasonal beverages. If the
respondent selected yes, they were directed to two more seasonal specific questions. Would the
respondent purchase a fall specialty beverage during fall and should CCs-Burbank offer all of
the seasonal drinks year around. If the respondent selected no to the original seasonal drink
question, they were then directed to the advertisement questions. Respondents had to choose if
they recall any CCs Burbank advertising from the past month. If the student selected yes, they
were directed to the next question where multiple forms of advertisement are listed (check all
that apply). Finally, in order to fill the managers last objective, respondents were asked how
likely their attention is to be drawn to the listed forms of advertisement on a 7-point scale
ranging from Very Unlikely to Very likely.
Following the questions, every respondent was presented with several lifestyle questions.
There was a coffee-specific lifestyle statements question and a general lifestyle statements
question. For both of the lifestyle questions, the respondents were to indicate agreement on a 4-
point scale ranging from Highly Disagree to Highly Agree. Finally, each respondent was
21
presented with multiple questions related to demographic characteristics such as gender, age,
classification, business or non-business major, current dwelling and location, and
employment/work status.
Sample Design

This research team designed the questionnaire to determine LSU students use and
reactions toward CCs Burbank products and location as a whole along with use and reaction
of coffee in general. The ideal sample would be one the perfectly represents the population of
Louisiana State University sample body. Due to failure of a random (probability) sample
assignments required by Dr. Burns in the past, the questionnaire was administered to a
convenience sample of Louisiana State University, students who are enrolled in Marketing 3401
at LSU.
A convenience sample selects respondents based on availability and ease. Having the
Marketing 3401 students all in one place, teachers who are willing to offer respondents extra
credit, and Dr. Burns publishing the survey online, the convenience sample was used by each of
Dr.Burns marketing 3413 research teams.
Sample Size and Accuracy
The team acquired a final sample size of 265 and the error is + 6.02%. The statistical
accuracy of the survey cannot be determined, because the students were required to use the
convenience sample for the Marketing 3401 class, meaning that is was a nonprobability and
nonrandom sample selection method. If it were a randomly selected sample of 265 students, it
would yield an accuracy level of + 6.9% at the 95% level of confidence.
22
Statistical Analysis
The teams statistical analyses were developed using the XL Data Analyst Excel macro
add-in. The data analyses, tables, figures, findings, and interpretations made by the team are
found in the following section of the report.
















________________________
2
Because several MKT 3413 teams used this convenience sampling approach, the maximum allowable number of
respondents (sample size) was set to 200 via Qualtrics capabilities so teams who published their questionnaires
early on would not exhaust the respondent pool.

23
DESCRIPTIVE FINDINGS
As described earlier in the report, each team was required to rely on convenience
sampling when distributing the survey. Convenience sampling means that the sample in not
representative. When trying to maximize the understanding of the nature of individuals who took
part in the survey, lifestyle dimensions and a profile of the sample demographics can be used due
to our use of a convenience sample.
The questionnaire included the following demographic question and life style
dimensions:
Gender
Classification (freshman, sophomore, etc.)
Business/Non-Business Major
Work Status (working or not working)
Age
General life style dimensions
Coffee Specific Lifestyle dimensions

The following pages report the survey findings pertaining to these questions.




24
Respondents Gender
Figure 1 presents the findings of the respondents gender. As can be seen, there was a
majority of female representation (78%) and a slight male representation (19%), with some no
responses (3%).
Figure 1
Respondents Gender















20%
80%
25
Student Classification

Student status was measured using the standard classifications of freshman, sophomore,
junior, senior, senior+, and graduate school. Figure 2 shows that half of the students (50%) were
juniors, next was seniors (33%), then senior+ (11%), and sophomores and graduate school
students are tied (3%).
Figure 2
Respondents Student Classification












3%
50%
33%
11%
3%
sophomore
junior
senior
senior+
graduate school
26
Business/Nonbusiness Major

Figure 3 indicates that over half of the students indicated that they are business majors
(53%). The others indicated that they were not business majors (47%).
Figure 3
Respondents Business/Nonbusiness Major
















53%
47%
yes
no
27
Work Status

Figure # indicates the percentages of respondents in accordance with work status. 78% of
respondents who have purchased an item in the past month from CCs Burbank recorded that
they work. Approximately only 2 out of 10 students stated that they are not currently working.
Figure 4
Respondents Work Status


The figure below shows that of the students who are currently working, a higher
percentage recorded that they work part-time (96%).
Figure 5
Respondents Work Status - Time



78%
22%
yes
no
4%
96%
28
Dwelling Location

Figure 4 describes the respondents dwelling location. Most students live off-campus
(84%) and 16% live in their sorority or fraternity houses on-campus.
Figure 6
Respondents Dwelling Type

Students also were asked to indicate whether or not their dwelling is located on the South
side of LSUs campus. Figure #, below, illustrates that each selection option has a very close
selection percentage, but less than 50% of respondents reported that they live of the South side of
campus.
Figure 7
Respondents Dwelling Location

16%
3%
64%
17%
47%
53% yes
no
29
Age
Table 1 reveals the typical respondent is 21 years old, and the standard deviation
indicates that most respondents are in this age range.
Table 1
Respondents Age

Variable Average Standard
Deviation
Minimum Maximum
Indicate your age
range.
21.3 0.8 21 24


30
General Lifestyle

General lifestyle was measured with the use of seven different general lifestyle
statements. The respondent was directed to respond in accordance with their level of agreement
or disagreement. The four options included Highly Disagree, Somewhat Disagree,
Somewhat Agreement, and Highly Agree. As seen in the table, respondents agreed most
with the first two statements. It also shows that the average respondents did not highly disagree
with any of the general lifestyle statements.
Table 2
General Life-style Dimensions

Variable Average* Standard
Deviation
Typical
Response
I enjoy socializing. 3.6 0.7 Highly Agree
I usually go along with the
crowd.
3.6 0.6 Highly Agree
I study harder than the
average student.
3.1 0.9 Somewhat
Agree
I have more ability than
most.
3.1 0.7 Somewhat
Agree
I like excitement in my life. 3.0 0.6 Somewhat
Agree
I wake up early. 2.9 0.7 Somewhat
Agree
I go to sleep late. 2.8 0.9 Somewhat
Agree
*Based on a scale where 1 = Highly Disagree and where 4 = Highly Agree.





31
Coffee-Specific Life style Dimensions

A total of ten coffee-specific life style statements were administered to respondents, and
they were instructed to respond to each one using the same 4-point disagree-agree scale as they
used with the general life style statements. Table 4 shows that respondents agreed most with the
statement, I like to add flavor to my coffee. They agreed least with the statement, I worry
about how many calories are in the coffee that I drink. Taste and flavor are important to the
respondents.
Table 3
Coffee-Specific Life Style Dimensions

Statement Average* Standard
Deviation
Typical
Response
I like to add flavor to my coffee. 3.4 0.8 Somewhat
Agree
I like the taste of the coffee I purchase from
coffee shops
3.3 0.9 Somewhat
Agree
Coffee increases my energy 3.3 0.7 Somewhat
Agree
I usually attend the same coffee shop 3.1 0.7 Somewhat
Agree
I prefer an ice coffee. 3.1 0.9 Somewhat
Agree
I like to study at coffee shops 3.0 1.0 Somewhat
Agree
There is no hassle getting to a coffee shop 2.8 0.7 Somewhat
Disagree
I have to drink coffee every day. 2.7 1.0 Somewhat
Disagree
I prefer warm coffee. 2.6 1.0 Somewhat
Disagree
I worry about how many calories are in the
coffee that I drink
2.5 1.1 Somewhat
Disagree
*Based on a scale where 1 = highly agree, and 4 = highly disagree.
32
Coffee Shop Purchases in a Typical Month

Our team included a question pertaining to the respondents typical spending in a month
at any coffee shop location. The standard deviation, minimum, and maximum reveal high
variability between the different respondents answers.
Table 4
General Coffee Shop Spending in a Month

Variable Average Standard
Deviation
Minimu
m
Maximum
How much do you
spend on ALL of your
coffee shop purchases in
a typical month?
$ 28.13 $ 17.80 $10.00 $65.00













33
Use of Coffee Shops

There are several coffee shop businesses near the LSU campus and other sorts of
establishments that offer the mainstream beverages: coffee, tea, other beverages, and etc.
Initially, we asked participants if CCs Burbank is the only coffee shop location where they
make purchases. As shown in the figure below, only 11% of respondents stated that CCs
Burbank is the only coffee shop where they make purchases.
Figure 8
CCs Is The Only Coffee Shop I Use







11%
89%
yes
no
34
Following this question, for those respondents who selected no, we asked them to check
all other establishments listed that they may frequent to purchase the same and/or similar
products that CCs Burbank offers. As shown in figure # below, most respondents who
reported that they do not only make purchases from CCs Burbank, are making purchases at
other coffee shop locations (93.8%).
Figure 9
Purchasing at All Other Establishments*


*Sum > 100% due to multiple answers.















22%
34%
94%
35
Students who then chose Other Coffee Shops, as shown in the figure above, were
directed to rank their usage of the coffee shops listed. On a 4-point scale labeled with: Never,
Rarely, Sometimes, and Often (1-4), we found that the highest average of students who purchase
products at other coffee shops are going to Starbucks, which is shown on table # below.
Table 5
Average Attendance at Other Coffee Shops

Other Coffee
Shops
Average* Standard
Deviation
Explanation
Starbucks 3.1 0.9 Sometimes
PJ's Coffee 1.9 1.1 Never - Rarely
Highland Coffee 1.4 0.7 Never
Coffee Call 1.2 0.5 Never
*Based on 4-point scale 1 = Never and 4 = Often.













36
CCs - Burbank Usage and Purchases in the Past Month

In order to determine the benefaction of CCs on Burbank by Louisiana State University
students, we asked two questions. The first question asked students how often do respondents
who have purchased any product from CCs in the past month typically purchase products in a
typical month. The second question asked typically, how much the respondent spends per visit at
CCs Burbank. Table # reveals the findings, and it indicates that all of the respondents who
purchase products from CCs Burbank on average purchase about four and a half times per
month (4.5), and the respondents spend about an average of slightly more than $4 per visit
($4.03).
Table 6
CCs Burbank Purchased Products in A Typical Month & Spending per Visit

Variable Average Standard
Deviation
Minimu
m
Maximum
How often do you
purchase products from
CC's on Burbank in a
typical month*?
4.5 6.9 0.5 30
Typically, how much do
you spend per visit?
$4.03 $3.10 $2.50 $17.50
*Based on 6-point scale 1 = Less than once a month and 6 = Daily.







37
Recall of CCs Advertising
A particular objective assigned to research involved what CCs advertising is recalled by
respondents in the past month. The team initially asked respondents if they recalled any CCs
advertising in the past month. The team identified and listed multiple types of advertising that
CCs Burbank particularly might use, and those students who recalled any CCs advertisement
from the past month were then asked to check all from the listed sources of advertising identified
by the team on the survey. Figure 10 shows that less than half (42%) of respondents recalled
advertising from the past month.
Figure 10
Recall of CCs Advertising








42%
58%
In the past month, do you recall CC's
advertising ...
yes
no
38
Figure 11 shows that of those who recalled CCs advertising in the past month 9 out of 10
recalled seeing the store sign, and approximately 5 out of 10 students recalled social media
advertising. One of the managers set objectives was to research which advertising outlet would
be the best investment for CCs Burbank.
Figure 11
Recall of CCs Particular Advertising Outlets*


*Sum > 100% due to multiple answers.









39
What Items LSU Students Purchase at CCs Burbank
In regards to typically purchased items from CCs on Burbank, we can see that coffee is
the most popular item being purchased. As you can see in figure #, more than half of the
participants indicated that coffee is one on of their typical purchases from CCs Burbank.
Approximately 3 out of 10 students purchase fresh pastries from CCs Burbank and all of the
remaining items are only purchased as a whole by less than approximately 5 out of every 10
students.
Figure 12
General Purchase Overview CCs Burbank*


*Sum > 100% due to multiple answers.





40
Evaluation of CCs Burbank Performance
The team selected twelve different aspects or CCs Burbank based on their knowledge,
research, website inspection, and store inspection. Respondents were asked to rate CCs
Burbank performance for each of the listed aspects using a 6-point scale of poor to
outstanding. The findings are presented in table #.
Table 7 shows that CCs Burbank highest average performance rating occurred for
internet access. However, as seen in the table below, all twelve aspects of CCs Burbank
were rated positively by the respondents. All of the performance aspects were rated above a 3.0
average which good outstanding on the scale. A majority of the aspects were ranged
between 4.0 and 4.5.
Table 7
Performance of CCs Burbank Typical Response

Variable Average* Standard
Deviation
Internet Access 4.5 1.1
Freshness of Coffee 4.4 1.3
Cleanliness 4.3 1.2
Location 4.3 1.2
Atmosphere 4.2 1.1
Hours of Operation 4.2 1.1
Cups Sizes Offered 4.1 1.2
Waiting Time for Order 4.1 1.3
Comfort 4.0 1.3
Employees 4.0 1.3
Quality of Food 3.5 1.3
Value for the Price 3.4 1.3
*Based on 6 point scale 1 = poor and 6 = outstanding

41
Satisfaction with CCs Burbank
Respondents were not only required to indicate their satisfaction in accordance with
several performance factors, respondents were also asked to rate their overall satisfaction of
CCs Burbank. Satisfaction was measured with a 7- point anchored scale ranging from very
dissatisfied to very satisfied. Figure # illustrates that about 63.9% of respondents recorded
that they are in general satisfied in regards to CCs Burbank overall satisfaction rating. The
figure shows that respondents satisfaction responses were lower on the negative side of the
scale. The average overall satisfaction score was found to be 6.0 (standard deviation of 0.8).
Figure 13
Overall Satisfaction with CCs - Burbank


[PERCENTAGE]
[PERCENTAGE]
[PERCENTAGE]
[PERCENTAGE]
Rate your overall satisfaction for CC's on Burbank.
somewhat dissatisfied somewhat satisfied satisfied very satisfied
42
CCs Managers Findings

As noted in the managers objectives, the most important research objective dealt with
students coming into the coffee shop and the atmosphere. Respondents indicated their typical
purchasing outlet at CCs Burbank through being able to check all options that applied to them.
The drive-thru takes 67.4% of the purchases being made by customers attending CCs
Burbank, the other 32.6% of purchases are transacted at the counter inside of the Burbank
location.
Figure 14
Drive Thru Vs. In Shop purchases








Go through the
Drive - Thru
67%
Go into CC's -
Burbank
33%
Drive Thru Vs. In Shop Purchases
43
The students that chose either both options or at least the in shop purchase choice, were
directed to follow-up questions in order to completely fulfill the managers research objective
our team was assigned. (Table # - # relate to figure # pictured above.) The respondents were
asked to rate the importance/unimportance of different atmosphere enhancing aspects while in
CCs Burbank. Respondents rated the importance of each statement ranging from 1 -6, 1
being not at all important and 6 being extremely important. As seen in table 8 below,
students feel that free wireless internet at CCs Burbank is one of the most important extra
aspects that draws them into the inside of the coffee shop.
Table 8
Students View of Atmosphere of CCs - Burbank

Atmosphere Add -
Ins
Average* Standard
Deviation
Importance Level
Free Wifi 5.3 1.0 Very Important
Prices 4.8 1.1 Somewhat Important - Very
Important
Desk space for
Work
4.4 1.2 Somewhat Important
Multiple Food
Options
3.7 1.4 Somewhat Unimportant -
Somewhat Important
*Based on 6-point scale 1 = not important at all and 6 = Very important














44
The last of this important research objective the manager set was for the team to find out
what students were doing, their intentions, and behaviors in accordance with coming into CCs
Burbank to make purchases. Respondents were to rate each statement on a 5 point scale ranging
from 1-5, 1 being never and, 5 being all of the time. Respondents indicated that on average
they are sometimes making their purchase and leaving and/or staying to do school work, less
students indicated that they meet friends to socialize which in-turn lowered the average to
rarely.
Table 9
Recreational Use of CCs - Burbank

Variable Average* Standard
Deviation
Frequency
Make my purchase and leave. 3.5 1.3 Sometimes - Often
Stay and do school work. 3.1 1.3 Sometimes
Meet friends to socialize. 2.1 1.2 Rarely
*Based on 5-point scale 1 = never and 5 = all of the time
















45
Seasonal coffee purchasing behavior was important to find out. Our research team came
up with three different questions in accordance with the seasonal beverage objective: Does the
respondent purchase seasonal beverages, would the respondent purchase a fall beverage in the
summer, and should CCs Burbank offer all seasonal beverages year around. Respondents who
selected no when asked to indicate whether or not they purchase seasonal beverages were not
invited to answer the next two questions. For this reason, we only had 38 respondents of the 72
who were able to complete the questions. For each of the three questions, the respondent was
required to choose yes or no.
Figure 15
Seasonal Beverage Purchasing Behavior


*Sum > 100% due to multiple answers







37%
53%
68%
46
The research team also asked a question pertaining specifically to CCs Burbank coffee.
Descriptive words were presented to the respondents on a 7-point semantic differential scale. The
team made every other line the opposite extreme of the adjectives to reduce the likelihood of the
halo effect occurring. The results from the respondents are show below. As stated below,
respondents find CCs Burbank coffee to be enjoyable, good, and appetizing, and would
recommend the product to others.
Table 10
Feelings about CCs Burbank Coffee

Variable Average
*
Standar
d
Deviatio
n
Minimu
m
Maximu
m
Unenjoyable:Enjoyable 6.0 1.0 2 7
Bad:Good 6.0 1.0 2 7
Would Not Recommend:Would
Recommend
5.9 1.1 2 7
Unappetizing:Appetizing 5.8 1.1 2 7
Inexpensive:Expensive 4.3 1.5 1 7
Not Fresh: Fresh 4.4 1.7 1 7
Low Quality: High Quality 5.1 1.0 1 7
*Based on 7-point bipolar scale using adjectives identified for each variable in the table.











47
The manager also wanted to get more insight on the types of advertising that catch LSU
students attention. As shown in table # below, generally store signs are the most valuable form
of advertising in terms that on average, students are somewhat likely to have their attention
drawn to this form of advertisement. In regards to relation with the set research objective
pertaining to types of advertising seen in the past month, the manager understands that social
media is one of the most visible and used form of advertisement. She moreover wanted to focus
on expensive advertisement methods.
Table 11
Attention Drawing Advertisements

Variable Average* Standard
Deviation
Degree of Amount of
Attention
Store Signs 5.0 1.6 Somewhat Likely
Coupon
Books
4.6 1.9 Undecided -Somewhat
Likely
Sponsorships 4.4 1.7 Undecided
Flyers 4.1 1.9 Undecided
Billboard 3.9 2.0 Somewhat Unlikely
*Based on 7-point scale 1 = very unlikely and 7 = very likely







48
HYPOTHESIS TESTS AND SALES ESTIMATES
Hypothesis Tests
As previously noted in the Objectives section of this report, each team was
required to meet with the manager of their project location. Our research team
asked the manager of the CCs Burbank location, to provide three hypotheses or
beliefs about LSU students purchase behavior and opinions of the CCs- Burbank
location. The Hypotheses provided by the manager were as follows:
Hypothesis 1: 80% of LSU students purchase an item from CCs Burbank per
month.
Hypothesis 2: LSU students who use CCs Burbank generally spend $6.00 -
$10.00 per visit, averaging $7.50 per visit.
Hypothesis 3: On a 7-point labeled scale of overall satisfaction with CCs
Burbank, LSU students will, on average, rate it 7, because of the atmosphere.
Each hypothesis was tested using the XL Data Analyst data analysis features1.
The findings are as follows.
Hypothesis 1: The hypothesis that 80% of LSU students use CCs Burbank
per month was not supported. Team research found that of the 272 respondents,
200 (74%) indicated that they had not purchased an item from CCs Burbank in
the past month and only 72 (26%) respondents indicated that they had purchased
an item from CCs Burbank in the past month. Tested on a 95% confidence
interval, the interval is stated to be 21.2% - 31.7%.
Hypothesis 2: The survey asked respondents to indicate how much they
typically spend per visit to CCs Burbank, and this amount was tested with respect
to the hypothesis of $7.50. The hypothesis was not supported; our research team
gathered that the average spent per visit by respondents was $4.00. Consequently,
the team determined the 95% confidence intervals to estimate this value. The
confidence interval was found to be between $3.31 and $4.74.
Hypothesis 3: This hypothesis was tested using the satisfaction scale. The
scale was a 7-point scale with end points of 1 being very dissatisfied, and 7 being
very satisfied. The value we use to test the hypothesis was 7, because the
manager formed a hypothesis that LSU students who use CCs Burbank are very
satisfied. The sample average was found to be 6, and the XL Data Analyst
hypothesis test indicated that the managers hypothesis was not supported.

3
The team realizes that hypothesis tests and confidence intervals assume a random sample. This assumption was
violated in order to demonstrate the teams command of hypothesis tests and confidence intervals,
49
Consequently, the team determined the 95% confidence intervals to estimate this
value. The confidence interval was found to be between 5.9 and 6.2.
Sales Estimates for CCs - Burbank Purchases by LSU Students
Ninety-five percent confidence intervals were computed for three purchases
variables (percent of LSU students using CCs Burbank in a month, average
CCs Burbank purchases per month by CCs Burbank users, and dollars spent
on CCs Burbank per purchase by CCs Burbank users), and these were used to
calculate the three sales estimates2. Table # contains the specifics and results of
these calculations.
Table #
Annual LSU Student Sales Estimates for CCs-Burbank
Table 12







4
The procedure used is similar to that in Burns, Alvin and Bush, Ronald, Basic Marketing Research: Using
Microsoft Excel Data Analysis, 2
nd
Edition, Prentice Hall Publishers, 2008, pages 366-367.
LSU Fall 2013 Enrollment
29,000

(Source:http://sites01.lsu.edu/wp/cfr/quic
k-facts-about-lsu/)
Pessimisti
c Estimate
Best
Estimate
Optimistic
Estimate
Percent Students Using CC's - Burbank* 21.20% 26.50% 31.70%
LSU Students using CC's - Burbank 6148 7865 9193


CC's - Burbank Orders/Month/Student* 2.9 4.5 6.1
Total CC's - Burbank Orders/Month 17,829 34,583 56,077

Dollars/Order* $3.30 $4.00 $4.70

Estimated LSU Student Dollars/Year $529,521 $1,244,98
8
$2,372,057
50











*Averages only for those who purchased from CCs Burbank in the past month.
The best Estimate of CCs Burbank purchases by Louisiana State University
students per year amounts to slightly more than $1 million dollars ($1,244,988).
The best estimate for CCs Burbank is that LSU students purchase more than
30,000 (34,583) per month and spend slightly less than $5 ($4.50) on each CCs
Burbank purchase. At the very minimum, the analysis indicates that LSU students
account for approximately $500,000 ($529,521) in CCs Burbank sales per year,
while the most optimistic estimate is that LSU students spend slightly more than $2
million per year ($2,372,057).
DIFFERENCES ANALYSES FINDINGS
Differences analyses involve comparisons of averages or percentages of
various groups identified in the survey to determine the statistical significance of
their differences. A statistically significant (at the .05 level) difference is
important because it means that the difference exists in the population of LSU
students, and the difference may have valuable market segmentation implications.
The team investigated areas where differences might lead to market segmentation
implications: (1) male versus female LSU students and (2) on-campus (LSU Greek
affiliated house) versus off-campus (apartment) LSU students. Our teams analyses
were all based off of respondents who have purchased from CCs Burbank in the
past month due to respondents who selected no being immediately directed to the
conclusion of the survey.
Differences between LSU Female and Male Students
Various differences analyses were applied to investigate possible differences
between males and females with respect to CCs Burbank top three item
51
purchase expenditures, average purchases per month, average spending per visit,
top three advertisement outlets recollection, evaluation of CCs Burbank as to
performance on several characteristics, overall satisfaction, and coffee-specific
lifestyle statements. The analyses were also applied to different research managers
objectives in order to investigate the differences between males and females with
respect to CCs Burbank drive-thru vs. In-shop purchases, importance of aspects
in a coffee shop, rating specifics of CCs Burbank coffee products, and
purchasing of seasonal beverages.
There were no significant differences findings between males and females in
regards to percent who use CCs Burbank, average purchases per month, or
average spending per visit. Table #, as show below, displays the significant
difference between males and females in regards to recalling social media
advertisements in the past month. On average, more females were able to recall
CCs social media advertising from the past month. In regards to social media
advertisements, 25% of females reported that they had seen it at least once in the
past month, along with 14.3% reported they have seen coupon book advertisements
for CCs Burbank in the past month.
Table#
Differences Between Male vs. Female LSU Students & Recall of Advertisements:
Table 13
Gender Male Female
Social Media 0.0% 25.0%
Coupon Books 0.0% 14.3%
Using the differences analyses, the research team also found that the majority of
evaluations on several performance characteristics along with the overall
satisfaction ratings did not significantly differ between males and females, with
one exception being Atmosphere. As shown in table #, males on average rated
CCs Burbank performance characteristic, atmosphere, higher than females, even
though the males on average reported being only somewhat satisfied.
Table#
Differences Between Males vs. Female LSU Students & Performance
Characteristics
Table 14
Gender Male*
Female*
52
Please rate CC's on
Burbank's following
aspects.-Atmosphere
5.0 4.0
*Based on 7-point scale 1 being Very Dissatisfied and 7 being Very Satisfied.
In conjunction with the respondents selections to the coffee-specific lifestyle
statements, table #, below, displays the significant differences between males and
females.
Table#
Differences Between Males vs. Females & Coffee-Specific Lifestyle Statements
Table 15
Gender Male*
Female*
I worry about how
many calories are in the
coffee that I drink
1.7 2.8
I usually attend the
same coffee shop
3.4 3.0
I prefer an ice coffee. 3.4 3.0
*Based on 4-point scale 1 being Highly Disagree and 4 being Highly Agree.
As shown in the table above, females worry more about how many calories are in
the coffee that they drink, and males more often attend the same coffee shop and
prefer an ice coffee over that of females.
Taking these analyses one step further, the various differences analyses were
applied to further investigate the different managers objectives. The three tables
below show the significant differences found between males and females in
regards to the managers set research objectives.
Table # shows that a higher percent of males reported that they go into the coffee
shop to make purchases. Table # shows that although females on average find
multiple food options to be only somewhat important when considering aspects of
a coffee shop, the still on average find more importance in the particular aspect
than males. Table # shows that 60.7% females reported that they do purchase
seasonal beverages when they are available which is greater than the males
purchase percentage response of 28.6%.
Table#
Differences Between Males vs. Females & Outlet of Purchase
53
Table 16
Gender Male Female
Go into the shop to make
my purchase
71.4% 35.7%
Table#
Differences Between Males vs. Females & Aspects in Coffee Shop
Table 17
Gender Male* Female*
Multiple food options 2.6 4.0
*Based on 6-point scale 1 being Not Important at All and 6 being Extremely
Important.
Table#
Differences Between Males vs. Females & Seasonal Beverages Purchasing
Table 18
Gender Male Female
Do you purchase the seasonal
beverages when they are
available?
28.6% 60.7%

A number of differences analyses were run, but the only ones showing
significance are shown on the previous page, in regard to males vs. females. All
others that were run were shown equal, supported, or un-significant, meaning the
testing was concluded for those items at that point in time.
Differences between LSU Students by Where They Live
The survey included a question on the type of dwelling the respondents live
with the response alternatives of LSU affiliated Greek House, apartment,
Condo, house, or dorm. In accordance with Dr. Burns guidelines, the
research team used the highest percentage on campus and off campus dwellings
that were selected by respondents. LSU Greek affiliated house was the highest
percentage on-campus dwelling selected and apartment was the highest
percentage off-campus dwelling selected. Several tests of significant differences
were computed using XL Data Analyst to ascertain if there are any market
segmentation implications as to dwelling location. Multiple significant differences
were found when comparing the LSU students who live on-campus vs. off-campus.
54
(Referring to LSU Greek affiliated House as On-Campus and Apartment as
Off-Campus.)
A significantly higher percent of off-campus students reported fresh pastry
purchases from CCs Burbank (34.8%) than those who live on campus (0.0%), as
shown in table #, below.
Table#
On-Campus vs. Off-Campus & Product Purchases
Table 19
Dwelling Type LSU Greek Affiliated
House
Apartment
Fresh Pastries 0.0% 34.8%
The off-campus students on average rated the Atmosphere higher than those who
live on-campus, as show in table #, below.
Table#
On-Campus vs. Off-Campus Students & Performance Characteristics
Table 20
Dwelling Type LSU Greek
Affiliated House
Apartment
Atmosphere 3.7 4.4
*Based on 6-point scale 1 being poor and 6 being outstanding.
A higher percentage of on-campus students recorded that they typically go
through the drive-thru to make their purchase when going to CCs-Burbank, as
shown in table #, below.
Table#
On-Campus vs. Off-Campus Students & Outlet of Purchasing
Table 21
Dwelling Type LSU Greek
Affiliated House
Apartment
I go through the drive-
thru to make my
purchase.
100% 87%
Students who live off- campus, on average, reported that they often make
their purchase and leave when they do go inside of CCs Burbank; whereas,
students who live on-campus, on average, reported that sometimes they make their
purchase and leave. On average, students who live on-campus more often stay after
55
making a purchase than those who live off-campus. The findings are displayed in
table #, below.
Table#
On-Campus vs. Off-Campus Students & In-Store Purchasing Habits
Table 22
Dwelling Type LSU Greek
Affiliated
House*
Apartment*
I Make my purchase
and leave.
2.5 3.7
*Based on 5-point scale 1 being Never and 5 being All of The Time.
As shown below, on average, students who live on-campus, consider free-
Wi-Fi to be important when considering aspects in a coffee shop, while students
who live off-campus find prices to be more important when considering aspects of
a coffee shop.
Table#
On-Campus vs. Off- Campus Students & Aspects in a Coffee Shop
Table 23
Dwelling Type LSU Greek Affiliated
House*
Apartment*
Prices 3.8 5.0
Free Wi-Fi 5.7 5.1
*Based on 6-point scale 1 being Not at All Important and 6 being Extremely
Important.
Zero percent of students who live on campus reported that they CCs
Burbank should offer seasonal beverages year around, while only 26.1% off-
campus students reported they should, findings are shown in the table below.
Table #
On-Campus vs. Off-Campus Students & Seasonal Beverages Purchasing
Table 24
Dwelling Type LSU Greek
Affiliated House
Apartment
CC's on Burbank should
offer all of the seasonal
drinks year around.
0.0% 26.1%
56
RELATIONSHIPS ANALYSES FINDINGS
The last set of analyses concerned a search for relationships among various
questions on the questionnaire with other questions to determine: (1) an LSU
student target market profile for coffee shop purchases, (2) CCs-Burbank LSU
student target market, and (3) key drivers or performance factors that are related
to satisfaction with CCs Burbank. Statistically significant relationships are useful
as they provide information about the patterns that exist in the population. These
relationships can provide important insights that are useful in understanding
consumer behavior or otherwise helpful in assessing CCs Burbank marketing
strategies and tactics.
A special class of relationship analyses involves the use of multiple
regression analysis. Accordingly, the final set of analyses involved relationship
analysis in the form of multiple linear regression analyses. Regression analysis is a
technique that assesses the relationships among many variables as they combine to
predict the level of a specific variable of interest. Basically, multiple regression
analysis identifies what factors are key or important in understanding the nature of
some relevant marketing construct such as customer satisfaction or the nature of
the target variable.
Identification of LSU Student Coffee Shop Purchases
As a first effort to understand the nature of coffee shop purchases by LSU students
in general, a series of multiple regression analyses using the XL Data Analyst was
performed. These analyses used the variable that measured total dollar purchases
of coffee shop items per month as the dependent variable with all the significant
demographic and life style variables as the independent variables. The trimmed
regression analysis results produced by the XL Data Analyst are presented in Table
#.
Table #
Determinants of Any Coffee Shop Purchases by LSU Students
Table 25
Trimmed Regression Analysis Results (Backward Stepwise)
Dependent Variable Total Cases 64
In general, how often do you make
purchases at ANY coffee shop
location?


Independent Variable(s) Coefficient Standardized
57
I study harder than the average
student.
-6.04* -0.65
I have more ability than most. 7.59* 0.76
I like excitement in my life. -3.26* -0.26
I wake up early. 3.30* 0.41
There is no hassle getting to a coffee
shop
-2.94* -0.28
Coffee increases my energy 3.85* 0.40
I worry about how many calories
are in the coffee that I drink
-1.61* -0.25
*Scale is 1-4, strongly disagree to strongly agree
The regression analysis, above, resulted in the identification of seven factors that
are significantly related to coffee shop purchases by LSU students. Specifically,
an LSU student purchases more items from coffee shops if he/she:
Does not study harder than the average student,
Believes they have more ability than most,,
Does not like excitement in their life,
They wake up early
Coffee does increase their energy,
Does encounter a hassle in getting to a coffee shop,
Do not worry about the amount of calories in their coffee drink selection.
The standardized coefficients reveal that students who believe they have
more ability is the most important factor followed by coffee being a large part of
waking up early and increasing energy. The other factors are less important, but
no one of these factors is significantly greater in importance over the others.
Identification of CCs - Burbank LSU Student Target Market
The next objective for this survey was to obtain a profile of CCs Burbanks LSU
student target market. This objective was investigated using multiple regression
analyses as a screening device to identify the significant demographic, coffee-
specific life style, and general life style factors that predicted the CCs Burbank
LSU student target market. Table # contains the results of this approach.
Table #
CCs - Burbank LSU Student Target Market Profile
Table 26
Trimmed Regression Analysis Results (Backward Stepwise)
Dependent Variable
58
How often do you purchase products from CC's on Burbank in a
typical month?
Independent Variable(s) Coefficient Standardized
Indicate your classification at LSU -2.71 -0.39
Is your dwelling located on the south
side of Louisiana State University
campus?
-3.03* -0.22
Do you currently work? 3.55* 0.21
I wake up early. 1.81** 0.23
I usually attend the same coffee shop 3.83** 0.41

*Dummy variable coded with 1 = yes and 2= no
**Scale is 1-4, highly disagree to highly agree
These findings lead to the following descriptions of CCs Burbank LSU target
market profile: LSU students who
Are Underclassman,
Live on the South side of LSU campus,
work,
wake up early,
Usually attend the same coffee shop.
The standard coefficients reveal that the coffee-specific life style characteristics are
more important in predicting CCs Burbank orders per month than is the student
classification, dwelling location, and work status.
Factors That Are Key to Satisfaction with CCs - Burbank
The last item of interest was satisfaction with CCs Burbank as customer
satisfaction is considered to be vital in a companys long-term success. The
analysis, Key Drive Analysis, used various performance factors and applied
multiple regression in order to identify which one or what set of performance
factors were instrumental in understanding overall satisfaction with CCs
Burbank. These factors found are known to be the drivers of the business. These
drivers are aspects that do not want to be changed. As in the previous regression
analysis, only those variables that are statistically significant at the 95% level of
confidence are reported in the following table.
Table #
Performance Factors that Are Key to LSU Students Satisfaction with CCs -
Burbank
59
Table 27
Results: Least Squares Method of
Regression

Dependent Variable Total Cases 70
Rate your overall
satisfaction for CC's on
Burbank.

Independent
Variable(s)*
Coefficient Standardized
Value for the Price 0.22 0.33
Atmosphere 0.26 0.39
Intercept 4.21

*Based on a 6 point scale where 1 = poor and 6 = outstanding
Table # identifies two key performance factors that are directly related to LSU
students positive satisfaction with CCs - Burbank:
Value for the price,
Atmosphere.
The standardized beta values reveal that the most important key drivers are the
value for the price and the atmosphere, with atmosphere taking a slight lead.











60
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
This survey of LSU students was performed to answer a number of questions that are
listed as research objectives in the Objectives section of this report. These objectives are
recast into specific questions, and in the following sections, the team has prepared concise
summaries in bullets to each question based on the findings that are provided in detail in the
previous section of the report. Each summary is followed by a conclusion drawn from the
findings.
LSU Students Use and Evaluations of Papa Johns Pizza
Question: How much do LSU students use CCs - Burbank?
Findings Summary
One-quarter of LSU students use CCs Burbank (26%)
Each LSU student who buys items from CCs Burbank makes about 4.5 purchases per
month, and spends about $4 per visit.
The Best Estimate for CCs Burbank is that LSU students buy approximately 34
thousand CCs Burbank items monthly and spend a total of slightly more than $1
million annually.

Conclusion: A significant amount of students use CCs Burbank, but those who do on average
use it multiple times per month.

Question: What is the relative popularity of CCs Burbank menu items?

Findings Summary
Coffee is ranked as the highest purchased item by LSU students; slightly more than 90%
of purchases are typically coffee at CCs Burbank.
Fresh Pastries are the second most purchased item; Fresh pastries are typically purchased
30% of the time.

Conclusion: LSU students do not use the range of menu items available at CCs Burbank: they
tend to purchase coffee with fresh pastry purchases following behind.




61
Question: Overall, how satisfied are they with CCs - Burbank?

Findings Summary (Only CCs Burbank Buyers)
Slightly less than a quarter of students indicate very satisfied (7 on the 1-7 satisfaction
scale).
An approximate one half of students indicate satisfied (6 on the 1-7 satisfaction scale).
The remaining 15% of students were spread between somewhat satisfied (11%) and
somewhat dissatisfied (3%) (1-7 satisfaction scale).

Conclusion: The average LSU student who uses CCs - Burbank is satisfied.


Question: How do LSU students who use CCs - Burbank rate its performance on its various
aspects?

Findings Summary
CCs - Burbank rates very good on:
Internet Access
Freshness of Coffee
Cleanliness
Location
Atmosphere
Hours of Operation
Cup Sizes Offered
Waiting Time for Order
Comfort
Employees
CCs - Burbank is rated good on all other performance dimensions used in the survey:
Quality of Food and Value for the Price.

Conclusion: In general, LSU students who use CCs - Burbank, rate its various aspects highly,
although, there some room for improvement.


Question: What CCs advertising do they recall, and/or where do they recall advertising?

Findings Summary
Less than half were able to recall seeing CCs advertising in the past month.
About 9 out of 10 (93%) recall seeing the CCs store sign.
Slightly more than half (53%) recall social media advertisements.
Only about 2 out of 10 recall seeing a CCs Coupon book advertisement (27%), Local
paper ad (20%), Flyer (20%), or radio ad (20%) in the past 30 days.
62
Only 7% of students recalled seeing a CCs billboard in the past month.

Conclusion: CCs most effective advertising is the store sign. Its social media advertisements are
less recognized than the store sign but is recalled more than other form of advertisements by
CCs that do not reach appreciable numbers.

Manager-Related Objectives
What did the survey discover with regard to CCs - Burbank manager-specific objectives?

Findings summary
LSU students rate the quality of frequently purchased coffee products from CCs
Burbank high. Students stated the coffee products to be enjoyable, good, appetizing, and
say they would recommend.
Approximately 50% purchase seasonal beverages.
Less than half (37%) believes that all seasonal beverages should be available for purchase
year around.
More LSU students frequent the drive-thru (62.4%) than inside (32.64%) of CCs
Burbank.
Students feel that free-wifi and prices are very important when forming their
consideration set of which coffee shop to attend.
Students stated on average stated that the store signs are only somewhat likely to draw
their attention. Coupon books, flyers, and sponsorships follow behind.

Conclusion: In general, students who purchase items from CCs Burbank rate it highly, more
often frequent the drive- thru, find that free-Wifi and prices are important, and state that store
signs are the best form of advertising for CCs - Burbank to draw their attention (therefore, the
manager needs to invest most allotted money to a store sign when revamping the advertising.)
Differences Between Types of LSU Students
Question: Are there differences by student demographics?

Findings Summary
Male vs. Female
No gender differences were found for CCs Burbank top three item purchase
expenditures, average purchases per month, nor average spending per visit.
Female students recall more social media and coupon book advertisements in the past
month.
Male LSU students are more satisfied with the atmosphere than females.
Compared to female LSU students, male LSU students usually attend the same coffee
shop and prefer an ice coffee while LSU females are more worried about how man
calories are in the coffee that they drink.
63
A higher percent of male LSU students go into the coffee shop to make their purchase
than females.
Females find more importance in multiple food options when considering aspects of a
coffee shop.
More LSU females than LSU males purchase seasonal beverages when they are available
for purchase.
On-Campus vs. Off-Campus
Off-campus students purchase more pastries from CCs- Burbank than on-campus
students.
Compared to off-campus LSU students, on-campus LSU students use the drive- thru a
higher percentage of the time while the off-campus students rated the atmosphere of CCs
Burbank higher.
In regards to LSU students going into CCs Burbank to make a purchase, on-campus
students on average sometimes make their purchase and leave while students who live
off-campus more-often make their purchase and leave.
Compared to off- campus LSU students, LSU students who live on-campus find free-Wi-
Fi to be extremely important while off-campus students find prices to be more important
when considering aspects in a coffee shop.
LSU students who live off-campus believe that CCs Burbank should offer seasonal
beverages year around.

Conclusions: Being that coffee is such a highly used product and coffee shops being located on
every corner, only few significant differences were found between males vs. females and on-
campus vs. off-campus LSU students.
Coffee Shop Purchases Market Definition
Question: What factors predict LSU students coffee shop item purchases in general?

Conclusion: Based on multiple regression analysis, an LSU student makes more coffee shop
purchases if he/she:
Does not study harder than the average student,
Believes they have more ability than most,,
Does not like excitement in their life,
They wake up early
Coffee does increase their energy,
Does encounter a hassle in getting to a coffee shop,
Do not worry about the amount of calories in their coffee drink selection.



64
CCs - Burbank LSU Target Market
Question: What is CCs Burbank LSU student target market profile?

Conclusion: Based on multiple regression analysis, CCs - Burbank LSU target market profile is
LSU students who
Are Underclassman,
Live on the South side of LSU campus,
work,
wake up early,
Usually attend the same coffee shop.

Keys to CCs - Burbank Success with LSU students
Question: What factors are key to satisfaction with CCs - Burbank?

Conclusion: Based on multiple regression analysis, there are two key performance factors that
are directly related to LSU students positive satisfaction with CCs - Burbank. These are:
Value for the price,
Atmosphere.

















65
LIMITATIONS OF RESEARCH
Research Errors
Research is vulnerable to an ample amount of errors whether it is the researcher, the
participant, or any error pertaining to the actual survey itself causes them. For the Marketing
3413 project, the two main types of errors in conjunction with this survey are respondent errors
and sampling errors.
Respondent Errors
Respondent errors are a non-sampling error and entail the errors on the participants part.
Whether the participant intentionally or unintentionally provided the surveyor with an error in
their response depends on multiple factors. A respondent misinterpreting a question and/or its
answers could cause an error along with other factors such as; not fully completing the survey,
refusals to participate in the survey or answer specific questions, or the inability of someone to
participate. The research groups were given an outline and guidelines when making the survey in
order to reduce the risk of respondent errors. Along with the guidelines each question was
reviewed to assure they were clear, concise, and understandable.
Sampling Error
Sampling error occurs when the method used to select the sample does not result in a
sample that is representative of the entire population. The survey administered for this research
project was a convenience sample. Because Dr. Burns was able to administer the survey to a
class full of students expecting extra credit, the final sample is not representative of the LSU
66
student body. The survey findings can show general assumptions of only those students who
match the demographic profiling for this sample and included in the sample method.