Research Objective : The aim of this research is to examine purchasing characteristics and selection attributes of packed lunch (dosirak) among single men in the Jeonbuk region, and predict relative importance and utility of each of attributes of packed lunch, and find optimal attributes of packed lunch, using conjoint analysis. Through the analysis, this research intends to develop differentiated service per each type, and provide resources of product strategies for managers and marketers of packed lunch. This research first conducted a focus group interview to those in the master''s and doctor''s programs in the food and nutrition area, specialists in the area, to deduce attributes and 4 levels per each attribute in selecting packed lunches, using the conjoint analysis. It also did a questionnaire survey to 300 single men living around universities in Jeonju city, Gunsan city, and Iksan city in Jeonbuk province, from July to September in 2020. 260 copies of the questionnaire were collected, and 252 (97.0%) were finally used for analysis.
The questionnaire consisted of questions on general characteristics, motivations to use packed lunch, considerations when they purchase packed lunch, and situations of purchase of packed lunches. The data was analyzed with the conjoint analytic method, using SPSS 26.0 version.
Research Results : The findings of the analysis were as follows. In the motivation of using packed lunch, the mean scores for the item, ‘to eat delicious lunch’ were 3.25 ± 1.18 for those of the 30s, 3.30 ± 1.07 for those of the 40s and above, and 2.72 ± 1.17 for those of the 20s. There was significant difference in the mean scores between those of the 30s and above and those of the 20s (p<0.01). The mean scores for the item, ‘to enjoy various menus’ 3.35 ± 1.17 for those of the 30s, 3.21 ± 1.01 for those of the 40s and above, and 2.89 ± 1.42. There was significant difference in the mean scores between those of the 30s and above and those of the 20s (p<0.05). For the item, ‘out of curiosity from advertisement or flyer’ (p<0.05). the mean score for those of the 40s and above (2.57 ± 1.12) was significantly higher than the scores of those of the 20s (2.13 ± 1.09) and those of the 30s (2.08 ± 1.18) (p<0.05). For the item, ‘delivery to house is possible’, the mean score of those of the 40s and above (3.07 ± 1.20) was significantly higher than the scores for those of the 20s (2.63 ± 1.39) and the 30s (2.52 ± 1.34) (p<0.05). In considerations in purchasing packed lunch, for the item, ‘expiration date’ the mean score for those of the 40s and above (3.51 ± 1.14) was significantly higher than the scores for those of the 30s (3.13 ± 1.09) and the 20s (2.86 ± 1.29) (p<0.01). For the item, ‘nutrition and calory’, the mean score of those of the 40s and above (3.03 ± 1.11) was significantly higher than the scores of those of the 30s (2.64 ± 1.17) and those of the 20s (p<0.05). For the item, ‘whether it contains food additives’, the mean score of those of the 40s and above (2.97 ± 0.99) was significantly higher than the scores of those of the 30s (2.51 ± 1.07) and those of the 20s (2.29 ± 1.15) (p<0.001). For the item, ‘origin of food’, the mean score of those of the 40s and above was 2.99 ± 1.00, and that for those of the 30s and the 20s were 2.71 ± 1.13, and 2.33 ± 1.18. The scores for those of the 30s and above and for those of the 20s were significantly different (p<0.01). For the item, ‘hygiene and safety of food (HACCP certification)’, he mean score of those of the 40s and above was 3.42 ± 1.10), and those of the 30s and the 20s were 3.30 ± 1.23, and 2.99 ± 1.18. There was significant difference in scores of those of the 40s and the 20s (p<0.05). In the practices of purchasing packed lunch, the highest proportions of all the age groups answered that they eat alone, followed by ‘with friends or seniors or juniors’ (29.3%) for those of the 20s, and ‘with workplace colleagues’ for those of the 30s (29.9%) and for those of the 40s and above (30.3%). There was significant difference (p<0.01). In the places where they eat packed lunch, the highest proportions in all the age groups answered that they eat ‘at the place where it is sold’, followed by ‘at home’ (35.4%) for those of the 20s; ‘at home’ (31.2%, 24 persons), ‘at workplace’ (24.7%, 19 persons) for those of the 30s; ‘at workplace’ 30.3% (23 persons), ‘at home’ 25.0% (19 persons). The proportions of those who eat packed lunch at workplace among those of the 30s and above were significantly higher than that of those in the 20s (p<0.01).
Using FGI, this research deduced four attributes for packed lunch: purchasing store (convenience store or packed lunch-specific store), delivery or not, menus [Menu 1: single menu - bowl of rice with topping, boiled rice with assorted mixtures, fried rice; Menu 2: rice & kimchi + pork + grilled beef); Menu 3 (rice & kimchi + pork cutlet + chicken + fish cutlet), and price (3,500 won, 5,500 won, or 8,500 won). Relative importances of packed lunch attributes prefered by respondents were as follows: ‘price’ (41.66%), ‘menu’ (24.62%), ‘delivery or not’ (17.45%), ‘purchasing store’ (16.27%). In price, 3,500 won (0.716) was favored the most. Pearson''s R between observed preference and estimated preference was 0.997 (p<0.001). Kendall’s tau was 1.000 (p<0.001), showing fit for the 11 conjoint model profile. Utility value in the levels of selection attributes of packed lunch and the highest utility attribute combination in optimal attribute combination were packed lunch-specific store, delivery, Menu 3 (rice & kimchi + pork cutlet + chicken + fish cutlet), and price (3,500 won). The utility combination value was 26.629. The optimal market shares of packed lunch attributes for single men were as follows: 68.6% for the maximum utility model, 57.6% for the BTL model, and 67.9% for the Logit model. The predicted market shares of current products of competing companies were 31.2% for the maximum utility model, 42.4% for the BTL model, and 32.1% for the Logit model. Based on the ‘price’, the most favored attribute, the optimal packed lunch model is ‘3,500 won’, while currently the most frequently used packed lunch model is ‘5,500 won’. Based on the BTL model, demand for the ‘3,500 won’ packed lunch (57.6%) is higher than the demand for ‘5,500 won’ model (42.4%).
Conclusion : It was found that major considerations in selecting packed lunch for single men in Jeonbuk province are convenience in purchase time, easiness in accessibility, and simplicity. Food safety and nutrition were important for those of the 40s and above, and those who are in the 30s and the 40s tend more to eat lunch with workplace colleagues than those in the 20s. Such findings can serve as the basic data for developing new products in the packed lunch market. The conjoint analysis showed that single men favor low priced packed lunch the most, which seems to be an element to be considered when a company establishes marketing strategies of new products.