The effect of marketing communications mix on the coffee house brand equity 2022

The effect of marketing communications, mix on the coffee house ,brand equity 2022

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING THE STATE BANK OF VIET NAM BANKING UNIVERSITY OF HO CHI MINH CITY NGUYEN DANH KIET THE EFFECT OF MARKETING COMMUNICATIONS MIX ON THE COFFEE HOUSE BRAND EQUITY GRADUATE THESIS OUTLINE MAJOR: BUSSINESS ADMINISTRATION CODE: SUPERVISOR DR TRAN DUC THUC HO CHI MINH, 2022 1|Page MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING THE STATE BANK OF VIET NAM HO CHI MINH UNIVERSITY OF BANKING NGUYEN DANH KIET THE EFFECT OF MARKETING COMMUNICATIONS MIX ON THE COFFEE HOUSE’s BRAND EQUITY GRADUATE THESIS OUTLINE MAJOR: BUSSINESS ADMINISTRATION CODE: SUPERVISOR DR TRAN DUC THUC HO CHI MINH, 2022 2|Page APPROVED BY: Committee APPROVED BY: Advisor Dr Tran Duc Thuc; PH.D THESIS COMMITTEE 3|Page DECLARATION I declare that this thesis has been composed solely by myself and that it has not been submitted, in whole or in part, in any previous application for a degree Except where states otherwise by reference or acknowledgment, the work presented is entirely my own The thesis has done under the guidance of DR TRAN DUC THUC at the Ho Chi Minh University of Banking, Viet Nam Thesis’s Author Nguyen Danh Kiet 4|Page ACKNOWLEDGE This thesis is the author’s work, the research results are honest, in which no previously published content or content is done by others except for cited quotes in the thesis During my thesis time, I got loads of backings and supportive gestures from numerous people This thesis would not have been accomplished without that valuable input, support, counsel, and advice First and foremost, I would like to express my deepest acknowledge to my advisor – DR TRAN THUC DUC– lecturer at Ho Chi Minh University of Banking – for his believable and unreserved help, valuable advice, and recommendation Thank for his effort and wide knowledge to make my topic possible, his suggestions, direction, and advices are always highly appreciated and greatly contributing to the success of this thesis I would also like to express my sincere appreciation to the professors and lecturers for their guidance during my academic years at the Ho Chi Minh University of Banking The knowledge and skills that I have learned, have assisted me in the completion of this thesis Last but not least, honestly the most supported ones are my family Words fail to express my thankfulness to my parents for their endless love To all the above and so many more, I just simply want to say again “Thank you for all your encouragement, support, and love” 5|Page ABSTRACT Purpose – The thesis between components of the marketing communications mix, such as brand identification, brand image, brand love, and brand loyalty, are investigated in this study The study focuses on attitudes toward advertisements, monetary and non-monetary advertising as parts of the marketing communications mix Design/methodology/approach – Based on a cross-section, online, selfadministered survey, proposed relationships are examined with 415 before the coffee House consumers Findings – Attitudes toward advertisements, monetary advertising, and nonmonetary advertising, all play important roles in marketing communications mix Keywords - Advertising, Sales promotions, Brand image, Brand identification, Brand love, Brand loyalty, Coffee shop industry 6|Page TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURE CHAPTER 1: OVERVIEW OF THESIS 11 1.1 The necessity of the topic 11 1.2 Objective and questions 12 1.3 Research subjects and scope 12 1.4 Research methods 13 1.5 Research significance 13 1.6 Thesis structure 13 CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 16 2.1 Prior literature 16 2.1.1 Marketing communications Process 16 2.1.2 Marketing communications mix tools 18 2.2 Three components of the communication mix 19 2.2.1 Attitude toward Advertisement 19 2.2.2 Non-Monetary marketing 20 2.2.3 Monetary marketing 20 2.3 The element of brand equity 21 2.3.1 Brand Identification 21 2.3.2 Brand Image 22 2.3.3 Brand Love 23 2.3.4 Brand Loyalty 24 2.4 Previous empirical thesis 25 2.5 Hypotheses model 28 CHAPTER 3: THE REASEARCH METHODOLOGY 30 3.1 Research process 30 3.2 Research methods 30 3.3 Sample description 31 7|Page 3.4 Survey design 32 3.4.1 Scale applied in the survey 32 3.4.2 The questionnaire designs 32 3.5 The reliability of the scale 33 3.5.1 EFA-Exploratory factor analysis 34 3.5.2 CONFIRMING FACTOR ANALYSIS (CFA) 34 3.5.3 SEMLINEAR STRUCTURE MODEL 36 CHAPTER 4: DATA ANALYSIS 38 4.1 Descriptive statistic 38 4.2 DATA ANALYSIS RESULTS 40 4.2.1 Testing the scale by Cronbach's Alpha reliability coefficient 40 4.2.2 The results of exploratory factor analysis EFA 42 4.2.3 Confirmatory factor analysis CFA 44 4.2.4 Unidirectional and data fit TESt 45 4.2.5 CHECKING THE VALUE OF CONFIGURATION OF THE COVERAGE45 4.2.6 Evaluate the reliability of the scale 47 4.2.7 Check the discriminant validity of the scale 49 4.2.8 SEM linear structural model testing 50 4.2.9 Check the relationship between the factors in the model 51 4.2.10 Testing theoretical model estimation using Bootstrap 53 4.3 Conclusion of Statistical Hypothesis 54 4.4 Discussion 55 Chapter 5: COnclusion 58 5.1 Implications 58 5.2 Limitations 60 5.3 Recommendations for Policy and Future research 61 References 63 PART II: SURVEYING IMPACTS OF FACTORS 70 8|Page LIST OF FIGURE FIGURE 2-1 SIMPLE MODEL OF COMMUNICATION PROCESS 17 FIGURE 2-2 COMPLEX MODEL OF MARKETING COMMUNICATIONS PROCESS 18 FIGURE 2-3 RESEARCH MODEL 28 FIGURE 3-1 RESEARCH FLOW CHART 30 FIGURE 4-1 CFA RESULTS OF THE CRITICAL MEASUREMENT MODEL (NORMALIZED) 45 FIGURE 4-2 SEM RESULTS OF THE RESEARCH MODEL (NORMALIZED) 51 9|Page LIST OF TABLE TABLE 2-1 SHOW HOW THE COMMUNICATION MIX INTERPRETS THE MARKETING MIX 19 TABLE 4-1 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS OF THE STUDY SAMPLE 39 TABLE 4-2 SUMMARY OF CRONBACH'S ALPHA TEST RESULTS .41 TABLE 4-3 EFA ANALYSIS RESULTS FOR MEASUREMENT CONCEPTS 43 TABLE 4-4 UNNORMALIZED REGRESSION COEFFICIENTS OF THE CFA MODEL .46 TABLE 4-5 STANDARDIZED REVOLUTION COEFFICIENTS OF THE CFA MODEL .47 TABLE 4-6 SUMMARY RELIABILITY RESULTS AND EXTRACTED VARIOUS 49 TABLE 4-7 RESULTS OF DIFFERENT VALUE BETWEEN VARIABLES 50 TABLE 4-8 SEM MODEL NON-NORMALIZED WEIGHT 53 TABLE 4-9 STANDARDIZED WEIGHT OF SEM MODELS .53 TABLE 4-10 STANDARDIZED REGRESSION COEFFICIENT OF THEORETICAL MODEL 55 10 | P a g e Estimate S,E, C,R, P DD2 < - DD 1,000 DD5 < - DD ,859 ,045 19,191 *** DD6 < - DD ,652 ,051 12,883 *** DD3 < - DD ,817 ,052 15,847 *** DD7 < - DD ,638 ,049 12,955 *** DD4 < - DD ,733 ,054 13,673 *** DD1 < - DD ,749 ,052 14,271 *** EE5 < - EE 1,000 EE1 < - EE 1,033 ,067 15,457 *** EE2 < - EE ,923 ,061 15,045 *** EE6 < - EE ,827 ,060 13,753 *** EE3 < - EE ,888 ,066 13,473 *** EE4 < - EE ,865 ,066 13,047 *** AA3 < - AA 1,000 AA2 < - AA ,814 ,051 15,872 *** AA4 < - AA ,820 ,054 15,192 *** AA1 < - AA ,758 ,051 14,852 *** AA5 < - AA ,791 ,054 14,682 *** BB3 < - BB 1,000 BB5 < - BB ,851 ,064 13,290 *** BB1 < - BB 1,047 ,081 12,996 *** BB2 < - BB ,902 ,075 11,959 *** BB4 < - BB ,857 ,073 11,729 *** GG1 < - GG 1,000 GG4 < - GG 1,140 ,067 16,966 *** GG2 < - GG 1,009 ,069 14,714 *** GG3 < - GG ,627 ,047 13,428 *** CC3 < - CC 1,000 CC1 < - CC ,577 ,060 9,658 *** Label 81 | P a g e Estimate S,E, C,R, P ,077 9,264 *** CC2 < - CC ,713 FF1 < - FF 1,000 FF2 < - FF 1,024 ,089 11,481 *** FF3 < - FF ,924 ,083 11,153 *** Label Standardized Regression Weights: (Group number - Default model) Estimate DD2 < - DD ,902 DD5 < - DD ,801 DD6 < - DD ,614 DD3 < - DD ,710 DD7 < - DD ,617 DD4 < - DD ,642 DD1 < - DD ,661 EE5 < - EE ,838 EE1 < - EE ,753 EE2 < - EE ,737 EE6 < - EE ,687 EE3 < - EE ,675 EE4 < - EE ,658 AA3 < - AA ,830 AA2 < - AA ,773 AA4 < - AA ,747 AA1 < - AA ,734 AA5 < - AA ,727 BB3 < - BB ,754 BB5 < - BB ,754 BB1 < - BB ,736 BB2 < - BB ,676 BB4 < - BB ,663 82 | P a g e Estimate GG1 < - GG GG4 < - GG GG2 < - GG GG3 < - GG CC3 < - CC CC1 < - CC CC2 < - CC FF1 < - FF FF2 < - FF FF3 < - FF , 838 , 837 , 734 , 681 , 881 , 639 , 596 , 716 , 767 , 719 Correlations: (Group number - Default model) Estimate DD < > EE -,131 DD < > AA ,252 DD < > BB ,307 DD < > GG ,273 DD < > CC ,389 DD < > FF ,372 EE < > AA -,195 83 | P a g e Estimate EE < > BB -,171 EE < > GG -,213 EE < > CC -,082 EE < > FF -,198 AA < > BB ,092 AA < > GG ,187 AA < > CC ,101 AA < > FF ,421 BB < > GG ,223 BB < > CC ,066 BB < > FF ,333 GG < > CC ,167 GG < > FF ,305 CC < > FF ,303 Squared MultiDxTe Correlations: (Group number - Default model) Estimate FF3 ,518 FF2 ,588 FF1 ,513 CC2 ,355 CC1 ,408 CC3 ,777 GG3 ,464 GG2 ,538 GG4 ,700 GG1 ,703 BB4 ,440 BB2 ,457 84 | P a g e Estimate BB1 ,542 BB5 ,569 BB3 ,569 AA5 ,528 AA1 ,538 AA4 ,558 AA2 ,598 AA3 ,689 EE4 ,433 EE3 ,456 EE6 ,471 EE2 ,543 EE1 ,567 EE5 ,702 DD1 ,437 DD4 ,412 DD7 ,380 DD3 ,505 DD6 ,377 DD5 ,642 DD2 ,813 CMIN Model NPAR CMIN DF P CMIN/DF Default model 87 606,634 474 ,000 1,280 Saturated model 561 ,000 Independence model 33 5502,103 528 ,000 10,421 RMR, GFI Model RMR GFI AGFI PGFI Default model ,023 ,910 ,893 ,769 85 | P a g e Model RMR GFI Saturated model ,000 1,000 AGFI PGFI lanline Comparisons NFI RFI IFI TLI Delta1 rho1 Delta2 rho2 Default model ,890 ,877 ,974 ,970 Saturated model 1,000 Independence model ,000 Model 1,000 ,000 CFI ,973 1,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 Parsimony-Adjusted Measures Model RTATIO PNFI PCFI Default model ,898 ,799 ,874 Saturated model ,000 ,000 ,000 Independence model 1,000 ,000 ,000 NCP Model NCP LO 90 HI 90 Default model 132,634 73,426 199,976 Saturated model ,000 ,000 ,000 Independence model 4974,103 4739,270 5215,429 FMIN Model FMIN F0 LO 90 HI 90 Default model 1,699 ,372 ,206 ,560 Saturated model ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 Independence model 15,412 13,933 13,275 14,609 Model RMSEA LO 90 HI 90 PCLOSE Default model ,028 ,021 ,034 1,000 Independence model ,162 ,159 ,166 ,000 RMSEA 86 | P a g e Composite reliability and extracted variance Estimate 1-r^2 r^2 Estimate DD2 < - DD 0,902 0,186 0,814 DD5 < - DD 0,801 0,358 0,642 DD6 < - DD 0,614 0,623 0,377 total r DD3 < - DD 0,71 0,496 0,504 (total r)2 Result 4,947 24,473 DD7 < - DD 0,617 0,619 0,381 total (1-r ) 3,434 DD4 < - DD 0,642 0,588 0,412 Aggregate Reliability 0,877 CR DD1 < - DD 0,661 0,563 0,437 Total variance extracted 0,509 AVE EE5 < - EE 0,838 0,298 0,702 EE1 < - EE 0,753 0,433 0,567 total r 4,348 EE2 < - EE 0,737 0,457 0,543 (total r)2 18,905 EE6 < - EE 0,687 0,528 0,472 total (1-r2) 11,777 EE3 < - EE 0,675 0,544 0,456 Aggregate Reliability 0,616 CR EE4 < - EE 0,658 0,567 0,433 Total variance extracted 0,212 AVE AA3 < - AA 0,83 0,311 0,689 total r 3,811 AA2 < - AA 0,773 0,402 0,598 (total r)2 14,524 AA4 < - AA 0,747 0,442 0,558 total (1-r2) 2,088 AA1 < - AA 0,734 0,461 0,539 Aggregate Reliability 0,874 CR AA5 < - AA 0,727 0,471 0,529 Total variance extracted 0,582 AVE BB3 < - BB 0,754 0,431 0,569 total r 3,583 BB5 < - BB 0,754 0,431 0,569 (total r)2 12,838 BB1 < - BB 0,736 0,458 0,542 total (1-r ) 2,425 BB2 < - BB 0,676 0,543 0,457 Aggregate Reliability 0,841 CR BB4 < - BB 0,663 0,560 0,440 Total variance extracted 0,515 AVE GG1 < - GG 0,838 0,298 0,702 total r 3,090 87 | P a g e Estimate 1-r^2 r^2 Estimate Result GG4 < - GG 0,837 0,299 0,701 (total r)2 9,548 GG2 < - GG 0,734 0,461 0,539 total (1-r2) 1,595 GG3 < - GG 0,681 0,536 0,464 Aggregate Reliability 0,857 CR Total variance extracted 0,601 AVE CC3 < - CC 0,881 0,224 0,776 total r 2,116 CC1 < - CC 0,639 0,592 0,408 (total r)2 4,477 CC2 < - CC 0,596 0,645 0,355 total (1-r2) 1,460 Aggregate Reliability 0,754 CR Total variance extracted 0,513 AVE FF1 < - FF 0,716 0,487 0,513 total r 2,202 FF2 < - FF 0,767 0,412 0,588 (total r)2 4,849 FF3 < - FF 0,719 0,483 0,517 total (1-r2) 1,382 Aggregate Reliability 0,778 CR Total variance extracted 0,539 AVE 88 | P a g e PART 5: SEM 89 | P a g e Regression Weights: (Group number - Default model) Estimate S,E, C,R, P DD < - BB ,262 ,053 4,929 *** EE < - BB -,259 ,098 -2,638 ,008 DD < - CC ,242 ,041 5,843 *** DD < - AA ,148 ,039 3,801 *** EE < - AA -,232 ,073 -3,163 ,002 FF < - EE -,172 ,065 -2,649 ,008 FF < - DD ,675 ,115 5,865 *** GG < - EE -,089 ,035 -2,564 ,010 GG < - FF ,109 ,039 2,835 ,005 GG < - DD ,185 ,063 2,925 ,003 DD5 < - DD ,863 ,045 19,001 *** DD6 < - DD ,656 ,051 12,837 *** DD3 < - DD ,825 ,052 15,834 *** DD7 < - DD ,641 ,050 12,855 *** DD4 < - DD ,741 ,054 13,687 *** EE1 < - EE 1,033 ,067 15,412 *** EE2 < - EE ,924 ,061 15,038 *** EE6 < - EE ,829 ,060 13,750 *** EE3 < - EE ,891 ,066 13,487 *** AA3 < - AA 1,000 AA2 < - AA ,817 ,051 15,868 *** AA4 < - AA ,820 ,054 15,134 *** AA1 < - AA ,762 ,051 14,892 *** AA5 < - AA ,786 ,054 14,511 *** BB3 < - BB 1,000 BB5 < - BB ,849 ,064 13,281 *** BB1 < - BB 1,045 ,081 12,980 *** BB2 < - BB ,898 ,075 11,922 *** Label 90 | P a g e Estimate S,E, C,R, P ,073 11,720 *** BB4 < - BB ,855 GG1 < - GG 1,000 GG4 < - GG 1,135 ,067 16,916 *** GG2 < - GG 1,007 ,069 14,704 *** GG3 < - GG ,626 ,047 13,424 *** CC3 < - CC 1,000 CC1 < - CC ,556 ,060 9,314 *** CC2 < - CC ,698 ,077 9,030 *** FF1 < - FF 1,000 FF2 < - FF 1,021 ,092 11,136 *** FF3 < - FF ,898 ,083 10,839 *** DD1 < - DD ,759 ,053 14,335 *** DD2 < - DD 1,000 EE5 < - EE 1,000 EE4 < - EE ,866 ,066 13,027 *** Label Standardized Regression Weights: (Group number - Default model) Estimate DD < - BB ,276 EE < - BB -,160 DD < - CC ,351 DD < - AA ,205 EE < - AA -,189 FF < - EE -,162 FF < - DD ,371 GG < - EE -,152 GG < - FF ,199 GG < - DD ,185 DD5 < - DD ,800 91 | P a g e Estimate DD6 < - DD ,614 DD3 < - DD ,713 DD7 < - DD ,615 DD4 < - DD ,644 EE1 < - EE ,752 EE2 < - EE ,737 EE6 < - EE ,687 EE3 < - EE ,676 AA3 < - AA ,830 AA2 < - AA ,775 AA4 < - AA ,747 AA1 < - AA ,737 AA5 < - AA ,722 BB3 < - BB ,756 BB5 < - BB ,754 BB1 < - BB ,736 BB2 < - BB ,674 BB4 < - BB ,663 GG1 < - GG ,840 GG4 < - GG ,834 GG2 < - GG ,733 GG3 < - GG ,681 CC3 < - CC ,896 CC1 < - CC ,626 CC2 < - CC ,593 FF1 < - FF ,723 FF2 < - FF ,772 FF3 < - FF ,706 DD1 < - DD ,666 92 | P a g e Estimate DD2 < - DD ,896 EE5 < - EE ,837 EE4 < - EE ,658 CMIN Model NPAR CMIN DF P CMIN/DF Default model 79 660,584 482 ,000 1,371 Saturated model 561 ,000 Independence model 33 5502,103 528 ,000 10,421 RMR, GFI Model RMR GFI AGFI PGFI Default model ,036 ,903 ,887 ,776 Saturated model ,000 1,000 Independence model ,146 ,366 ,327 ,345 Baline Comparisons NFI RFI IFI TLI Delta1 rho1 Delta2 rho2 Default model ,880 ,868 ,964 ,961 Saturated model 1,000 Independence model ,000 Model 1,000 ,000 CFI ,964 1,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 Parsimony-Adjusted Measures Model PRATIO PNFI PCFI Default model ,913 ,803 ,880 Saturated model ,000 ,000 ,000 Independence model 1,000 ,000 ,000 NCP Model NCP LO 90 HI 90 Default model 178,584 115,198 250,027 93 | P a g e Model NCP LO 90 HI 90 Saturated model ,000 ,000 ,000 Independence model 4974,103 4739,270 5215,429 FMIN Model FMIN F0 LO 90 HI 90 Default model 1,850 ,500 ,323 ,700 Saturated model ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 Independence model 15,412 13,933 13,275 14,609 Model RMSEA LO 90 HI 90 PCLOSE Default model ,032 ,026 ,038 1,000 Independence model ,162 ,159 ,166 ,000 RMSEA 94 | P a g e Percentile CI IV M DV a b AA DD FF 0,148 0,675 0,039 0,115 3,187 0,00153 0,148 0,484 0,154 0,492 BB DD FF 0,262 0,675 0,053 0,115 3,781 0,00018 0,217 0,591 0,219 0,593 CC DD FF 0,242 0,675 0,041 0,115 4,162 0,00004 0,268 0,683 0,267 0,685 AA DD GG 0,148 0,185 0,039 0,063 2,322 0,02063 0,138 0,454 0,138 0,454 BB DD GG 0,262 0,185 0,053 0,063 2,525 0,01190 0,193 0,554 0,197 0,564 CC DD GG 0,242 0,185 0,041 0,063 2,629 0,00884 0,241 0,625 0,241 0,623 AA EE FF -0,232 -0,172 0,073 0,065 2,034 0,04255 -0,275 0,111 -0,268 0,119 BB EE FF -0,259 -0,172 0,098 0,065 2,870 0,00429 AA EE GG -0,232 -0,089 0,098 0,035 2,733 0,00651 -0,285 0,081 -0,284 0,081 BB GG -0,259 -0,089 0,098 0,035 2,832 0,00482 -0,244 0,131 -0,307 0,129 EE sa sb Bias CI sobel test p-value Lower Upper Lower Upper -0,22 0,168 -0,239 0,158 PART 6: SOBEL AND BOOTSTRAP TEST 95 | P a g e ... Marketing communicationss Mix on the brand equity of The Coffee House Secondly, Evaluate the impact of the elements of the Marketing Communications Mix on the brand equity of The Coffee House Lastly,... Marketing Communications Mix affect the brand equity of The Coffee House? - What should be done to improve Marketing Communications Mix in order to rate up the brand equity of The Coffee House? 1.3 Research... object: The impact of factors combining marketing communications on the brand equity of The Coffee House Survey object: Customers have known The Coffee House Scope of research Scope of space: The Coffee