1. How could Chipotle foster greater brand loyalty across its multicultural in the U.S?

Chipotle can permanently incorporate Chiptopia to foster greater brand loyalty.

2. How could Chipotle foster talk-ability across its multicultural in the U.S?Chipotle should create a more interactive app and make frequent post throughout social media daily

Conclusion: Chipotle could foster greater brand loyalty and talk-ability across its multicultural in the U.S by eliminating uncertainty avoidance and indulge in mobile communications.

With a high uncertainty avoidance from the multicultural market, Chipotle can permanently incorporate Chiptopia to foster greater brand loyalty. By doing so, the multicultural market will be less stress about the unknown future as they will know how many points they have and when their next free burrito will be.

Per 100 people, 98.4 have mobile phone subscription in the U.S

With a high number of mobile phone subscriptions as a form of communications, Chipotle should create a more interactive app and make frequent post throughout social media daily to foster talk-

ability across its multicultural market in the U.S.

TABLE OF CONTENTS:

1. HOFSTEDE TABLE 1 (NIKKI)2. HOFSTEDE FIGURE 1 (NIKKI)3. UNITED NATIONS TABLE 2 (MONICA)4. UNITED NATIONS FIGURE 2 (MONICA)5. OECD TABLE 3 (SAMANTHA)6. OECD FIGURE 3 (SAMANTHA)7. SOURCES (NIKKI)

HOFSTEDE TABLE 1Table 1. What could drive brand loyalty in these countries?

USA Mexico Brazil Korea AustraliaIndividualism 91 30 38 18 90

Indulgence 68 97 59 29 71

Masculinity 62 69 49 39 61

Uncertainty Avoidance 46 82 76 85 51

Power Distance 40 81 69 60 36

Long-term Orientation 26 24 44 100 21

Bottom Lines:

USA has a high loosely-knit social framework in which individuals are expected to take care of

only themselves and their immediate family. They allow themselves to enjoy life while

maintaining a preference in achievements, heroism, assertiveness, and material awards at

a medium level. However, they still feel uncomfortable with uncertainty of the

unknown future. With everyone having equal rights, there is not a high power distance. They also prefer to maintain time-honored traditions and norms while viewing societal change with

suspicious.

Mexico represent a tightly-knit framework in society where individuals

are dependent on others for unquestioning loyalty. They love to enjoy

life with almost no restraint while maintain a preference in achievements,

heroism, assertiveness, and material awards at a medium level. However,

they are very worried about the unknown future as there are inequalities

among all. Still, they maintain time-honored traditions and norms while

viewing societal change with suspicious.

Brazil also represent a tightly-knit framework in society. They also enjoy life with some restraints. They maintain

a medium level of competitiveness with worries of the unknown future. While there are some inequalities

issues, they still maintain time-honored traditions and norms while viewing societal change with suspicious.

Korea has a very tightly-knit framework. They have a very high restraint when it comes to enjoying

life. While they are less competitive, they are still very

worried about the unknown future. With a high hierarchical order, they are encourage to thrift and efforts in modern education as a way to

prepare for the future.

Australia are expected to take care of only themselves and their

immediate family. They love to enjoy life with low restraint. While they like to be competitive, they are still afraid about the unknown

future. With a low hierarchical order, they maintain time-honored traditions and norms while viewing societal change with suspicious.

Major Findings:

Besides Korea, all countries represent a tightly-knit framework in which individuals are expected to take care of only themselves and their immediate family. They all like to enjoy life with a certain restraint. They all worry about the unknown future. Therefore, to drive brand loyalty in these countries a product or service will have to focus on individuals instead of as a whole due to high

individualism and have a laid out plan of the future as they all worry about the unknown future at certain levels.

HOFSTEDE FIGURE 1

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

USA Mexico Brazil Korea Australia

Figure 1. What could drive brand loyalty in these countries?

Individualism Indulgence Masculinity Uncertainty Avoidance Power Distance Long-term Orientation

UNITED NATIONS TABLE 2Measure Issue USA Mexico Brazil Korea Australia

Rank 8 74 75 17 2Human Development Index Overall 0.915 0.756 0.755 0.898 0.935

Life Expectancy at Birth Health 79.1 76.8 74.5 81.9 82.4Expected Years of Schooling Education 16.5 13.1 15.2 16.9 20.2

Gross National Income per Capita Income $52,946.50 $16,056 $15,175 $33,890.50 $42,260.60 Inequality-Adjusted Human Development

Index Inequality 0.76 0.587 0.557 0.751 0.858

Gender Development Index Gender 0.995 0.943 0.997 0.93 0.976Multidimensional Poverty Index Poverty n.a. 0.024 0.011 n.a. n.a.

Employment to Population Ratio Work 57.8 58.5 65.6 59.1 61.5Homicide Rate (per 100,000 people) Human Security 4.7 21.5 25.2 0.9 1.1

Exports and Imports (% of GPD) Trade 30% 64.20% 27.60% 102.80% 41%Mobile Phone Subscriptions (per 100 people) Communication 98.4 82.5 139 115.5 131.2

Carbon Dioxide Emissions per Capita (tonnes) Sustainability 17 3.9 2.2 11.8 16.5

Population, Total (millions) Demography 322.6 123.8 202 49.5 23.6

Bottom Lines:

With an overall raking of 8, the USA has the

highest in income, gender, sustainability

and demography. However, they ranked the lowest in the work

to population ratio.

With an overall ranking of 74, Mexico has the

highest homicide rating, which isn't good. They

have the second highest rating for trade.

They also rank the lowest in education,sustainability , and communication.

With an overall ranking of 75, Brazil has the

highest in employment to work ratio,

communication, and homicide (although not good). They rank low in inequality, trade and

sustainability

With an overall ranking of 17, Korea ranks the highest in trade and

second in life expectancy,

communication, and sustainability. They also

rank the lowest in homicide rates.

With and overall ranking of 2 Australia has the

highest in health, education, and

communication. In addition, they are in close

seconds with income, gender and work, and they also have a low rating of homicides .

Major Finding:

The countries listed above all have high numbers in education, which means that each of these countries value and strive in having a higher education, with the lowest only being 13.1 in Mexico and the highest being 20.2 in Australia. It would be best to build brand loyalty by making stores available on campuses as education is important in these countries. In addition, each country has a high number in communication with the lowest being an 82.5 in Mexico and a high of 131.2 in Australia. As technology is growing it would be best to build brand loyalty by becoming more intact

with social media, posting frequently, and frequently keeping up to date with technology and communication changes.

Table 2.How is life and what can drive brand loyalty across these societies?

UNITED NATIONS FIGURE 2

79.176.8

74.5

81.9 82.4

50

60

70

80

90

100

USA Mexico Brazil Korea Australia

Life

Exp

ecta

ncy

in Y

ears

Figure 2. How is life and what can drive brand loyalty across these societies?

$52,946.5Grossnational

$16,056Grossnationalincomeper

$15,175Grossnationalincomeper

$33,890.5Grossnationalincomeper

$42,260.6Grossnational

Table 3: How is life and what can drive brand loyalty across these societies?Measure Issue US Mexico Brazil Korea Australia

Population (millions) 311.6 118.4 196.5 50.2 23.1Visitors per year (millions) 171.6 76.7 5.2 11.1 6.1

Renewable energy 6.30% 8.70% 45.80% 8.70% 4.60% Rooms per person Housing 2.4 1 0.9 1.4 2.3

Household net adjusted disposable income Income $41,071 $12,806 $11,487 $19,372 $33,138 Employment rate Jobs 68.10% 60.40% 66.70% 65.30% 71.60%

Quality of support network Community 90.10% 75.30% 90% 75.80% 95.10% Student skills Education 492 417 402 542 513

Air pollution (micrograms) Enviornment 10.7 11.9 16.6 29.1 5.9Voter turnout Civic Engagement 66.70% 63.10% 78.90% 75.80% 93.20%

Self reported heath Heath 87.50% 65.50% 69.70% 35.10% 85.40% Life satisfaction Life Satisfaction 6.9 6.2 6.5 5.8 7.3

Feeling safe walking alone at night Safety 73.90% 39.90% 39.50% 67.70% 62.60% Employees working long hours Work-Life Balance 11.70% 28.30% 9.50% 23.10% 13.40%

Bottom Lines

US has low voter turn out, but high self reported heath,

quality of support network and disposable income. To build brand loyalty in the US a company could promote

their brand as healthy and a family activity.

Mexico has a very low disposable income, and voter turnout. They also a high amount of people

working long hours. To build brand loyalty in Mexico a company could promote

their brand as low cost, and a good thing to eat while at

work.

Brazil has a low disposable income, low student skills,

and do not feel safe walking home at night. However

they have a decently high voter turn out. To promote a

brand in Brazil a company could promote their product as inexpensive and fulfilling

their civic duty.

Korea has low population and self reported heath but

has a higher disposable income than most other

countries and a high amount of people working long hours, the also have a low life satisfaction rating.

To promote a brand in Korea a company could show how their product could improve their life.

Australia has a very high voter turn out, life

satisfaction and people feel safe walking home at night. They have a low population

and visitors per year. To promote a brand in Australia a company could show how

their product could further improve their life.

Major FindingThe countries above all value their support network and life satisfaction, a company could show how their product brings families together whilst being healthy and inexpensive. A

company could also promote their brand as safe and harmless as many of these counties do not feel safe walking alone at night

OECD TABLE 3

OECD FIGURE 3

5

6

7

8

$33,138

$19,372

$11,487

$12,806

$41,071

• Australia - OECD Data. (n.d.). Retrieved November 14, 2016, from https://data.oecd.org/australia.htm• Brazil - OECD Data. (n.d.). Retrieved November 14, 2016, from https://data.oecd.org/brazil.htm• Geert Hofstede. (n.d.). Retrieved November 14, 2016, from https://geert-hofstede.com/united-states.html• Human Development Reports. (n.d.). Retrieved November 14, 2016, from

http://www.hdr.undp.org/en/countries/profiles/USA• Human Development Reports. (n.d.). Retrieved November 14, 2016, from

http://www.hdr.undp.org/en/countries/profiles/MEX• Human Development Reports. (n.d.). Retrieved November 14, 2016, from

http://hdr.undp.org/en/countries/profiles/kor.html• Human Development Reports. (n.d.). Retrieved November 14, 2016, from

http://www.hdr.undp.org/en/countries/profiles/BRA• Korea - OECD Data. (n.d.). Retrieved November 14, 2016, from https://data.oecd.org/korea.htm• Mexico - OECD Data. (n.d.). Retrieved November 14, 2016, from https://data.oecd.org/mexico.htm• United States - OECD Data. (n.d.). Retrieved November 14, 2016, from https://data.oecd.org/united-states.htm