Global marketing of automobiles is a crucial practice that requires well informed decision making (Keegan & Green, 2005). Through effective collection of data from the field this paper presents descriptive and inferential analysis of data from the field, regarding global marketing of automobiles. The data was collected from 1,000 households comprising of vehicle owners and non-owners. The data shows that the 1-seat-all-electric model is the least desirable model by the respondents. There was no single model that was highly desirable. The respondents gave pop and chart television show as their favorite show. Use of social media is of less importance according to the survey. The respondents preferred using traditional media. The paper also tests the hypotheses put forward by the Global Motors principals and found out that American public is neutral in desirability of the 4-seat-gasoline-hybrid.

Table of contents

Title page…………………………………………………………………………………………1

Executive summary………………………………………………………………………………2

Table of contents…………………………………………………………………………………3

Demographic composition of the sample…………………………………………………………4

Size of home town or city…………………………………………………………………….4

Gender…………………………………………………………………………………………5

Number of people in a family…………………………………………………………………5

Age category…………………………………………………………………………………..6

Education category…………………………………………………………………………….7

Income category……………………………………………………………………………….7

Dwelling type…………………………………………………………………………………9

Global warming………………………………………………………………………………10

How respondents feel about global warming and gasoline emissions…………………………..11

Gasoline emissions…………………………………………………………………………..11

Types of automobile models; the most and the least desirable………………………………….12

The most desirable automobile model………………………………………………………12

The least desirable automobile model……………………………………………………….13

The “traditional” media usage of the respondents in the sample………………………………..14

The social media usage of the respondent in the sample…………………………………………18

Hypothesis tests………………………………………………………………………………….19

The beliefs of the Global Motors principals on the desirability of automobile models…………19

1-seat-all-electric…………………………………………………………………………..19

4-seat-all-electric…………………………………………………………………………..20

4-seat-gasoline-hybrid……………………………………………………………………..21

5-seat-diesel-hybrid………………………………………………………………………..22

References……………………………………………………………………………………….24

Demographic composition of the sample

The collected data contained some demographic information. This section provides an analysis of demographic variables. The demographic variables in this research include the size of home town or city, gender, marital status, number of people in the family, age category, dwelling type, education and income category. Below is the analysis of each of the above demographic information.

1. Size of home town or city

The size of home town or city was measured using an ordinal scale that was coded such that the value 1 represented a size of town or city with a population of below 10,000 people. I used bar charts to present the percentage of respondents under each size of home town or city as shown in the chart below.

Chart 1: Size of home town or city

Majority (39.6%) of the respondents had come from cities or towns with populations ranging from 500,000 to one million people. Only 4% of the respondents had come from small cities or towns with less than 10,000 people. The largest cities with one million and more people were represented by 12.8% of the respondents only.

1. Gender

The variable gender was measured using a nominal scale of measurement. The coding of the variable is in such way that the value “1” represented a female respondent whereas the value “0” represented a male respondent. For the analysis used a pie chart to illustrate the percentage of each gender the responded to the survey.

Chart 2: Gender

Among the 1,000 respondents, 56% were male while 44% were female.

1. Number of people in a family

The number of people in the family is a discrete figure by the respondents and, therefore, was measured using a scale level of measurement. I used the measures of central tendency and dispersion to describe the data. I also used percentages to analyze the data.

Table 1 (a): Statistics

Statistics

Number of people in household

N             Valid      1000

Missing0

Mean    2.61

Median                3.00

Mode    3

Std. Deviation    .958

Variance              .918

Minimum            1

Maximum           6

Table 1 (b): Number of people in household

Number of people in household

Frequency          Percent                Valid Percent     Cumulative Percent

Valid      1              107         10.7        10.7        10.7

2              365         36.5        36.5        47.2

3              386         38.6        38.6        85.8

4              106         10.6        10.6        96.4

5              30           3.0          3.0          99.4

6              6              .6            .6            100.0

Total      1000       100.0     100.0

According to the above table, the average number of people in the household was approximately 3 with a standard deviation of one person. The least number of people in the household was one while the maximum number was six. Majority of the households (38.6%) had three people. Only 0.6% of the households had 6 people. The above table shows clearly that households with two and three people had the largest representation with a total of 75.1% respondents.

1. Age category

This variable was measured using ordinal level of measurement as the respondents were supposed to choose the age category in which their age falls. The respondents were required to choose from a scale of 1-5 where “1” represents the ages of “18 to 24” years, “2” represents “25 to 34” years, “3” represents “35 to 49”, “4” represents “50 to 64” years and “5” represents those with 65 years and older. To analyze the age category, I used the below bar graph to present the percentages of respondents along with the age categories.

Chart 3: Age category

The above chart shows that a majority of the respondents (44%) were in the age category of between 35 years and 49 years. Those in the age category of 25 to 34 years were also represented by a significantly large percentage (32%). Respondents within the age category of 18 to 24 years had the least representation of 2%. The old people were only 7.5%.

1. Education category

This variable was categorical in nature since the respondents were supposed to choose a category under which their levels of education fall. The variable was then coded in a scale of 1-5 with “1” representing the respondents with the level of education that was “less than high school” and “5” representing the respondents with postgraduate degrees. I used a pie chart below to show the percentages of respondents per education category.

Chart 4: Level of education

From the above pie chart, the college degree holders were the majority respondents with 54.8% representation. Those with some college level of education had a relatively big percentage (27.5%). Respondents with post graduate degrees and those with high school diplomas were 8.50% and 7.40% respectively. The least number of respondents contained the ones with less than high school qualifications (1.8%).

1. Income category

This variable was also categorical. It was coded in such a way that the value “1” represented the respondents with income of less than $25,000. Value “2” was for respondents earning between $25,000 and $49,000, “3” was for respondents earning from $50,000 to $74,000, “4” was for the respondents earning from $75,000 to $125,000 and “5” was for those with income levels that were greater than $125,000.

Chart 5: Income category

The above chart shows that a majority of the respondents (39.30%) were earning $50,000 to $74,000. Those with income levels between $75,000 and $125,000 were also well represented in the sample (33.20%). The respondents with income levels of lower than $25,000 were only 2.10%.

1. Dwelling type

The variable dwelling type was also categorical, and I used pie charts to show the percentage of respondents per dwelling type. There were four categories of dwelling types namely single family, multiple families, condominium/townhouse and mobile home. They were coded on a scale of 1-4 respectively.

Chart 6: Dwelling type

From the above chart majority of the respondents came from multiple family dwelling types (37.70%) followed by those who came from single family (31.90%). Only 8.50% of the respondents came from mobile homes.

How respondents feel about global warming and gasoline emissions

The respondents were asked about how they feel about global warming and gasoline emissions.

1. Global warming

For global warming, a 7 point Likert-scale was used in data collection. The Likert-Scale applies for questions regarding opinions of people (Doole & Lowe, 2008). The chart below presents the analysis of the variable “I am worried about global warming”.

Chart 7: I am worried about global warming

As depicted by the chart above, majority of the respondents (43.5%) agreed that they are worried about global warming. Those who strongly agreed that they are worried were 25%. Only 12.8 percent of the respondents were neutral about global warming. The cumulative percentage of those who were not worried about global warming was 12.6% while that one for the respondents who were worried about global warming was more than 74%. Therefore, the respondents were worried about global warming.

1. Gasoline emissions

The respondents were also asked on their views to whether gasoline emissions contribute to global warming. The responses were on a 7 point Likert-scale with “1” representing “very strongly disagree” response and “7” was for “very strongly agree” response. The scale was applicable for the ordinal level of measurement applied (Zikmund & Babin, 2007).

Chart 8: Gasoline emissions contribute to global warming

The above chart shows that 33.9% of the respondents agreed that the gasoline emissions contribute to global warming. 25% and 9.2% of the respondents strongly agreed and very strongly agreed that the gasoline emissions contribute to global warming. Only 6% were undecided about the phenomenon. Cumulatively, more than 68% were for the opinion that gasoline emissions contributed to global warming while 26% were not for the opinion. Therefore, gasoline emissions contribute to global warming according to the sample.

Types of automobile models; the most and the least desirable

1. The most desirable automobile model

According to the data collected, there is no model that is most desirable. The only model that had a high cumulative score on being desirable was the 4 seat gasoline hybrid model with 39% respondents. However, its cumulative score on undesirability was 43.1%. The table below shows the 4 seat gasoline hybrid model frequencies.

Table 2 (a): Desirability: 4 Seat Gasoline Hybrid

Desirability: 4 Seat Gasoline Hybrid

Frequency          Percent                Valid Percent     Cumulative Percent

Valid      Very undesirable             117         11.7        11.7        11.7

Undesirable       152         15.2        15.2        26.9

Somewhat undesirable162         16.2        16.2        43.1

Neutral179         17.9        17.9        61.0

Somewhat desirable      129         12.9        12.9        73.9

Desirable             130         13.0        13.0        86.9

Very desirable   131         13.1        13.1        100.0

Total      1000       100.0     100.0

1. The least desirable automobile model

The least desirable automobile model is the 1 seat-all-electric model. More than 70% admitted that the model is very undesirable, undesirable and somewhat undesirable cumulatively. A cumulative 2% said that it was very desirable, desirable and somewhat desirable. The second least desirable model is a standard size gasoline model with a cumulative percentage of 64% of the respondents saying that it is very undesirable, undesirable and somewhat undesirable. The third least desirable model is the 5 seat diesel with a cumulative percentage of 52.9% of the respondents saying that it is very undesirable, undesirable and somewhat undesirable.

Table 2 (b): Desirability: 1 Seat All Electric

Desirability: 1 Seat All Electric

Frequency          Percent                Valid Percent     Cumulative Percent

Valid      Very undesirable             233         23.3        23.3        23.3

Undesirable       232         23.2        23.2        46.5

Somewhat undesirable236         23.6        23.6        70.1

Neutral279         27.9        27.9        98.0

Somewhat desirable      6              .6            .6            98.6

Desirable             7              .7            .7            99.3

Very desirable   7              .7            .7            100.0

Total      1000       100.0     100.0

Table 2 (c): Desirability: Standard Size Gasoline

Desirability: Standard Size Gasoline

Frequency          Percent                Valid Percent     Cumulative Percent

Valid      Very undesirable             104         10.4        10.4        10.4

Undesirable       248         24.8        24.8        35.2

Somewhat undesirable288         28.8        28.8        64.0

Neutral141         14.1        14.1        78.1

Somewhat desirable      150         15.0        15.0        93.1

Desirable             51           5.1          5.1          98.2

Very desirable   18           1.8          1.8          100.0

Total      1000       100.0     100.0

Table 2 (d): Desirability: 5 Seat Diesel Hybrid

Desirability: 5 Seat Diesel Hybrid

Frequency          Percent                Valid Percent     Cumulative Percent

Valid      Very undesirable             149         14.9        14.9        14.9

Undesirable       190         19.0        19.0        33.9

Somewhat undesirable190         19.0        19.0        52.9

Neutral231         23.1        23.1        76.0

Somewhat desirable      80           8.0          8.0          84.0

Desirable             80           8.0          8.0          92.0

Very desirable   80           8.0          8.0          100.0

Total      1000       100.0     100.0

 

The “traditional” media usage of the respondents in the sample

The traditional media usage of the respondents in the sample is described in terms of favorite television show type, favorite radio genre, favorite magazine type and the favorite local newspaper section.

The respondents’ favorite television show type is “documentary” with 25.4% of the respondents. Movies/miniseries are the second favorite television shows with 19.5% of the respondents. Comedy, reality and science fiction shows are not favorite television shows since only 7%, 7.6% and 7.1% of the respondents had rated them as their favorite respectively.

Chart 9: Favorite television show type

The favorite radio genre is pop and chart according to the respondents in the sample with 40% of the respondents followed by jazz and blues (15.9%). The least favorite is an easy listening radio genre with 8.2% of the respondents.

Chart 10: Favorite Radio Genre

Majority of the respondents (25.4%) rated family and parenting magazines as their favorite magazine types. News, politics and current events magazines were also favorite magazine types (25.3% of respondents). The least magazine types were the trucks, cars and motorcycles magazines (4.1% of respondents).

Chart 11: Favorite Magazine type.

The favorite local newspaper section is the local news section (31.7%). Sports and business sections are also favorite with 23.6% and 20.4% of the respondents. The least favourite local newspapers sections are the national news sections (4.1%). 4.9% of the respondents do not read the newspapers. International business requires people to be well informed on global issues rather than the local ones (Cavisgil, 2009).

Chart 12: Favorite local newspaper section

The social media usage of the respondent in the sample

Table 3(a): Use of online blogs

Use of online blogs

Frequency          Percent                Valid Percent     Cumulative Percent

Valid      Never   580         58.0        58.0        58.0

2              264         26.4        26.4        84.4

3              144         14.4        14.4        98.8

Four+ times a day            12           1.2          1.2          100.0

Total      1000       100.0     100.0

 

Table 3(b): Use of content communities

Use of content communities

Frequency          Percent                Valid Percent     Cumulative Percent

Valid      Never   339         33.9        33.9        33.9

2              334         33.4        33.4        67.3

3              258         25.8        25.8        93.1

Four+ times a day            69           6.9          6.9          100.0

Total      1000       100.0     100.0

Table 3(c): Use of social network sites

Use of social network sites

Frequency          Percent                Valid Percent     Cumulative Percent

Valid      Never   345         34.5        34.5        34.5

2              257         25.7        25.7        60.2

3              302         30.2        30.2        90.4

Four+ times a day            96           9.6          9.6          100.0

Total      1000       100.0     100.0

 

Table 3(d): Use of online games

Use of online games

Frequency          Percent                Valid Percent     Cumulative Percent

Valid      Never   320         32.0        32.0        32.0

2              325         32.5        32.5        64.5

3              311         31.1        31.1        95.6

Four+ times a day            44           4.4          4.4          100.0

Total      1000       100.0     100.0

Table 3(e): Use of virtual worlds

Use of virtual worlds

Frequency          Percent                Valid Percent     Cumulative Percent

Valid      Never   465         46.5        46.5        46.5

2              326         32.6        32.6        79.1

3              190         19.0        19.0        98.1

Four+ times a day            19           1.9          1.9          100.0

Total      1000       100.0     100.0

The above tables present the analysis results on the usage of social media by the respondents in the sample. Majority of the respondents do not use the social media. 58% of the respondents said that they never use online blogs and another 33.9% do not use content communities. Majority of the respondents (34.5%) do not use social network sites. Also, majority of the respondents (46.5%) do not use virtual worlds. Less than 10% admitted to using the social media more than four times a day in each category.

Hypothesis tests

The beliefs of the Global Motors principals on the desirability of automobile models.

1. 1-seat-all-electric

Table 4 (a): One-Sample Statistics

One-Sample Statistics

N             Mean    Std. Deviation    Std. Error Mean

Desirability: 1 Seat All Electric      1000       2.64        1.231     .039

 

Table 4 (b): One-Sample Test

One-Sample Test

Test Value = 3

t              df            Sig. (2-tailed)     Mean Difference             95% Confidence Interval of the Difference

Lower   Upper

Desirability: 1 Seat Al