Segmentation, Targeting and Positioning in the

Diaper Market
300 mothers of infants were surveyed. Each was given a randomly
selected brand of diaper (Pampers, Luvs, ou Huggies) and asked to
rate the diaper on 9 attributes and to give her overall preference for
the brand. These ratings were obtained on 7-point scales. The study
was designed so that each of the three brands appeared 100 times.
The 9 attributes were:
VARIABLE ATTRIBUTE MARKETING OPTIONS
X1 Count per box Desire large counts per box?
X2 Price Pay a premium price?
X3 Value Promote high value
X4 Unisex Unisex versus separate-sex diapers
X5 Style Prints/colors versus plain diapers
X6 Absorbency Regular versus super absorbency
X7 Leakage Narrow/tapered versus form-fitting gathers
X8 Comfort/Size Extra padding and form-fitting gathers
X9 Taping Resealable tape versus regular tape

Pampers 1

Which attributes are most important in a diaper?

Coefficientsa

Unstandardized Standardized
Coefficients Coefficients
Model B Std. Error Beta t Sig.
1 (Constant) -3,458 ,320 -10,804 ,000
Count per Box ,504 ,119 ,269 4,245 ,000 R2 =0.730
Price ,109 ,129 ,056 ,843 ,400
Value ,016 ,076 ,010 ,215 ,830
Unisex ,472 ,093 ,362 5,088 ,000
Style -,065 ,102 -,044 -,643 ,521
Absorbency ,341 ,157 ,204 2,170 ,031
Leakage ,253 ,165 ,148 1,533 ,126
Comfort ,106 ,085 ,065 1,253 ,211
Taping ,020 ,069 ,012 ,282 ,778
a. Dependent Variable: Brand Peference

Pampers 2

1
What are the underlying dimensions of consumer choice?

KMO and Bartlett's Test

Factor analysis Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling

Adequacy. ,803
on attribute
ratings Bartlett's Test of Approx. Chi-Square 2404,021
Sphericity df 36
Sig. ,000

Total Variance Explained

Initial Eigenvalues Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings Rotation Sums of Squared Loadings
Component Total % of Variance Cumulative % Total % of Variance Cumulative % Total % of Variance Cumulative %
1 4,973 55,254 55,254 4,973 55,254 55,254 3,066 34,061 34,061
2 1,534 17,043 72,297 1,534 17,043 72,297 2,543 28,260 62,321
3 1,050 11,662 83,959 1,050 11,662 83,959 1,947 21,638 83,959
4 ,556 6,180 90,140
5 ,326 3,622 93,762
6 ,272 3,025 96,787
7 ,135 1,503 98,290
8 ,099 1,102 99,392
9 ,055 ,608 100,000
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

Pampers 3

What are the underlying dimensions of consumer choice?

a
Rotated Component Matrix

Component
1 2 3
Count per Box ,224 ,865 ,251
Price ,193 ,891 ,243
Value ,183 ,862 ,105
Unisex ,244 ,266 ,902
Style ,237 ,220 ,916
Absorbency ,850 ,232 ,256
Leakage ,879 ,182 ,257
Comfort ,863 ,177 ,157
Taping ,768 ,145 ,079
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.
Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.
a. Rotation converged in 4 iterations.

Pampers 4

2
 Which factors/dimensions are the most
important for consumers?

Regression of brand preference on the factor scores

Coefficientsa

Unstandardized Standardized
Coefficients Coefficients
Model B Std. Error Beta t Sig.
1 (Constant) 4,020 ,062 65,126 ,000
Funcional factor 1,019 ,062 ,519 16,473 ,000
Economic factor ,913 ,062 ,465 14,767 ,000
Styling factor ,922 ,062 ,470 14,910 ,000
a. Dependent Variable: Brand Peference

R2 =0,706

Pampers 5

How do consumers evaluate the three brands on

each factor?

Average factor scores of all brands on each factor

Funcional factor Styling Economy

0,5
0,5 0,5
0,4 0,4
0,339 0,321 0,4
0,3 0,3 0,3
0,2 0,2 0,2 0,143
0,1 0,1 0,1
0,01
0 0 0
Pampers Hughies Luvs Pampers Hughies Luvs
-0,1 -0,1 -0,1 Pampers Hughies Luvs
-0,074
-0,2 -0,141
-0,2 -0,179 -0,2 -0,153
-0,3 -0,3 -0,3
-0,265
-0,4 -0,4 -0,4
-0,5 -0,5 -0,5

For each factor, are there significant differences between

the consumers’ evaluations of the 3 brands?

Pampers 6

3
 ANOVA of the factor scores on the brands
Null Hypothesis: For each factor, the mean ratings of the 3
brands are equal
ANOVA

Sum of
Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Funcional factorBetween Groups 19,029 2 9,515 10,093 ,000
Within Groups 279,971 297 ,943
Total 299,000 299
Economic factor Between Groups 4,374 2 2,187 2,205 ,112
Within Groups 294,626 297 ,992
Total 299,000 299
Styling factor Between Groups 15,481 2 7,741 8,109 ,000
Within Groups 283,519 297 ,955
Total 299,000 299

Conclusion: the positioning of the 3 brands does not

differ significantly in the economic factor

Pampers 7

Perceptual Map

0,5

0,4

0,3
Pampers
0,2

0,1
Styling

0
-0,5 -0,4 -0,3 -0,2 -0,1 0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5
-0,1

Luvs -0,2 Hughies

-0,3

-0,4

-0,5
Functional

Pampers 8

4
 Perceptual Map

0,5

0,4

0,3

Pampers 0,2
Economy

0,1 Hughies
0
-0,5 -0,4 -0,3 -0,2 -0,1 0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5
-0,1

-0,2
Luvs
-0,3

-0,4

-0,5

Functional

Pampers 9

How important are the factors?

Coefficientsa

Unstandardized Standardized

Model B
Coefficients
Std. Error
Coefficients
Beta t Sig.
1. “revealed”
1 (Constant) 4,020 ,062 65,126 ,000 levels of
Funcional factor
Economic factor
1,019
,913
,062
,062
,519
,465
16,473
14,767
,000
,000
importance
Styling factor ,922 ,062 ,470 14,910 ,000
a. Dependent Variable: Brand Peference

2. Declared levels of importance (2nd sample)

Data: importance ratings for the three factors:
funcionality, style and economy
Descriptive Statistics
N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation
IMP_FUNC 300 1,00 7,00 4,1900 1,20224
IMP_ECON 300 1,00 7,00 4,0533 1,04601
IMP_STYL 300 1,00 7,00 4,2300 1,23917
Valid N (listwise) 300

Which is the most important factor?

Pampers 10

5
 Segmentation according to product benefits
Can we identify homogeneous segments of consumers?

Final Cluster Centers

Cluster
1 2 3 Cluster analysis on the
IMP_FUNC
IMP_ECON
3,26 4,25 4,91
importance ratings
3,26 4,79 3,98
IMP_STYL 4,53 5,11 3,09

ANOVA

Cluster Error

n1 = 89
Mean Square df Mean Square df F Sig.
IMP_FUNC 66,381 2 1,008 297 65,848 ,000
IMP_ECON
IMP_STYL
57,347
114,040
2
2
,715
,778
297
297
80,169
146,591
,000
,000
n2 =106
The F tests should be used only for descriptive purposes because the clusters have been chosen
to maximize the differences among cases in different clusters. The observed significance levels
n3 =105
are not corrected for this and thus cannot be interpreted as tests of the hypothesis that the cluster
means are equal.

Pampers 11

Benefits sought by each Cluster

0,8
0,6
0,4
0,2
0 Funcional
-0,2 Cluster1 Cluster2 Cluster3 Styling
-0,4 Economy
-0,6
-0,8
-1
-1,2

Pampers 12

6
Which targets and which Positioning?

0,8

2
0,3
1 Pampers
Pampers
Styling

brands
-1 -0,8 -0,6 -0,4 -0,2 0 0,2 0,4 0,6 0,8 1
-0,2 clusters
Luvs Hughies

-0,7

3
-1,2
Funcional

Pampers 13

Which targets and which Positioning?

0,8

2
0,3
Pampers
Economy

Hughies
brands
-1 -0,8 -0,6 -0,4 -0,2 0 0,2 0,4 0,6 0,8 1 clusters
-0,2
Luvs 3

-0,7
1

-1,2
Funcional

Pampers 14