1. 1

2. • Overview
• Secondary Data/Literature Review
• Research Problems
• Scope of the Research
• Research Methodology
• Data Analysis
• Findings
• Limitations
• Recommendations
• References
2

3. • Industry: Mexican Restaurants in the US
• Over 1,700 Stores in the US
• Competition & Market Share: 12.2%
• Financial Performance
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
1,835.90
2,269.50
2,731.20
3,214.60
4,108
4,654.30
CHIPOTLE'S US SPECIFIC REVENUE
Chipotle, 12.20%
Taco Bell, 23%Other Restaurants,
64.80%
Market Share
Chipotle Taco Bell Other Restaurants

4. • Green Marketing
• Green Marketing in Restaurant
• Perceived Quality
• Brand Image
• Chipotle’s Green Marketing
• Secondary Research Revealed:
Only 5% of Chipotle’s Customers Have Significant
Knowledge about Green Practices of Chipotle!

5. • What is the influence of green practices on
customers?
• Are Chipotle’s customers environmentally and
health conscious?
• Is more effort needed to be put into the promotion
of Chipotle’s green practices?
Problem definition: How the awareness about green
practices influences Chipotle’s customers and
whether the company should be more diligent in the
way they communicate the messages of their “Food
with Integrity”. 5

6. 1. What is the relationship between awareness of
Chipotle’s green practices and being heavy or light
user?
2. Is there a relationship between education level of
customers and being concerned about treating
animals properly?
3. Is there any relationship between being light or
heavy user and changing the purchase frequency
after getting aware of Chipotle’s green practices?
6

7. • Limited to the city of San
Francisco
• The age group from 18 to 34
7

8. RESEARCH
METHODOLOGY
Pilot testing
• 10 Interview
Research Design
• Descriptive and
exploratory
research
Sampling
Method
• Quota
Sample Size
• 120
Data Collection
• Primary
• Secondary
Statistical Tools
• Chi Square
• Mann-Whitney
• Spearmen
• Fishers exact
Test
8

9. Respondents Percentage
Male 62 51%
Female 58 49%
Total 120 100%
Respondents Percentage
18 – 24 60 50%
25 - 34 60 50%
Total 120 100%
Age group
Gender*
*Source: San Francisco Population by Gender, 2012 9

10. 120 Respondents
18-24 years 25-34 years
60 respondents 60 respondents
Male (51%) Female (49%) Male (51%) Female (49%)
31 29 31 29
10

11. 11

12. Relationship between awareness of Chipotle’s green practices and being a
heavy/light user
Ho: There is no
relationship
H1: There is a
relationship
12

13. • Light users: 38.8% (were aware) & 61.2% (were not aware)
• Heavy users: 72.7% (were aware) & 27.3% (were not aware)
• p-value: .004 < .05
• Hence, we reject the null hypothesis (Ho) and conclude that there is a
relationship between awareness of Chipotle’s green practices and the
nature of the consumer (heavy/light user)
Awareness
Total
Yes No
Frequency
Light Users
Count 38 60 98
% within Frequency 38.8% 61.2% 100.0%
Heavy Users
Count 16 6 22
% within Frequency
72.7% 27.3% 100.0%
Total Count 54 66 120
Value df
Asymp.
Sig. (2-
sided)
Exact Sig.
(2-sided)
Exact Sig.
(1-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 8.368a 1 .004
Test Used : Cross Tabulation & Chi Square
13

14. Relationship between education level and being concerned about treating animals
properly.
Ho: There is no
relationship
H1: There is a
relationship
14

15. 1st Test Used : Mann-Whitney U test
Ranks
Education N Mean Rank
Sum of
Ranks
Importance of
treating animals
properly
Non highly
educated 39 66.10 2578.00
Highly educated 81 57.80 4682.00
Total 120
Importance of treating animals
properly
Mann-Whitney U 1361.000
Z -1.290
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) .197
15
• The mean rank of non-highly educated people (66.10) is greater than that of
highly educated population (57.80), implying non-highly educated people care
more about treating animals well.
• p-value: 0.197 > .05
• Hence, we do not reject our null hypothesis, i.e. the difference observed above is
not statistically significant. In other words, there is no relationship between
education level and caring about treating animals properly.

16. 2nd Test Used : Spearman Correlation
Education
Spearman’s
rho
Importance of treating
animals properly
Correlation
Coefficient -.118
Sig. (2-tailed) .198
N 120
• Correlation between variables is negative: -.118
• p-value: .198> .05
• Hence, we do not reject the null hypothesis (Ho) and say that
there is no relationship between education level and people being
concerned about treating animals properly 16

17. Relationship between being light user or heavy user and change in purchase
frequency after getting aware of Chipotle’s green practices.
Ho: There is no
relationship
H1: There is a
relationship
17

18. Test Used : Cross Tabulation & Fisher’s Exact
Test
Frequency Change
TotalYes No
Frequency
Light Users
Count 40 20 60
% within Frequency 66.7% 33.3% 100.0%
Heavy Users
Count 6 0 6
% within Frequency 100.0% 0.0% 100.0%
Total Count 46 20 66
Value df Asymp.
Sig. (2-
sided)
Exact
Sig. (2-
sided)
Exact
Sig. (1-
sided)
Pearson Chi-
Square
2.870
a
1 .090
Fisher's Exact
Test
.167 .103
• Light users: 66.7% (yes) & 33.3% (no)
• Heavy users: 100% (yes) & 0% (no)
• p-value: .167 > .05
• Hence, we do not reject the null hypothesis (Ho) and conclude that there is
no relationship between being light user or heavy user and change in
purchase frequency after getting aware of Chipotle’s green practices. 18

19. • Heavy users are more aware about Chipotle’s green
practices than light users
• No significant difference between level of education and
being concerned about treating animals properly
• Changing the frequency of eating at Chipotle after getting
aware of green practices doesn’t depend on being light or
heavy user
Yes (54)
45%
No (66)
55%
AWARENESS
19

20. Not Important (10)
8%
Neutral
(33)
28%
Importa
nt (77)
64%
IMPORTANCE OF TREATING
ANIMALS PROPERLY Not Important (11)
9%
Neutral
(32)
27%
Important
(77)
64%
IMPORTANCE OF
RECYCLING
Not
Important
(14)
12%
Neutral
(27)
22%
Important
(79)
66%
IMPORTANCE OF THE
NUMBER OF CALORIES
20

21. • Limited to San Francisco
• Sample Size
• Survey Method Limitations (Quota
Sampling)
• Time Constraint
21

22. YES NO Total
46 20 66
Change in Frequency of
eating at Chipotle
Yes (54)
45%
No (66)
55%
AWARENESS
• Less visibility of the initiative as more than half
(55%) of the consumers from the sample are
unaware.
• So it is rational for the company to invest on
promotional efforts.
22

23. • High priority for factors such as healthy animal raising,
recycling and the number of calories.
• Significant percentage of consumers are health and
environment conscious.
23
Not Important (10)
8%
Neutral
(33)
28%
Importa
nt (77)
64%
IMPORTANCE OF TREATING
ANIMALS PROPERLY
Not Important
(11)
9%
Neutral
(32)
27%
Importa
nt (77)
64%
IMPORTANCE OF
RECYCLING
Not
Important
(14)
12%
Neutral
(27)
22%
Important
(79)
66%
IMPORTANCE OF THE
NUMBER OF CALORIES

24. Awareness
Yes No
Light User 38 (38.8%) 60 (61.2%)
Heavy User 16 (72.7%) 6 (27.3%)
• Proportion of heavy users among people who know
about Chipotle’s green practices is higher
• The relationship is statistically significant
• Concentrate on Light Users as a primary target
group for promotional activities
24

25. • Alvarez, A. (2015). Mexican Restaurants in the US. IBISWorld Industry Report OD4305. Retrieved
from http://0-clients1.ibisworld.com.library.ggu.edu/reports/us/industry/default.aspx?entid=4305
• Brennan, A. (July, 2014). Mexican Restaurants in the US. IBISWorld. Retrieved from http://0-
clients1.ibisworld.com.library.ggu.edu/reports/us/industry/majorcompanies.aspx?entid=4305
• Cone Communication (March 14, 2014). Cone: Americans Willing to Pay More for Sustainable
produce. Environmental Leader. Retrieved from
http://www.environmentalleader.com/2014/03/14/cone-americans-willing-to-pay-more-for-
sustainable-produce/
• Czaplewski, A. J., Eric, M. O., & McNulty P. (March, 2014). Going Green Puts Chipotle in the Black.
Marketing News, 48(3), 30-37.
• Finger, B. (May 1, 2014). The Twilight of the Tortilla: What People Really Order at Chipotle. The Awl.
Retrieved from http://www.theawl.com/2014/05/the-twilight-of-the-tortilla-what-people-really-order-at-
chipotle
• Food with Integrity (2015). Available from http://www.chipotle.com/en-US/fwi/fwi.aspx
• Gaeta, A. (February 27, 2011). Chipotle Target Market Analysis. Retrieved from
http://www.scribd.com/doc/49627759/Chipotle-Target-Market-Analysis
• Haiken, M. (September 13, 2011). America’s Top 20 Healthiest Cities. Forbes Magazine. Retrieved
from http://www.forbes.com/sites/melaniehaiken/2011/09/13/americas-top-10-healthiest-cities/
• Ham, S., & Lee, S. (2011). US Restaurant Companies' Green Marketing via Company Websites:
Impact on Financial Performance. Tourism Economics, 17(5), 1055-1069.
• Malhotra, N. K. (2010). Marketing Research: An Applied Orientation 6th edition. Upper Saddle River,
NJ: Pearson/Prentice Hall.
• Namkung, Y., & Jang, S. S. (2013). Effects of restaurant green practices on brand equity formation:
Do green practices really matter? International Journal of Hospitality Management, 33, 85-95.
• Online Survey Software Tools and Solutions | Qualtrics. (n.d.). Retrieved April 13, 2015, from
http://www.qualtrics.com/research-suite/
• San Francisco City and County (2010). Bay Area Census. Retrieved from
http://www.bayareacensus.ca.gov/counties/SanFranciscoCounty.htm
• Woolverton, A., & Dimitri, C. (2010). Green Marketing: Are Environmental and Social Objectives
25

26. 26