Naming strategies by the companies located in each of the three studied cities
| City and Strategy | Results (%) | Differ. |
|---|---|---|
| Bogota | ||
| No strategy | −49 | −13 |
| Market strategy | 36 | |
| Belonging | −36 | 0 |
| Uniqueness | 36 | |
| Cartagena | ||
| No strategy | −39 | 5 |
| Market strategy | 44 | |
| Belonging | −30 | 47 |
| Uniqueness | 77 | |
| Santa Marta | ||
| No strategy | −41 | −14 |
| Market strategy | 27 | |
| Belonging | −17 | 67 |
| Uniqueness | 84 | |
| City and Strategy | Results (%) | Differ. |
|---|---|---|
| No strategy | −49 | −13 |
| Market strategy | 36 | |
| Belonging | −36 | 0 |
| Uniqueness | 36 | |
| No strategy | −39 | 5 |
| Market strategy | 44 | |
| Belonging | −30 | 47 |
| Uniqueness | 77 | |
| No strategy | −41 | −14 |
| Market strategy | 27 | |
| Belonging | −17 | 67 |
| Uniqueness | 84 | |
Notes:
Each result on Table 2 comes from Figure 3. The two components of each dimension (No-Strategy vs Market Strategy and Belonging vs Uniqueness) are graphically transferred to the SNM Model, resulting into a two-dimensional graph (Figure 5)
Sharing content requires targeting cookies to be enabled. Please update your cookie preferences to use this feature.